Washington County’s deflection program reports early growth: 31 active participants and 20 provider partnerships

Marnie Kyle and Danielle (program manager) briefed the Board of Commissioners on the county’s new deflection program and early operating results, including partnerships, staffing and funding arrangements intended to support people charged with low‑level controlled‑substance offenses.

Marnie Kyle, one of the county’s ACAs, said the program had expanded eligibility and partnerships and introduced Danielle, the program manager. Kyle said the county added staff quickly after planning and that design choices were meant to align behavioral health and public‑safety partners. She explained the county had adapted operations to meet legislative interest in data during the upcoming session.

Danielle described eligibility, access points, and program performance. "We now have 31 active participants in our program," she said, and reported that about 80% of those who would otherwise be eligible were already involved in the criminal justice system. Danielle said staff expanded eligibility to include PCSA charges in addition to PCSU, which increases the number of people who could be considered for deflection.

Program design and partnerships: staff said the program now has 20 partnership MOUs with local providers; 12 of those MOUs involve peer‑delivered services and 11 involve substance‑use outpatient providers. Staff said they have executed several flexible‑fund contracts to support peer services and short‑term needs such as phones or transportation. That flexible spending is intended to reduce barriers to engagement and improve successful referrals.

Staffing and fund structure: staff said three funded county FTEs currently support the program (the program manager, a DA office staffer, and a lieutenant from the sheriff's office — the lieutenant position is a 0.8 FTE). Two peer‑support contract FTEs and two flexible‑fund contracts were also in place. Staff announced plans to create a stand‑alone fund for the deflection program to centralize accounting and reduce administrative burdens; the fund will be modeled after other cross‑functional county funds and the board will see it in the next budget.

Operational challenges and next steps: staff identified failure to appear (FTA) and inability to contact eligible people as ongoing problems that reduce uptake; they described technical assistance and peer outreach efforts underway to address FTAs. Commissioners raised questions about the population of people who were previously prosecuted and whether those individuals could now access deflection; staff said that is a complex question and agreed to research patterns of prior cases and report back.

Staff said the program’s outreach and statewide engagement have generated invitations to present the county’s model to other jurisdictions and legislative committees. Danielle said technical assistance partners, including OHSU, have described Washington County’s program as “thoughtful, proactive, and prepared.”

No formal board action was taken. Staff requested continued support for staffing, flexible funds and legislative outreach and agreed to return with additional data that commissioners said they need for conversations with legislators.