RFP# 7551258: RI Department of Corrections Probation and ...Probation and Parole Automated Case Management & Tracking System (PPACTS) 3 Regarding Requirement 17, page 10: The software

RFP# 7551258: RI Department of Corrections

Probation and Parole Automated Case Management & Tracking System

(PPACTS)

1

Solicitation Information

February 14, 2017

Addendum #3

RFP# 7551258

TITLE: RI Department of Corrections Probation and Parole Automated Tracking System (PPACTS) with Case Management

SUBMISSION DEADLINE: March 3, 2017 at 11:30 AM (ET)

ATTACHED ARE VENDOR QUESTIONS WITH STATE RESPONSES.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS WILL BE ANSWERED.

GAIL WALSH

CHIEF BUYER

DIVISION OF PURCHASES

RI DEPT. OF ADMINISTRATION



(PPACTS)

2

Vendor A

The RFP references an “attachment 1” on page 6 of the RFP document, but I didn’t see any attachments

listed on the procurement page. Can you please let me know how to download this attachment?

Attachment 1 is attached herein.

Vendor B

- How many system users do you anticipate?

150

Regarding Requirements 5 and 6, page 7:

The capability to electronically receive from, or forward data to, external data sources, either

automatically or upon the user’s request.

The software must support open exchange of data using industry standards.

- Who are the “external data sources”?

External sources are the RIDOC InFacts and TPCDS systems

INFacts : Powerbuilder 12 front end, Oracle back end

TPCDS: .Net front end, Oracle backend

- Are you in need of Interoperability connectivity?

No

Or will you download data to a file and share manually?

Files need to be sent in SFTP format



(PPACTS)

3

Regarding Requirement 17, page 10: The software should include a comprehensive financial

management solution to assist officers in the management of collection of fees while on Probation and

Parole or waivers for hardship.

- Please provide more detail on what is needed/expected for this comprehensive financial

management system.

Regarding a comprehensive financial management system – the system must be able to

automatically add the monthly fees to offenders on Probation and Parole, capture one-time

Interstate fees, place offenders on hardship waivers so the fees do not accumulate, produce

a file for our collection agency monthly, capture electronically what has been collected

from the collections agency electronically, end of the year produce a list of offenders who

owe fees above a certain amount and electronically send to the Taxation department.

Reports must be produced.

Vendor C

1) The RFP doesn’t seem to include the number of users to be licensed to use the Probation CMS.

We price our software on the total number of licensed users (not concurrent users).

150

2) Item number 30 in the General Requirements Section states, “The software should allow specific

client photos to be stored along with other identifying information from the backend Oracle

server-database. (Facial Recognition Photos saved in an Oracle table with pointers).” -- Is this an

existing Oracle Server database that must be interfaced to, pulling in photos and pointer

information?

Yes

Or is the state asking for the proposed case management system to take and store photos in an

Oracle Server database with corresponding pointers?

No



(PPACTS)

4

Vendor D

1. What are the primary reasons that are driving the purchasing of a new case

management system?

Evolution from a paper based system

2. What is the desired timeframe for implementation?

9 mos – 12 mos – including conversion, design, testing and training

3. How many users will be using the software?

150

4. Have you evaluated or viewed any other vendor's products? If yes, please provide.

No

5. Do you have an approved budget for the initial purchase and the annual costs? If not

please explain how you intend to fund the initial purchase?

We decline to provide that information

6. As a vendor we have to make a significant investment in the preparation of the proposal

to address the functional and implementation requirements in your RFP. We understand

that you may not want to disclose your actual budget, but we request that you consider

disclosing a budget range for the initial purchase and the annual costs?


7. Does RIDOC have a preference for a COTS-based solution or custom-developed

solution?

No

8. Please explain how the 10% MBE participation is calculated?

Based on a dollar value for contracted services.



(PPACTS)

5

If you don’t use any subcontractors does the 10% MBE still apply?

It is a statewide goal and will be addressed at time of contract award.

Section 3 Scope of Work

1. What systems are currently interfaced to your current legacy case management system?

Infacts our Inmate Facility Tracking System (written in house) contains a module for Probation and Parole which tracks indictments, charges, probation time, conditions, fees, caseload worker, waivers etc., we do not have a real case management system. INFACTS and Probation and Parole interface with each other.

2. You identify a number of systems that you want to interface with.

Which of those systems will be required and need to be part of our cost proposal to integrate with the new PPACTS case management system? Infacts (PowerBuilder12 with Oracle 11g), TPCDS –(Transitions from Prison to Community Datasystem (.NET with Oracle 11g), CMARS Community Mapping (Ruby on Rails hosted by vendor), Winfacts (.Net and Sql), Parole Board System (PowerBuilder12 and Oracle 11g) and SATS (Java and JBOSS)

3. Please identify for each of the required interfaces if they are Bi-directional, Out Going, or

Incoming and the approximate number of data elements that will be required.

Not fully sure if all the interfaces listed above are currently occurring. We don’t have a Case Management System so we will learn more from the demos. INFACTS sharing data will be bi-directional. TPCDS interface would be a bi-directional, CMARS outgoing, Winfacts – Outgoing, SATS (Substance Abuse Treatment) – one directional for Urine testing and Parole Board System – bidirectional. The data elements vary from each system. INFACTS is connected directly to the Probation/Parole module so it in incorporated via Oracle processes and triggers.



(PPACTS)

6

4. In #2. The software should support connection to industry standard database servers

and support URL/ web-service integration with existing Java applications. It would be

preferable that the software include a software development kit (SDK).

Please specify which type of functions you would like access to via an SDK (e.g. reports, interfaces, etc.).

A software development kit is typically a set of software development tools that allows the creation of applications for a certain software package, software framework, hardware platform. This will be via the vendor and its software package.

5. In #3. A middle-ware application (e.g., web service, portal) to translate the data and

facilitate information exchange for the judiciary at the time of sentencing, law

enforcement during investigations and researchers attempting to ascertain P&P

performance measures indicative of recidivism reduction efforts.

Please specify the judiciary information you wish to input via users and the data received via interfaces to existing judiciary systems. We request data information that describes the protocol used to transmit the data and the documents that describe the data to be transmitted (i.e. Interface Control Documents and/or Data Dictionaries).

This is no longer applicable.

