BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair S
2013-2014 Regular Session B
1
0
9
7
SB 1097 (Nielsen) URGENCY
As Introduced: February 19, 2014
Hearing date: April 22, 2014
Penal Code
AA:sl
REALIGNMENT:
OFFENDER POPULATION DATA
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation: None
Support: Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs; Los
Angeles Probation Officers
Union, AFSCME Local 685; Riverside Sheriffs'
Association
Opposition:None known
KEY ISSUES
SHOULD DATA FROM EACH COUNTY CONCERNING CRIMINAL OFFENDERS
"REALIGNED" PURSUANT TO AB 109 (2011) BE COLLECTED, COMPILED AND
REPORTED, AS SPECIFIED?
SHOULD THE STATE PROVIDE FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE CREATION OR
EXPANSION OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT ALLOWS EACH COUNTY TO CONSISTENTLY
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageB
COLLECT AND REPORT THIS INFORMATION, AS SPECIFIED?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to establish funding and a
framework, established through the Board of State and Community
Corrections, for collecting and compiling data concerning
criminal offenders who were "realigned" pursuant to AB 109 in
2011, as specified.
Under current law, "crimes and public offenses" include
felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions. (Penal Code � 16).
Under current law , a felony is a crime punishable by death, by
imprisonment in state prison, or by imprisonment in county jail,
as specified. (See Penal Code �� 190 et seq.; 1170); every
other crime or public offense is a misdemeanor "except those
offenses that are classified as infractions." (Penal Code �
17(a).)
Current law provides that the Attorney General is the head of
the Department of Justice ("DOJ"). (Government Code � 12510.)
Current law requires DOJ "present to the Governor, on or before
July 1st, an annual report containing the criminal statistics of
the preceding calendar year and to present at other times as the
Attorney General may approve reports on special aspects of
criminal statistics. A sufficient number of copies of all
reports shall be prepared to enable the Attorney General to send
a copy to all public officials in the state dealing with
criminals and to distribute them generally in channels where
they will add to the public enlightenment." (Penal Code �
13010(g).)
Current law requires this report to contain statistics showing
all of the following:
(a) The amount and the types of offenses known to
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageC
the public authorities;
(b) The personal and social characteristics of
criminals and delinquents;
(c) The administrative actions taken by law
enforcement, judicial, penal, and correctional
agencies or institutions, including those in the
juvenile justice system, in dealing with criminals
or delinquents;
(d) The administrative actions taken by law
enforcement, prosecutorial, judicial,
penal, and correctional agencies, including those in
the juvenile justice system, in dealing with minors
who are the subject of a petition or hearing in the
juvenile court to transfer their case to the
jurisdiction of an adult criminal court or whose
cases are directly filed or otherwise initiated in
an adult criminal court; and
(e) The number of citizens' complaints received by
law enforcement agencies
under Section 832.5. These statistics shall indicate
the total number of these complaints, the number
alleging criminal conduct of either a felony or
misdemeanor, and the number sustained in each
category. The report shall not contain a reference
to any individual agency but shall be by gross
numbers only.
It shall be the duty of the DOJ to give adequate
interpretation of the statistics and so to present the
information that it may be of value in guiding the
policies of the Legislature and of those in charge of
the apprehension, prosecution, and treatment of the
criminals and delinquents, or concerned with the
prevention of crime and delinquency. The report shall
also include statistics which are comparable with
national uniform criminal statistics published by
federal bureaus or departments heretofore mentioned.
(Penal Code � 13012.)
Current law establishes the "Board of State and Community
Corrections" ("BSCC"), with the following mission:
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageD
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 the duties of the BSCC, including the
following with respect to data collection and analysis:
"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 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 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
promising and innovative projects consistent with the
mission of the board;
Develop definitions of key terms, including, but not
limited to, "recidivism," "average daily population,"
"treatment program completion rates," and any other terms
deemed relevant in order to facilitate consistency in local
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageE
data collection, evaluation, and implementation of
evidence-based practices, promising evidence-based
practices, and evidence-based programs, as specified;
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;
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, as specified;
Collect county realignment plans, as specified, and
analyze and report on "available data regarding the
implementation of the local plans and other outcome-based
measures," as specified; and,
Support the development and implementation of first
phase baseline and ongoing data collection instruments to
reflect the local impact of realignment, specifically
related to dispositions for felony offenders and
postrelease community supervision, including making any
data collected in this regard available on the BSCC Web
site, as specified. (Penal Code � 6027(a) and (b).)
