BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair A
2013-2014 Regular Session B
1
9
2
AB 1920 (Campos) 0
As Amended June 12, 2014
Hearing date: June 24, 2014
Penal Code
AA:mc
BOARD OF STATE AND COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS:
"SOCIAL IMPACT PARTNERSHIPS PILOT PROGRAM"
HISTORY
Source: California YouthBuild Coalition
Prior Legislation: None
Support: Riverside Sheriffs' Association; Association for Los
Angeles Deputy Sheriffs; AFSCME, AFL-CIO; California
Workforce Association; California Public Defenders
Association; California Catholic Conference of Bishops
Opposition:None known
Assembly Floor Vote: Ayes 75 - Noes 0
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD A "SOCIAL IMPACT PARTNERSHIPS PILOT PROGRAM" BE ENACTED, AS
SPECIFIED?
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageB
SHOULD NON-SUBSTANTIVE NARRATIVE ADDITIONS BE MADE TO THE STATUTORY
DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF STATE AND COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS CONCERNING
JOB TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR AT-RISK YOUTH?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to 1) enact a "Social Impact
Partnerships Pilot Program," as specified; and 2) make
non-substantive narrative additions to the duties of the Board
of State and Community Corrections concerning the development of
comprehensive regional partnerships and job training and
employment opportunities for at-risk youth, as specified.
Current law establishes the "Board of State and Community
Corrections" ("BSCC"), as specified. (Penal Code § 6024.)
Current law provides the following mission for the BSCC:
The mission of the board shall include providing
statewide leadership, coordination, and technical
assistance to promote effective state and local
efforts and partnerships in California's adult and
juvenile criminal justice system, including addressing
gang problems. This mission shall reflect the
principle of aligning fiscal policy and correctional
practices, including, but not limited
to prevention, intervention, suppression, supervision,
and incapacitation, to promote a justice investment
strategy that fits each county and is consistent with
the integrated statewide goal of improved public
safety through cost-effective, promising, and
evidence-based strategies for managing criminal
justice populations. (Penal Code § 6024(b).)
Current law enumerates specified duties for the BSCC, including
requiring it to do the following:
Collect and maintain available information and data
about state and community correctional policies, practices,
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageC
capacities, and needs, including, but not limited to,
prevention, intervention, suppression, supervision, and
incapacitation, as they relate to both adult corrections,
juvenile justice, and gang problems. The board shall seek
to collect and make publicly available up-to-date data and
information reflecting the impact of state and community
correctional, juvenile justice, and gang-related policies
and practices enacted in the state, as was well as
information and data concerning promising and
evidence-based practices from other jurisdictions.
Develop recommendations for the improvement of criminal
justice and delinquency and gang prevention activity
throughout the state.
Identify, promote, and provide technical assistance
relating to evidence-based programs, practices, and
innovative projects consistent with the mission of the
board.
Develop definition of key terms, as specified.
Receive and disburse federal funds, and perform all
necessary and appropriate services in the performance of
its duties as established by federal acts.
Develop comprehensive, unified, and orderly procedures
to ensure that applications for grants are processed
fairly, efficiently, and in a manner consistent with the
mission of BSCC.
Identify delinquency and gang intervention and
prevention grants that have the same or similar program
purpose, are allocated to the same entities, serve the same
target populations, and have the same desired outcomes for
the purpose of consolidating grant funds and programs and
moving toward a unified single delinquency intervention and
prevention grant application process in adherence with all
applicable federal guidelines and mandates.
Cooperate with and render technical assistance to the
Legislature, state agencies, units of general local
government, combinations of those units, or other public or
private agencies, organizations, or institutions in matters
relating to criminal justice and delinquency prevention.
Develop incentives for units of local government to
develop comprehensive regional partnerships whereby
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageD
adjacent jurisdictions pool grant funds in order to deliver
services to a broader target population and maximize the
impact of state funds at the local level.
Conduct evaluation studies of the programs and
activities assisted by the federal acts.