6. In #5. The capability to electronically receive from, or forward data to, external data

sources, either automatically or upon the user’s request.

We request data information that describes the protocol used to transmit the data and the documents that describe the data to be transmitted (i.e. Interface Control Documents and/or Data Dictionaries). Currently within the Probation and Parole System – OEM (Oracle Enterprise Manager) is used to schedule jobs to send reports via e-mail to indicated staff. Windows Scheduler may also be used. RIDOC currently received PDF documents from the Courts for Probation and Parole hourly from 10 AM to 6 PM – the documents are placed on a shared folder within specific folders within i.e. Kent, Superior (by courts). These PDFs contain court clerk notes. RIDOC also on demand can create queries and send files via e-mail. Any e-mails sent via a job uses BLAT. If we are sending data files we use SFTP.



(PPACTS)

7

7. In #7. The software must import legacy data from an ORACLE database and manage

that data using existing business practices.

Please provide the following information about your current PPACTS:

a. How many clients and cases will need to be converted? Approximately 154,000

records

b. How many document will need to be converted? Documents or forms that

need to be pre-filled with information from the system approx. 50

Please provide documentation of your database (schema, relational model, data dictionaries) so we can properly estimate the data conversion. This will be discussed with awarded vendor.

8. In #9. The software should generate a variety of reports for use by end users in all areas

of the business processes.

Please describe and provide samples of the reports you currently use and the additional ones you wish to use in the future. Currently there are 50 Letters or Forms (some pull information from system to fill in the document)plus many reports run off the Probation and Parole System 32. Some reports user enters information on screen as shown below.

9. In #10. The ability to allow Probation and Parole staff to access and enter data remotely

and securely via tablet, laptop or other mobile device.

What types of tablets do you wish to utilize? What are their sizes and operating systems?

Tablets have been bought. DELL Venues – Windows 8.1 (most likely upgraded to 10) 4 GB DDR3 RAM only limited number. We will be purchasing other tablets not sure as of yet.



(PPACTS)

8

10. In #12. The ability to interface with other legacy systems at the RIDOC which have an

Oracle 12 backend and the front-end of PowerBuilder 12 Infacts (Inmate Tracking

Facility System) or .NET with SQL server with interface to INFACTS (TPCDS)

(Transition from Prison to the Community Database System).

Please provide information that describes the protocol used to transmit the data and the documents that describe the data to be transmitted (i.e. Interface Control Documents and/or Data Dictionaries).

External – SFTP Internal – ODBC connects or SQL.net

11. In #13. The ability to allow for future changes and/or customization in response to

legislative and/or executive mandates.

Is this requirement related to the "SDK" requirement above?

No, we need to know if we are able to create any customization or must we always rely on vender services. If so, please describe the type of future enhancements in as much detail as possible so that we can determine the best solution (e.g. SDK, api).

Example :We seek to create and enhance data controls and quality functions

12. In #18. Allow for centralized support for all locations to minimize the impact on day to

day operations of probation officers.

Please describe how work operations would vary from location to location and any specific work requirements uniquely related to a location that are separate from those related to the staff assigned to that location. There would not be any difference in the day-to-day tasks in P&P offices However, for those offices located within courthouses, that system must ride on the network of that particular courthouse



(PPACTS)

9

13. In #19. Provide a single shared instance while maintaining independence and data

security for any participating location.

Please describe how work operations would vary from location to location and any specific work requirements uniquely related to a location that are separate from those related to the staff assigned to that location. Basically, there are remote office for Probation and Parole and some staff move from one office to another. Make sure that the staff member has access to all the different case loads he/she maintains.

14. In # 21. The software should provide intuitive navigation, dependent on the business

process utilized by the end user using the system.

Please provide more detail on what you mean by “dependent on the business process utilized by the end user using the system”.

Reference Attachment #1

15. In # 22. The software should support automated workflow routing between end users.

Please provide examples of workflow routing based on your current business process and the triggering events for those workflows.


16. In # 23. The software must support the ability to customize workflow routing based on

current business processes.

Please provide examples of workflow routing based on your current business process and the triggering events for those workflows.


17. In # 24. The software should facilitate the transfer of electronic documents between

offices.

What types of documents do you transfer between locations and under what circumstances?

Basically scanned documents



(PPACTS)

10

18. In #29. The software should have the ability to obtain data values from backend

databases to prepopulate fields/drop-down boxes on the user interface. (InFacts and

TPCDS)

Please provide the data information that describes the protocol used to transmit the data and the documents describing the data to be transmitted. (i.e. Interface Control Documents and/or Data Dictionaries.)

OBDC connections, SQL.net connections

19. In the Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #6. The ability to

incorporate specialized risk and needs assessments as needed.

What assessment instruments do you currently use and do you plan on changing?

RIDOC utilizes the LSIR and LSIR-SV. This assessment functionality currently resides in the TPCDS database. On paper RIDOC conducts the Static-99, and Acute assessments If so what instruments will you be moving to?

We have no plans to move to any other assessments at this time

20. Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #7. Integration of

criminogenic needs/principal service need, goals and action steps within the system in

terms of identifying/selecting needs, tracking/reporting on goals and action steps, and

display of these items in a case plan.

Please provide a copy of your Case Plan(s) template.

Since we have no case management system we do not have a case plan template.

21. Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #13. Automated

notification capabilities such as e-mail notification, notification of supervisory review

required, notification of supervisory signature required, calendaring, management of

conditions and action lists.

a) Please provide examples where RIDOC would require notification of a supervisory

review or signature being required.



(PPACTS)

11

b) Please clarify the notification need for calendaring. For example, is this to notify

someone that a person has been calendared for an event, for a person to calendar

an offender/client, or something else? What types of calendaring events are at

issue?

c) Please clarify, what types of conditions and action lists require a notification

requirement – exactly whom is being notified of what content and under what

circumstances?


22. Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #14. Automated

notification capability between individual offices, and between staff in each office.

Please provide examples of the types of notification you are requesting between individual offices and staff.

Case transfers between offices

23. Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #15. The ability to

exchange information between the system and outside vendors regarding substance

abuse and mental health treatment, electronic monitoring, community service, drug

testing, etc.

What specific types of information are currently or desired to be exchanged and at what frequency between the State and outside vendors?