Current law additionally authorizes the BSCC to:
Collect, evaluate, publish, and disseminate statistics
and other information on the condition and progress of
criminal justice in the state; and
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. (Penal Code �
6027(c).)
This bill would establish the "Criminal Justice Reinvestment
Assessment Grant Program of 2014" ("Program"), with specified
purposes, requirements and features described below.
Administration and Purpose
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageF
This bill would require that the program be administered by
BSCC.
This bill would provide that the purpose of the program is to
establish and implement "reporting systems to identify and
expand programs that provide proven, evidence-based, local
programming opportunities for the successful reintegration of
offenders into society."
This bill would require BSCC to "award grants to assist counties
with the creation or expansion of infrastructure that allows
each county to consistently collect and report criminal justice
information" enumerated by this bill.
Local Information Collection and Reporting Requirements
This bill would require that, on or before June 1, 2014, each
local community corrections partnership<1> shall report to BSCC
on the county's capacity to collect and report the data required
by this bill, as enumerated below.
This bill would require that this report "include a local plan
that identifies the additional resources necessary for that
county to consistently collect and report criminal justice
information" required by this bill.
BSCC Review and Granting Authority
This bill would require BSCC to review each county's capacity
assessment, and "prioritize and award grants" pursuant to the
standards described below.
This bill would require BSCC to "establish minimum standards,
funding schedules, and procedures for awarding grants, which
shall take into consideration, but not be limited to, all of the
following:
(a) Size of the county.
(b) Demonstrated efforts to report data prior to January 1,
-------------------------
<1> Specifically, established pursuant to Penal Code Section
1230.
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageG
2016.
(c) Demonstrated ability to report data prior to January 1,
2016."
This bill would require that funding "shall be used to
supplement, rather than supplant, existing programs. Grant
funds shall be used for programs that are identified in the
local plan . . . ."
BSCC Reporting
This bill would require BSCC to "submit to the Legislature on or
before June 15, 2014, a report detailing the estimated need,
cost, and schedule for each county to consistently collect and
report criminal justice information as required by (this bill) .
. . . "
This bill would require BSCC to compile the local reports of the
data specified below concerning persons convicted of jail
felonies and, by May 15, 2015, and by May 15 of each year
thereafter, make a report to the Governor and the Legislature
that summarizes the data reported by the counties.
This bill would require BSCC to compile the local reports of the
data specified below concerning persons released from prison and
subject to Postrelease Community Supervision and, by May 15,
2015, and by May 15 of each year thereafter, make a report to
the Governor and the Legislature that summarizes the data
reported by the counties pursuant to subdivision (a).
Data to be Reported
This bill would require that on or before January 1, 2015, and
annually each year thereafter, each county shall report
specified data to BSCC in a format prescribed by BSCC.
This bill would require BSCC to "specify and define minimum
required reporting which shall include, but not be limited to,
the following for each individual sentenced" as a jail felon
(specifically, sentenced pursuant to Penal Code section
1170(h)):
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageH
(1) Individual identifiers;
(2) County identifiers;
(3) Date of birth;
(4) Gender;
(5) Race or ethnicity;
(6) Age at first arrest;
(7) Conviction offense;
(8) Sanction or sentence received;
(9) Total jail time served;
(10) Release status;
(11) Violations of probation;
(12) Rearrests;
(13) Reconvictions;
(14) Any other return to custody;
(15) Use of flash incarceration;
(16) Assessed risk level;
(17) Participation in pretrial programs;
(18) Participation in specialty court;
(19) Participation in day reporting release programs;
(20) Participation in electronic monitoring programs;
(21) Participation in community service release programs;
(22) Participation in work release programs;
(23) Participation in intensive probation supervision;
(24) Needs assessment;
(25) Any reentry programming provided;
(26) Participation in cognitive behavioral therapy;
(27) Participation in mental health treatment;
(28) Participation in substance abuse treatment;
(29) Participation in gender-specific programming;
(30) Participation in family programming;
(31) Any health care assistance provided;
(32) Any housing assistance provided;
(33) Any income support provided;
(34) Any employment assistance provided;
(35) Any vocational training assistance provided;
(36) Any educational enrollment assistance provided;
(37) Any mentoring programming provided; and,
(38) Any peer support programming provided.
