20240723-74305-23

Priority Area 1: Data Analysis
Analyze data from the Department of Corrections (DOC), KSP, AOC and other state agencies (where appropriate and available) to quantify the number of people involved in Kentucky's criminal justice system for DV- and IPV-related offenses, with the goal of identifying the full scale and impact of these offenses on the state's criminal justice system and the potential for reducing prison and jail populations and improving interventions. CSG Justice Center staff will also quantify the prevalence of domestic violence by identifying the number of people on community supervision with current or historical IPV-related offenses or protective orders.
Background: Kentucky has historically struggled to consistently collect and comprehensively analyze relevant data to effectively evaluate and address the state's DV challenges. This is especially troubling given that lifetime prevalence rates of DV in Kentucky are far higher than the national average. About 45 percent of all women and 36 percent of all men in Kentucky experience DV during their lifetime compared to the national averages of 37 percent and 31 percent, respectively. Additionally, the Department of Corrections (DOC) is unable to adequately quantify how many people are incarcerated or on community supervision with a domestic violence-related history, which creates a missed opportunity for the state to comprehensively address the DV related population with programs and intervention. Because the DOC is contracted to handle misdemeanor probation in Jefferson County, the largest county in the state, additional information will be available for the analysis.
Update: CSG Justice Center staff received an updated prison snapshot data file from the Kentucky Department of Corrections in June to correct an issue with a prior data submission. Using the updated data, staff reran some of the code to identify the prevalence of people with a history of domestic violence civil protective orders in DOC custody during 2022. All visualizations affected by the new data submission were updated, as well. CSG Justice Center staff also created new maps reflecting rates of domestic violence victimization by area development district and maps reflecting rates of civil protective order issuance by area development district. Finally, staff explored the civil protective order history of women incarcerated by DOC, both as petitioners and as respondents. Staff continued the quality assurance review of DOC, KSP, and AOC data analysis.
Priority Area 2: Assess Community Supervision
Conduct a qualitative assessment of community supervision systems in Kentucky, with a focus on DV caseloads. CSG Justice Center staff will assess the effectiveness of current policies and practices in reducing revocations and promoting successful and safe community reintegration. CSG Justice Center staff will conduct interviews and focus groups with DOC leadership, probation district supervisors, probation and parole officers, and clients on supervision with a DV-related charge (if available) to understand and assess the implementation practices for evidence-based supervision.
Background: Kentucky had the 14th-highest rate of people on probation or parole supervision in the country in 2019, with nearly 64,000 people under state or local supervision. Before the start of the pandemic, over 45 percent of the prison population was incarcerated due to supervision violations, which was the seventh highest percentage in the country at that time. Resources for people who are incarcerated or supervised in different parts of the system vary and may not support ensuring people receive the treatment and programming they need to reduce recidivism. Additionally, while the commonwealth is currently unable to identify the exact number of people on community supervision with underlying DV or IPV offenses, stakeholders in Kentucky report that people cycle through probation--especially misdemeanor probation--for DV offenses, which could be another driver of their prison and jail population growth. The DOC is contracted with Jefferson County, which includes Louisville, to manage those on probation with misdemeanor offenses, which could provide an estimate of the total misdemeanor population with an underlying DV or IPV offense and how that population fares on supervision.
Update: While CSG Justice Center staff continue planning the project launch, we are developing our discussions on how to pair our data analysis with the probation and parole assessment findings. While we continue these internal discussions staff continue to actively draft our presentation for a future working group meeting. In meetings with local jailers, CSG Justice Center staff are learning about the extent to which jails coordinate with community supervision prior to an incarcerated individual's release.
Priority Area 3: Assess Responses and Interventions to Those Who Commit Domestic Violence
Conduct a qualitative assessment of the efficacy, accessibility, and availability of services, treatment, and programming aimed at those who commit domestic violence, with an emphasis on Batterer Intervention Programs (BIP), to better understand if the interventions for the incarcerated and supervised populations reduce supervision failure and repeated criminal behavior. CSG Justice Center staff will evaluate the use of evidence-based programming, funding for such programming, the use of risk and need assessments, and reentry processes. This assessment work will inform evidence-based solutions for the commonwealth's DV population.
