Nurse asks who reviews detention cases for early release

I have the programming hours for the last calendar year.

We've provided 10,000, approximately 10,000 hours of programming.

Councilman Movers, very briefly, please.

Yes, very briefly.

This is what happens when you cede the floor to your committee members at the start.

Mistake.

Okay, one, I think the question was a little bit more on like the daily average programming time and like with correction, like there's a certain amount, there's a standard of what people would have access to for programming hours each day.

That is like a minimum, like fresh air, things like that.

So I think that's what he was looking for.

My question is, and this is the same issue we had with correction in terms of case review, is how many people, like how many staff members

actively look like it's in their job description to look at the cases of the individuals that are in detention.

So it's really at this point me and my executive staff that are looking at it.

The staff in the facilities really don't get involved day to day.

So that's how many people.

I'm just trying to get down to the nitty gritty because we had to like really hammer down into the nitty gritty to get more capacity for case review to advocate for you all to have more staffing.

So I'm just curious, like how many people?

On a like as part of their primary work responsibility is like looking at the case review at the cases reviewing it as like a

a chunk of their day a chunk of their week you know what is that yeah so i'm gonna say that that role is much more appropriate in the mock j bucket

because we do not have access to the courts or to counsel in the same way that mock j does to convene so i'm gonna turn this over to to this opera to

Yes.

So, and can you repeat exactly?

So, and just because I know the chair is going to pop off on me.

How many people have in their job description or as an explicit ask that they are supposed to be reviewing cases of people in juvenile detention for

looking at it, making recommendations, advocating for them to be released early?

So, as you know, the sharing of juvenile case information is limited, and so nobody in the administration is able to look at these cases directly.

We're working very closely with the Office of Court Administration, and they are making sure that the cases in secure detention are being reviewed by judges and the court stakeholders very regularly.

And that is one of the reasons why we are meeting so often with them is to talk about what are we doing with long-term cases.

So do you all, so nobody who works in these facilities is able to say, these 20 young people, we highly recommend that they get released early.

Like, we are advocating for them with OCA or whoever is the ultimate decider.

Like, I'm just trying to understand logistically, like, what in the operation allows those names to rise into a place of moving them through and out of the system?

I mean, I can say we're working very closely on the data sharing to be able to look at these cases, which ACS can speak more about.

Okay.

Yes.

So what you're calling out is a complication to kind of where various information sits and who has access to it.

And we're working with Mach J and with our state partners to get a data agreement to be able to more readily share across those systems.

And we're hoping that that is going to be achieved in the very near future.

Thank you.

That's great.

That's great.

I just think like we don't need, you know, we've never needed legislation to do any of this stuff.