This was a pilot project with the CMARS system. This item could be further discussed with the selected vendor

24. Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #17. The software

should include a comprehensive financial management solution to assist officers in the

management of collection of fees while on Probation and Parole or waivers for hardship.

a) What types of financial obligations, including types of fees, does RIDOC track?

Probation and Parole monthly fees $20 per month//Interstate Case Payments $60/GPS Fees

$6/day $42/week



(PPACTS)

12

b) Please describe the role RIDOC and officers play in the collection of fees including:

The only role we take is in the collection of Electronic Monitoring (EMP) fees.

i.) whom you take funds from

Parole Officers collect these fees from Parolees on EMP

ii) the types of funds

Only money orders are accepted

iii.) the manner you receive funds

Money order given to Parole Officer

iv.) who exactly collects funds

The Parole Officer

v.) the roles of staff including the officer and any financial clerks

Officer collects money order verify all info is accurate – goes into safe – every

two weeks collected from safe and brought to RIDOC Inmate Accounts for

deposit. Access database keeps track of payments and balances owed.

vi.) your rules on how funds are applied to obligations

No special rules. Money only goes towards GPS cost obligation.

vii.) how collected funds are subsequently disbursed

Brought to inmate accounts to be deposited

i) the waiver process including rules and qualifying criteria

EMP fees are not usually waived but there in an internal form that can be used to

grant a waiver

25. Specific as to Probation and Parole Case Management section, #18. The software

should support the generation of predefined reports, such as the Bail Report and

Presentence Report, as well as allow for the creation of custom ad hoc reports by the

end user.

Please provide a list of required reports and examples of each.

There are many forms and reports as described previously. Some samples are

attached.



(PPACTS)

13

26. Are you looking for train-the-trainer training for your end users or are you expecting the

vendor to train all of your users?

Yes

If so how many users will need to be trained? 20

Vendor E

• Under the first paragraph of the Specific Requirements heading on page 6 of the RFP there is a reference to Attachment 1. Can the attachment be provided for vendor review?

Reference Attachment #1 • Vendors are directed to address the general and specific elements under Section 3 – Scope of Work.

Are the responses to the 30 general requirements, 8 descriptions, and 19 probation and parole specific items to be included with the Technical Response?

If so, please clarify the section (4.1-4.4) in which the responses should be included.

It should be answered in 4.3

Also, is it the expectation that those responses would be included in the six pages allowed for the

Technical Response?

Yes

• How are the responses to the items under Section 3 – Scope of Work evaluated in terms of scoring? Are the responses included in the evaluation of the Technical Response?

See the Scoring grid on page 13 of RFP

Vendor F

1) What is the number of users by role?

150

2) What is the number of new offenders per year? Number of new caseloads per year?

RIDOC ceased hand collecting these stats in 2014. However, at the end of CY14

there were a total of approximately 5,900 new cases opened during that time frame.



(PPACTS)

14

3) What is the total number of active offenders?

Approximately 9,000 active cases

4) Section 3 - Scope of Work (p.7 requirement #7)

What kind of legacy data resides in the Oracle database that needs to be imported and managed?

Informix was an error in the RFP. It should read “ORACLE”.

The legacy information that resides in the system is caseload maintenance, case information, special conditions, risk assessment scores, etc.

Please elaborate. Is this a one-time migration? Yes

5) What are required interfaces or integrations in scope for this RFP? What services are available

for these required integrations?

This has been answered previously.

6) Section 2 (Background and purpose), 2nd paragraph, last sentence: What is the current system

that will no longer be supported within 5 years?

P&P Tracking System, it is in-house and needs to be moved from Powerbuilder 12

eventually.

7) Section 3 - Scope of Work (p.8 requirement #27)

Please elaborate on “catalog”.

Basically this means that a record can have supporting documents (scanned) available to that record to support the information since a lot of information that is critical to cases are still paper.



(PPACTS)

15

8) Conversion (p. 9, #4 of top section)

Where will the data be converted from? From what system(s)? From what type of databases? What is

the estimated volume of data to be converted? What is the number of clients and caseloads to be

converted? Will documents need to be converted or migrated? If yes, what are the types of documents

and the volume of documents to be migrated?

Data that will need to be converted is on Oracle tables or views. The data to be converted will vary depending on what the RIDOC decides on just a case management system or full system with other Probation and Parole components. The number of clients and caseloads has been described previously. Again, depending on the system most of the documents for current RIDOC system is all paper. May be scanning in documents. There are some documents that are housed in our Transition from Prison to Community which the new system may need to point to for reviewing purposes.

9) Is there remote check-in capability today? Are Kiosks being used today? Should we include

Kiosk capability in the proposal cost?

NO TO ALL – NOT AT THIS TIME

10) What tools are being used for risk assessments by Probation and Parole today?

RIDOC utilizes the LSIR and LSIR-SV. This assessment functionality currently resides in the TPCDS database.

11) Assuming budget is allocated for PPACTS, is there a desired date or timeframe that the system

should be live in production?

9 to12 mos – including conversion, design, testing and training

12) Page 10 - #16

Is offender ID being used today? YES

If it is, where is this id being generated? Probation and Parole Tracking System

Is it unique across all applications in the enterprise? Yes

If it is not, what is the unique identifier being used today to uniquely identify an offender?

N/A



(PPACTS)

16

Vendor G

1) RFP Page 15 RESPONSE CONTENTS – Items 1-6 address the format and proposal contents. I do

not see a section dedicated to Functionality.

Question: Where in the proposal should the functionality response reside?

In the technical section

2) RFP Page 3, #14 – The respondent should be aware of the State’s Minority Business Enterprise

(MBE) requirements, which address the State’s goal of ten percent (10%) participation by MBEs

in all State Procurements. For further information contact the MBE Compliance Officer at (401)

574-8670 or [email protected] or visit the website at www.mbe.ri.gov.

Question: Is there a 10% MBE requirement for RFP# 7551258?

It is a statewide goal and will be addressed at time of contract award.

3) RFP Page 8, #16 – The software must be clusterable and fault-tolerant.

Question: Can you please elaborate on this requirement.

Basically the application must be available at all times if hosted by vendor. Minimum downtime if vendor has issues with hardware, network etc. If the software is housed at the RIDOC, provisions will be put in place for the application to run with minimum downtime via the infrastructure and configuration of servers.

