Leon County Detention Facility Assessment Final Report

Attachment #1
Page 1 of 68
Leon County Detention Facility

Needs Assessment
Final Report
August 30, 2024

Attachment #1
Page 2 of 68
Contents
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 2
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 7
Goal ...............................................................................................................................................7
Methodology .................................................................................................................................7
COUNTY POPULATION & CRIME ............................................................................................. 8
DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION ANALYSIS ....................................................................... 10
Average Daily Population ............................................................................................................. 11
Bookings ......................................................................................................................................14
Bookings By Charge ............................................................................................................................................. 16
Average Length of Stay ................................................................................................................. 18
Population Profile ........................................................................................................................ 23
Demographics...................................................................................................................................................... 23
Classification ........................................................................................................................................................ 27
Mental Health .............................................................................................................................. 27
Home Address ..................................................................................................................................................... 29
Charges ................................................................................................................................................................ 30
Recidivism............................................................................................................................................................ 35
County Jail Population Comparisons ............................................................................................. 36
ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION ..................................................................................... 37
Criminal Court Case Processing .....................................................................................................41
JAIL POPULATION FORECASTS .............................................................................................. 45
Background and Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 45
Average Daily Population Forecast Scenarios ................................................................................ 46
Main Forecast: Continuation of the Present System .......................................................................................... 46
Alternate Forecast Scenario 1: ALOS is Reduced to 30 Days .............................................................................. 49
Alternate Forecast Scenario 2: ALOS is Reduced to 30 Days, Bookings Quickly Return to 2019 Levels............. 50
Alternate Forecast Scenario 3: Bookings Return to 2019 Levels ........................................................................ 51
Current Bedspace Capacity ........................................................................................................... 52
SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS/OPPORTUNITIES FOR POPULATION REDUCTION .................... 57
i | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

Attachment #1
Page 3 of 68
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Leon County Detention Facility (LCDF), with a current capacity to house 1,246 detainees (not counting
124 beds in an Annex building), opened in 1993 and for over two decades has maintained a population of
more than 1,000 detainees at any point in time. Due to an increase in the detainee population in late
2021, the Leon County Board of County Commissioners held a LCDF Population Management Workshop
in March 2022. One of the results of that workshop was the Board’s approval of a study to evaluate current
and projected LCDF space needs. The primary goal of the Leon County Detention Facility Needs
Assessment is to determine the projected bed need for the Detention Facility through the year 2048. In
addition, the needs assessment includes an examination of the factors which drive the in-custody
population as well as some possible strategies for avoiding significant future detention population growth.
This study also examines programs and best practices adopted by other jurisdictions across the country
and identifies recommended strategies to safely manage the facility’s population. Our main analysis is
based on a series of large data extracts covering custody factors, court event dates, and other relevant
variables. The research effort culminates in 4 forecasts of the possible future size of the population,
reflecting both a continuation of current policies and practices as well as the impact of possible changes
to the criminal justice system.
The data extract contained key information for each individual held in the Leon County Detention Facility
between January 1, 2016, and July 13, 2023. In addition, we acquired updated population data that
covered the full year 2023. We also retrieved Leon County projected population growth data, as well as
those from bordering counties. To fully understand the dynamics of the detainee population factors, we
forensically reconstructed the Detention Facility’s daily population by several factors, including charge
severity, gender, and age group, among others. All the data sources were then combined to produce time
series statistical forecasts. The accuracy of population forecasting is greatly influenced by changes in
public policy, criminal court case processing, law enforcement strategies, socioeconomic factors, and a
host of other factors. To avoid producing a population forecast that may have a short shelf life, we utilized
the best performing statistical models to produce a main forecast that reflects a continuation of current
policies as well as three additional ‘hypothetical’ scenarios that consider possible changes to the criminal
justice system. The margin of error for the new forecasts is approximately plus/minus 10% by the year
2048.
The two main drivers of any jail’s population are how many people are booked into the jail and how long
they stay. In the case of the Leon County Detention Facility, the population returned to pre-COVID-19
pandemic levels during 2021. The main driver of this population increase was growth in detainee average
length of stay (ALOS) due in part to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic upon the judiciary. This
population increase would have been larger if jail bookings had returned to pre-pandemic levels.
However, bookings are slowly building back to where they were in 2019. As the courts have worked to
reduce the backlog in cases, Detention Facility ALOS decreased during 2023, driving the jail’s population
below where it was in 2022. Detention Facility ALOS is the key driver of the population and needs to be
monitored and managed.
2 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

Attachment #1
Page 4 of 68
In addition, there is extremely strong statistical evidence that criminal court case processing is the prime
determinant of the Detention Facility’s ALOS. Managing case processing times in the future will decrease
ALOS and, in turn, the Detention Facility’s population. Overall, Leon County does an exemplary job of
utilizing multiple strategies to deter, deflect, and divert individuals from custody in the Detention Facility.
At the end of 2023, the full year average daily population (ADP) for the Leon County Detention Facility
was 1,041 detainees. Our statistical modeling has produced a main forecast that, assuming nothing
changes regarding the practices of the criminal justice system, shows a likely moderate increase in the
Facility’s population with an expected average daily population (ADP) of 1,194 people by 2048.
If several system changes are implemented to reduce the ALOS, the population can be expected to
decrease. Therefore, three alternative forecasts were produced. The first alternate forecast projects the
impact of a reduction in the Detention Facility’s ALOS to an unprecedented 30 days while bookings
continue their current gradual rate of increase. This results in a 2048 ADP of 926. It must be noted that
achieving such a reduction in ALOS will be difficult and could take approximately 4 years to execute. The
task is not impossible and has been accomplished by other jurisdictions in the country. Alternate forecast
2 combines a return to pre-pandemic booking levels with the 30-day ALOS, resulting in a 2048 ADP of
1,060. The third alternative forecast assumes that the current ALOS of 53 days stays in place while
bookings quickly return to their pre-pandemic level (29 bookings per day from the current 23). If these
two measures unfold, the expected ADP will be approximately 1,679 by 2048.
Two factors must be applied to the forecasted ADP to determine a total bed requirement so that the
Detention Facility can operate effectively and in a safe and secure manner:
• Peaking Factor – Reflects the daily and seasonal variations in jail occupancy and the temporary
unavailability of beds due to unanticipated circumstances, routine repairs and maintenance, etc. and,
• Classification Factor – Reflects the need to separate the detainee populations based on gender,
security requirements, treatment needs, etc.
Thus, for all four forecasts, a classification factor of 15% is added to the projected ADP numbers along
with an 11.9% peaking factor for females and a 6.2% peaking factor for males. The table below represents
the projected ADP and bed needs for Leon County among our 4 forecasts1:
Main Forecast Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3

2048 ADP 1,194 926 1,060 1,679
2048 Bed Need 1,456 1,129 1,293 2,047
Overall, Leon County does an exemplary job of utilizing multiple strategies to deter, deflect, and divert
individuals from custody in the Detention Facility. The County’s criminal justice system has multiple
programs aimed at a wide variety of people. Our analysis indicates that most of these efforts are directed
1
The bed need is calculated by adding the ADP, the peaking factor, and the classification factor together.

Attachment #1
Page 5 of 68
at lower-level arrestees/offenders. Crime and arrest trends, however, are showing that more people with
more serious charges are in contact with the criminal justice system than ever before. Put simply, there
are no more easy opportunities for new custody alternatives. Unfortunately, that means that a lot of the
diversionary programs will not be effective in heading off future growth simply because many of the
people involved will have felony (and violent felony) charges. The strategy for Leon County should be to
blunt facility population growth by reducing ALOS through case processing improvements wherever
possible, in tandem with the continued use of Electronic Monitoring and Supervised Pretrial Release
programs.
The needs assessment produced 21 total system recommendations, some of which directly reduce ALOS,
and some that are more general efficiency changes. It should be acknowledged that many issues related
to ALOS and case processing are beyond the County’s control and will require extensive cooperation
among the key criminal justice stakeholders. To be clear, implementing most if not all these
recommendations would help reduce ALOS to the goal of 30 days, making it possible to achieve the
guidance suggested by Alternate Forecast 1. The table below contains the recommendations.

Attachment #1
Page 6 of 68

Attachment #1
Page 7 of 68
Achieving a reduction in case processing times will require significant levels of cooperation and
collaboration among the key criminal justice stakeholders, something that arguably does not always
occur. However, the work that has been done thus far has succeeded in limiting the LCDF population.
Continuing that work and making additional adjustments should keep the County in a positive situation
regarding the facility’s population well into the future.

Attachment #1
Page 8 of 68
INTRODUCTION
The Leon County Detention Facility (LCDF), with a current capacity to house 1,246 detainees (not counting
124 beds in an Annex building), opened in 1993 and for over two decades has maintained a population of
more than 1,000 detainees at any point in time. Due to an increase in the detainee population in late
2021, the Leon County Board of County Commissioners held a LCDF Population Management Workshop
in March 2022. One of the results of that workshop was the Board’s approval of a study to evaluate current
and projected LCDF space needs. The primary goal of the Leon County Detention Facility Needs
Assessment is to determine the projected bed need for the Detention Facility through the year 2048. In
addition, the needs assessment includes an examination of the factors which drive the in-custody
population as well as some possible strategies for avoiding significant future detention population growth.
This study also examines programs and best practices adopted by other jurisdictions across the country
and identify recommended strategies to safely manage the facility’s population. Our main analysis is
based on a series of large data extracts covering custody factors, court event dates, and other relevant
variables. The research effort culminated in 4 forecasts of the possible future size of the population,
reflecting both a continuation of current policies and practices as well as the impact of possible changes
to the criminal justice system.
Goal
The primary goal of this study is to ascertain the future size of, and internal categories within, the Leon
County Detention Facility detainee population. This analysis is intended to help the County make informed
decisions regarding the future of the facility. A major focus of this analysis is to examine the efficacy of
possible system changes/alternatives to incarceration.
Methodology
We undertook five main tasks to execute this study.
First, we conducted multiple interviews and meetings with stakeholders from across the criminal justice
system.
Second, we analyzed historical population-related information concerning both the county and the
detention facility, including past levels of jail admissions/bookings and length of stay.
The third step of the analysis was to acquire multiple comprehensive data extracts which included key
information about every single individual held in the Leon County Detention Facility between January 1,
2016, and July 13, 2023. This enabled the construction of a population profile over time which provided
indications of changes within and among key aspects of the jail’s population. To keep our findings as up
to date as possible, several basic facility population measures were updated through December 31, 2023.
Fourth, the results of the statistical analyses were combined into multiple time series forecasts using
Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) methods.

Attachment #1
Page 9 of 68
Finally, we developed findings and recommendations based on all our conversations, meetings, analyses
as well as our past experiences working with other jurisdictions.
COUNTY POPULATION & CRIME

To provide some context for the analysis of the Detention Facility’s current and future population, it is
prudent to examine the overall population of Leon County, as well as discuss the crime and arrest rate
statistics that are publicly available. The analysis begins with an examination of the projected population
levels of Leon County as a whole. In general, it has been the research team’s experience that the most
applicable population projection data to use for a jail study is males and females between the ages of 18
and 59 years of age, rather than a total population figure. This is done because this group generally
constitutes a decided majority of any given jail’s population. To acquire the data, we retrieved information
from the Florida Demographic Estimating Conference Report from February 2023 and a report from the
University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research from April 20232.
As Figure 1 shows, the overall Leon County population has grown 9% between 2009 and 2023.
FIGURE 1. LEON COUNTY POPULATION, 2009 - 2023
Figure 2 depicts the projected Leon County Population through 2050, with both the full population and
population of adults between 18 and 59 years of age. It is this latter population that is the most relevant
2
Florida Demographic Estimating Conference, February 2023 and the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Florida
Population Studies, Volume 56, Bulletin 195, April 2023; https://bebr.ufl.edu/population/

Attachment #1
Page 10 of 68
for the detention facility because young children are never held in the facility; and senior citizens are rare
users of jail space. Adults between 18 and 59 years of age typically constitute 90% of the Detention
Facility’s population at any given point in time. We note that while the full population for Leon County is
expected to grow 16% by 2050, the cohort of adults between 18 and 59 years of age is expected to grow
only 9.9%. In Figure 2, as well as some other charts in this report, we are using two vertical scales to
compare trends.
Meanwhile, we must be cognizant of the fact that not everyone held in the Detention Facility is a citizen
of Leon County. Throughout this analysis, we will examine the population and other impacts of people
from the bordering counties of Jefferson, Wakulla, Liberty, Gadsden, and Thomas County (GA). Figure 3
shows the comparison between the growth rates for Leon County adults and the ‘region’ (that is, Leon
County plus the bordering counties). While the Leon County adult population is expected to grow 9.9%,
the regional growth rate is expected to be 10.1%. To be clear, when we develop our forecast models, the
population growth rate will be analyzed in terms of each county’s relative contributions to the Detention
Facility’s population.
FIGURE 2. LEON COUNTY FULL POPULATION VS. ADULT POPULATION, 2021 - 2050