Identify and evaluate state, local, and federal gang and
youth violence suppression, intervention, and prevention
programs and strategies, along with funding for those
efforts. The board shall assess and make recommendations
for the coordination of the state's programs, strategies,
and funding that address gang and youth violence in a
manner that maximizes the effectiveness and coordination of
those programs, strategies, and resources. By January 1,
2014, the board shall develop funding allocation policies
to ensure that within three years no less than 70 percent
of funding for gang and youth violence suppression,
intervention, and prevention programs and strategies is
used in programs that utilize promising and proven
evidence-based principles and practices. The board shall
communicate with local agencies and programs in an effort
to promote the best evidence-based principles and practices
for addressing gang and youth violence through suppression,
intervention, and prevention.
Collect county criminal justice realignment plans within
two months of adoption by the county boards of supervisors.
Commencing January 1, 2013, and annually thereafter, the
board shall collect and analyze available data regarding
the implementation of the local plans and other
outcome-based measures, as defined by the board in
consultation with the Administrative Office of the Courts,
the Chief Probation Officers of California, and the
California State Sheriffs Association.
By July 1, 2013, and annually thereafter, the board
shall provide to the Governor and the Legislature a report
on the implementation of the plans described above. (Penal
Code
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageE
§ 6027.)<1>
Current law also authorizes BSCC to do either of the following:
(1) Collect, evaluate, publish, and disseminate statistics and
other information on the condition and progress of criminal
justice
in the state. (2) Perform other functions and duties as
required by federal acts, rules, regulations, or guidelines in
acting as the administrative office of the state planning agency
for distribution
of federal grants. (Id.)
This bill , with respect to the board's existing duties to
develop incentives for units of local government to develop
comprehensive regional partnerships whereby adjacent
jurisdictions pool grant funds in order to deliver services,
would add the descriptive language, "such as job training and
employment opportunities" to this language, and would define
"population" to include at-risk youth.
Social Impact Partnerships Pilot Program
This bill additionally would enact the "Social Impact
Partnerships Pilot Program," ("program") with the following
---------------------------
<1> In addition to these duties, BSCC (and its predecessor
entities) also is required to establish minimum standards for
local correctional facilities (Penal Code § 6030), to inspect
local detention facilities biennially (Penal Code §§ 6031 and
6031.1), to conduct biennial inspections of local juvenile
facilities, as specified (Welfare and Institutions Code § 209),
and to engage in related efforts with respect to standards and
conditions in local facilities where minors are detained, as
specified. (See WIC §§ 207.1, 210, and 210.2.) In addition to
its ongoing duties, CSA/BSCC is statutorily tasked with
administering certain programs, such as the AB 900 Local Jail
Construction Financing Program, the Juvenile Justice Crime
Prevention Act, and the Youthful Offender Block Grant.
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageF
features and requirements.
Administration
This bill would require the BSCC to administer the program.
This bill would authorize the chair of the BSCC to "identify and
submit proposed social impact partnerships to the chairs of the
Senate and Assembly budget committees and the chairs of the
relevant subcommittee for consideration with the May Revision of
the Governor's Budget each year beginning in 2015."
This bill would require the BSCC chair, before submitting a
proposed social impact partnership as authorized above, to
"consult with the appropriate state agency or department
responsible for administering a state program that would be
affected by the proposed social impact partnership."
This bill would require that, at "a minimum, each submission
shall include all of the following:
(A) A description of the proposed social program.
(B) A description of the organization's experience in
providing the proposed social program.
(C) A description of the financial stability of the
organization.
(D) An identification of each component of the social
program to be provided.
(E) A description of the manner in which the social
services will be provided.
(F) A description of the recruitment or selection process,
or both, for participants in the social program.
(G) The proposed quantifiable results upon which success of
the social program will be measured.
(H) An itemization of all expenses proposed to be
reimbursed under the contract."
This bill would require that, upon appropriation of sufficient
funds by the Legislature, the BSCC "chair shall enter into a
contract with the approved applicant," and require that each
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageG
contract include all of the following:
(1) A requirement that the payment be conditioned on the
achievement of specific
outcomes based upon defined performance targets.
(2) An objective process by which an independent evaluator,
selected by the chair, will determine whether the performance
targets have been achieved.
(3) A calculation of the amount and timing of payments that
would be earned by the service provider during each year of the
agreement if performance targets are achieved as determined by
the independent evaluator.