4) RFP Page 8, #22 – The software should support automated workflow routing between end users.

Question: What is the business practice that drives this requirement? Can you provide an example to

illustrate the need?




(PPACTS)

17

Vendor H

1. How many end users are going to use the Case Management System?

150

2. How many paroles are going to be managed as part of the Case Management System?

On any given day, RI has just shy of 525 parolees being supervised in the

community, which includes those offenders on lifetime community supervision. The

remaining ~23,000 are probationers.

3. Has the State of Rhode procurement office or the State of Rhode Island Depart of Corrections

met with any vendors related to this RFP?

No

4. Is there a defined budget for the project?


5. What are your expectations as far as the schedule for kicking off project as well as the schedule

for the full implementation for the project?

9 to 12 mos – including conversion, design, testing and training

1 | P a g e NIC Technical Assistance Report to Rhode Island Department of Corrections

Attachment 1

National Institute of Corrections 16C1024 -Technical Assistance Report to the Rhode Island Department of Corrections: Probation &

Parole

Case Management Planning: Process and Data

Rebecca McNees, Consultant and NIC EBDM Capacity Builder

Tammy Meredith, Ph.D., Applied Research Services, Inc.

March 11, 2016

A National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Technical Assistance (TA) Team undertook a two-month

examination of system process and data issues pertinent to the Rhode Island Department of Corrections

(RIDOC) Adult Probation and Parole. The TA purpose is to assist the agency in identifying, prioritizing and

planning for case management system improvements. Participation in the federal Justice Reinvestment

Initiative (JRI) led the Department of Corrections and other stakeholders toward an interdepartmental

focus on the need for improved data on probationers and parolees in order to streamline agency

functions, improve programmatic planning, measure agency performance and impact, and answer

policy-relevant questions. The following pages summarize information gleaned from document reviews,

telephone conferences and interviews, and an on-site meeting held in Cranston1/21/2016. We first

present a system map which describes in detail the process flow of probationers and parolees from

judicial sentencing to completion of community supervision. Special attention is given to relevant pieces

of data captured at each decision point, and the automated or non-automated data systems that

support personnel at each step. Next, we outline the critical issues to consider in any effort to improve

case management data collection. Finally, recommendations are offered as the agency contemplates the

design of an automated case management system (CMS).

Process: System Mapping

In order to best understand what happens and what data are collected at key decision points for

individuals with probation and parole obligations in Rhode Island, a group of representative

stakeholders and practitioners participated in a one-day system mapping. System mapping aids groups

in creating a visual representation of the criminal justice system, noting key decision points and the

processes that take place as a result of those decisions. System mapping provides the group with an

opportunity to identify what is actually happening as individuals move through the justice system, policy

and practices that may or may not align with research evidence related to desired outcomes, and in

Rhode Island DOC’s case, the data collected by various agencies within the system about individuals at

key points.

RIDOC is particularly interested in how data and systems can be integrated or created to support

particular research and performance questions regarding probationer and parolee outcomes such as

recidivism and supervision practices that are known to improve public safety outcomes. The system map

begins at the Sentencing decision point and is diagramed for individuals sentenced to a split-sentence

(incarceration and probation/parole) and directly to probation as key data is collected at the Intake Unit

for any individual that is committed at any point, including pretrial, prior to sentencing. The following


section will describe the processes that occur after sentencing for probationers and parolees in Rhode

Island. While some processes will be diagramed throughout this report, the full system maps are

included in the Appendix.

Rhode Island Adult Corrections Criminal Justice System Map: Sentencing through Discharge

Individuals in Rhode Island can be sentenced directly to probation as an alternative to incarceration or a

split sentence, a period of active incarceration followed by probation upon release. The system process

map begins with individuals that receive a split sentence and those with a revocation of previously

suspended time with admission the Adult Corrections Institution Intake Unit.

Admission to the Intake Unit

Upon admission to the Intake Unit, the

sentence is calculated by the Records and

ID Staff from the handwritten commitment

form completed by the court staff (Green

Sheet). Data Collected at this time

includes Name, Defense Attorney, Term to

Serve, and Condition of Sentence if

available. If the individual was admitted to

the Intake Unit awaiting trial, some

information was previously collected.

However, the Records and ID Staff do not

have access to pretrial screenings or

assessments as pretrial services are

administered by the courts.

During Intake, additional demographic data is collected and medical and mental health screenings are

conducted. Data is entered into INFACTS, and staff access BANNER (courts public data system) in an

attempt to verify charges and dispositions. At this point, individuals that are considered special security

risks (e.g. prior law enforcement personnel) are diverted to a special housing unit and do not participate

in the Assessment & Orientation process.


Administrative Classification is an optional process for certain individuals. Those eligible for

administrative classification include individuals who are sentence to six months or less or individuals

sentenced by the court to participate in work release. If eligible, these individuals are then placed at the

minimum security facility and diverted from Assessment & Orientation.

Assessment and Orientation

Once Intake is completed, individuals enter

the Assessment and Orientation phase. An

intake counselor reviews information and

conducts risk and needs screenings and/or

assessments. The LSI-R is the risk screener

tool conducted on individuals that have

more than six months to serve. In the event

that the LSI-R score is 4 or higher, the full LSI

Assessment is conducted. Other

assessments that are conducted include the

TCU Drug Screen and the Parole Risk

Assessment (if applicable). Assessment

information is available and entered into the

TPCDS by the counselor.

Custody Classification

The Classification Risk Assessment is conducted to determine the appropriate level of control required

for an individual to maintain safety and security within the ACI. Scoring for custody is based primarily on

Current Charge Category, Criminal History, and Prior Institutional Conduct (static factors). Risk for

recidivism as determined by the LSI is not required as part of the custody classification and assignments

to appropriate institutions is not driven by risk for recidivism. Policy does exists that directs the

classification board to consider the LSI score, but it is currently unknown to what extent this score

factors into custody classification.

Data is reviewed from INFACTS and TPCDS. For staff that has access, criminal history can be accessed

from NCIC reports and the Attorney General’s BCI database. The majority of individuals are placed in

Medium Security, which offers the most programming and interventions, with minimal case planning

and programming occurring for individuals in minimum security.