Attachment #1
Page 11 of 68
FIGURE 3. LEON COUNTY ADULT POPULATION VS. REGIONAL ADULT POPULATION, 2021 - 2050
Traditionally, jail population analysts (the present authors included) have presented crime rate data from
the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR) and other agencies as part of their work products. Recently,
however, significant questions and problems have arisen regarding the validity of the UCR data due to
declining participation rates and other methodological issues. It has been the research team’s experience
that the crime rate data may provide some context for understanding a criminal justice system, but it is
not useful for actual statistical models of jail populations. A variety of studies have suggested that the UCR
data significantly undercount the true nature of crimes in localities. Moreover, the Vera Institute of Justice
has recommended that locally produced data may be more indicative of what is going on in each
jurisdiction. That said, the research team notes that the Florida State University Center for Criminology
and Public Policy Research’s October 2023 report regarding Leon County is a useful resource for
understanding what is happening in terms of crime. The report finds significant increases in homicides,
firearm homicides, and firearm assaults over time, particularly within the last decade. The report is also a
useful tool for understanding some of the socioeconomic and other lenses (principally, violence
prevention strategies) for violent crimes in Leon County3.
DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION ANALYSIS

Key measures that impact the Leon County Detention Facility’s population were employed in a
comprehensive set of analyses such as bookings (the number of people booked into the facility), average
daily population (ADP), average length of stay (ALOS, a measure of how long, on average, detainees stay
in custody), arrest offenses, criminal court case processing, a review of alternatives to incarceration, and
3
https://www.councilmenandboys.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FSU-CVIPI-Phase-1-Report_final.pdf

Attachment #1
Page 12 of 68
a profile of the detainee population. To perform our Detention Facility population analysis, a significant
set of data extractions from Leon County’s integrated justice information management system was
obtained and analyzed. Our intention was to examine every charge for every detainee held between
January 1, 2016, and July 13, 2023, along with demographic and release information. Due to
methodological requirements and data updates some measures of the analysis may have a later start date
or a more recent end date.
Average Daily Population

The Leon County Detention Facility’s average daily population (ADP) by month from 2009 through
December 31, 2023, can be found in Figure 4. There are several key takeaways from the Detention
Facility’s long-term population trend. First, there is a gradual growth in the facility’s population, despite
ebbs and flows, across time (the dotted trend line demonstrates the growth). The ADP for the full year of
2022 was 17% higher than it was in 2009, outstripping the 9% growth for the Leon County population
during that period. However, the facility’s population decreased significantly in the second half of 2023
such that 2023 was only 8% higher than 2009. Second, the Leon County Detention Facility’s population,
like most jails in America, tends to be seasonal. The population is typically highest toward the end of the
summer months (the peaks in the graphs are generally July, August, or September), and lowest around
late December or early January.
FIGURE 4. LEON HISTORICAL DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION, 2009 – DECEMBER 2023

Attachment #1
Page 13 of 68
In addition, Figure 4 depicts the impact of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spring 2020. What
is somewhat unique about the Leon County Detention Facility’s population is that the population level
returned to pre-COVID levels relatively quickly (by midyear 2021). For the most part, this is uncommon as
most facility populations are remaining 10% or more lower than what they were prior to 2020.
At this point, a methodological note needs to be made about the ADP data for the study. The monthly
data that appear in Figure 4 above are based on snapshots of the jail’s population count each morning.
The present study’s reconstruction of the jail data is based on the actual specific booking and release
dates/times for each detainee held in custody. This is a key distinction to make because the numbers will
be slightly different. To be clear, the differences are not very significant, but they do exist for a very good
mathematical reason. The present study’s method reflects the entire amount of time that everyone spent
in custody in the jail, whereas the snapshot data will miss some of that specificity. For example, if the jail’s
official count figure is based on a 4am snapshot, a person who is booked into the facility at 5am and then
released later that same day will never be factored into the snapshot-based population figure. The
forensic reconstruction captures people such as this. Figure 5 below presents the reconstruction of the
jail’s actual population since the start of 2016 through mid-July 2023. Although it is difficult to see, the
line on the chart is actually a series of data points reflective of each day’s population. Note the steady
climb from the first wave of the pandemic in Spring 2020 through the Fall of 2021. As expected, the
population declines somewhat in late December 2021/early January 2022, and then rises a bit during the
Summer. After that point, the jail’s population took an unexpected turn, with the population peaking in
the first week of March 2023 and then steadily declining for the balance of the year.
FIGURE 5. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY DAILY POPULATION, 2016 - 2024

Attachment #1
Page 14 of 68
The daily population reconstruction is aggregated into a monthly average daily population (ADP) time
series in Figure 6. Based on the history of the population trend, the ADP should have gone up in August
and September 2023 instead of declining. The decline continues for the balance of the year. Figure 7
provides an annual look at the ADP data. Note that 2022 has the highest population during the timespan
of our analysis, but by the end of 2023 there was a reduction in the ADP (below 1,000 detainees).
FIGURE 6. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION, 2016 - 2023
FIGURE 7. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION, 2016 - 2023

Attachment #1
Page 15 of 68
Bookings
All detention facility populations are determined by two factors: How many people are booked into the
detention facility and how long those people stay (ALOS). In 2019, prior to the pandemic, Leon County
had over 10,000 bookings. This averaged out to nearly 29 bookings to the jail every day. Not surprisingly,
the numbers decreased in the wake of the pandemic, falling to an average of just under 17.5 bookings per
day. This report utilizes the average daily bookings figure instead of monthly totals so that it is possible to
compare the partial year of 2023 against previous time points. As Figure 8 shows, the number of bookings
has not returned to pre-pandemic levels (although the population did by 2022). The 2023 average daily
booking number (22.8) is still approximately 20% behind where it was in 2019 (28.9), although there is
slow growth (the 2023 number is 4% higher than in 2022).
FIGURE 8. MONTHLY DAILY AVERAGE Bookings, 2016 – 2023
Meanwhile, Figure 9 provides an annual depiction of the booking data between 2016 and 2023. Bookings
have not returned to pre-pandemic levels but continue to grow slightly from the low point of 2020.

Attachment #1
Page 16 of 68
FIGURE 9. ANNUAL DAILY AVERAGE Bookings, 2016 – 2023
To demonstrate the relationship between ADP and bookings, Figure 10 plots the two trends together.
They mirror each other well. Prior to the pandemic, the trends are similar (note that the chart has two
vertical scales for demonstration purposes). After the pandemic, the bookings trend drops well below the
ADP trend. Both trends increase, with the ADP recovering to pre-pandemic levels. However, the level of
bookings remains well below the pre-pandemic numbers. As this analysis will show, other factors are
responsible for driving the Detention Facility’s population after the pandemic.
FIGURE 10. MONTHLY LEON COUNTY BOOKINGS VS. ADP, 2016 – 2023

Attachment #1
Page 17 of 68
Bookings By Charge
The research team also examined what the offense was that necessitated each booking during the period
of the analysis. Because most people are booked with more than one offense, to make comprehending
the nature of the offenses involved across the population easier, it is necessary to determine the most
serious offense of each person. The data extracts produced by Leon County staff contained every single
charge for every single detainee held between 2016 and July 13, 2023. These extracts were analyzed, and
the charge information was reclassified into multiple categories. This enabled the construction of a further
reclassification to develop the most serious charge for each detainee. The categories used to make the
final determination are (presented in order of seriousness):
• Violent
• Sex Offenses
• Offenses vs People
• Weapons
• Burglary
• Theft/Fraud
• Drugs
• Offenses Against the Administration of Government
• DUI
• Public Order
• Other
• Alcohol
• Traffic
• Supervision/Temporary Release Violation
• Hold/Writ
‘Offenses vs. People’ is defined as crimes such as neglect, endangerment, corruption of minors,
harassment, etc.). ‘Offenses Against the Administration of Government’ is defined as crimes such as
Failures to Appear in Court or Resisting Arrest. ‘Public Order’ offenses include things like Vandalism,
Trespassing or Disorderly Conduct. Using the information collected from the large data extract, when a
detainee has multiple charges, a primary charge category is assigned according to the priority listed above.
The priority listing is premised on the most serious offense having the highest priority. For example, if a
detainee were charged with a DUI and a violent offense, the primary charge category for that detainee
would be violent. In addition, according to the algorithm, felony charges will trump misdemeanor charges.
For instance, a person with a misdemeanor theft and a felony public order offense would have a most
serious charge category of ‘Felony Public Order.’ Finally, offenses are also ranked based on the level of
seriousness (felonies vs. misdemeanors, such that any felony outranked any misdemeanor).
Table 1 breaks down the Leon County bookings by most serious charge and is sorted by the values within
the actual jail population (violent felons are the largest component of the population, so they appear at
the top of Table 1). In comparing 2023 to 2019, there are significant shifts in the facility’s bookings. The

Attachment #1
Page 18 of 68
number of violent felony bookings has risen significantly, as have weapons and burglary felonies.
Meanwhile, misdemeanor drug offense bookings have significantly decreased. However, the largest
change is the number of probation and pretrial release violators (in the table and throughout this report
they are identified as VOP). These are detainees who were on pre or post sentence community supervision
but have not committed a new crime (the way the study’s algorithms work, nearly any new crime would
outweigh a community supervision charge). VOP bookings are less than half of what they were prior to
the pandemic.
TABLE 1. DAILY AVERAGE BOOKINGS BY MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE
After the pandemic, more serious offenses tended to be booked into the detention facility, and lower-
level offense bookings decreased. Figure 11 shows that the felony proportion of bookings is increasing
over time on a consistent basis.
FIGURE 11. MONTHLY FELONY PERCENTAGE OF LEON COUNTY BOOKINGS, 2016 – 2023

Attachment #1
Page 19 of 68
Average Length of Stay

While bookings are one half of the equation for determining the size of a correctional population, the
second determinant is how long those booked into the facility remain in custody. The average length of
stay (ALOS) is the total number of days on average the detainee population is incarcerated from booking
into the jail until they are released from the jail. For the present analysis, ALOS was calculated simply by
averaging how long everyone released during a given period stayed in custody. Logically, a lower ALOS
will help keep a jail’s ADP from growing.
During the research team’s onsite visit in Summer 2023, several stakeholders mentioned a high ALOS for
the jail as a significant problem. In most instances, when asked to elaborate, these individuals would cite
ALOS numbers like that which was included in the Leon County Detention Facility Population Management
Workshop report 44 from March 2022. It appears to the research team that the ALOS numbers presented
in that report (137 days for 2019 and 263 days for 2022) were calculated using the length of stays for the
currently held population. This is problematic for several reasons.
The generally accepted ALOS number that is used by jails and planners throughout the country is the
average of the stays of people released in a given time period. While using the current population stay
may be helpful in some contexts, the number is not mathematically helpful for forecasting or for
understanding how long the typical arrestee will stay in the jail. On any given day, there are a large number
of people who are booked and released for comparatively short lengths of time. Using a one-time
snapshot of the currently held population significantly downplays the net impact of such short-stay
people. Using the released ALOS number more closely reflects the experience of the typical arrestee as
well as providing a mathematically correct statistic that can be used in modeling. In addition, the mean
ALOS number is mathematically useful for understanding the relationship between bookings and the
facility’s ADP while the in-custody LOS number is not helpful.
A statewide ALOS is unknown and there is a lack of a national ALOS standard because there are many
factors that influence ALOS (e.g., if there is a separate booking facility or 36-hour holding facility, the
maximum length of time a detainee can be sentenced locally, and if there are separate pretrial and post-
trial facilities).
As with most jails across the country, the Leon County Detention Facility’s ALOS numbers increased after
the first wave of the pandemic. Increases were measured in 2020, 2021, and 2022. However, the ALOS
number for 2023 is lower than in 2022. In general, two main factors help explain these patterns. First, as
our bookings analysis showed, more serious arrestees are coming to the jail, which means more people
staying for more complicated matters that take longer to process. Second, the pandemic significantly
impacted the courts, and helped cause case backlogs which in turn drove up ALOS for affected detainees.
Generally, across the nation, the research team has seen ALOS numbers rise after the pandemic due to
several problems (such as staffing shortages) that are typically contributing to court case backlogs. Leon
County’s ALOS in 2023 was 7% below where it was in 2022 (due in part to improved court case processing
4
https://www2.leoncountyfl.gov/coadmin/agenda/workshops/WS220220322.pdf?ver=1

Attachment #1
Page 20 of 68
times) but 36% higher than it was in 2019. Figure 12 charts the ALOS for each year between 2016 and
2023. A special note should be made about the ALOS number prior to the pandemic. Generally, it is
expected that a well-functioning criminal justice system with a jail of this size should have an ALOS in the
27-to-32-day range. Leon County’s ALOS numbers were consistently above this level. ALOS is not typically
within a jail’s control. Rather, jail ALOS is driven by the overall criminal justice system. After the pandemic,
it has not been uncommon for large jails to have ALOS numbers in the mid to upper 50s, with a couple of
highly efficient criminal justice systems returning to (or slightly under) the 30-day level by 2023.
FIGURE 12. ANNUAL LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY MEAN ALOS, 2016 – 2023
Figure 13 provides a monthly examination of ALOS for the Leon County Detention Facility. The increase
over time is captured by the trend line, and if one looks carefully, the slight decrease that is noted in Figure
12 can be detected.
FIGURE 13. MONTHLY LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY MEAN ALOS, 2016 – 2023

