BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2459
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 6, 2010
Counsel: Gabriel Caswell
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Tom Ammiano, Chair
AB 2459 (Caballero) - As Amended: April 6, 2010
SUMMARY : Creates the Community Juvenile Probation Performance
Incentives Act of 2010. Authorizes counties to establish a fund
to be used to provide supervision and rehabilitative services
for juvenile offenders subject to probation. All programs
receiving funding shall be spent on evidence-based practices.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Defines "evidence-based practices" as supervision policies,
procedures, programs, and practices demonstrated by scientific
research to reduce recidivism among juveniles under probation.
2)Defines "juvenile program" as a program established pursuant
to this bill consisting of a system of probation supervision
services dedicated to all of the following goals:
a) Enhancing public safety through the management and
reduction of juvenile offender risk while under probation
supervision and upon reentry into the community;
b) Providing a range of probation supervision tools,
sanctions, and services applied to probationers based on a
risk/needs assessment for the purpose of promoting
behavioral change that results in reducing recidivism and
promoting the successful reintegration of juvenile
offenders into the community;
c) Maximizing offender restitution, reconciliation, and
restorative services to victims of crime committed by
juvenile offenders;
d) Holding juvenile offenders accountable for their
behaviors and for successful compliance with applicable
court orders and conditions of supervision; and,
AB 2459
Page 2
e) Improving public safety outcomes for juvenile offenders
placed on probation for an offense, as measured by
successful completion of probation and commensurate
reduction in the rate of recidivism by juvenile
probationers.
3)States that each county is authorized to establish in each
county treasury a Community Juvenile Probation Performance
Incentives Fund (CJPPIF), to receive all amounts allocated to
that county for purposes of implementing this article.
4)Specifies that in any fiscal year for which a county receives
moneys to be expended for the implementation of this article,
the moneys, including any interest, shall be made available to
the chief probation officer of that county, within 30 days of
the deposit of those moneys into the fund, for implementation
of the community corrections authorized by this article.
5)Provides that the community juvenile probation program shall
be developed and implemented by probation and advised by a
local Community Juvenile Probation Partnership.
6)Specifies that the local Community Juvenile Probation
Partnership shall be chaired by the chief probation officer
and comprised of the following membership:
a) The presiding judge of the juvenile court, or his or her
designee;
b) A county supervisor or chief administrative officer for
the county;
c) The district attorney;
d) The public defender;
e) The sheriff;
f) The chief of police;
g) The head of the county department of social services;
h) The head of the county department of employment;
i) The head of the county alcohol and substance abuse
AB 2459
Page 3
programs;
j) The head of the county office of education;
aa) A representative from a community-based organization
with experience in successfully providing rehabilitative
services to juvenile offenders; and,
bb) An individual who represents the interests of victims.
7)States that funds allocated to probation pursuant to this bill
shall be used to provide supervision and rehabilitative
services for juvenile offenders subject to probation, and
shall be spent on evidence-based practices and programs, which
may include, but are not limited to the following:
a) Implementing and expanding evidence-based risk and needs
assessments;
b) Implementing and expanding intermediate sanctions; and,
c) Providing more intensive probation supervision.
8)Defines "community corrections" as the placement of persons
under probation supervision, within conditions imposed by a
court for a specified period.
9)Defines "chief probation officer" as the chief probation
officer for the county in which a juvenile offender is subject
to probation.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Directs the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR) to establish three pilot programs for
intensive training and counseling programs for female parolees
to assist in the successful reintegration into the community
upon release from custody following in-prison therapeutic
community drug treatment. [Penal Code Section 3054(a)(1).]
2)Provides that the services offered in the above pilot programs
may include, but shall not be limited to, drug and alcohol
abuse treatment, cognitive skills development, education, life
skills, job skills, victim impact awareness, anger management,
family reunification, counseling, vocational training and
AB 2459
Page 4
support, residential care, and placement in affordable housing
and employment opportunities. [Penal Code Section
3054(b)(1).]
3)Provides that CDCR shall operate the Preventing Parolee Crime
Program with various components including, at a minimum,
residential and non-residential multi-service centers,
literacy laboratories, drug treatment networks and job
placement assistance for parolees. [Penal Code Section
3068(a).]
4)Provides that prisoners on parole shall remain under the legal
custody of CDCR and shall be subject at any time to being
taken back within the enclosure of the prison. (Penal Code
Section 3056.)
5)Provides that Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) has the power to
establish and enforce parole rules and regulations. (Penal
Code Section 3052.)
6)Provides that BPH has full authority to suspend or revoke any
parole, and to order returned to prison any prisoner upon
parole. (Penal Code Section 3060.)
7)Allows revocation of parole only for cause, and provides for a
revocation hearing. Depending upon the severity and
complexity of the allegations considered in the hearing, the
parolee may be entitled to the assistance of counsel if
fairness so requires. (Penal Code Sections 3063, 3063.5 and
3063.6; California Code of Regulations Sections 3901.21.10 and
3901.27.)
8)Provides that any person returned to prison after revocation
of parole may be held for 12 months and an additional 12
months for prison misconduct. The person shall then be
released on parole for the balance of the period of parole
unserved at the time of return to prison. (Penal Code Section
3057.)