Case Planning and Programming in the Adult Correctional Institutions

Once an individual has been transferred to the appropriate facility based on the custody classification,

case planning and programming referrals are completed by the assigned counselor. The counselor

reviews the risk and needs assessment, minutes from the classification board, and other relevant file

information to determine programming requirements, accessing INFACTS and TPCDS data systems.

Referrals are made, and individuals are placed on waiting lists if necessary.


Programming1 consists of Educational, Vocational, Cognitive-Behavioral (including Thinking for a

Change), Residential Drug, and Residential Sex Offender programming. Program referrals are entered

into TPCDS. Policy establishes a priority designation for how individuals are enrolled into programming,

including court-ordered and service matching to risk and needs assessment results. Currently, it is

uncertain how often program enrollment is based on the priority designations outlined in policy.

Discharge Planning

An institutional probation officer starts the discharge planning process for all individuals nearing release

with a “Probation Hold,” which is a designation indicative of a community supervision obligation upon

release (split sentence). The probation officer ensures that the individual has release instructions,

probation information, out of state releases, and problematic releases (e.g. housing and an acceptable

release plan). Contracted Discharge Planners may work with individuals nearing release in conjunction

with the Institutional Probation Officer.

Reentry Programming

Reentry programming is designated as a formal and voluntary program that individuals can participate in

prior to release, and is currently delivered through a contracted vendor. Reentry programming is distinct

from, and more intensive than, general discharge planning that occurs for all individuals preparing for

release. Discharge Planners, contracted reentry case managers, coordinate with probation officers to

develop reentry plans. During this programming, the primary data systems used by the Discharge

Planners are TPCDS and Community Mapping and Reentry System (CMARS). Notably, CMARS is a

separate data system that was developed for primary use by local reentry councils, while law

enforcement, discharge planners, and probation officers also use the system. Funding to maintain and

sustain this system is nearing depletion. A case management module is in development; however, it is

uncertain if there will be funding to continue system use.

Preparing for Discharge

For individuals being discharged with a Probation Hold, a Probation Intake Package is prepared prior to

release. A probation aide prepares the forms included in the intake package. The probation aide

accesses the following data systems to gather information necessary to complete forms: BANNER,

INFACTS, and police reports. Creation of the electronic record occurs when the probation aide delivers

the Intake Package to clerical staff. Clerical staff then creates the “probation file,” (electronic record and

hard file) by entering the data into the PPTS module of INFACTS; however, not all information from the

Intake Package is entered into PPTS (e.g. employment data).

1 Minimal programming is offered at the Minimum Security Facility.


Discharge from ACI

Once an individual with a probation hold is released from the ACI, he/she must report to the probation

office within 24 hours. The individual’s file is sent to the probation office from the adult correctional

institution. The individual then has the Initial Appointment with his/her probation officer, which is the

point at which the process is the same for an individual with a split-sentence and those sentenced

directly to probation.

Individuals Sentenced Directly to Community Supervision

The majority of community supervision cases in Rhode Island are sentenced directly to probation,

ranking third in nation in 2013 for the percentage of adults on probation supervision according to a 2015

report produced by the Council for State Governments2. The next section describes the process for

direct placement to probation/parole supervision through discharge, noting that the Initial Appointment

with the assigned probation officer is the point at which the process is the same for all individuals on

community supervision.

Staff in the probation office is notified of probation assignments either through the receipt of the court

disposition sheet received from the court or the probation aide checks with the court daily for

assignments in order to track individuals that do not report from court to the probation office.

Initial Meeting with Probation Aide

Once an individual reports for probation, the initial meeting takes place with the probation aide to

complete the intake package forms. All forms are hard copies, and collect the following information:

• Basic Demographic Information;

• Work/Employment Information;

• Emergency Contact;

• Signed Conditions of Probation;

• DNA Collection for felony offenses;

• Fee Form; and

• Special Court-Ordered Conditions.

The intake package is then mailed to the appropriate district office (this package is all paper forms and

no copies are made/kept by the probation aide completing the package). Once the intake package is

2 The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2015, Justice Reinvestment in Rhode Island Overview. Washington DC: The

Council of State Governments Justice Center.


received by the district office, a supervisor reviews the file and makes an assignment to a probation

officer.

Creation of the electronic record occurs when the probation aide delivers the Intake Package to clerical

staff. Clerical staff then creates the ‘probation file,’ (electronic record and hard file) by entering the data

into the PPTS module of INFACTS; however, not all information from the Intake Package is entered into

PPTS (e.g. employment data). The individual then has the Initial Appointment with his/her probation

officer.

Initial Appointment with Probation Officer

During the Initial Appointment, the Probation Officer reviews the file information and PPTS to verify the

information entered. The probation officer cannot change, correct, or add information into the PPTS and

must notify the clerical staff of any necessary changes. Clerical staff will then make any changes to the

data in PPTS. The individual also has a photo taken, signs a release of information, and the program

referral form is completed.

Assessment

During the initial meeting the probation officer will review or complete the LSI-R Screener and other

screenings/assessments for specialized cases. The LSI-R Screener is entered into TPCDS, other

assessments/screenings are not. During the initial appointment, the officer must access the following

data systems to review or verify information:

• BCI-Criminal Records Database (maintained by the Attorney General)

• CMARS

• TPCDS

• PPTS

• SOCN (Sex Offender Risk Level)

• ICOTS (Interstate Compact system-cases transferred out of or into the state for supervision).

Assignment to Supervision Level

Supervision levels are primarily

charge-driven, with the exception of

Low Supervision. Attempts are made

in some instances to group caseloads

by specialized crimes or factors. The

active supervision caseloads are Low

Supervision, Sex Offender, Domestic

Violence, Gender-Specific (women

only), Generic, and Parole. Specialized

supervision includes mental health,

drug court, and youthful violent

offender. There is also a set of inactive

caseloads that are driven by status of

the case; Warrants, Minimum


Supervision, and Admin Banked for District Court Cases (misdemeanors).

Supervision Types Considerations

Low Supervision: For individuals scoring low risk on the LSI, policy recommends standards for

supervision contacts. Actual practices or adherence to a minimum standard for contact varies by

probation office. This remains an actively supervised caseload.