Attachment #1
Page 21 of 68
In general, a better measure of central tendency for the ALOS of a jail is to take the median (the midpoint
of the data). A typical detainee will stay for a time significantly shorter than the mean average, which is
heavily impacted by the presence and release of longer-staying detainees. The data extracts were used to
calculate the median time individuals stayed in custody between 2016 and the end of 2023. Figure 14
depicts the median ALOS. This represents the midpoint of the lengths of stay for every person released
each year. Typically, one would expect to see a median ALOS of between 2 and 4 days for a county jail.
Well-functioning and efficient criminal justice systems, all things being equal, generally have a median
ALOS somewhere under 3 days. Leon County, despite the pandemic’s impacts on the criminal justice
system, has regularly kept the median ALOS around and below the 2-day median since 2019.
FIGURE 14. ANNUAL LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY MEDIAN ALOS, 2016 – 2023
One can learn more about ALOS by examining some differences in ALOS among known groups in the
population. Figure 15 depicts annual ALOS by gender. Females generally will have significantly shorter
ALOS numbers than males, which is what we see below.
FIGURE 15. ANNUAL LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY ALOS BY GENDER, 2016 – 2023

Attachment #1
Page 22 of 68
Table 2 below breaks the ALOS numbers by the level of the most serious offense. Significant increases in
felony ALOS can be seen, possibly driven by court backlogs, in addition to improvements in misdemeanor
ALOS. Because most people held in the Detention Facility have a felony charge, the increases in felony
ALOS are driving increases in the overall ALOS numbers.
TABLE 2. ALOS BY MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE LEVEL55

2023 vs.
Most Serious Charge 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
2019
Felony 82.4 69.6 65.3 70.35 62.4 80.9 92.5 92.2 31.0%
Misdemeanor 16.8 16.2 15.8 16.30 17.4 15.2 15.6 11.7 -28.0%
Supervision Violation 37.5 37.8 39.7 42.28 47.1 53.7 59.1 62.1 47.0%
Hold 5.4 5.3 6.2 5.34 14.2 14.6 8.8 8.4 57.6%
Grand Total 41.3 37.5 36.7 39.0 41.6 49.1 57.1 53.1 43.4%
Table 3 takes the most serious offense analysis and applies ALOS numbers to it. Clearly, more serious
charges equate to longer lengths of stay in custody. Here it is possible to see improvements for violent
felony detainees for 2023, but there are also increases in several key areas, most notably the VOP
population.
TABLE 3. ALOS BY MOST SERIOUS CHARGE, 2020 – 2023

2023 vs.
Most Serious Charge 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
2019
Violent Felony 128.7 111.7 97.1 115.4 81.0 131.4 174.7 167.8 45.5%
VOP 37.5 37.8 39.7 42.2 47.3 53.8 59.1 62.5 47.9%
Drugs Felony 50.1 42.3 47.0 49.3 47.0 48.0 46.6 49.2 -0.1%
Theft/Fraud Felony 54.0 49.8 51.4 43.8 49.8 58.0 48.5 47.1 7.6%
Weapons Felony 154.9 103.7 65.1 90.1 69.0 80.0 66.2 92.1 2.2%
Burglary Felony 117.9 101.3 87.7 88.0 81.9 99.0 124.5 122.1 38.8%
Sex Offense Felony 142.8 142.0 155.5 195.1 83.6 166.3 244.3 161.2 -17.3%
Offenses vs Govt Felony 61.1 52.7 51.1 45.5 52.0 47.7 49.7 31.0 -31.9%
Violent Misd 16.5 19.4 14.1 18.4 23.0 15.7 15.5 11.5 -37.2%
Drugs Misd 26.8 23.6 24.7 26.5 36.0 30.9 36.3 26.9 1.5%
Offenses vs People Misd 31.7 26.3 31.2 39.3 24.4 29.6 19.3 44.0 12.0%
Theft/Fraud Misd 21.4 18.7 19.1 16.5 19.7 21.5 22.3 16.8 2.1%
Hold for Other Agency 5.4 5.3 6.2 5.3 14.2 14.6 8.8 8.5 58.4%
Public Order Felony 56.2 27.3 19.8 29.1 22.9 18.4 39.5 38.4 32.0%
Everything Else 10.3 8.6 9.6 8.6 8.0 9.4 10.1 9.9 14.4%
Total 41.3 37.5 36.7 39.0 41.6 49.1 57.1 53.1 43.4%
The ALOS analysis was also applied to the release reasons for individuals released during the timespan of
the study. Table 4 below represents the top 9 release mechanisms (plus releases to Florida State Hospital)
from the Leon County Detention Facility.
5
Please note that percentage comparisons may appear to be inaccurate due to rounding of the actual numbers
presented in the tables

Attachment #1
Page 23 of 68
TABLE 4. ALOS BY RELEASE MECHANISM
Recalling the comparison of the jail’s ADP trend to the bookings trend, Figure 16 plots the monthly mean
ALOS alongside the jail’s ADP. The booking trend correlated with the ADP trend, at least before the
pandemic. The ALOS trend was not strongly correlated prior to the pandemic. However, after the
pandemic, ALOS and the jail’s ADP are very much correlated. It is this fact that explains why the Leon
County Detention Facility’s population increased despite a decrease in bookings during 2022. This also
explains why the population has decreased by the end of Summer 2023. Improvements in ALOS have
caused the facility’s population to decrease. The bottom-line takeaway is that working on reducing ALOS
is the key strategy to staying ahead of the jail’s population, especially in case bookings return to where
they were in 2019.
FIGURE 16. MONTHLY ALOS VS. ADP, 2016 – 2023

Attachment #1
Page 24 of 68
Population Profile
A profile of the Leon County Detention Facility was developed from a forensic reconstruction of each day
covered by the main jail data extract. The key statistics of interest were developed by calculating the total
bed days consumed during the entire period of analysis which were then converted into ADP figures.
Demographics
The reconstruction of the facility’s ADP between 2016 and 2023 is superior to single point in time
snapshots, which may very well miss important fluctuations in parts of the population as time passes.
Unlike snapshot data, the forensic reconstruction captures the exact times, lengths of stay, and internal
fluctuations within the population. The first component of the analysis was to examine the ADP by gender.
As Figure 17 demonstrates, the percentage of female detainees in the jail decreased with the onset of the
pandemic in 2020 and still remains proportionally low.
FIGURE 17. DETAINEES BY GENDER
The reconstruction also enabled the development of a historical examination of the proportions of
detainees by race. Figure 18 shows that the percentage of black detainees has steadily increased over
time. The cause of this appears to be a growing disparity between white and black detainees in terms of
ALOS, which is driven by a proportional difference in charge levels. Back in 2019, the ALOS for black
detainees was just under 42 days, 20% more than the ALOS for white detainees. However, by 2023, black
detainee ALOS is 65 days, 71% higher than the ALOS for white detainees. The difference in ALOS can be
partially explained by a shift in charge levels between and among the races. In 2019, 63% of felony
bookings involved a black arrestee (37% white). In 2023, those numbers changed to 71% and 29%
respectively. Moreover, 75% of the violent felony bookings in 2022 and 2023 involved black arrestees.
The more serious charge levels generally translate to longer lengths of stay.

Attachment #1
Page 25 of 68
FIGURE 18. DETAINEES BY RACE
Figure 19 tracks the Detention Facility’s ADP by age group between 2016 and 2023, based on each
detainee’s age at booking. In the last several years, nationally, the research team has observed a decrease
in the proportion of detainees in their 20s, with a resulting proportional increase of detainees who are in
their 30s, and a smaller increase of detainees in their 40s. The Leon population follows this pattern---there
is a decrease in the percentage of detainees in their 20s (as well as detainees under the age of 20) nearly
throughout the analysis. At the same time, there are increases in detainees in their 30s and 40s in terms
of population proportions. At present it is unclear exactly what this will mean for the long-term future of
the jail’s population. There is at least the possibility that these demographic trends will help constrain the
jail’s long-term population, although not well enough to prevent all growth. It should be noted that this
shift is a couple of years behind what has been measured elsewhere (the group in their 30s typically
passed the group in their 20s already—it is only happening now with the Leon County Detention Facility
population.

Attachment #1
Page 26 of 68
FIGURE 19. DETAINEES BY AGE GROUP
Figure 20 gives a monthly representation of this phenomenon. The gold line depicts the rising trend of
detainees in their 30s over time. The proportion of detainees in their 30s matches the proportion of
detainees in their 20s for the first time in 2020, and the two cohorts have similar proportions until the
final year of the analysis. If all things remain equal, the cohort of detainees in their 30s will have
permanently passed the detainees in their 20s as the largest age group in the jail at some point in 2024 or
2025. Meanwhile, the group of detainees in their 40s continues to rise. As time goes on, inevitably (unless
something changes) detainees in their 40s will catch up to the people in their 20s.
FIGURE 20. DETAINEES BY AGE GROUP BY MONTH

Attachment #1
Page 27 of 68
The age cohorts are broken down by gender in Table 5. Note that females in their 30s have clearly passed
females in their 20s, while the same is not true for males. Also note that males and females between 20
and 59 years of age constitute nearly 91% of the population in 2023.
TABLE 5. DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION BY AGE AND GENDER
Figure 21 represents the annual ADP proportion of individuals by their case status. The data for this chart
did not come from the forensic reconstruction but were acquired from the Florida DOC website 6 as it
would be extremely difficult to reconstitute every detainee’s exact time of when their case statuses would
change. The big takeaways from this chart are that the proportion of pretrial detainees has increased over
time, while the proportion of post-trial detainees has shrunk a little. Most of the population are in pretrial
status facing one or more felony charges.
FIGURE 21. DETAINEES BY CASE STATUS
The proportion of pretrial detainees was in line with some other large Florida facilities (Pinellas,
Hillsborough, and Duval Counties, for instance). Counties such as Dade, Broward, and Orange have higher
proportions of pretrial detainees. Generally speaking, the research team typically encounters pretrial
proportions that run above 80% in jurisdictions with larger jails (over 1,000 beds). The lower proportion
6
https://fdc.myflorida.com/pub/jails/index.html

Attachment #1
Page 28 of 68
in this instance is perhaps due to the significant number of pre- and post-sentence community supervision
detainees (who are generally in a violated status and have returned to custody) in the Leon County
Detention Facility.
Classification
The security classification system for the detainee population was not robust enough to enable a
reconstruction with our forensic methods. After several conversations with LCSO staff and leadership, it
was decided to take a one-day snapshot of the classification level of the population, on June 26, 2023 (see
Figure 22). Roughly two-thirds of the population are general population, while over a third are a higher
close custody level. Efforts to enhance the facility’s classification system were ongoing when we
conducted our analysis.
FIGURE 22. DETAINEES BY CUSTODY CLASSIFICATION LEVEL
Mental Health
The proportion of individuals in custody with a mental health or substance abuse issue is one of the key
measures for a county detention facility. As time has progressed, this proportion has risen across the
country. For the present study, two methods were used for determining the size of this population. The
first method was to utilize a pharmacy report produced by Corizon, the facility’s healthcare provider. This
report only gave summary numbers for each month, making it impossible to trace the information back
to the characteristics of individuals. Essentially, the report in question is a measure of how many
individuals in custody are being prescribed psychotropic medications.
The other strategy for measuring the mental health population came from the courts. In this case, mental
health information is entered for individuals with criminal matters before the court. With the assistance
of County and judiciary staff, the research team secured a validated extract of individuals with mental

Attachment #1
Page 29 of 68
health issues. Figure 23 plots the results from both methods. While the nature of the decrease during
2023 in the court dataset is a bit unclear, the results of both reports show that the proportion of detainees
with mental health is approximately 35% and 40%, about what could be expected in a large detention
facility.
The ALOS for individuals in the Leon County Detention Facility who have a mental health issue is generally
75% higher than the average. In 2022 and 2023, the ALOS is nearly twice as high as the overall average.
Finally, when the charge levels of the people involved (Table 6) are examined, there are significantly higher
proportions of violent felony and public order offense charges.
TABLE 6. TOP TEN CHARGE CATEGORIES FOR PEOPLE WITH MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES
2023
Most Serious Offense Mental Health No Mental
Issue Health Issue
Violent Felony 54.10% 38.10%
Burglary Felony 9.00% 8.20%
Theft/Fraud Felony 7.30% 9.70%
Drugs Felony 7.00% 14.40%
Weapons Felony 5.20% 11.00%
Sex Offense Felony 4.40% 5.00%
Offenses vs People Felony 2.00% 0.80%
Offenses vs Government Felony 1.80% 2.70%
Public Order Misd 1.80% 1.00%
Public Order Felony 1.50% 0.70%
Everything Else 6.00% 8.50%
Total 100.00% 100.00%
FIGURE 23. DETAINEES WITH A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE

Attachment #1
Page 30 of 68
Home Address
The Detention Facility records the address of each arrestee as represented in the data by city, state, and
zip code. While there are naturally some possible questions about the validity of some of the data, it is an
excellent indicator of the use of the jail by people who live outside of Leon County. Table 7 gives a
breakdown of the booking numbers by where people reside. There are several categories presented and
the ‘bordering counties’ grouping has already been defined. The ‘2nd Ring Neighboring Counties’ group
represents counties that are 2 counties away but are still in the State of Florida. It should be noted that,
from the data provided, it was not possible to tell whether a given detainee was homeless.
TABLE 7. DETENTION FACILITY BOOKINGS BY HOME ADDRESS
Not surprisingly, the ALOS for people from bordering counties is slightly higher than for Leon County
residents. It is surprising that their ALOS numbers have risen as sharply as they have in 2022 and 2023
(Table 8).
TABLE 8. DETENTION FACILITY ALOS BY HOME ADDRESS
Finally, Table 9 provides the breakdown of the facility’s ADP by the address in the jail’s information
management system. In the end, the proportion of Leon County residents in the jail mirrors what it was
back in 2016. If one adds the ‘Unknown/Missing’ component to the Leon County number, the numbers
are roughly comparable throughout the analysis, in the low 80% range. Yes, there is growth from the
bordering counties, but this growth is relatively small.

