 |
About the Task Force
The Probation Services Task Force, staffed by the Center for Families, Children & the Courts, was established in June 2000 by the Judicial Council and the California State Association of Counties. The primary purpose of the task force was to assess programs, services, organizational structures, and funding related to probation services provided by counties to the courts, probationers, and the general public. The task force identified, analyzed, and prepared a report of findings and recommendations for presentation to the Judicial Council, CSAC, the Governor, and the Legislature.
The task force included members appointed by CSAC, members appointed by the Chief Justice, chief probation officers, representatives from the statewide probation officers association and an appellate court justice appointed by the Chief Justice to serve as a non-voting chairperson. The composition of the Probation Services Task Force is presented in the table below:
|
Representatives |
Number of Appointments |
Appointed by |
Criteria |
|
County |
6 |
CSAC |
Urban, suburban, and rural; north and south |
|
Court |
6 |
Judicial Council |
Urban, suburban, and rural; north and south |
|
Probation chiefs |
3 |
1 - Judicial Council
1 - CSAC
1 - CPOC |
Urban, suburban, and rural |
|
Probation officers |
3 |
1 - Judicial Council
1 - CSAC
1 - CPPCA |
Urban, suburban, and rural |
|
Chair |
1 |
Chief Justice |
Non-voting appellate justice |
Task Force Role and Charge
The task force was charged with addressing broad issues relating to probation, including:
- Identifying and evaluating current practices and options for funding probation services.
- Identifying the nature and scope of probation services provided by counties to the courts, probationers, and the general public.
- Identifying and evaluating current practices and options for the appointment and accountability of the Chief Probation Officer.
- Identifying and evaluating various organizational structures for adult and juvenile probation services.
- Identifying and evaluating practices of other jurisdictions with regard to the range and level of probation services, organizational structure and funding.
- Identifying the appropriate relationship between probation services and the courts as it relates to court services and alternatives for achieving the preferred outcome.
|
|
|
|