Minimum Supervision Unit: A caseload in this office is also referred to as “Banked,” and this unit

includes approximately 10,000 cases total for inactive supervision, of which approximately 4,400 are

from superior court (felony). This caseload represents an option for graduated reduction in supervision

frequency/intensity for individuals that have been compliant with probation conditions for at least one

year and have completed all sentenced conditions.

Active Probation Supervision

Community-Based Programming and Interventions

Individuals routinely report in-person to officers on a monthly basis. The focus of meetings and

determination of contact schedule is based on the presenting issues. Officers regularly focus sessions on

verifying residence status, restitution/financial obligations, treatment participation, and compliance.

While officers have been trained in the use of core correctional practices (EPICS3), supervision contacts

are primarily driven by immediate issues with the individual and monitoring compliance with conditions.

All activities that occur during supervision contacts are recorded in a case file ledger. Because of

caseload volume and the infancy of the LSI implementation, it is rare that officers are using EPICS during

the contacts or spending the majority of sessions focusing on criminogenic risks. There is also no design

for differential contacts based on risk of the individual. It is also unclear how long contacts last, but it is

safe to presume that all individuals have similar contacts lasting a minimal amount of time as the

volume of cases severely limits the officers’ ability to individualize sessions to factors other than

immediate crisis and condition compliance.

All programming and treatment is provided by community-based service providers, either publicly

funded (e.g. social services/community services boards) or private providers. Programming referrals are

driven by court-ordered conditions rather than a combination of court-order and risk/needs assessment

results. Tracking program entry and completion, as well as the quality of service-matching

(appropriately matched and sequenced to criminogenic risk and needs), are currently a challenge to

monitor and measure because of the lack of automated data.

3 EPICS is a program offered by the University of Cincinnati that trains probation officers to use core correctional practices

known to reduce recidivism when applied appropriately. Detailed information on the model can be found

at:https://www.uc.edu/corrections/services/trainings/effective_practices_in_community_supervision.html


Responding to Noncompliance on Probation (Technical Violations Only)

In order to effectively measure, intervene, identify drivers of probation noncompliance, and respond

effectively to noncompliance, understanding what happens during the violations process is critical for

the RIDOC. The current system of violation responses and corresponding data collection presents

specific challenges to assessing the type of end to a probation term, whether the individual finished

his/her or her term successfully or violated probation resulting in removal or incarceration. Probation

violations account for nearly half of the new admissions to the ACI, and the system must understand

what happens during violations to design a strategy to improve tracking of probation outcomes.

This section details only the process for those individuals with a technical violation of probation, and

because new charges account for more than double the probation revocations than technical violations

the group may want to consider recording and noting the differences in process from the system map

included here.

Informal Responses (Low Severity Noncompliance)

Officers can choose to apply an informal sanction (less than court notification) in response to

probationer noncompliance in the instance of low severity violations of conditions. In these instances,

once compliance is achieved supervision continues. Noncompliant behavior and informal responses are

not recorded in a data system, leading to challenges when measuring if sanctions are commensurate

with the violation behavior as well as instances of noncompliance leading to formal notification to the

court. This is an opportunity to address violation responses that may lessen the instances of continued

noncompliance and/or reporting of violations to the court.

Currently, responses to probation violations are at the discretion of individual officers and their

supervisors. There is no standard policy that guides consistent responses to particular technical

noncompliance and violation behaviors.

Formal Response (High Severity or Repeated Noncompliance)


A formal written report is prepared and sent to the court (Superior Court requires the Presentment

Report and District Court requires the 32F). Once notification is received by the Superior Court, it could

take 2-3 months for a hearing to be scheduled. There is also the option of issuing an arrest warrant that

could lead to detaining an individual at the ACI Intake Unit pending the hearing. Hearing schedules are

tracked in BANNER, the courts public data system. In District court, the probation officer schedules the

hearing on designated violation hearing court dates. A progress report is completed and submitted to

court prior to the violation hearing.

Violation Hearing Outcomes

Only formal violations and case outcomes are tracked in PPTS, and dispositions of violation hearings are

numerous and difficult to record or extract from PPTS. Because probation terms have expiration dates,

probation may end despite the outcome of the violation, leading to the challenges faced when

evaluating the outcomes of particular probation cases and supervision practices to probation outcomes.

There is a possibility that these outcomes may differ for New Criminal Offenses violations, such as new

terms of probation or active periods of incarceration.

Probation Supervision Discharge

Once it has been determined that probation has expired or has been terminated by court action, clerical

staff prepares to close the case in PPTS. This requires data entry into four screens in the module, and

lacks the ability to record the outcome of the case (successful or unsuccessful based on noncompliance

or termination by the court).

In the four PPTS closure screens, clerical staff must record the following data:

• Conditions-Verify and enter completion dates;

• Charges-Expiration dates;

• Indictments-Expiration dates and change in status to closed or expired; and

• Probation Case-Expired and Date and Reason Why: Closed, Deceased, Expired.

The design of this process impedes efficiency based on the duplication of information, and also impacts

the ability to isolate individual behaviors that are indicative of future outcomes or an impact on risk to

reoffend that could be attributed to specific practices during the period of probation supervision. It also

limits the ability to measure recidivism by probation outcome, which is a good indicator of future

offending. Time to reoffending is also an important measure to ensure that recidivism is tracked

appropriately and supervision dosage delivered to mitigate risk of reoffending, both for in-program and

post-program recidivism.

Using the System Map to Isolate Key Decision Points for Data Collection and Integration


Several lessons were learned from previous attempts to extract and analyze the probation system’s

performance and probationer outcomes, and these challenges are exacerbated by the inability to record

case supervision activities in an automated data system. While data is collected throughout the

incarceration and community supervision process, systems remain rudimentary and are not currently

integrated with one another. Most notably, as RIDOC moves forward with its adoption of evidence-

based practices throughout the system, the key practices and information most critical to evaluate the

public safety impacts are stored in probation officer paper files. Without case management and

probation performance statuses being entered into an automated data system about key decisions,

evaluators and policy makers do not have access to efficiently evaluate the efforts in place to reduce

recidivism. For offenders who serve time at the ACI, some key information is collected and entered

during incarceration about risk and needs and programming referrals in the TPCDS by Adult Counselors;

however, this information is not populated in the PPTS. It is available in TPCDS, but as a separate system

that probation officers have to access. Additionally, this same data is not collected and entered for

offenders who come to community supervision directly from court so that, to the extent possible, case

plans, interventions, and supervision decisions are not risk-informed.