Attachment #1
Page 31 of 68
TABLE 9. DETENTION FACILITY ADP BY HOME ADDRESS
Charges
The analysis of bookings and ALOS examined those numbers by the most serious charge category of the
detainees involved. Naturally, the same analysis is extended to the ADP of the jail over time (see Table 10,
which is sorted by 2022 values). Given the bookings and ALOS numbers together, in addition to the public
safety mission of the criminal justice system as a whole, it is not surprising to see that the largest group in
the jail is comprised of violent felons. The growth in ALOS for violent felons helps drive the proportion of
this group within the jail’s population.
TABLE 10. LEON DETENTION FACILITY ADP BY MOST SERIOUS CHARGE CATEGORY
Ultimately, the story of the Detention Facility’s population is that there are comparatively more felons in
custody now than before, with violent felons making up a significant proportion of the population as
compared to pre-pandemic times. In addition, there has been a significant decrease in the number of
individuals whose most serious matter is a VOP charge. Related to this topic, Table 11 ignores the VOP
charge for people and reverts to the original arrest charge that had resulted in being put on probation in
the first place.

Attachment #1
Page 32 of 68
TABLE 11. LEON DETENTION FACILITY ADP BY MOST SERIOUS CHARGE CATEGORY AND ORIGINATING OFFENSE INSTEAD OF VOP
By looking at the original offense rather than the VOP, it is possible to see that the violent felony
proportion grows to over 40% of the population. There are other increases in various felonies as well.
While the Table 10 depiction may be useful for thinking about jail population management strategies, the
Table 11 depiction serves as a reminder that the facility holds a very serious (and increasingly so)
population.
The trends for the 5 most common charge categories can be seen in Figure 24. Note the significant growth
in the violent felon detainee population in 2021 and the reduction in the VOP population. There is a small
increase in the number of weapons felony-charged detainees but a slight reduction in drug felonies.
FIGURE 24. LEON ADP BY SELECTED MOST SERIOUS OFFENSES

Attachment #1
Page 33 of 68
The growth in the felony population is further demonstrated by the trends evident in Figure 25. Felony-
charged detainees made up 60% of the population until the pandemic, and the proportion has climbed
ever since, to the current 75% level. Naturally, the proportions of individuals who have a misdemeanor
most serious charge or a stand-alone supervision violation (VOP or Supervised Pretrial Release) have
decreased.
FIGURE 25. LEON ADP BY CASE LEVEL
Meanwhile, Figure 26 plots the population by charge level. The proportional growth relative to the overall
ADP is detectable. Clearly, the population of the Leon County Detention Facility is growing more serious,
at least as far as charge levels are concerned.
FIGURE 26. VIOLENT FELONY ADP
As the second-largest component of the jail’s population, the probation violation population is important
to understand. The analysis breaks this population into two main groups. The first group is comprised of

Attachment #1
Page 34 of 68
people who have a new offense, which generally triggers the violation of probation (VOP). The second
group are in custody only because of a probation violation. This group will be referred to as the ‘VOP-
Only’ population. Typically, these are people who have some sort of technical violation such as missing
appointments, failing drug/alcohol tests, or some other compliance requirement failure. Figure 27
provides a monthly view of what both groups look like in the jail’s population. The black line traces people
who have a VOP charge in addition to other charges, while the red line is the VOP-Only population. The
significant reductions in these populations come in two waves. First, there is the reduction from the
pandemic’s initial waves. Second, there is a gradual reduction in the numbers since that time. The
decrease in the VOP-Only population is noteworthy because this population is arguably more
discretionary in nature. On an average daily basis, there are about 100 fewer VOP-Only people in custody
than before the pandemic, a net positive for Leon County in terms of facility capacity issues.
The VOP-Only population was examined further in terms of case processing. In previous projects in the
State of Florida, the research team had found that the time between booking and a VOP hearing can be a
useful opportunity for achieving some reductions in the jail population. Simply put, the more time it takes
to hold VOP hearings, the more VOP-Only people will be in the population. This topic is an important area
of judicial discretion because some judges will choose to let a particular individual wait on their hearing
for a variety of reasons. An alternative strategy could be to hold the hearing more quickly and use
sanctions to move the person along to other destinations, such as the Florida Department of Corrections
or release back into society. Regardless, the median time between booking and VOP hearings for VOP-
Only detainees was analyzed over time (Figure 28). To be precise, the time calculation was only for the
people who remained in custody until the VOP hearing. As expected, this processing time has grown
significantly since the pandemic. The decrease in the 2023 time is likely associated with the efforts by the
judiciary to reduce the court case backlog. Returning this time to where it was before the pandemic would
have a positive impact on the detention facility’s ALOS and, in turn, the ADP.
FIGURE 27. PROBATION VIOLATION ADP

Attachment #1
Page 35 of 68
FIGURE 28. VOP-ONLY TIME BETWEEN BOOKING AND VOP HEARING
Another common population component in many jurisdictions is people who have failed to appear (FTA)
for their court dates. Leon County does an excellent job of flagging who has an FTA. Figure 29 shows the
ADP proportion for such detainees. The decline between 2016 and 2021 is good news for the criminal
justice system but should remain an area for improvement (the proportion has been relatively stable
between 2021 and the end of our data in 2023). Meanwhile, Table 12 breaks the FTA percentage down
by residential information on the theory that people from outside Leon County would have a higher rate
due to travel and other issues. The rate for some years is indeed slightly higher, but for 2023 YTD it is not
significantly so.
FIGURE 29. LEON DETENTION FACILITY FAILURE TO APPEAR ADP

Attachment #1
Page 36 of 68
TABLE 12. LEON DETENTION FACILITY FAILURE TO APPEAR ADP PROPORTION BY DETAINEE RESIDENCE
Recidivism
The jail’s data enabled an analysis of the frequency of repeat arrests/bookings. For each year of the
analysis, everyone who was booked was examined and the data were then scanned for a subsequent
booking. Table 13 provides a summary of this analysis through midyear 2023. The 9,920 bookings in 2016
involved 7,825 unique people. Of those, 4,231 were not booked again in Leon County in the next 3 years.
That leaves 3,594 people (46%) who at some point in the next 3 years were booked again. The ‘all-time’
rate declines for each year (for the most part) because there has been less time for rearrests to occur. The
3- year return rate has declined slightly, with people who were booked in 2019 returning at a 42% rate.
Table 14 provides a similar analysis for the population of people with mental health issues. Note the
substantially higher rates of return in 3-years as well as all-time.
TABLE 13. LEON DETENTION FACILITY RECIDIVISM STATISTICS
TABLE 14. LEON DETENTION FACILITY RECIDIVISM STATISTICS – MENTAL HEALTH POPULATION
People People
Total People 3-Year All-Time
Year Returned Returned
Bookings Booked Return Rate Return Rate
Within 3 yrs All time
2016 974 612 452 74% 544 89%
2017 1,018 663 501 76% 581 88%
2018 1,253 817 567 69% 649 79%
2019 1,253 767 519 68% 580 76%
2020 992 664 498 515 78%
2021 1,127 742 511 511 69%
2022 1,252 776 401 401 52%
2023 453 323 89 89 28%

Attachment #1
Page 37 of 68
The 3-year ‘Leon-to-Leon’ re-book rate of around 42% is low compared to national recidivism estimates
(which unfortunately lump prisons and jails together) which are showing 66% 3-year arrest rates. The
average number of bookings for the 33,744 unique people in Table 13 is 2.0. Sixteen people have been
booked more than 20 times. One person was booked 40 times. We examined the top 8 most frequently
booked people (Table 15) and saw that the initial bookings tended to involve more minor Public Order
Misdemeanor offenses, but subsequent bookings became more serious in nature.
TABLE 15. OFFENSES OF LEON DETENTION FACILITY MOST FREQUENTLY BOOKED PEOPLE OVER TIME
County Jail Population Comparisons

It is important to compare the Leon County Detention Facility in terms of its size relative to other jails in
Florida. While sizes of populations are easy to find on the Internet, the key population drivers of bookings
and ALOS are not always available. The research team elected to include the top 22 largest jails in Florida
(so chosen because each facility held over 800 detainees in August 2023) 7. Of the 22 jails, the Leon County
Detention Facility ranks 6th in terms of the incarceration rate per 1,000 residents with an incarceration
rate of 3.5 (Table 16). When the 22 county facilities are rank ordered in terms of the overall population
size, Leon County is 20th. The previously cited Florida State University Center for Criminology and Public
Policy Research’s October 2023 report utilized Alachua County as a comparable county.
Alachua County is ranked 9th in terms of largest incarceration rates and is 21st in overall size on the list,
with an August jail population of 824 detainees. It is interesting to note that the two facilities have nearly
identical proportions of felony pretrial detainees. Achieving ALOS improvements could bring the Leon
County Detention Facility’s population in line with Alachua County’s jail.
Overall, making these comparisons is not always easy and straightforward, especially regarding the
varying sizes and challenges of the jurisdictions in which each jail operates. However, in the very least it
is a good benchmark of where Leon County sits regarding other Florida Counties8.
7
https://fdc.myflorida.com/pub/jails/2023/jails-2023-08.pdf
8
Polk County did not report a felony pretrial population number for August 2023.

Attachment #1
Page 38 of 68
TABLE 16. LARGEST COUNTY JAILS IN FLORIDA, SORTED BY INCARCERATION RATE
ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION
What is impressive about the Leon County criminal justice system is that, considering the relative size of
the county, multiple evidence-based efforts have been implemented and resourced to responsibly
manage the Detention Facility’s population. Indeed, many of these efforts have been in place for a
relatively long period of time. The main thrust of these strategies has been aimed at providing alternatives
to custody for low-risk arrestees. The net effect of these strategies has been to reduce the number of
misdemeanants and non-violent felony arrestees in custody. As the statistical analysis has confirmed, the
proportion of such lower-risk people in the Detention Facility has shrunk and continues to do so. On the
other hand, the proportion and sheer number of violent felons in the facility has grown. Therein lies a
significant problem. It is this population of people that the Detention Facility is holding in large (increasing)
numbers, and they are not readily diverted from custody in such a way as to maintain the safety of the
community.
Moreover, when the individual records of those people held during Summer 2023 was searched, only a
handful of individuals were found who were in custody on minor charges with low bond amounts and no
holds. Furthermore, those individuals in question were relatively recent arrivals to the facility and it could
be expected that they would make bond in short order. To put the situation succinctly, there are
comparatively few people lingering in the Detention Facility’s population who can be released but for
whatever reason are not. The term ‘lingering’ is used intentionally because it is acknowledged that the
population will always have a cycle of arrestees who are going to be released in short order.

