BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair
AB 2521 (Hagman) - Corrections: data collection.
Amended: May 23, 2014 Policy Vote: Public Safety 7-0
Urgency: No Mandate: No (See Staff Comments)
Hearing Date: August 4, 2014
Consultant: Jolie Onodera
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary: AB 2521 would require, commencing July 1, 2015,
the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC), in
consultation with specified stakeholders, to collect and analyze
data regarding recidivism rates of all persons who are sentenced
and released on or after July 1, 2015, pursuant to 2011
realignment, as specified. This bill requires the data to be
posted quarterly on the BSCC website beginning September 1,
2016.
Fiscal Impact:
Annual costs of about $250,000 (General Fund) to the BSCC
for resources to collect, track, analyze, and post data
relating to thousands of offenders.
One-time costs potentially in excess of $250,000 (General
Fund) for information technology (IT) infrastructure,
software, and maintenance to enable BSCC to analyze and
track the data. BSCC would also incur ongoing costs for
maintenance and operations.
Ongoing significant costs, potentially state-reimbursable
or subject to a subvention of funds from the state under
Proposition 30 (General Fund*) to local law enforcement,
including county sheriffs and probation departments, to
assist in the provision of data to the BSCC to fulfill its
mandated data collection requirements. To the extent some
counties lack adequate data information systems and/or
personnel to collect and report this information, additional
unknown, but potentially significant costs could be incurred
by the state in order for BSCC to meet the bill's mandates.
*Under 2011 Realignment Legislation, the state provided funding
to the counties for the assignment of specified public safety
AB 2521 (Hagman)
Page 1
services responsibilities to local agencies, including related
reporting responsibilities. Pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012),
legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an
overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local
agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011
Realignment Legislation apply to local agencies only to the
extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost
increase. To the extent local agencies were not provided with
funding under 2011 Realignment to complete these reporting
activities, funding may be required from the state to support
these local activities.
Background: Existing law establishes the BSCC and enumerates
various duties of the BSCC with respect to data collection and
analysis. As stated in the BSCC 4th Quarterly Report of 2013:
The BSCC has the broad responsibility to collect and
maintain available information and data about state
and community correctional policies, practices,
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 BSCC is also required to collect data and
complete reports related to public safety
realignment, including the development of first phase
baseline and ongoing data collection instruments and
an annual report on the implementation of local
community corrections plans.
The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) noted in its
recent report, Corrections Realignment and Data Collection in
California (April 2014):
Realignment legislation did not dedicate funds for an
evaluation of the effects of realignment subsequent
to its implementation, nor did it provide counties
with specific funds for assessing the success rates
of their local correctional strategies. This was a
missed opportunity. Through realignment, the state
effectively created 58 county-level policy
laboratories. The variation across counties in
correctional practices creates an ideal opportunity
to identify cost-effective strategies and to
AB 2521 (Hagman)
Page 2
disseminate these best practices across the state.
Yet, without a consistent framework for data
collection and evaluation, weeding out failing
strategies and identifying successful ones will be a
haphazard process.
Acquisition of the data necessary to identify
effective practices is a goal that is within reach.
However, it will require counties to make
improvements in four areas: capturing data, linking
data across systems, standardizing definitions, and
upgrading technology to facilitate extraction of data
for multiple purposes. Addressing these obstacles
will require leadership and a directed use of
available resources. But, if counties can make these
adjustments, there will be significant benefits,
including an improved ability to identify the most
effective strategies and target resources toward
those correctional interventions, an expanded base of
evidence to support difficult policy choices, and an
increased ability to share successful interventions.
For the state as a whole, increasing the capacity for
data-driven practices at the county level will result
in a more efficient, effective, and sustainable
corrections system. It will also enable the state to
better track the overall results of realignment and
to more easily implement incentive-based funding in
the future.
This bill takes a step towards assessing the impacts of 2011
realignment through the collection of recidivism data across all
counties to enable the BSCC to compile and evaluate the
statewide effects of realignment on recidivism.