Research evidence overwhelmingly supports the system’s application of the Risk-Need-Responsivity

model as the most effective way to reduce higher risk offenders’ risk for future offending, and these

principles must be woven together throughout the treatment of a justice-involved individual. In order

for probation officers to effectively apply the core correctional practices and provide supervision

interventions grounded in research evidence, this information must be more readily accessible to

officers considering the workload challenges that exist due to high caseloads4. When attempting to

answer some of the key performance and research questions, the current system of data collection and

review of case file information is inefficient for evaluators to provide reliable and timely information to

inform policy decisions for the RIDOC, and hampers practitioners’ ability to efficiently manage cases in a

way to incorporates the research evidence into their day-to-day decision making.

After reviewing the initial system map, participants provided some of the initial opportunities for

improvement. RIDOC wants to achieve the ability to effectively and reliably answer research questions

about the individuals involved in the criminal justice system regarding public safety outcomes,

specifically to include recidivism and drivers of recidivism, and improve the efficiency of the system

through automating data that is necessary for documenting criminal justice performance.

Specific Opportunities for Improvement Include:

1. Reducing Paperwork

• Scanning Intake Packages when sending to the assigned probation district

• Scanning/Emailing requests for warrants to the AG

• Auto-populating forms and letters in various systems (PPTS is set up to do some forms)

2. Improving Data Quality and Efficiency

• Viewing court reports for violations

• Simpler forms for commitment to Intake Unit (who is being committed, for how long and

type of commitment, and for what charges)

4 The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2015.


• Eliminating duplication of data entry into multiple systems

• Uniform recording of case information and management practices into one system

• Tracking all offender information in one data system

• Tracking and accurately recording employment information, programming referrals, and the

use of EPICS, and specifically being able to assess service matching to risk/needs determined

by LSI and other validated screening/assessments

• Uniform terminology for Parole and Probation (uniform tracking as individuals with both

obligations must be tracked separately in PPTS)

Data: The Need for a Case Management System

The Department of Corrections and other stakeholders (law enforcement, prosecution, judicial,

community, legislative) increasingly need information on probationers and parolees, to include caseload

statistics, performance on supervision, agency responses to conditions and violations, and ultimately

measures of supervision success or failure (recidivism). Such case management data should be the

source to overlay actual figures on the process map, a task that cannot be performed with current data

systems. Case management data comes from a variety of RIDOC automated and paper-based

information systems. The need for a comprehensive computerized case management system is clear as

RIDOC struggles to track supervised populations and answer even basic questions for internal or

external audiences.

Two options are contemplated: creating agency management information system (MIS) enhancements

to the existing and disparate probation/parole data systems, or purchasing a new customizable case

management system. The optimal choice should be determined by agency timelines, MIS staff time and

expertise to support an in-house project, existing computer system platforms and language

compatibility and expansion capabilities, the need and desire for web-based access for field officers, the

RIDOC vision for future, current budget constraints, and future funding opportunities to purchase new

products and expertise. The two options are described in more detail below, with specific attention to

critical issues for each.

CMS Option 1: Enhance Existing Data Systems

The RIDOC Oracle-based inmate data system, Inmate Facility Tracking System (INFACTS), and its

Probation & Parole Tracking System (PPTS) module, house the bulk of automated data on offenders

entering supervision from court or from prison (ACI). Unfortunately, that data cannot be analyzed or

extracted for analytical purposes to understand probationers or caseloads. Probation and parole officers

supplement that data with information on current cases under supervision with paper files housed in

their regional offices. Those paper files are neither collated for a statewide view of supervision activities

in the aggregate nor housed in a location accessible to anyone beyond the supervising officer.

Enhancing the existing PPTS system requires the agency’s acceptance of the current platform and

language for the future, issues for IT expert consultation. At a minimum, the following data

improvements should be incorporated into an enhanced data system:

1. Add Case Identifiers. In addition to personal information (name, gender, race, DOB, address)

case identifiers should include correctional IDs (INFACTS ID#, PPT CLIENT#), law enforcement

state fingerprint ID (SID), social security number, driver’s license number, and any other


personal identifier captured in another state agency database under consideration for potential

linking. Agency information such as the supervising officer and supervision office and region

should be included for caseload reporting purposes.

2. Organize Details By Person (Not Case). Officers supervise people, not cases. Link and summarize

charges, indictments, supervision cases (probation and parole), supervision terms, and dates for

each person.

3. Capture Sentence Detail. Accurate documentation of sentence type, length and date is required.

Entry of the sentence detail, merged with prison confinement details, can automatically

generate supervision start and expiration dates, along with terms (length) of supervision.

4. Capture Critical Date History. As sentence and supervision dates are updated due to new

charges or cases it is critical to capture updates for accurate calculations of supervision terms

and expiration dates.

5. Capture Supervision Status History. The existing system identifies supervision status as banked

(unsupervised), low, or active and identifies specialized caseload status (mental health, domestic

violence, etc.). Risk should be added as a status (see Linking to Other Databases below) as the

agency plans to move toward risk-based supervision practices. Currently, as statuses change

over the course of supervision that data is not captured. Thus a complete history of supervision

statuses, with dates of changes, should be captured. This is required for an agency to report the

population by a selected status at supervision start, supervision completion, or any point in time

(current caseload).

6. Capture Supervision Completion Status & Agency. At the close of each supervision episode

capture the type of completion (successful, terminated/revoked for technical violation,

terminated/revoked for new offense, transfer, etc.) and the agency of release (street, ACI, other

jurisdiction, etc.). This will allow RIDOC the ability to track outcomes by caseload types.

7. Capture Supervision Conditions. Regular and special conditions set by the court should be

captured for each offender. A comparison of conditions to violation activity is required to

determine if an offender is compliant with terms of supervision.

8. Improve Interface. Create a more user friendly interface and reporting options to better serve

probation officers.

