CSTS Standards Meeting Minutes

Date: January 24, 2017

Present: Judith Franklin-Ramsey, Melanie Voss, Jan Krogman -DOC, Heidi Rademacher-Dakota, Lyndon Stinson – Freeborn, Dan Pepper – Washington, Jessica Miller – Wright, Stacy Pribyl – Brown, Angela Neeb, Kate Selnes – Hennepin, Jim Schneider – Cass, Laura Minnihan – Isanti, Tami Luke, Brenda Martini - DFO

Standards Related Business:

1.  Introduction of New Member – Jim Schneider – Cass County

2.  New Attendance Sheet

  1. Executive Committee really liked the new attendance sheet and Judith will give it to them every quarter

3.  Technical Contact List

  1. Technical Contact list for CSTS and who in their counties are using certain features and feel comfortable getting questions from other users about the topics
  2. Those in attendance were asked to either fill in the sheet at the meeting, or to email Judith or Heidi with what they wanted to mark for their agency

4.  Manual Discussion and how we are going to keep it updated:

  1. It was decided to look at the next upgrade of CSTS and see if there are any standards that we will need to add into the existing manual
  2. At this time we will then decide how to incorporate the changes into the manual

5.  June User Group:

  1. We are going to find out what STI will have time for. Suggestions were:
  2. Panel of Experts – or Stump the experts with topics like, Smart Chrono, PSC, etc.

6.  User Questions:

  1. Prior Record changed to offense history – is there a standard of having the current or subsequent offenses put into the violation, PSI, etc as part of their offense history?
  2. Standards agreed that this is a county business process and not a standard
  3. 2 Counts that are consecutive – does this need to be put into the manual?
  4. Standards agreed that it would not need to be addressed
  5. Broadcast messaging –and cell phone tracking
  6. There are phones that we will not be able to text with the broadcast message. Some counties are just sending those emails or nothing at all.
  7. COMS/DEMS question about whether or not counties are able to delete out old DEMS/COMS messages or duplications.
  8. It was suggested that they do not delete until the DOC, the case manager, and the county all know the deletion is occurring. Make sure before you delete out anything. If completing a clean-up of old data, contact the DOC to figure out what you should do moving forward.
  9. Are people sending letters to clients/attorneys when they are completing an expungement?
  10. All counties handle this differently. Some do not send letters, others send letters by request, and others send a letter all the time.
  11. How are we recording DANCO:
  12. In the condition area or as an alert or both.

7.  Next Focus Areas

  1. Administrative Set-up/usage/maintenance manual and Training Guide
  2. Cross reference between codes and reports

Action Items:

1.  An Updated Technical list will be sent out with the next meeting’s agenda
2.  Survey will be brought next month to review
3.  From the enhancement committee to bring back the Sealed and Expunged questions that they had.

Decisions made in 2017:

1.  The DOC is going to move forward with the changes to the Group Codes that were suggested back in 2012. The standards committee discussed the need to possibly change the condition codes, but that the groups were at such a high level that it would be ok for the DOC to move forward with the changes proposed.

Future Agenda Items:

1.  Sealed and Expunged enhancements question
2.  Proposal for a Small Follow up survey
  1. To clarify some terms that perhaps did not provide enough information to those responding to survey
  2. To clarify responses for questions where we asked “which don’t you use?”

3.  Next Focus Areas:

  1. Relook at Standard Condition Codes; perhaps use some of the integrations that are built into CSTS such as MNCIS , S3, etc.
  2. New Methods for delivery, such as web
  3. Repository for individual business agency usage decisions