9)States that a statewide needs assessment shall be completed
and sent to the Legislature by May 3, 1991, with preliminary
information provided to the Legislature by April 15, 1990,
regarding the need for multipurpose youth centers and youth
shelters for runaway youths. The needs assessment shall
identify all of the following (Welfare and Institutions Code
AB 2459
Page 5
Section 2023):
a) The capability of existing centers and shelters
presently to address the needs of California youths;
b) The nature and extent of youth needs that are presently
unmet or unaddressed by existing facilities;
c) The nature and extent of future need for multipurpose
youth centers and youth shelters;
d) Cost estimates for addressing needs identified in
subdivisions (b) and (c); and,
e) Other information, issues, and trends relevant to
understanding and serving the youths under study.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "AB 2459
authorizes each county to create a Community Juvenile
Probation Performance Incentives Fund (CJPPIF), which the
state may fund in order to provide an incentive to local
juvenile justice departments to spend on evidence-based
programs. These funds must be spent according to
recommendations of the Juvenile Justice Coordination Council
as specified and reported in detail to the Administrative
office of the Courts concerning how the funds were spent and
how effectively."
2)Background : According to the Juvenile Justice Crime
Prevention Act's (JJCPA) annual 2008 report, there are
presently no enumerated provisions for demanding that programs
meet the standard for evidence-based programs. Programs
become evidence based, according to the sixth issue in a 2007
report, What Works, Wisconsin- Research to Practice Series,
"if (a) evaluation research shows that the program produces
the expected positive results; (b) the results can be
attributed to the program itself, rather than to other
extraneous factors or events; (c) the evaluation is
peer-reviewed by experts in the field; and (d) the program is
'endorsed' by a federal agency or respected research
organization and included in their list of effective
AB 2459
Page 6
programs."
Those departments charged with management and executions of
juvenile justice programs at the state and local levels have
made some successes. However, there are issues presently with
program reporting and with overall performance. At present,
the JJCPA report for example cites that in the case of
education outcomes (consisting of percentages of school days
attended, days suspended, and grade point averages), less than
20 programs are reporting in each category. When more
programs submit reports, such as the overall juvenile justice
outcomes (consisting of arrest rate, incarceration rate, and
completion of probation), the most promising improvement was a
7% difference between likelihood of students arrested in
programs versus students outside of such programs.
3)Evidence-Based Practices Generally : Evidence-based practices
or treatment refers to practices that employ systematic
empirical research to provide evidence of statistically
significant effectiveness. Evidence-based practices have
become more prominent in recent years as more organizations
are strongly encouraging members to carry out investigations
and tracking methods to provide evidence supporting or
rejecting the use of specific interventions and tools.
4)Argument in Support : According to Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) Local 1000 , "[T]his bill would
support the use and development of evidence-based programs
within our juvenile justice facilities in the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation and those for programs used
within the juvenile court system. SEIU Local 1000 supports
effective public policy, and thus supports the premise of this
and similar legislation.
"Currently, Washington State has a program in place that
evaluates the effectiveness of juvenile justice programs. As
stated in their evidence-based analysis of programs in their
state, '?The basic idea is straightforward: taxpayers are
better off if their dollars fund programs that have been
proven to be effective in achieving key policy outcomes, in
this case reduced re-offending.'
"SEIU Local 1000 represents teachers and librarians, including
the academic teachers, coaches, vocational instructors and
librarians in state prisons, including juvenile facilities.
AB 2459
Page 7
We invite the support efforts to evaluate and improve our
effectiveness, the effectiveness of education programs we
deliver, and those that are delivered within other parts of
the system, which include our courts.
"SEIU Local 1000 supports evidence-based public policy;
however, measures of effectiveness must be carefully chosen to
place accountability where it belongs. Evaluation must
include management of correctional education programs such as
inmate classification, inmate assignment, program selection,
program location, curriculum design and especially accurate
statistical studies of outcomes. Attempts to evaluate
education programs will be subject to fatal errors unless
these inputs are analyzed.
"SEIU Local 1000 supports meaningful measures of effectiveness
for rehabilitation programs in California's juvenile justice
system. We would suggest that rather than reinvent the wheel,
you might use the system in place in Washington State which
has already developed a program for evidenced based decision
making."
5)Related Legislation:
a) AB 2017 (Hall) funds the California YMCA's Youth and
Government Program through taxpayer donations via their
state tax returns. AB 2017 is pending hearing by the
Assembly Revenue and Tax Committee.
b) AB 2200 (Solorio) mandates CDCR, to the extent funds are
appropriated, establish a reentry program specifically
targeting offenders who will be between 16 and 23 years of
age upon their release, parole, or discharge from either
state or county custody. AB 2200 is pending hearing by the
Assembly Appropriations Committee.
c) SB 516 (DeSaulnier) authorizes the addition of the
California Fund for Youth check off to the personal income
tax form upon the removal of another voluntary contribution
fund from the form. SB 516 is pending hearing by the
Assembly Human Services Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
AB 2459
Page 8
California Narcotic Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
SEIU Local 1000
Opposition
None
Analysis Prepared by : Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744