Attachment #1
Page 39 of 68
Among the multiple strategies/methods for managing the Detention Facility’s population, the Supervised
Pretrial Release Program (SPTR) serves a vital role in providing alternatives to incarceration and thereby
responsibly manages the size of the custody population. SPTR staff completes risk assessments of
arrestees booked into the facility which examines ties to the community, criminal history, and other
factors. In addition, SPTR furnishes the risk assessment results to the judiciary to support the
release/detain decision. Many multiple larger metropolitan areas lack what SPTR brings to Leon County
and frankly it is impressive that a county of this size had the forethought and ability to be able to
successfully implement such a program.
The research team was able to acquire monthly statistics from the SPTR program. Figure 30 gives the
active caseload at each month’s end between 2016 and September 2023. There is a vast expansion in the
caseload after March 2019, which is when a new Administrative Order went into effect essentially
requiring judges to ascertain each arrestee’s ability to make bond and determining whether alternative
release mechanisms of release were appropriate. This had the effect of significantly boosting the SPTR
caseload. In addition, the first wave of COVID-19 spurred further system changes that also increased the
SPTR caseload. Fortunately, as the case clearance rate has improved during 2022 (and presumably 2023),
the caseload has retreated a bit. Figure 31 looks at each month’s case closures and provides a rate of
successful closures over time. The slight decrease in the percentage in 2019 and 2020 is to be expected,
given the expansion of the caseload both in terms of sheer numbers as well as case complexities.
FIGURE 30. LEON COUNTY SPTR ACTIVE MONTHLY CASELOAD

Attachment #1
Page 40 of 68
FIGURE 31. LEON COUNTY SPTR SUCCESSFUL CASE CLOSURE RATE
Leon County also operates an electronic monitoring program under the Office of Intervention and
Detention Alternatives (OIDA). The affected population is more serious than what would be encountered
or handled by a pre-arrest diversion program. In Leon County, judges can release people with a GPS
monitor (tracks location) or what is known as a SCRAM monitor (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol
Monitoring; for detecting alcohol use). Like what has been seen in the SPTR caseloads, there has been an
increase in the use of electronic monitoring in Leon County 9. In 2021 and 2022 there were anywhere
between 220 to 270 people on electronic monitoring at any point in time. Individuals who were put on
electronic monitoring in Leon County were added to the large main data extract in October of 2023,
allowing the development of a count of the monthly assignments to electronic monitoring (Figure 32).
The monthly number typically hovers in the 30s. While it is acknowledged that the timing for electronic
monitoring doesn’t always line up with bookings (that is to say, there are many times where the placement
on electronic monitoring will be long after the date of booking), when one looks at the assignments as a
function of bookings, the proportion of people on electronic monitoring is not all that large. About 4.5%
of the booking load will end up on electronic monitoring.
9
https://www2.leoncountyfl.gov/coadmin/agenda/workshops/WS220220322.pdf?ver=1,

Attachment #1
Page 41 of 68
FIGURE 32. LEON COUNTY ASSIGNMENTS TO ELECTRONIC MONITORING
During the research team’s onsite visit, and subsequent conversations, it is readily evident that the
criminal justice system in Leon County has several diversion strategies that function prior to arrest. These
programs serve an important role in helping minimize bookings into the jail, and, more importantly,
helping people get the right services during times of crisis. Like many other counties, agencies in Leon
County have successfully implemented Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) training along with teams working
with homeless individuals and people who may have mental health and substance abuse issues. The net
effect of these programs can be thought of as arrest prevention.
Naturally, arrests can and do occur. In such instances, there are other programs that operate which in
effect helps minimize the use of the jail. In conversations with stakeholders and agencies, several
highlighted the work of the State Attorney’s Office with their Pre-arrest Diversion Program. This program
is directed at first-time arrestees who could potentially be charged with certain non-violent misdemeanor
offenses. As with similar programs across the country, if the person in question successfully completes
the program, the charges are dropped by the State Attorney’s Office.
Like many other jurisdictions, Leon County has a variety of problem-solving courts, including Felony Drug
Treatment Court, Veterans Treatment Court, and the Misdemeanor Mental Health Docket. These Courts
all play a part in helping affected individuals. Despite the fine work that is accomplished, it has been our
experience that such programs address the needs of people who constitute a fraction of the overall
Detention Facility population.
To summarize, Leon County has done an impressive job of implementing programs to divert people from

Attachment #1
Page 42 of 68
the Detention Facility. The existence of some of those programs (particularly SPTR, Probation, and
Electronic Monitoring) have prevented the County from facing an overcrowding nightmare at the
Detention Facility. After a thorough review of the population dynamics, it is apparent that there are very
few new diversion programs that can be tried which would accomplish an additional reduction in the
average daily population. The fact of the matter is that the Leon County Detention Facility is currently
housing a serious population that is not going to be easily diverted from custody, either on a pre-arrest or
post-arrest basis. Rather, it is perhaps more advisable at this stage for the County to begin the tough
process of streamlining case processing as much as possible in the system as well as expanding the
requirements of existing programs.
Criminal Court Case Processing

Criminal court case processing is a vital consideration for the Detention Facility’s population. If cases take
longer to dispose, the facility’s ALOS (and ADP) will tend to rise. The opposite is true as well. Because of
the integrated nature of the Leon County information systems, it was possible to analyze several key
aspects of case processing for the detainee population. At a high level, the so-called case clearance rate
is a good indicator of where the courts are in terms of managing backlogs. If the case clearance rate is
above 100%, more cases are being disposed than are being filed. Below the 100% level, cases are being
added, and the backlog grows. Figure 33 demonstrates that by 2022, the Circuit and County courts were
reducing the case backlog by disposing of more cases than are being filed 10. Through the third quarter of
2023, the Circuit Court case clearance rate is 130%. This helps explain the reduction in the Detention
Facility’s ALOS.
FIGURE 33. LEON COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT AVERAGE ANNUAL CLEARANCE RATES
10
Statistics retrieved from Florida Office of State Courts Administrator Clearance Rate Dashboard (flcourts.gov)

Attachment #1
Page 43 of 68
Using the large data extract, the median monthly time between initial appearance and case disposition
was calculated for people who remained in jail throughout the life of their case. Figure 34 reflects this
analysis.
FIGURE 34. LEON COUNTY CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT PROPORTION OF CASE EVENTS THAT WERE RESET OR CONTINUED
Interestingly, Figure 35 overlays the processing time from Figure 34 on top of the monthly ALOS chart.
The correlation is extremely strong, and it would be extremely difficult to refute the notion that criminal
case processing is not the key driver of the jail’s population. Meanwhile, Table 17 provides the median
time between initial appearance and release from jail by case level. Here one can see more evidence of
improvement during 2023.
FIGURE 35. LEON MEDIAN COURT CASE PROCESSING TIME BY MONTH

Attachment #1
Page 44 of 68
TABLE 17. LEON MEDIAN DAYS BETWEEN INITIAL APPEARANCE & RELEASE FROM LCDF
The court processing analysis also enables a revisit of the VOP-Only case processing time for in-jail cases.
Recalling that the previous examination had looked at the time between booking and a VOP hearing,
Figure 36 shows the median monthly time between booking and case disposition for VOP-Only cases.
Although this time was decreasing by midyear 2023, the YTD average is about 43% higher than it was in
2019.
FIGURE 36. MEDIAN DAYS BETWEEN BOOKING & CASE DISPOSITION FOR VOP-ONLY LCDF CASES
Finally, another indicator of criminal justice system efficiency is the time between final case disposition
and transfer of people to the state Department of Corrections. Figure 37 demonstrates the annual median
time in days. The time compares extremely favorably with what is seen elsewhere and has returned to
pre-pandemic levels.

Attachment #1
Page 45 of 68
FIGURE 37. MEDIAN DAYS BETWEEN CASE DISPOSITION & TRANSFER TO DOC CUSTODY

Attachment #1
Page 46 of 68
JAIL POPULATION FORECASTS

Multiple jail population forecast models were built to develop an overall Leon County Detention Facility
population forecast through the year 2048.
Background and Methodology
The best predictor of any trend’s future levels is the history of that trend. A jail’s population time series is
no different. However, because of the existence of unforeseen circumstances, it should be noted that the
precision of forecasts of all kinds diminishes the further into the future one projects. All forecasts are only
as good as what is known when the forecast was produced. The long-term accuracy of jail population
forecasting is heavily impacted by changes in public policy, law enforcement strategies, socioeconomic
factors, and a host of other influences. Statistically speaking, jail population forecasts by their very nature
assume that the status quo at the time the forecast is produced remains in place for the duration of the
forecast. The margin of error for these forecasts is essentially plus or minus 10% by the year 2048.
In terms of actual forecast development methodologies, there are multiple methods for building statistical
forecasts. The forecasting technique developed from Box and Jenkins’ Autoregressive Integrated Moving
Averages (ARIMA) approach is one of the best options. To that extent, a series of ARIMA forecasts of jail
population variables were employed in this study. ARIMA is generally used in time series forecasting
situations primarily because of its ability to avoid the built-in errors of other forecasting techniques.
ARIMA approaches are designed to estimate, diagnose, and control for autoregression problems. In
addition, because ARIMA examines the past behaviors of a given trend, this approach can forecast
multiple time points into the future. Moreover, ARIMA approaches allow the statistician to account for
seasonal fluctuations in data as well as smooth out random fluctuations.
Before diving into the actual forecast models, it is important to review some further analysis of the
projected county population numbers mentioned at the outset of this document. Figure 38 plots the Leon
County Detention Facility population against the Leon County population between 2009 and 2023.
Although given the scales involved it is somewhat hard to see, the long-term Detention Facility population
curve has generally outpaced the county’s population. However, the reduction in the population during
2023 reverses that trend.

Attachment #1
Page 47 of 68
FIGURE 38. LEON COUNTY POPULATION VS. LCDF POPULATION OVER TIME
Recalling this fact as well as the fact that the population levels of neighboring counties have already been
analyzed, the relative contributions of the neighboring counties to the jail’s population over time were
calculated. At the end of the day, when the contributions of the various county populations to the jail’s
population are calculated considering the expected growth curves of the adult county populations, the
conclusion is that the actual impact is nearly identical to only factoring in the projected Leon County adult
population growth rate.
Average Daily Population Forecast Scenarios

Main Forecast: Continuation of the Present System
ARIMA approaches perform best when at least 50 time points of past data are available. For the present
forecast, the ADP of the Detention Facility for each month dating back to January 2016 was reconstructed,
more than enough to develop a valid and reliable model. Bookings, ALOS (itself forecasted using the case
processing statistics), the overall Leon County Population, and the previous population of the jail were all
utilized as predictors. Several hundred models were tested, with a final model being selected for how well
it performed on several diagnostic statistics. A base forecast model was first built that assumes everything
that is in place for the above predictor variables remains ongoing for the entirety of the forecast window,
with one key modification.
During 2023, the Florida Legislature enacted several changes to §FS907.041, the statute governing pretrial
detention and release which went into effect January 1, 2024. The changes to the law could have a
significant impact on the population of the Leon County Detention Facility by making it more difficult to
release people at or around the time of initial appearance. Overall, the law:

Attachment #1
Page 48 of 68
▪ Requires the Florida Supreme Court to develop a uniform statewide bond schedule by the end
of the year,
▪ Authorizes the chief judge of a judicial circuit to set a higher bond amount for a criminal
offense than the uniform statewide bond schedule,
▪ Prohibits a person from being released prior to his or her first appearance if he or she has been
arrested for a dangerous crime,
▪ Authorizes a court to revoke pretrial release and order pretrial detention if a defendant
violates a condition of pretrial release,
▪ Adds manslaughter while driving and boating under the influence, trafficking fentanyl,
extortion, and written threats to kill to the list of “dangerous crimes”,
▪ Prohibits a court from granting nonmonetary pretrial release at a first appearance hearing if
a defendant is arrested for a dangerous crime and the court determines there is probable
cause to believe the defendant committed the offense,
▪ Requires a state attorney, or a court on its own motion, to motion for pretrial detention if a
defendant is arrested for a dangerous crime that is a capital felony, a life felony, or a first-
degree felony and the court determines there is probable cause to believe that the defendant
committed the offense,
▪ Requires a court to order pretrial detention of a defendant who is arrested for a dangerous
crime if the court finds a substantial probability that the defendant committed the offense and
that no conditions of release or bail will reasonably protect the community from risk of physical
harm, and
▪ Authorizes any party to motion for reconsideration of pretrial detention if an alleged criminal
is granted pretrial release and then new information comes to light suggesting pretrial
detention is warranted.
Using the large data extract, the research team attempted to analyze the impact of the 2023 legislative
changes to the pretrial detention and release statute (§FS907.041) on the Detention Facility’s population
by applying the terms of the law to the previous population. This enabled the determination of who would
not have been released had the law been in place. In terms of a bottom-line effect, one could expect to
see an approximate 9.4% increase in the Leon County Detention Facility’s ADP because of this law. This
analysis was applied to the data and the ADP forecast was then constructed. Figure 39 depicts the result
of this forecast model. The monthly ADP gradually grows to 1,194 by midyear 2048, assuming that no
other major public policy or societal changes occur during that time.

Attachment #1
Page 49 of 68
FIGURE 39. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY MAIN FORECAST
This main forecast provides a starting point for the determination of the jail’s future population. However,
the forecast simply reflects only an average and as such it needs to be increased by two factors:
1. Peaking factor - to reflect the daily and seasonal variations in jail occupancy and to accommodate the
temporary closure of beds due to the need for maintenance, and,
2. Classification factor - to adjust for the requirement to separate detainees as needed based on gender,
security requirements, treatment needs, etc.
For the peaking factor calculation, the average of the top 5% highest population days between 2016 and
December 2023 were compared to the ADP. The jail’s daily population fluctuations were such that one
could expect the highest population during any day to be 11.9% greater for females and 6.2% larger for
males than the ADP.
In addition, not all jail beds are always available for use by every detainee. For instance, a vacant bed in a
female unit cannot be filled with a male detainee, a maximum-security detainee cannot be placed in a
vacant bed in a minimum-security setting, etc. A classification factor is, in effect, an acknowledgement of
this reality. To include this factor, a commonly accepted standard of 15% was used for the estimations.
The peaking and classification factors are added to the ADP to complete the actual number of needed
beds. Table 18 shows the bed need calculations for the main forecast. Thus, the projected ADP for 2048
of 1,194 detainees would require 1,456 beds to operate a safe and secure facility.