This bill would require that, on or before January 1, 2015, and
annually each year thereafter, each county shall provide
specified data to BSCC in a format prescribed by BSCC. This
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageI
bill would require BSCC to specify and define minimum required
reporting which shall include, but not be limited to, the
following for each individual released from prison who is
subject to local supervision (specifically, "Postrelease
Community Supervision," pursuant to Penal Code Section 3451):
(1) Violations of postrelease community supervision;
(2) Rearrests;
(3) Reconvictions;
(4) Any other return to custody;
(5) Use of flash incarceration;
(6) Participation in intensive probation supervision;
(7) Any reentry programming provided;
(8) Participation in cognitive behavioral therapy;
(9) Participation in mental health treatment;
(10) Participation in substance abuse treatment;
(11) Participation in gender-specific programming;
(12) Participation in family programming;
(13) Any health care assistance provided;
(14) Any housing assistance provided;
(15) Any income support provided;
(16) Any employment assistance provided;
(17) Any vocational training assistance provided;
(18) Any educational enrollment assistance provided;
(19) Any mentoring programming provided; and,
(20) Any peer support programming provided.
Appropriation, Local Mandate and Local Planning Grants
This bill contains an unspecified General Fund appropriation to
BSCC for the 2014-15 fiscal year for the purposes of
implementing its provisions.
This bill would authorize BSCC to award up to the amount of the
appropriation, less BSCC's "administrative costs, not to exceed
5 percent of the total grant funding awarded statewide, as
individual grants not exceeding ____to counties to assist in
establishing data reporting systems that will allow a county to
consistently collect and report criminal justice information as
required by (this bill) . . ."
Legislative Findings and Declarations
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageJ
This bill contains legislative findings and declarations
generally concerning the Legislature's commitment to reducing
recidivism among criminal offenders and the 2011 criminal
justice realignment (AB 109), including:
(c) The 2011 Realignment Legislation addressing public
safety represents a significant shift of
responsibilities and may be the largest criminal
justice experiment in modern history. However, the
quick and unanticipated nature of the passage of this
legislation, in combination with broad county
discretion in its implementation, offers a unique and
crucial opportunity to identify best practices in
community corrections and the impacts of correctional
decentralization.
(d) The 2011 Realignment Legislation addressing public
safety did not require counties to collect data on
outcome measures, nor did it provide specific
resources for data collection that if adequately
funded and properly implemented would allow
policymakers, researchers, stakeholders, and counties
to take advantage of the historic opportunity to study
and evaluate the changing felon population and the
strategies and interventions that counties employ to
reduce recidivism.
(e) The Bureau of State Audits' September 2013 High
Risk report identified the 2011 realignment of
criminal justice responsibilities between the state
and counties as a "high-risk" policy, citing a lack of
"reliable and meaningful realignment data to ensure
[the state's] ability to effectively monitor progress
toward achieving intended realignment goals."
(f) It is the intent of the Legislature to fully fund
the data collection and reporting efforts required by
this article. It is further the intent of the
Legislature that funding for these activities not come
from existing funding that supports the 2011
Realignment Legislation addressing public safety.
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageK
This bill is an urgency bill, citing the following "facts
constituting the necessity":
In order to ensure that relevant data pertaining to
the 2011 Realignment Legislation addressing public
safety are collected and reported as soon as possible
to allow stakeholders to measure the effectiveness of
this landmark change in public safety policy, it is
necessary that this bill go into immediate effect.