The Issue of Linking to Other Databases

In addition to the PPTS, relevant probation and parole data is housed in two existing databases. RIDOC

INFACTS feeds the prison history, and since PPTS is a module of INFACTS prepopulating fields is current

practice. Officers can also view details of the prison episode leading to the current supervision episode,

for parolees and split sentence probationers. The Transition from Prison to Community Data System

(TPCDS), developed by an RIDOC contractor, houses prison programming, reentry plans, and risk

assessments. Unfortunately there is no link between PPTS and TPCDS, so officers must manually log into

each system separately to view selected fields. Any plan to expand the existing data system should

include the database linkages to capture these critical data items:


1. Reentry Plan. Reentry and discharge planning occurs in prison for the majority of inmates

(except short sentences). Institutional probation officers perform this duty 120 days prior to exit

to the community, reviewing conditions of supervision and starting to prepare the probation

intake package. That information should be linked to PPTS for viewing and updating by the field

officers to avoid duplication of efforts.

2. Risk/Need Profile. LSI-R and other risk assessments entered and stored in TPCDS must be linked

to case management system data if the agency plans to move toward risk-based case

management. Risk is not an offender status in PPTS, thus a critical need exists to link assessment

results to case management in order for officers to prepare need-based case plans within risk

groups. Requiring officers to view risk/need results separately from case management is time

consuming, duplicative and conflicts with efforts to practice evidence-based supervision.

3. Violations & Responses. The prevention and management of noncompliance behavior of

supervised offenders is an agency goal. Supervision violations and the official responses by

officers (sanctions) entered and stored in PPTS must be linked to case management system data

if the agency wishes to measure compliance with conditions and measure effective (or

ineffective) practices in violation and response behaviors. There is also an articulated need to

enter historical violation history into PPTS on the existing active caseload.

4. Reentry Services. The web-based Community Mapping and Reentry System (CMARS) allows

counselors to view geographically region-specific supervised caseloads and reentry community

services. This tool imports INFACTS data already, and thus it makes sense to also link to PPT or

any future case management system to improve the community service knowledge based of

officers. Sharing of resource availability can only lead to reduced duplication of efforts and

improved delivery of supervision.

5. Sex Offender Registry. RIDOC should identify electronically the registered sex offenders on a

supervision caseload by linking with the state agency responsible for managing the sex offender

registry.

The Issue of Automated Forms

The workgroup for this project agree with the recommendations put forth by the Council for State

Governments (CSG) through the Justice Reinvestment Initiative. Rhode Island’s probation/parole officers

carry extremely large caseloads. In 2013 the state had the third largest probation rate in the nation.5

They also devote an extraordinary amount of time manually documenting supervision information. In

addition, the potential for agency liability is extensive when case information is housed in paper files, to

include single-copy misplaced files and the potential for exposure of confidential information. Thus any

new CMS must include the ability to create form and letter templates that pre-populate with data from

existing or new data systems. Reducing the time spent hunting down key pieces of information across

multiple databases, reducing duplication of data entry to create new forms, and reducing the current

practice of printing forms and placing them in paper files will free up time for officers to effectively

5 The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2015.


manage their caseloads. MIS is already working on prepopulated form solutions for PPTS and should be

highly encouraged to devote time and resources to these efforts.

CMS Option 2: Create a New Case Management System

The second option for capturing, organizing and reporting necessary probation and parole supervision

data is to purchase a case management system customizable to RIDOC’s needs. As the work group on

this project duly notes: RIDOC can publish a request for information (RFI) to numerous vendors who

specialize in building and customizing correctional/community supervision case management systems.

There is agency no cost or commitment required to solicit information and demonstrations. Both agency

needs and the research on effective behavior change strategies with justice involved individuals dictate

that key elements are minimally necessary to document in any new case management system:

1. Up-to-date offender demographics, profile and identifiers

2. Judicial sentence and terms and conditions of supervision

3. Supervision contact (office, collateral, field, phone) and court appearance detail

4. Supervision statuses (active/unsupervised, special populations)

5. Risk and needs assessment results and RNR-informed case plans

6. Supplemental assessments of literacy, educational attainment, behavioral health, mental health,

and substance abuse disorders

7. Program referral, intake, participation and completion (to include education, employment,

substance abuse, cognitive behavioral therapy, anger management, domestic violence classes)

8. Drug test administration and results

9. Employment status (dates of employment, employer detail, wage verifications)

10. Violations of supervision and agency responses

Recommendations

The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) has worked over the past thirty years to provide technical

assistance to 29 probation and parole agencies across the United States, identifying research and

frameworks most effective in changing offender behavior.6 To effectively change behavior of

probationers and parolees, officers must understand and communicate conditions of supervision,

monitor compliant or violation behavior, respond appropriately to both, and address those criminogenic

needs (risk factors) that drive noncompliant behavior. Without readily available, accurate, and up-to-

date information on each component of this behavior change model, officers cannot effectively do their

job. RIDOC has already devoted resources to working with NIC in the development of supervision

practice protocols. The next logical step, as observed in the evolution of other agencies, is automating

case management as a means of helping overburdened officers to implement evidence based practices.

It is timely to move toward a major investment in a robust system. Toward that end, we offer the

following recommendations when selecting among the two options presented, enhancing existing data

systems or creating a new case management system:

6 Carter, M. (2015). Behavior Management of Justice Involved Individuals. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice

Programs, National Institute of Corrections.


1. Examine all existing CMS data elements at each stage of the enclosed system maps for quality

(accuracy), availability, and timeliness.

2. Develop process improvement plans necessary to improve data collection.

3. Determine what data elements necessary for effective supervision are not currently captured.

4. Prioritize CMS needs among officers (data timeliness, sharing capabilities, mode of access, user

interface, need for summary or individualized reports, agency training and support, etc.).

5. Collaborate with other state agencies that have already developed automated CMS systems,

such as the RI Department of Children, Youth & Families (DCYF), in order to leverage state

resources, knowledge and experiences transferrable to DOC.

6. Publish a request for information (RFI) to numerous vendors who specialize in building and

customizing correctional case management systems in order to acquire additional information

to aid this decision making process.


Appendix: Rhode Island Department of Corrections System Maps


Rhode Island Adult Corrections Criminal Justice System Map

Starting Decision Point: Sentencing


Rhode Island Adult Corrections Institutions Flowchart

Split Sentence-Active Incarceration and Community Supervision

Rhode Island Adult Corrections Institutions Flowchart

Case Planning through Release


Rhode Island Adult Corrections Flowchart

Sentenced to Community Supervision



Technical Violations of Probation Conditions


Probation Case Closures