(4) A determination by the chair that the contract will
result in significant performance improvements and budgetary
savings across impacted agencies or departments if the
performance targets are achieved."
This bill would provide that the BSCC chair "shall not enter
into any contract that exceeds the funds appropriated for it by
the Legislature."
Definitions
This bill would apply the following definitions for purposes of
this program:
"Board" means the Board of State and Community
Corrections.
"Chair" means the Chair of the Board of State and
Community Corrections.
"Social impact partnership," which may also be known and
referred to as a "pay for success contract," refers to a
contract for services provided to address a defined
demographic group's particular needs that are traditionally
addressed through state programs, and funding for those
programs, and that are entered into in order to improve
outcomes and lower costs because payment is made only after
measured results are achieved.
Creation of Fund
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageH
This bill would create the "Social Innovation Financing Trust
Fund" in the State Treasury. All funds appropriated by the
Legislature . . . shall be deposited into the Social Innovation
Financing Trust Fund."
This bill would provide that social impact partnership contracts
entered into by the board with approved applicants shall be paid
from the Social Innovation Financing Trust Fund.
This bill would authorize BSCC to adopt regulations to implement
this title.
This bill would require BSCC to "adopt a reasonable application
fee that is sufficient to cover the expenses incurred by the
board in processing the application."
Reporting
This bill would require the BSCC chair to "report annually to
the Governor and Legislature on the status of each ongoing
social impact partnership, including, but not limited to, a
description of the desired outcome and an overview of the
independent evaluator's findings. The report shall also contain
an accounting of the Social Innovation Financing Trust Fund."
This bill would provide that the report made pursuant to its
provisions shall be made in accordance with the requirements of
Section 9795.
Sunsets
This bill would provide that its reporting section shall remain
in effect only until January 1, 2020, and as of that date is
repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before
January 1, 2020, deletes or extends that date.
This bill would provide that its provisions shall remain in
effect only until January 1, 2020, and as of that date is
repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageI
January 1, 2020, deletes or extends that date.
This bill would state that its provisions "shall not create a
statutory entitlement to services or any contractual obligation
on the part of the state."
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
For the last several years, severe overcrowding in California's
prisons has been the focus of evolving and expensive litigation
relating to conditions of confinement. On May 23, 2011, the
United States Supreme Court ordered California to reduce its
prison population to 137.5 percent of design capacity within two
years from the date of its ruling, subject to the right of the
state to seek modifications in appropriate circumstances.
Beginning in early 2007, Senate leadership initiated a policy to
hold legislative proposals which could further aggravate the
prison overcrowding crisis through new or expanded felony
prosecutions. Under the resulting policy, known as "ROCA"
(which stands for "Receivership/ Overcrowding Crisis
Aggravation"), the Committee held measures that created a new
felony, expanded the scope or penalty of an existing felony, or
otherwise increased the application of a felony in a manner
which could exacerbate the prison overcrowding crisis. Under
these principles, ROCA was applied as a content-neutral,
provisional measure necessary to ensure that the Legislature did
not erode progress towards reducing prison overcrowding by
passing legislation, which would increase the prison population.
In January of 2013, just over a year after the enactment of the
historic Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011, the State of
California filed court documents seeking to vacate or modify the
federal court order requiring the state to reduce its prison
population to 137.5 percent of design capacity. The State
submitted that the, ". . . population in the State's 33 prisons
has been reduced by over 24,000 inmates since October 2011 when
public safety realignment went into effect, by more than 36,000
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageJ
inmates compared to the 2008 population . . . , and by nearly
42,000 inmates since 2006 . . . ." Plaintiffs opposed the
state's motion, arguing that, "California prisons, which
currently average 150% of capacity, and reach as high as 185% of
capacity at one prison, continue to deliver health care that is
constitutionally deficient." In an order dated January 29,
2013, the federal court granted the state a six-month extension
to achieve the 137.5 % inmate population cap by December 31,
2013.