Attachment #1
Page 50 of 68
TABLE 18. MAIN FORECAST BED NEED CALCULATION
Alternate Forecast Scenario 1: ALOS is Reduced to 30 Days

Recognizing that the criminal justice system in Leon County had a relatively high ALOS prior to the onset
of the pandemic, the research team experimented with what would happen if the ALOS was reduced to
30 days. While this is a bold goal (yet achievable), it was used to see what the forecast result would be if
the recommendations are implemented. A variety of system changes would have to be successfully
implemented to be able to achieve such a reduction in a safe and responsible fashion. For this particular
forecast, a 26% bookings increase was projected by 2048 (30.8 per day) and the system was given
approximately 4 years to achieve the ALOS reduction. Given the current booking trend and the expected
growth of the region, it is very likely that bookings will be at this level by 2048. It will be difficult to prevent
the booking trend from growing in the future. The big unknown is how quickly bookings will increase over
time, absent some change to policy. Alternate forecast 1 projects an ADP for 2048 of 926 (Figure 40).
FIGURE 40. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY ALTERNATE FORECAST 1 – ALOS DECREASES TO 30 DAYS

Attachment #1
Page 51 of 68
TABLE 19. ALTERNATE FORECAST 1 BED NEED CALCULATION

Females Males
Total Bed
Peaking Classification Peaking Classification Total ADP
ADP Bed Need ADP Bed Need Need
(11.9%) (15%) (6.2%) (15%)
2028 121 14 18 154 784 49 118 951 906 1105
2033 122 15 18 155 789 49 118 956 911 1111
2038 123 15 18 156 793 49 119 961 916 1117
2043 123 15 19 157 797 49 120 967 921 1123
2048 124 15 19 157 802 50 120 972 926 1129
Alternate Forecast Scenario 2: ALOS is Reduced to 30 Days, Bookings Quickly Return to 2019
Levels
The first alternate forecast examined the potential impact of an ALOS reduction to 30 days. Given the
expected regional and county population growth, coupled with our forecasts of bookings numbers, we
tested what could happen if ALOS decreases to 30 days in addition to an increase in booking levels. We
phased in the bookings increase across a 4-year period and then growing from there to 35 per day. In
essence, a quicker return of bookings to the 2019 level means that the long-term level of bookings is
expected to be higher over time, due principally to population growth. The resulting projected ADP for
2048 becomes 1,060. Figure 41 plots the forecast and Table 20 relates the bed days.
FIGURE 41. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY ALTERNATE FORECAST 2 – ALOS DECREASES TO 30 DAYS, BOOKINGS INCREASE

Attachment #1
Page 52 of 68
Females Males
Total Bed
(11.9%) (15%) (6.2%) (15%)
2028 136 16 20 173 882 55 132 1069 1018 1242
2033 138 16 21 175 891 55 134 1080 1028 1254
2038 139 17 21 177 900 56 135 1090 1039 1267
2043 141 17 21 178 909 56 136 1101 1049 1280
2048 142 17 21 180 918 57 138 1112 1060 1293
Alternate Forecast Scenario 3: Bookings Return to 2019 Levels

Given the fact that bookings have continued to gradually/incrementally increase, it was necessary to
examine what would happen if bookings returned to 2019 levels (28.9 bookings vs. 22.8 bookings in 2023).
The same methodological approach was used, while also stepping into the bookings trend by ‘ramping
up’ an increase in bookings over the course of the next 4 years. We held ALOS to where it was in 2023.
The resulting projected ADP for 2048 became 1,679, representing a significant increase over the main
forecast. Figure 42 charts this alternate forecast against the main forecast, essentially showing the likely
outcomes if there are no changes to the present system vs. the likely outcome if bookings return to pre-
pandemic levels.
FIGURE 42. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY ALTERNATE FORECAST 3 – BOOKING LEVELS REBOUND TO 2019
Table 21 details the bed need calculations for this scenario. The expected 2048 ADP of 1,679 requires
2,047 beds for safety and security.

Attachment #1
Page 53 of 68
Females Males
Total Bed
(11.9%) (15%) (6.2%) (15%)
2028 218 26 33 276 1407 87 211 1705 1624 1981
2033 219 26 33 278 1418 88 213 1719 1638 1997
2038 221 26 33 281 1430 89 214 1733 1651 2014
2043 223 27 33 283 1442 89 216 1747 1665 2030
2048 225 27 34 285 1454 90 218 1762 1679 2047
The guidance suggested by the main forecast and the alternative forecast does not have to become reality.
During the project, several opportunities for continuing to safely and responsibly managing the LCDF
population became evident. The next section focuses on these recommendations and presents forecasts
of what could happen if they are implemented.
Current Bedspace Capacity

As mentioned earlier, the current capacity of the four housing units in the Detention Facility totals 1,246
beds. There is a 124-bed, open dormitory style Annex that is not currently being used to house detainees.
If the Annex were brought back online, the additional 124 beds would bring the maximum capacity to
1,370 beds.
When the Detention Facility was built in 1993, it was reportedly designed to hold mostly misdemeanant
detainees. Over the years, and especially post-COVID-19, the profile of the inmate population has
changed. In 2023 the confined population was comprised of more than 76% felony-charged persons.
Housing Units 1 and 3 have four housing pods with 94 beds in each pod. However, the pods in these Units
were originally designed as 47-bed pods. A second bed was added to each cell doubling the capacity to 94
beds. While Housing Unit 1 houses newly admitted and general population offenders, the classification
level for all of Housing Unit 3 is “violent felony.” This means that using the direct supervision model of
inmate management, there are 94 offenders charged with violent felonies with one officer assigned to
each pod.
Table 22 shows the breakdown of all housing areas by capacity and classification designation. The trend
20-30 years ago was to build larger-capacity housing units for general population housing units that would
be managed by a single officer through effective interpersonal communication skills. Higher-risk
classification units would have fewer beds which would be easier for staff to manage.

Attachment #1
Page 54 of 68
TABLE 22. FACILITY POD CLASSIFICATIONS
Recent trends in detention facility planning have changed course and are now moving towards smaller-
capacity housing units of no more than 48 beds and often no larger than 32 beds. Some jurisdictions are
also abandoning the direct supervision method of inmate management (which always has an officer inside
the housing unit with the offender population) in favor of the strategic inmate management (SIM) model.
This method of inmate management integrates the elements of direct supervision with the elements of
effective inmate management but does not require an officer to always be in a housing pod with the
inmate population. It is costly to have an officer stationed in every housing pod, and managing multiple,
large housing pods is difficult for a single officer.
As was discussed early in this report during the stakeholder interviews, the 31-year-old correctional facility
is becoming more and more costly to maintain. Repairing leaky roofs and water line replacements are
expensive items on an aging building. The maintenance supervisor, however, indicated that the building
could last for many years to come if it were properly maintained, and issues were addressed in a timely
manner.

Attachment #1
Page 55 of 68
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the offender population has changed as detailed earlier in this report. Non-
violent misdemeanor offenses either do not come to jail now or do not stay very long when they do come.
This leaves the detention facility with a population that is higher risk and increasingly has higher needs
such as substance abuse or serious mental illness. The design and capacity levels of the existing housing
pods are no longer conducive for the current offender population. During our onsite visit to the facility in
June 2023, Sheriff McNeil indicated a desire to move away from the direct supervision style of inmate
management which has an officer stationed in each housing pod with the inmates due to the increased
level of security for the offender population. Many of the pods have too many beds for the types of people
that are being housed. Table 23 shows the ADP and bedspace projections that were discussed earlier.
Even if the current housing pods were appropriate for today’s offender population, the total of 1,370 beds
(if the Annex is reopened) falls short of two of the forecast scenarios.
TABLE 23. FORECAST MODEL SUMMARIES
Main Forecast Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3

2048 ADP 1,194 926 1,060 1,679
2048 Bed Need 1,456 1,129 1,293 2,047
Housing Pod Options

There are several directions Leon County can take regarding the projected bedspace shortages in the
coming years. Decisions must be made regarding the appropriate capacities of the various housing pods
based upon classification, levels of risk and need, and staff deployment.
One option would be to reactivate the Annex. This option would increase the number of available beds
by 124 which would not have a big impact on the growing population and would add additional security
posts that must be staffed. The beds in the Annex are open, dormitory-style spaces. These types of beds
are more appropriate for inmates charged with non-violent, misdemeanor offenses, and not the higher
levels of felony charges that make up today's inmate population.
Another option would be to reduce the capacities of the housing units in Pods 1 and 3 to no more than 47
inmates. These pods currently house the newly admitted offenders that are in the process of being fully
screened and classified (Unit 1) and those offenders charged with violent felony offenses (Unit 3). This
option would reduce the number of inmates per housing pod to more manageable numbers, creating a
safer environment for staff and inmates, but would reduce the capacity by 376 beds.
There is also the option of building new Housing Units. This option would involve the services of an
architectural and engineering firm to work with Leon County officials to design and properly locate
additional housing on the site that will efficiently tie-in to the existing building and utilities.

Attachment #1
Page 56 of 68
Additional Bedspace Needs

For this option, the current housing configuration and style of operations remain unchanged. The Annex
would be reopened to maximize the existing resources and inventory of beds, which is 1,370. Applying
the current inventory of beds to the projected bedspace forecasts shows a small deficit of beds in the
main forecast. Alternate 2 (reducing ALOS to 30 days) would provide a surplus of existing beds and would
provide the greatest opportunity for remodeling and repurposing of existing spaces. Alternate 1 (a return
to 2019 booking levels at the current ALOS) would require the greatest amount of remodeling and
construction of additional beds.
TABLE 24. FORECAST MODEL BEDSPACE SUMMARIES
Main
Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3
Forecast
2048 ADP 1,194 926 1,060 1,679
2048 Bed Need 1,456 1,129 1,293 2,047
Current Beds 1,370
Deficit -86 241 77 -677
Many factors must be considered and discussed about how to move forward with inmate housing and
space needs. These include the potential reduction in current housing pod capacities, programming
spaces, staffing requirements, etc. Modern detention facilities often average 350 to 400 square feet per
bed depending upon the level of programs and services offered. If a replacement facility or significant
remodeling were considered, the estimated square footage requirement would vary greatly depending
upon the total number of beds included.
The square footage estimates provided in Table 25 are rules-of-thumb derived from multiple detention
facility programming projects across the country. The area of usable space that is available for people,
furnishings and equipment, or net square feet (NSF) of an area, is calculated. A departmental grossing
factor (circulation and wall thicknesses within each subcomponent department) is added to the NSF to
generate estimated departmental gross square footage (DGSF). The total amount of space necessary is
computed by adding a building gross factor to the DGSF. This factor includes such central circulation areas
as corridors, duct chases, and other common use areas that cannot be assigned to any particular
component. The addition of the Building Gross Factor to the DGSF provides an estimated total square foot
requirement for the building. These spaces are not a substitute for a detailed planning effort that should
be undertaken by Leon County but provide an estimate of the spaces that may be required to plan for
expansion. The Florida Model Jail Standards have been incorporated into these estimates.

Attachment #1
Page 57 of 68
The following square footage options can be used when discussing different approaches to remodeling,
adding, and replacing the current inventory of beds in the detention facility.
TABLE 25. SPACE NEEDS

Main
Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3
Forecast
2048 Bed Need 1,456 1,129 1,293 2,047
350 sf 509,600 395,150 452,550 716,450
400 sf 582,400 451,600 517,200 818,800

Attachment #1
Page 58 of 68
SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS/OPPORTUNITIES FOR POPULATION REDUCTION

Given the serious nature of the current detainee population of the Leon County Detention Facility as well
as the comparatively high ALOS both before and after the COVID-19 epidemic’s first waves, it is Justice
Planners’ recommendation that Leon County prioritize investing attention and resources toward reducing
ALOS. The biggest area of opportunity has to do with criminal justice case processing, which is addressed
in part below. Moreover, there are opportunities for expansion of some existing strategies to attempt to
responsibly and safely stay in front of the Detention Facility’s population growth.
During the analysis, multiple recommendations were developed regarding potential areas of
improvement for the Leon County criminal justice system. In the spirit of offering as many options as
possible to Leon County, some of these recommendations may be mutually exclusive with each other.
Finding 1: The Detention Facility’s ALOS is higher than expected. Moreover, the ALOS before the pandemic
was also higher than expected from such an otherwise effective and efficient criminal justice system.
Recommendation: Leverage the existing framework of the Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC) to
begin a formal long-term project aimed at safely and responsibly reducing Detention Facility ALOS.
Recommended Action: Accomplishing large-scale, sustained ALOS reduction will require the cooperation
of nearly all key stakeholders in the Leon County criminal justice system. The PSCC is uniquely suited as
an all- encompassing body to provide a global approach to reducing ALOS. It is recommended that the key
stakeholders form a working committee/task force that holds a series of regular discussions focusing on
solutions to possible delays in the processing of arrestees through the Detention Facility. At the time of
this writing, it appears that the County is reconvening the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, which is
a very positive development. If this group can identify and develop at least 15 to 20 potential changes to
help speed case processing in a few months, the group can then turn toward the much more difficult
question of implementation. Many of the system changes would require cooperation from multiple
independent stakeholders, which can make implementation a challenge. However, the problem is not
completely insurmountable. Some strategies that can be considered:
A. The time between booking/initial appearance and VOP hearings for VOP-only people should be
reduced. Other jurisdictions have successfully achieved significant time reductions. For instance,
our research team recalls the median time to VOP hearings in Orange County, FL being reduced
from 63 days in 2001 to 25 days by 2003. A good goal to consider for the time between initial
appearance and disposition should be 37 days, exactly what it was in 2019. In terms of impact to
the jail’s population, the current time between booking/initial appearance and the VOP hearing is
57 days. If we apply a 20-day reduction to the 2023 overall VOP-only ALOS of 62.5 days, the VOP-
only ADP is reduced from 187.5 to 127.5, a reduction of 60 detainees on an average daily basis.
B. There should be greater cooperation and flexibility in terms of moving cases through the system in
general. Stakeholder conversations led to the conclusion that a significant number of cases only
resolve when a trial date becomes imminent, rather than early in the process. Plea agreements
near the front-end of the felony process are increasingly rare. Pleas at initial appearance are