Proposed Law: This bill requires, commencing July 1, 2015, the
BSCC, in consultation with the Administrative Office of the
Courts (AOC), the California State Association of Counties
(CSAC), the California State Sheriffs' Association (CSSA), and
the Chief Probation Officers of California (CPOC), to collect
and analyze data regarding recidivism rates of all persons who
are sentenced as realigned felons pursuant to paragraphs (2) or
(5) of PC � 1170(h) or who are placed on postrelease community
supervision (PRCS) after release from state prison on or after
July 1, 2015. Additionally, this bill:
AB 2521 (Hagman)
Page 3
Requires the data to include, as it becomes available,
recidivism rates for these offenders one, two, and three
years after their release into the community.
Requires the collected and analyzed data to be posted
quarterly on the BSCC website beginning on September 1,
2016.
Specifies that the term "recidivism" has the same
meaning as the definition of the term developed by the BSCC
pursuant to existing law (PC � 6027(b)(3)).
Related Legislation: SB 1097 (Nielsen) 2014 would establish a
grant program, and appropriate an unspecified sum, to be
administered by the BSCC, for the purpose of establishing and
implementing data reporting systems to be used by the counties
for criminal offenders who were impacted by 2011 Realignment, as
specified. This bill was held on the Suspense File of this
Committee.
SB 852 (Leno) Chapter 25/2014, the Budget Act of 2014, contains
the following language with regard to data collection and
analysis:
The Board of State and Community Corrections shall
provide, no later than February 15, 2015, a report to
the Governor and the Legislature describing a set of
6 to 12 recommended performance metrics that are
available or should be commonly available and can be
used to provide information to county governments,
the Legislature, and the Governor about the results
of a county's community corrections system. In
developing the report, the board is strongly
encouraged to consult with stakeholders and
nonpartisan research organizations. The report shall
include, but not be limited to, definitions of data
points, a description of where the data may be
accessed, and how the data may be interpreted.
Staff Comments: The BSCC will incur one-time and ongoing
staffing costs to collect, analyze, and post the data required
under the provisions of this bill. The BSCC has indicated it
currently does not collect individual offender level data from
the counties, with the exception of the 11 counties
participating with the PPIC and the BSCC to develop data
processes for collecting and reporting information on PRCS cases
AB 2521 (Hagman)
Page 4
to the BSCC.
The BSCC does not currently have adequate databases, servers and
data programmers to collect and analyze data as specified in
this bill. As a result, the BSCC estimates ongoing resource
needs of $250,000 for a programmer analyst and research
specialist, as well as one-time costs potentially in excess of
$250,000 for database, servers, and software to enable the
collection, analysis, and reporting of this data on the BSCC
website on a quarterly basis.
More importantly, the BSCC will need the cooperation of courts
and local law enforcement, including county sheriffs and
probation departments, in the provision of data to the BSCC to
fulfill its mandated data collection requirements. To the extent
some counties lack adequate data information systems and/or
personnel to collect and report this information, additional
unknown, but potentially significant costs could be incurred by
the BSCC to develop a statewide data reporting system to enable
counties to provide this data.
While this bill is not keyed a state-mandated local program, to
the extent local law enforcement agencies incur increased
workload and costs above the level provided under 2011
Realignment, the initial and ongoing costs for data collection,
compilation, and submittal could potentially require a
subvention of funds from the state.
Proposition 30 (2012) provides that legislation enacted after
September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the
costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of
service mandated by the 2011 Realignment Legislation shall apply
to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides
annual funding for the cost increase. Local agencies shall not
be obligated to provide programs or levels of service required
by legislation described in this paragraph above the level for
which funding has been provided. Any costs in excess of the
funds provided to local agencies to cover the costs of
infrastructure upgrades/development and data reporting would
potentially require a subvention of funds, or alternatively,
could be eligible for state reimbursement through the mandates
process. The ongoing costs to local agencies to continue
collecting and reporting data to the BSCC, would likewise
potentially be the responsibility of the state.
AB 2521 (Hagman)
Page 5
To the extent the data collection and reporting efforts are
successful would facilitate a more efficient and effective use
of the state and local investment in realignment as well as
assist in the identification of those counties experiencing
positive outcomes through reduced recidivism.