Throughout my fellowship year, I was given a wide array of projects during my court placement. Here, you can find two write-ups I managed for the San Mateo Superior Court. 

BJA FY 24 Improving Substance Use Disorder Treatment and Recovery Outcomes for Adults in Reentry Grant Application

A. Description of the Issue  
In 2023, the United States witnessed a staggering surge in opioid overdose deaths, with half attributed to fentanyl. In California, the impact is particularly acute, with fentanyl overdose accounting for 1 in 5 deaths among individuals aged 13-24. San Mateo County mirrors this grim trend, experiencing a rise in fentanyl and opioid-related deaths from 11% in 2020 to 31% in 2021. Disturbingly, demographic data reveals an overrepresentation of Black and young residents among those battling addiction as 81% of overdose-related deaths occur in individuals aged 20 to 59.1  
San Mateo County’s collaborative court programs serve as vital interventions in combating this crisis, offering a robust array of community treatment alternatives for incarcerated individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) and mental health diagnoses. However, the current process falls short of Adult Treatment Court Best Practice Standard 1.B. Analysis of three collaborative court programs—Veterans Treatment Court (VTC), Multiple Driving Under the Influence (MDUI) court, and Drug Court—revealed alarming averages: 214 days, 159 days, and 339.5 days respectively from arrest to candidate admission to treatment court. This is in stark contrast to the Adult Treatment Court Best Practices, which advocate admission to treatment within 60 days of arrest.2 To address this disparity, the proposal seeks to establish a post-arraignment screening and diagnostic court calendar, with two principal objectives: 1) To create a uniform, proactive screening process immediately following arraignment. 2) To ensure continuity of care as individuals receiving treatment in the jail transition to community-based care. 
A.1. Current Process  
San Mateo County is a coastal California county located due south of the City and County of San Francisco and north of Santa Clara County. The opioid overdose rate in San Mateo County was 10.7 per 100,000 residents in 2022 according to the California Department of Public Health. When an individual is arrested and booked into jail custody by the county Sheriff's Office, jail medical staff conduct a classification assessment of the individual. This includes a discussion of their substance use history and a determination of whether the individual is currently experiencing symptoms of chemical withdrawal.  Those with identified substance use issues are usually placed in a Behavioral Health Unit (BHU) where their criminogenic risks and needs are assessed using the Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS). Responsive case plans are then developed from the assessment results. 
Following the jail classification process, the Pretrial Services Office of San Mateo County assesses the arrestee using the Virginia Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument-Revised (VPRAI-R). This assessment serves as a decision aid to the arraignment judge in arriving at a release determination. Given the statutorily limited timeframe between booking and arraignment (48 hours in California) and the decentralized nature of early data collection, defense attorneys have limited insight into the clinical needs of defendants prior to arraignment. If a defendant under-reports their substance use history and does not present signs of chemical withdrawal at the time of booking, a referral for substance use diagnosis and treatment may not happen until months later when the defendant is finally connected to one of the Collaborative Court teams, where a Clinical Case Manager Assessment Specialist could complete a level of care determination using the American Society of Addiction Medicine diagnostic tool. 
A lack of fluency among attorneys about substance use disorders and their treatment can also exacerbate delays in referring the case to an intervention offered by the Collaborative Courts. Attorneys may make improper referrals (e.g. a defendant qualifies for a program, but that program is not the “best-fit” intervention). Improper referrals and decentralized expertise on SUD add time to case processing and contribute to the Court’s inability to meet Best Practice Standard 1.B. A post-arraignment screening and diagnostic calendar provides an opportunity to quickly consolidate the accumulated defendant data and determine what additional SUD and behavioral health screening is necessary to match defendants with their “best-fit” disposition and treatment prior to release, thus ensuring improved outcomes for re-entry. ​

Rise24 Conference Memo

​ANAHEIM, California – San Mateo County Collaborative Courts team members joined over 7,000 fellow treatment court professionals at the annual RISE24 Conference in Anaheim, California on May 22, 2024.  Judges and court staff from the San Mateo County Superior Court were joined by representatives from San Mateo County partner agencies, including the District Attorney’s Office, Private Defender Program, Probation Department, and multiple treatment providers.
 
Hosted by All Rise since 1995, RISE is the premier training and educational conference for treatment court professionals.  Two dozen team members from a diverse spectrum of professional disciplines serving the San Mateo County Superior Court’s Veterans Treatment Court, Military Diversion Program, and Multiple DUI Court attended this year’s RISE conference.  Their participation was made possible by grant funding from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Veteran's Court Enhancement Project Grant (15PBJA-21-GG-04279-VTCX) and the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Multiple DUI Court Program Grant (AL240210).
 
The conference offered exclusive, practical, multidisciplinary content to help treatment court programs better meet the needs of veterans and those with behavioral health disorders. The sessions covered numerous aspects of treatment courts, from judicial supervision to rehabilitation services, providing a holistic view of the field in conjunction with important training on emerging science and trends.
 
Participants had direct access to a vast group of experts in treatment, evaluation, supervision, and law.  Additionally, the RISE24 Conference provided significant opportunities for networking and exchanging ideas with peers from across the country, allowing attendees to learn how other programs employ best practices and innovative solutions to enhance collaborative court programs.  Collaborative Courts Supervising Judge Susan Jakubowski noted, “The RISE24 Conference was a unique and valuable opportunity to meet and learn from other collaborative courts and justice partners from all over the United States.”  A highlight of the conference was the RISE24 Expo, which showcased the newest and most innovative services and products available to the treatment court field.