Attachment #1
Page 59 of 68
extremely rare. Moreover, Leon County’s version of a felony fast track rocket docket appears to be
only rarely used in recent times, and even then, in only one Circuit division. We understand that
there can be a philosophical disconnect in situations where a defendant takes a plea deal despite
possibly not having committed the offense with which they are charged. While we respect and
understand that position, in terms of Detention Facility population management and realistic
system effectiveness and efficiency, the overall approach should be reconsidered. This issue
appears to be a part of the case processing time problem in Leon County. In a perfect world, plea
conferences with realistic offers should be held as close to the front end of the process as possible
and for more serious felonies, a formal fast track “rocket docket” needs to be staffed and energized
to move cases more quickly through the system. After all, roughly 98% of Circuit Court cases are
disposed of before trial 11. The system would function more efficiently and effectively if realistic
agreements can be made at the front end of the process and those cases settle more quickly. Such
a shift in approach would reduce processing times, further decreasing ALOS. The impact of an
improvement along these lines is estimated as follows: The current felony ALOS is 75 days
(excluding felony-charged people who have a VOP matter) and the median felony case process
time is 112 days. Returning the felony process time to a median of 61 days (where it was in 2017)
would reduce the overall felony ALOS to 55 days. The resulting ADP savings would be 140
detainees.
C. Expand the use of citations and notices to appear (NTAs) by law enforcement officers. Some
jurisdictions across the country have expanded citations and NTAs to the point where
misdemeanants are only rarely booked into the county jail. Some jurisdictions have even instituted
issuing NTAs during the booking process itself. Somewhat perversely, this would have the impact
of increasing ALOS due to the lack of misdemeanants and their shorter stays. However, the
reduction in bookings would result in a net decrease to the population. An analysis of the full year
2022 data (excluding people with holds, FTAs, and supervision violations) indicates that the ADP of
the Detention Facility can be reduced by approximately 20 individuals with this practice.
D. Regarding the changes to Florida’s pretrial detention and release laws (§FS 907.041;) a series of
changes to the initial appearance process should be considered to mitigate potential negative
impacts on the Detention Facility’s population. Specifically, the prohibition of non-monetary
release for defendants charged with dangerous crimes if a judge feels there is probable cause
present (as well as following a new statewide bond schedule) may necessitate a creative solution
that could combine some fashion of monetary and non-monetary monitored release. For instance,
upon an agreement between the State Attorney and the Public Defender, appropriate defendants
could be released with a consent bond and electronic monitoring immediately after initial
appearance. Moreover, a bond reduction/ modification hearing could be added to the normal
process for people who do not make bail within 1 or 2 days of initial appearance. A significantly
11
Statistics retrieved from Florida Office of State Courts Administrator Clearance Rate Dashboard
(flcourts.gov)

Attachment #1
Page 60 of 68
reduced bond, coupled with supervision by pretrial release staff would perhaps work to both
satisfy statutory requirements as well as retain the benefits from the pretrial release program. It is
expected that the number of people on the initial appearance docket will increase due to the
change in the pretrial release statute, which will have the effect of requiring more bond reduction
hearings. The judicial system should find a way to expand capacity for the expected increase in the
bond hearings. In addition, the judiciary will also need to consider shifting the initial appearance
schedule to obtain an optimal number of people to improve processing times. This may include the
consideration of holding occasional afternoon dockets in addition to morning dockets to account
for everyone.
E. Given the proportions of people in the jail with mental health disorders, it is prudent for Leon
County to duplicate the misdemeanor-level mental health docket at the felony level. By all
accounts, the misdemeanor mental health docket is a model program. The same care and attention
should be expanded to felony cases. The same personnel are handling felony competency cases
and with an expansion of resources, felony matters can be successfully handled in the same
manner.
F. In a related issue, there is a clear need to identify, develop, and secure more evaluators for
competency evaluations. Cutting the time for evaluations will be helpful from several perspectives.
However, there is a statewide shortage of people doing this type of work. The ultimate solution
may be at the state government level in the form of funding or some form of intervention to recruit
and attract more evaluators. Regardless, the lack of evaluators means that people are waiting in
jail for longer periods of time..
Finding 2: Existing large-scale diversion strategies/programs need to continue, and, if possible, further
expand.
Recommendations: Continue the use of SPTR and electronic monitoring. Shift to using the Public Safety
Assessment risk assessment instrument and apply to all arrestees.
Recommended Action: It was noted previously that there are few ‘easy’ opportunities for reducing the
LCDF population in terms of new programs. However, it appears that more individuals can be served by
some of the existing alternative programs. After all, only a few dozen individuals are added to the
electronic monitoring program each month. While this will have a cost, it will be offset by reduced use of
the jail, especially in the long run. With felony bookings on the rise, the number of people not eligible for
the various diversion programs also increases. Leon County is encouraged to continue its investment in
electronic monitoring, which is better suited than many programs to supervise more serious offenders. A
variety of jurisdictions have several thousand people on electronic monitoring (Indianapolis, Indiana and
Louisville, Kentucky are two examples). Fulton County, Georgia achieved significant jail population
reductions in September and October of 2023 by placing detainees on electronic monitoring in
combination with stipulated bonds.
Additionally, the SPTR program could be expanded with a modification to the Administrative Order to

Attachment #1
Page 61 of 68
reimplement the authority to release prior to first appearance. Moreover, evaluating a move from the
Ohio risk assessment instrument to something along the lines of the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) makes
a great deal of sense. The PSA scores can be calculated without requiring the arrestee to participate in an
interview and the risk scores can be produced once the arrestee is identified. There should be a small
time-savings as well as a potential improvement in the quality of release/detain decisions given the
automated nature of the PSA process. In addition, the proportion of people who are evaluated by the PSA
would be higher, given the fact that less than half of Leon County arrestees have a completed ORAS. This
should increase the number of overall pretrial evaluations as well as improving the speed with which these
evaluations are performed. The net effect would be to make an already efficient pretrial process that
much better by reducing LOS at the front end for those who present lower risks of re- offense or failure
to appear in court. It is hoped that the statistical credibility (and established national track record) of the
PSA would result in judges relying upon the PSA information for release/detain decisions. Perhaps a pilot
period can be instituted where the PSA is validated in Leon County, potentially increasing key stakeholder
comfort with the approach.
Finding 3: Like many communities in the United States, mental illness and substance use disorders are
significant problems in Leon County. The jail population has a very high rate of both issues.
Recommendation: Develop a formalized approach to evaluating these issues as close to the time of
booking as possible.
Recommended Action: Court staff does a terrific job of recording the evaluations of psychiatric providers
for individuals with matters before the court. However, this practice tends to occur well after arrest. The
Detention Facility’s provider uses a brief jail mental health and substance use screening, however the
results are not entered into any connected data system. In terms of operating the Detention Facility, and
managing its population, a best practice would be to have the ratings readily available for detainee
management purposes as well as to have a more reliable estimate of the number of people in custody
with mental health or substance use issues. The research team has seen such practices used in both
Orange and Miami-Dade Counties in the past (we are not sure if the practices continue to this day). The
Orange County ratings system used a 5-point scale for each person while Miami-Dade County used a 10-
point scale. At any rate, it was important for staff to know if a person had a mental health/substance use
issue (not necessarily the specific diagnosis). This system allowed stakeholders to know the level of serious
mental illness in the facility population on a daily basis, which then spurred the knowledge necessary to
help cover the needs of these people. Put simply, if it can be measured, it can be managed.
Finding 4: Similar to nearly every other large community across the country, homelessness in Leon County
is a problem.
Recommendations: Continue developing programs that attempt to improve the issue, such as the
Sheriff’s HOST team. Leverage technology to develop a method for identifying homeless individuals
booked into the Detention Facility.
Recommended Action: Every stakeholder with whom we met mentioned the issue of homelessness,
which affects the entire community, including the Detention Facility. It is also evident that Leon County is

Attachment #1
Page 62 of 68
aware of the issue and continues to work on solutions. Providing stable housing is a necessary step to
helping people achieve overall stability in their lives. An attempt was made to utilize the jail data to
estimate the size of the homeless population in custody, but the dataset included city, state, and zip code
information only. If there are indicators of homelessness in the jail data, they do not fall into those fields.
Taken together with Finding 3 above, it is important to note that improving treatment, housing, and
services for homeless people and those facing mental illness or substance abuse issues should help to
prevent crime and in turn reduce the demand for detention beds. The Lippman Commission in New York
advocated an intentional continuum of housing and services, ranging from emergency housing to
transitional and permanent housing along with needs-based treatment12. New York City has had some
success reducing its jail population by providing more housing and support, especially for people facing
mental health issues. The initial steps for providing those services would begin with the alterations to the
booking process described under Finding 1.
Finding 5: Drug Court may not be meeting its full potential.
Recommendation: Formalize and standardize the referral system for Drug Court.
Recommended Action: Some stakeholders raised concerns that some individuals who would benefit from
participating in Drug Court do not get referred to the program. Making the referral process into a more
robust formalized system (perhaps beginning with the booking process or even earlier) may expand this
important service. In addition, modifying some of the requirements for Drug Court could expand its use.
Finding 6: Jail population management efforts are often concentrating on microlevel matters.
Recommendations: Leverage the county’s justice information system to assist the Detention Review
Coordinator to focus on larger system issues rather than individual issues. Move toward practicing
differentiated case management.
Recommended Action: While it is impressive that Leon County has a jail population manager-type
position (the 'Detention Review Coordinator'), it seems as if the position is mostly concentrating on
individual cases instead of monitoring and managing the larger systemwide measures that impact the
LCDF population. From the conversations with stakeholders, the Detention Review Coordinator is very
good at monitoring systems and looking for ways to alert the judiciary of individual cases that need
attention. This is a good thing. It would be even more beneficial to also have this position utilize statistical
reports from the system to monitor macro-level system functions to achieve ‘more bang for the buck’
regarding the jail population. For instance, in Camden, New Jersey, the Jail Population Manager position
is the key resource for facilitating criminal justice council meetings as well as the more important matter
of watching case processing and jail statistics to ensure targets are met. Specifically, Camden has
implemented population targets for the various custody statuses. The effectiveness of this approach is
that if the analytics indicate that there is, say, an increase in the post-indictment population, the Jail
12
Women’s Community Justice Association. Path to Under 100: Strategies to Safely Lower the Number of Women
and Gender-Expansive People in New York City Jails. June 2022, page 7.

Attachment #1
Page 63 of 68
Population Manager attempts to determine what has happened and then works with stakeholders to
solve the issue. The Camden Jail Population Manager is responsible for collecting, analyzing, compiling,
and presenting statistical data relative to the jail population. In short, the jail’s population is continuously
reviewed, along with appropriate options for non-custody alternatives.
A variety of reports from Leon County’s information system can set up such a macro-level approach.
Reports can be automated and then used to direct work efforts. Some reports that come to mind are:
• A twice-daily list of people who are held on bond only, by charge level, with no holds. Break the
report out by bond amount and length of custody.
• Daily custody status reports that examine the full Detention Facility population by exactly where
everyone is in the legal process.
• Daily reports that identify detainees eligible for a bond reduction or release. In fact, the system may
be well-served by automatically triggering a bond reduction hearing. Currently, it is the
responsibility of defense counsel to make the motion to schedule the hearing. Automatically
triggering a review at an appropriate time after initial appearance could likely save some jail days.
Moreover, we note that the new pretrial release law has an automatic review at 5 days for
individuals where a pretrial detention motion was granted by the court. There may be gains by
having reviews scheduled at appropriate times both before and after the 5-day period.
• Daily reports that identify long-staying detainees (people who have stayed for more than a year)
• Alert reports when a primary custody status group in the jail has exceed established and agreed
upon population ranges.
• Reports that detail detainees with court event dates that fall outside of expected ranges.
• A monthly case processing report that examines times between key milestones for the in-custody
population, such as the time between initial appearance and case disposition/release, the time
between booking and VOP hearings for VOP-only detainees, or the time between booking and
indictment, etc.
• A regular statistical report that updates many of the measures presented in this study may be
helpful.
• A list of the long-staying detainees in the Detention Facility along with their next court events.
Beyond the Detention Review Coordinator position, there are a host of pre- and post-arrest diversion
programs that tend to operate on the individual level. While that is the right thing to do, there should be
a focus on larger issues that drive larger numbers of people within the jail’s population. As the population
grows more serious, it will become increasingly difficult to divert and deflect people from custody.
Attention needs to be paid to making the system as efficient as possible in terms of processing the felony
population through the Detention Facility. Again, cutting case processing time will reduce ALOS, and ADP.
Operating at a more macro-level, the system, through the CJCC/PSCC, should establish benchmarks for
case processing times, such as target time limits for pretrial detention. The Detention Review Coordinator
can help with monitoring progress. Using information technology, some of the anticipated costs of this
approach can be reduced. A 2021 study of court cases in Brooklyn, New York found that written guidelines