Background: Kentucky stakeholders report that it is common for people convicted of IPV-related offenses to be sentenced to misdemeanor probation multiple times where they receive little support or services beyond the requirement to participate in a Batterers Intervention Program (BIP). However, stakeholders suspect that BIP may not be effective and have expressed interest in assessing these programs and developing recommendations for improvements. DOC leaders have explained that when a person is incarcerated, the DOC does not receive background information on that person's either victim or perpetrator history with DV or IPV (beyond criminal convictions), which inhibits their ability to adequately manage and serve that person. Further, while DOC provides cognitive behavioral therapy and anger management, BIP is not available, which may indicate key areas of missing programming for people with criminal histories that include DV and IPV. Resources for people who are incarcerated or supervised in different parts of the system vary and may not support ensuring people receive the treatment and programming they need to reduce recidivism.
Update: CSG Justice Center staff met with several jailers around the state. Through those conversations, staff uncovered several common themes: Population Does Not Always Support Programming. Generally, staff heard that jails focused programming on sentenced populations. Several of the jails CSG Justice Center staff met with either had relatively short lengths of time or the population were awaiting sentencing. This led to instances where the jails' populations were largely ineligible for programming Programming Appears to be Voluntary and Not Based on Criminogenic Risk and Needs. While jails were supportive of programming, enrollment was largely based on whether an individual volunteered. While jails may assess an individual's risk and needs, those assessments were not used when pairing individuals with programming. Programming Decision Made by the Department of Corrections. Additionally, CSG Justice Center staff heard from several jails that DOC control of programming sometimes hindered the jails' ability to get programming to those who needed it. This included instances where the DOC approved individuals for certain programs and rules the DOC set on class size, curriculum, etc.
While there were some challenges relating to programming, the jails appeared to recognize the importance of programming; and have invested staff and resources to bolster what was available. One jail devoted an entire community space to programming with technology, while others regularly focused on advertising what programs were offered to approve attendance.
Priority Area 4: General Stakeholder Engagement
Connect with criminal justice stakeholders (law enforcement, judges, defense attorneys, prosecuting attorneys, corrections staff, lawmakers, victim and their advocates, and community-based organizations) across the commonwealth to fully understand the DV challenges and how it impacts the criminal justice system at different points and in different regions of the state. CSG Justice Center staff plan to engage with a diverse array of stakeholders at every step of the project to ensure proper context to CSG Justice Center's data analysis, qualitative assessments, and policy recommendations.
Background: Despite various local and regional efforts to address DV, it continues to be an issue that permeates the commonwealth. Louisville has a Criminal Justice Commission Domestic Violence Coordinating Council that meets to discuss domestic violence and has published reports on addressing domestic violence. Lexington created a Special Victims Unit to support survivors of domestic violence. The Attorney General's Office created the Domestic Violence Resource Prosecutor position under the Prosecutor's Advisory Council. CSG Justice Center staff can connect these efforts from across the commonwealth, help break down silos, and guide possible policy discussions.
Update: After receiving the Judicial Branch's appointments to the working group, CSG Justice Center staff meet with each working group member to discuss how DV intersects with Kentucky's criminal justice system. One of the working group members is the director of a domestic violence intake center in Fayette County. Staff gained some insight into how victim services operate in urban Kentucky.
In June, CSG Justice Center staff continued our judicial outreach through a conversation with the 5th judicial district family court judge. The 5th judicial district judge highlighted how different protections might be needed to account for her counties being predominantly rural. For example, she indicated how the statute limits the distance of a protection order to 500 feet, and how that may be ineffective in a rural setting because there might not be another person within 2 miles of an individuals' home to respond to potential violations. The judge indicated that due to differences like this, she tries to grant emergency protection orders quickly to bring parties to court to set up appropriate protections.
Priority Area 5: Assessing the need for broader criminal justice reforms
Build momentum for fostering support for another JRI project focused on the broader criminal justice challenges. CSG Justice Center staff believe that the initial DV- and IPV-focused analyses will lay the foundation for the commonwealth's understanding of larger criminal justice challenges and trends and motivate state leaders to request additional and broader analyses through another round of JRI.
Background: Kentucky jail and prison populations are increasing. From 2000 to 2018, the state's prison population increased 13 percent, with a prison incarceration rate of 428.9 per 100,000 adult residents in 2018.iv During the same period, the jail population increased by 70 percent, and the jail incarceration rate reached 792.7 per 100,000 adult residents in 2018.v Following the pandemic, the commonwealth saw a 24 percent decrease in the number of individuals incarcerated by DOC in prisons, jails, and other state-funded facilities. Starting in 2022, the number of incarcerated people began to rise again.vi From 2021 to 2022, the DOC population incarcerated in jails increased 12 percent. In addition to housing people who are sentenced to incarceration for misdemeanor offenses, local jails in Kentucky house nearly half of people sentenced to incarceration for felony offenses. Without relying on local jails, Kentucky would be unable to house the total prison population in existing state facilities.
Update: No update.