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
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageL
has been reduced by over 24,000 inmates since October 2011 when
public safety realignment went into effect, by more than 36,000
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)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageM
In a status report to the Court dated February 18, 2014, the
state reported that as of February 12, 2014, California's 33
prisons were at 144.3 percent capacity, with 117,686 inmates.
8,768 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. Stated Need for This Bill
The author states:
The Bureau of State Audits (BSA) identified AB 109
(2011) as a high-risk issue in California given the
pressures it places on local jail populations with
virtually no way to empirically evaluate the
effectiveness of realignment programs. "The State
does not currently have access to reliable and
meaningful realignment data to ensure its ability to
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageN
effectively monitor progress toward achieving intended
realignment goals" . . . .
Similarly, the Public Policy Institute of California
(PPIC) has pointed to the failure to establish a clear
framework by which to evaluable realignment: "Because
AB 109 establishes no incentives, resources, or
standards for counties to measure outcomes, it will be
difficult to assess what California's most significant
justice reform in decades has achieved" . . . .
SB 1097 seeks to provide for the collection and
reporting of a broad spectrum of offender and program
data which will help ensure best practices are
developed at the local level to promote public safety,
reduce recidivism, and address offenders'
rehabilitative needs.
2. What This Bill Would Do
As explained in detail above, this bill would enact a framework,
established through the BSCC, for collecting information
concerning criminal offenders who were "realigned" pursuant to
AB 109 in 2011 - specifically, persons who have been convicted
of jail felonies and persons who have been released from prison
and are subject to local supervision (probation), not parole.
The bill enumerates specific data to be included. With respect
to jail felons, the data generally pertains to information about
the offender, the conviction offense, the sentence, what
happened to the person after sentencing, such as jail time,
programming and violation behavior. With respect to persons
coming out of prison on postrelease community supervision
(probation, not parole, supervision), the data generally
concerns arrests, violation behavior, sanctions for violations,
and programming.
The bill proposes state grants, from a total General Fund amount
not specified in the bill, "to assist counties with the creation
or expansion of infrastructure that allows each county to
consistently collect and report criminal justice information"
required by this bill. In addition, this bill would require
counties to report to BSCC the data described above. The bill
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageO
also requires the BSCC to compile local data and make annual
reports.
3. Focus of this Bill: The 2011 Criminal Justice Realignment
This bill pertains to data about two specific subgroups of
felony offenders - subclasses created by the "2011 Realignment
Legislation Addressing Public Safety" (AB 109)<2>. These two
subgroups are 1) felony offenders who, because of their
conviction offense and criminal history, are subject to serving
their terms in jail instead of prison ("jail" felonies); and 2)
felony offenders who, because of their conviction offense and
other factors, are subject to local supervision instead of state
supervision (essentially, probation instead of parole) upon
release from prison ("postrelease community supervision").
"Jail" Felonies
Under California law operative until October 1, 2011, a felony
was a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in state
prison.<3> Effective October 1, 2011, criminal justice
realignment redefined the term "felony" to include certain
felonies punishable by imprisonment in a county jail, as
specified, depending upon the criminal history of the
offender.<4> This change, contained in subdivision (h) of
Penal Code section 1170, applies only to criminal statutes which
have been expressly amended to provide for a felony jail term
where otherwise allowable.
Certain felons are categorically prohibited from serving an
---------------------------
<2> AB 109 (Committee on Budget) (Ch. 15, Stats. 2011) is the
principal measure establishing the 2011 public safety
realignment. Subsequent measures have revised AB 109 and
enacted additional provisions relating to certain aspects of
realignment.
<3> Penal Code � 17. This classification does not affect the
ability of the court to suspend execution of a felony sentence
and impose conditions of probation where allowable, supervised
and performed locally. (See Penal Code � 1203.1.) A
misdemeanor is a crime punishable by imprisonment by 6 months or
not more than one year. (Penal Code �� 19 and 19.2.)
<4> Penal Code � 17.