The Three-Judge Court then ordered, on April 11, 2013, the state
of California to "immediately take all steps necessary to comply
with this Court's . . . Order . . . requiring defendants to
reduce overall prison population to 137.5% design capacity by
December 31, 2013." On September 16, 2013, the State asked the
Court to extend that deadline to December 31, 2016. In
response, the Court extended the deadline first to January 27,
2014 and then February 24, 2014, and ordered the parties to
enter into a meet-and-confer process to "explore how defendants
can comply with this Court's June 20, 2013 Order, including
means and dates by which such compliance can be expedited or
accomplished and how this Court can ensure a durable solution to
the prison crowding problem."
The parties were not able to reach an agreement during the
meet-and-confer process. As a result, the Court ordered
briefing on the State's requested extension and, on February 10,
2014, issued an order extending the deadline to reduce the
in-state adult institution population to 137.5% design capacity
to February 28, 2016. The order requires the state to meet the
following interim and final population reduction benchmarks:
143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;
141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,
137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.
If a benchmark is missed the Compliance Officer (a position
created by the February 10, 2016 order) can order the release of
inmates to bring the State into compliance with that benchmark.
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageK
In a status report to the Court dated May 15, 2014, the state
reported that as of May 14, 2014, 116,428 inmates were housed in
the State's 34 adult institutions, which amounts to 140.8% of
design bed capacity, and 8,650 inmates were housed in
out-of-state facilities.
The ongoing prison overcrowding litigation indicates that prison
capacity and related issues concerning conditions of confinement
remain unresolved. While real gains in reducing the prison
population have been made, even greater reductions may be
required to meet the orders of the federal court. Therefore,
the Committee's consideration of ROCA bills -bills that may
impact the prison population - will be informed by the following
questions:
Whether a measure erodes realignment and impacts the
prison population;
Whether a measure addresses a crime which is directly
dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there
is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;
Whether a bill corrects a constitutional infirmity or
legislative drafting error;
Whether a measure proposes penalties which are
proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other
reasonably appropriate remedy; and,
Whether a bill addresses a major area of public safety
or criminal activity for which there is no other
reasonable, appropriate remedy.
COMMENTS
1. Recent Amendments
This bill was amended in the Senate on June 12, 2014 to include
the "Social Impact Partnerships Pilot Program" described above.
As passed out of the Assembly, the bill merely added job
training and employment opportunities for at-risk youth as
examples of areas in which local governments could pool grant
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageL
funds to deliver services. This provision remains in the bill.
2. "Social Impact Partnerships Pilot Program"
As explained above, this bill would create the "Social Impact
Partnerships Pilot Program," to be administered by the BSCC
subject to funding appropriated by the legislature. As before
the Committee, the bill describes a social impact partnership
as:
a contract for services provided to address a defined
demographic group's particular needs that are
traditionally addressed through state programs, and
funding for those programs, and that are entered into
in order to improve outcomes and lower costs because
payment is made only after measured results are
achieved.
Members may wish to discuss whether this description, which
appears to be the only indicator of the targeted purpose of this
program, sufficiently describes the purpose of the program.
IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS PILOT SUFFICIENTLY CLEAR?
The bill would authorize the chair of BSCC to bring proposed
social impact partnerships to the legislature for consideration
at May Revise each year. Before doing this the BSCC chair would
be required to consult with state entities that would be
affected by the proposed partnership. Members may wish to
consider the practical application of this requirement and what
it would or could mean to the BSCC's decision making process.
The bill also would require that submissions to the legislature
include a number of information points that appear to concern
particular programs and organizations that would receive grants
under the program. Members may wish to discuss this proposed
process and how it would work in the larger context of the
budget process.
This bill is very similar to SB 593 (Lieu), currently scheduled
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageM
to be heard in the Assembly Committee on Jobs, Economic
Development, and the Economy on June 24, 2014, the same day this
bill will be heard by this Committee. SB 593 passed the Senate
floor 35-0 in January and passed Senate Government Organization
Committee 6-0. Until June 10th, SB 593 authorized this proposed
program through the Office of Planning and Research (not BSCC,
as AB 1920 does). SB 593 recently was amended to remove the OPR
component and authorize the Governor to enter into a social
impact partnership with requirements like those in AB 1920,
submitted as part of the Governor's proposed budget, with at
least three proposed contracted agreements during the fiscal
year in which the state enters into the first contractual
agreement. SB 593 also was amended to specifically authorize
programs to improve outcomes in programs designed to reduce
recidivism in the population of formerly incarcerated
individuals and reduce the incidence of child abuse and neglect
through prevention and treatment, to improve the stability of
at-risk and foster children through behavioral health and other
trauma-informed care, and to improve educational outcomes and
job preparedness for at-risk and foster children. SB 593 also
specifies that these partnerships "shall not be used for the
operation of entire state programs nor cause the displacement of
any state employee," which is not in AB 1920.