Attachment #1
Page 64 of 68
prescribing target weeks for case adjournment contributed to reduced pretrial detention time.
Specifically, for those with violent felony cases, dispositions within six months went from 25% to nearly
43%13
Finding 7: Jail population information processes need to be improved.
Recommendation: Build a reporting module in the current system (and future systems) that more readily
provides views of key correctional metrics. Prepare and disseminate daily snapshots that keep all
stakeholders aware of how many people are being held in the jail, for how long, and for what reasons.
Recommended Action: The integrated criminal justice information system is wonderful in many respects.
In its current state, however, it is not a ready to use jail reporting system. There is a lot of data about the
Detention Facility population, but there is little information about the population that permeates the
system. The unit of analysis in the current system is arguably court cases. A second unit of analysis needs
to be instances of incarceration. Each unique admission to the jail should receive its own discrete booking
number, and add-on charges should fall under that number. This will help streamline reporting in such a
way that corrections information can be more easily produced. When these changes are made, an
automated daily snapshot detailing where the jail stands in terms of the current population, the ADP,
bookings, releases, and special categories of the population should be produced. This snapshot should be
sent to the key stakeholders each day. During the course of this study, it was learned that the Detention
Facility will switch to the ProPhoenix Corrections Management System. This should be a positive
development for the quality and quantity of population management information in Leon County.
The jail population cannot be managed unless it can be readily measured, and awareness is spread
throughout the system. Several jurisdictions use such snapshots to keep people informed and held to
account, including Orange and Miami-Dade counties in Florida and Dane County, Wisconsin. Multiple
jurisdictions have produced dashboards detailing such information, such as Harris County, Texas and
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Orange County and Miami-Dade have placed a version of their daily
snapshots on their publicly facing websites. Miami-Dade details the longest staying detainees’ court cases.
Orange County’s internal snapshot listed the top ten longest staying detainees along with their court
division and the next scheduled court event. In some instances, greater awareness spurs more action.
In the end, the Detention Review Coordinator should use the statistics and analytics from the information
system to drive population change. Candidly, the snapshot approach increases the chance that a given
stakeholder will see the information that is being sent. Not everyone will take the chance to visit a
dashboard. In Justice Planners’ experience, jurisdictions that utilize a snapshot approach tend to have
higher awareness of facts surrounding the jail population.
13
Weill, Joanna; Rempel, Michael; Rodriguez, Krystal; and Raine, Valerie; Center for Court Innovation. Reducing
Felony Case Delay in Brooklyn: Evaluation of Jail Reduction Strategies Implemented in 2019. March 2021, pages 36
– 38.

Attachment #1
Page 65 of 68
Finding 8: Current progress toward Detention Facility population stability should be sustained.
Recommendation: It appears that much of the reduction in case processing times stems from the courts
employing state funding for additional senior judge days and other resources. Such funding should be
permanent.
Recommended Action: By several accounts, the improvements in case processing (which reduced ALOS
and in turn the ADP) are due to improved staffing at the State Attorney’s Office, the Public Defender, and
the judiciary. More senior judge days are funded with State dollars, resulting in more hearings and trials
being conducted. The system is operating at a high level of efficiency. Reducing or eliminating this funding
risks setting the system back and adding to the Detention Facility’s population. Moreover, what was
learned from the stakeholder interviews and the court data, there is a significant need for an additional
Circuit Court division. The workload is definitely present, and the current momentum of the criminal
justice system should be maintained.
Finding 9: Criminal justice system improvements have presented an analytical challenge.
Recommendation: Leon County should consider regular updates to the forecast/analysis effort to monitor
progress.
Recommended Action: This study’s initial forecast for Leon County was developed in early August 2023
and painted a very different picture than the forecasts reported in this document. The final seven months
of 2023 presented a host of developments and improvements that only began to register in the bulk of
our data extracts from July. As updated summary data between August 2023 through January 2024 was
added, each run of the forecast model presented more encouraging news regarding the Detention
Facility’s population. All criminal justice systems are dynamic, and Leon County’s system has made
excellent progress, quickly rendering the initial August 2023 forecasts obsolete. Keep in mind that all this
change occurred before the changes to §FS907.41 were implemented. As of early 2024, the full impact of
this law is unclear.
Meanwhile, the research team notices a pattern in our national practice where jurisdictions are requesting
longer-term engagements, where forecasts are updated on a regular basis (whether it be 6 or 12 months).
Moreover, some systems that have a statistician on staff have formalized routine population analyses and
projections (Orange County and Hillsborough County come to mind) to stay on top of changes. Such an
approach can be an early warning device for undesired changes as well as reinforcing the need for various
system alterations. Regardless of the party conducting the updates, the information should be
disseminated to the PSCC on a regular basis for review and response.
Finding 10: 16% of the Detention Facility’s population have been held for over a year.
Recommendation: Leon County should proactively manage the long-staying detainee population.
Recommended Action: On January 8, 2024, the Detention Facility held 37 people who had been in custody
for over 1,000 days. Long-staying detainees in Leon County are charged with multiple serous violent

Attachment #1
Page 66 of 68
offenses and present correctional management concerns. This population increases the ALOS and utilizes
a high percentage of the maximum custody level facility space, a scarce resource. As described in Finding
6, Leon County should establish a list of these long-staying individuals along with pertinent scheduling
information.
Moreover, detainees on this list should be routinely tracked by a team of representatives from the State
Attorney’s Office as well as the Public Defender and the court. This long-staying detainee team can review
the status of the cases, and every effort should be made to move these cases along in the process without
compromising the integrity of the process itself.
Finding 11: The number of inmates held in many of the housing pods are more than the original design
capacity and poses a security risk due to the types of inmates being held.
Recommendation: The Sheriff and Leon County should explore reducing the capacity of the 94-bed
housing pods to the design capacity of 47.
Recommended Action: Eight of the 19 housing pods in the detention facility were originally built for 47
beds. Each of these pods have had a second bed added to each cell bringing the capacity of each pod to
94 inmates. As discussed earlier in this report, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, detainees
charged with non- violent misdemeanor charges are mostly diverted from the detention facility. As a
result, those who are held in custody tend to be of higher custody levels and require more intensive levels
of services. Having 94 inmates charged with violent felonies in a single housing pod with one Corrections
Officer presents a potentially dangerous situation for staff and detainees alike.
Many new detention facilities are designed with housing pods of no more than 48 people (along with 24
and 32-bed pods) to better-address their programmatic and therapeutic needs as well as maintaining a
safer number of detainees for staff to manage.
Implementing the recommendations highlighted in Table 26 below would assist the Leon County criminal
justice system in realizing future detention facility ADP consistent with Alternative Forecast Models 1 and
2 requiring no new construction as described in Table 24. Many of these recommendations reduce the
facility’s ALOS such that it is possible to examine two new alternate forecast scenarios, one in which the
2023 booking level remains in place, but the LCDF ALOS is decreased to 30 days and one in which the 30-
day ALOS is accomplished, but bookings return to 2019 levels.

Attachment #1
Page 67 of 68
TABLE 26. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

Summary of Recommendations
Recommendation 1: Leverage the existing framework of the PSCC to formalize long-term project aimed at safely and responsibly reducing
Detention Facility ALOS
Number Recommended Actions Responsible Parties Category
Reduce time between initial appearance and disposition through earlier
1A-1 plea agreements for felony cases that do not also include a Violation of Judiciary, State Attorney, Public Defender Short-Term
Probation (VOP) charge or a Failure to Appear (FTA) matter
1B-1 Reduce time between booking and VOP hearing for VOP-only cases Judiciary, State Attorney, Public Defender Short-Term
1C-1 Expand the use of notices to appear Local Law Enforcement Agencies Immediate
Consider development of a combination monetary/non-monetary consent
1D-1 Judiciary, State Attorney, Public Defender Long-Term
bond
Formalize/automate scheduling of bond reduction hearings post-initial
1D-2 Judiciary, State Attorney, Public Defender Long-Term
appearance
Increase capacity/time allotted for the scheduling of bond reduction
1D-3 Judiciary Long-Term
hearings
Judiciary, State Attorney, Public Defender,
1E-1 Duplicate current misdemeanor mental health docket at the felony level Long-Term
and Clerk of Court
1F-1 Increase the number of mental health evaluators for competency evaluations Court Administration Long-Term
Recommendation 2: Continue the use of SPTR and electronic monitoring. Explore alternative risk assessment instruments and apply to all
arrestees.
2-1 Continue the use of electronic monitoring Judiciary, SPTR Short-Term
Evaluate using a risk assessment instrument that does not require the arrestee
2-2 Judiciary, SPTR Long-Term
to participate in an interview
Recommendation 3: Develop a formalized approach to evaluating mental health and substance use disorder issues as close to the time of
booking as possible.
Establish a practice of developing mental health and substance use ratings Sheriff's Office, Judiciary, Community
3-1 Long-Term
for arrestees Partners
Recommendation 4: Continue developing programs that attempt to identify and address homelessness, such as the Sheriff's HOST team.
4-1A Continue to work to counter homelessness in Leon County All Community Partners Long-Term
Leverage technology to develop a method for identifying homeless
4-1B Information Technology Immediate
individuals booked into the Detention Facility
Recommendation 5: Formalize and standardize the referral system for Drug Court.
State Attorney's Office, Court
5-1 Formalize and standardize the referral system for Drug Court Long-Term
Administration
Recommendation 6: Leverage the county's justice information system to assist the Detention Review Coordinator to focus on larger system
issues rather than individual issues. Move toward practicing differentiated case management.
Leverage technology to enable the Detention Review Coordinator to Information Technology, Judiciary, Court
6-1 Long-Term
monitor system trends and benchmarks Administration
6-2 Move toward practicing differentiated case management Judiciary Long-Term
Recommendation 7: Build a reporting module in the current system (and future systems) that more readily provides views of key correctional
metrics. Prepare and disseminate daily snapshots that keep all stakeholders aware of how many people are being held in the jail, for how long,
and for what reasons.
Build a reporting module that readily provides data to stakeholders on key
7-1 Information Technology; Stakeholders Long-Term
performance metrics
Recommendation 8: It apperas that much of the reduction in case processing times stems from the courts employing state funding for additional
senior judge days and other resources. Such funding should be permanent.
Recent funding for additional judges and other resources must be made
8-1 Court Administration Long-Term
permanent
Recommendation 9: Leon County should consider regular updates to the forecast/analysis effort to monitor progress.
Regular updates to the forecast/analysis are needed in order to account for
9-1 Public Safety Coordinating Council Short-Term
the dynamic changes of the Leon County Criminal Justice System
Recommendation 10: Leon County should proactively manage the long-staying detainee population.
10-1 Proactively manage the long-staying detainee population Judiciary, State Attorney, Public Defender Short-Term
Recommendation 11: The Sheriff and Leon County should explore reducing the capacity of the 94-bed housing pods to the design capacity of
47.
11-1 Reduce capacity of 94-bed housing pods to the design capacity of 47 Sheriff's Office, County Long-Term

Attachment #1
Page 68 of 68
justiceplanners.com

Leon County Detention Facility Assessment Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Leon County Detention Facility Assessment Final Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Leon County Detention Facility Assessment Final Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Attachment #1

Leon County Detention Facility

August 30, 2024

i | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

2 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

Main Forecast Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3

3 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

4 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

5 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

6 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

7 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

COUNTY POPULATION & CRIME

FIGURE 1. LEON COUNTY POPULATION, 2009 - 2023

8 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

9 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION ANALYSIS

10 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

Average Daily Population

FIGURE 4. LEON HISTORICAL DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION, 2009 – DECEMBER 2023

11 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 5. LEON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY DAILY POPULATION, 2016 - 2024

12 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

13 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 8. MONTHLY DAILY AVERAGE Bookings, 2016 – 2023

14 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 9. ANNUAL DAILY AVERAGE Bookings, 2016 – 2023

15 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

16 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

TABLE 1. DAILY AVERAGE BOOKINGS BY MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE

17 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

Average Length of Stay

18 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

19 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

20 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

TABLE 2. ALOS BY MOST SERIOUS OFFENSE LEVEL55

TABLE 3. ALOS BY MOST SERIOUS CHARGE, 2020 – 2023

21 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

TABLE 4. ALOS BY RELEASE MECHANISM

FIGURE 16. MONTHLY ALOS VS. ADP, 2016 – 2023

22 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 17. DETAINEES BY GENDER

23 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 18. DETAINEES BY RACE

24 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 19. DETAINEES BY AGE GROUP

FIGURE 20. DETAINEES BY AGE GROUP BY MONTH

25 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

TABLE 5. DETENTION FACILITY POPULATION BY AGE AND GENDER

26 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 22. DETAINEES BY CUSTODY CLASSIFICATION LEVEL

27 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 23. DETAINEES WITH A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE

28 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

TABLE 7. DETENTION FACILITY BOOKINGS BY HOME ADDRESS

29 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

TABLE 9. DETENTION FACILITY ADP BY HOME ADDRESS

30 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 24. LEON ADP BY SELECTED MOST SERIOUS OFFENSES

31 | Leon County Detention Facility Needs Assessment Final Report

FIGURE 25. LEON ADP BY CASE LEVEL