With respect to the general approach embraced by both bills, as
explained by the Senate Appropriation Committee's analysis of SB
593:
A "pay for success" or "social impact contract" is a
financing model in which funds are raised from private
investors through philanthropic and non-governmental
organizations to provide capital for social services
traditionally delivered by public entities. Social
impact partnerships are intended to provide public
funding of service delivery programs only on a
reimbursement basis once demonstrated performance
measures are achieved by a private entity under
contract to perform specified services. This model is
intended to shift financial risk to non-governmental
entities that are paid for providing traditional
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageN
services only upon demonstration of results.
The federal government initiated "pay for success"
programs in 2012 and recently provided $24 million for
pilot financing programs in New York and
Massachusetts. The President's proposed 2014 Budget
includes a new $300 million Pay for Success Initiative
Fund at the Department of the Treasury to help states
and local governments implement "pay for success"
programs with philanthropies, nonprofits, and other
non-governmental organizations to test new models for
providing services.
Members may wish to ask the author whether the recent amendments
of this bill should be reconciled to SB 593 and, if so, how.
3. Support
As written in the Assembly Public Safety Committee analysis of
this bill, the California Youthbuild Coalition, sponsor of this
bill, submits:
BSCC is the entity designated by the state of
California to provide technical assistance and funding
to support anti-recidivism and gang reduction
programs. This bill will further BSCC's objective by
allowing greater consideration for job training and
employment opportunities in their delivery of services
to a broader population such as at-risk youth.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice's Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
requiring job training and employment opportunities
are considered best practices in addressing
community gang issues. Job training and employment
opportunities are essential in the long-term strategy
for preventing gang affiliation and encouraging
persons to become responsible community members. Job
training provides a foundational anchor preparing
at-risk youth with effective and necessary skills.
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageO
Once training and skills are acquired, availability of
employment opportunities provides a positive
alternative to gang affiliation. Furthermore,
employment opportunities provide a sense of
self-reliance, importance, and upward mobilization for
at-risk youth.
Our state must look past short-term fixes, and focus
on providing long-term solutions for at-risk youth.
Providing and requiring consideration of best
practices, such as job training and employment
opportunities, will move our state in the right
direction in reducing recidivism and combating
community gang issues.
(More)
4. Stated Need for This Bill
The author states:
Currently, the state has an overcrowding crisis in our
prisons and jails. One of the main reasons for this
overcrowding crisis is the state's high level of
recidivism. The state is constantly seeking programs
that are "evidence-based" and have proven to work in
reducing recidivism.
Even when community based organizations and other
reentry programs are providing successful wrap-around
services to those recently released, on parole, or
probation, it is frequently difficult to secure
funding for these essential services. Receiving
funding from the state or other federal funding is
rare and frequently difficult. However, this bill
would use Social Impact Partnerships pilot program to
fund proven, successful reentry programs.
Social impact partnerships is a financing approach
that bridges the timing gap between government success
payments and upfront working capital needed for
service providers to run reentry programs. Financing
capital can be raised from philanthropic or commercial
sources. Depending on the terms of the financial
deal, these investors will be either repaid from
government success payments or will reinvest payments
into future projects. If the funded programs do not
meet the terms of agreement or stated targeted
outcomes, the state is not required to repay the
investment.
In hopes of using Pay for Success, this bill will set
up a pilot program based on a proven, evidence-based
program that reduces recidivism, provides education,
job training, and workforce development. Using a
proven model, such as the California Youthful Offender
(More)
AB 1920 (Campos)
PageQ
Reentry program, AB 1920 ultimately aims at reducing
recidivism by proving proven wrap-around services to
recently released young offenders.
***************