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageP
executed felony sentence in county jail. The following persons
are statutorily ineligible to serve any executed felony sentence
in county jail:
The defendant has a prior or current felony conviction
for:
o a serious felony described in subdivision (c) of
Section 1192.7; or,
o a violent felony described in subdivision (c) of
Section 667.5;
The defendant has a prior felony conviction in another
jurisdiction for an offense that has all the elements of a
serious or violent felony in California, as specified;
The defendant is required to register as a sex offender;
or,
The defendant is convicted of a crime and as part of the
sentence receives an aggravated theft enhancement, as
specified.<5>
For convicted felony offenders subject to confinement in a
county jail, courts are authorized to impose the felony sentence
to commit a defendant to county jail as follows:
For a full term in custody as determined in accordance
with the applicable sentencing law.
For a term as determined in accordance with the
applicable sentencing law, but suspend execution of a
concluding portion of the term selected in the court's
discretion, during which time the defendant shall be
supervised by the county probation officer in accordance
with the terms, conditions, and procedures generally
applicable to persons placed on probation, for the
remaining unserved portion of the sentence imposed by the
court. The period of supervision shall be mandatory, and
may not be terminated earlier except by court order.
During the period when the defendant is under such
supervision, unless in actual custody related to the
sentence imposed by the court, the defendant shall be
entitled to only actual time credit against the term of
--------------------------
<5> Penal Code � 1170(h) (3).
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageQ
imprisonment imposed by the court.<6>
Postrelease Community Supervision
Prior to realignment, California law generally provided that
persons who had served a determinate sentence in state prison
for a felony were subject to up to three years of conditional
release ("parole") supervised by the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR").<7> This policy of
providing a period of conditional, supervised release for felons
immediately following a determinate prison term has continued
under realignment.<8> Realignment requires, however, that on
and after October 1, 2011 some of these felons - generally
depending upon the crime that sent them to prison - are subject
instead to postrelease community supervision ("PRCS") by a local
entity determined by each county's board of supervisors - which
in every county has been determined to be probation.
Certain inmates are categorically excluded from PRCS by statute;
these offenders are subject to state parole supervision.<9>
On and after October 1, 2011, persons released from prison after
serving a determinate prison sentence who are not excluded
because of the above-enumerated reasons are subject to PRCS
provided by a county agency designated by each county's board of
supervisors "which is consistent with evidence-based practices,
including, but not limited to, supervision policies, procedures,
programs, and practices demonstrated by scientific research to
reduce recidivism among individuals under postrelease
supervision."<10>
As noted by the Legislative Analyst's Office last year:
When including all types of criminal cases-felony,
misdemeanor, traffic infractions, and juvenile
----------------------
<6> Penal Code � 1170(h) (5).
<7> See Penal Code � 3000. Parole periods for certain
offenses, such as sex crimes, can exceed three years;
realignment does not change the length of these parole periods.
<8> See Penal Code � 3000(a) (1).
<9> Penal Code � 3000.08; see also Penal Code � 3451(b).
<10> Penal Code � 3451.
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageR
delinquency-there were over 8 million filings in
California trial courts in 2009-10. Only a few
hundred thousand of these are for felony cases each
year. Of adult felony cases brought by the district
attorney, 80 percent result in a guilty verdict, and
most of these offenders are sentenced to a combination
of jail and probation.<11>
During this same period, 58,700 felons were admitted to
prison.<12> While the data supporting this snapshot predates
realignment, it illustrates a felony population broader than
what this bill would reach. There are other felons who are
handled locally, such as felons who are put on felony probation,
and those subject to parole supervision but affected locally by
court parole violation and detention decisions, who are not
included in this bill. Members and the author may wish to
discuss whether felony offenders and what happens to them should
be tracked and analyzed more fully, not just the subsets of
felony offenders created by realignment.
4. Data Collection
The BSCC currently has responsibilities relating to data
collection. As explained in the BSCC's 4th Quarterly Report
from last year:
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.
----------------------
<11> California's Criminal Justice System: A Primer (Jan.
2013) Legislative Analyst's Office.
<12> Id.
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageS
In its first year, the BSCC has made significant
progress toward its data collection and reporting
responsibilities as defined by goal one. The BSCC has
worked with stakeholders to design and implement first
phase realignment baseline data collection instruments
that will continue to be expanded and refined, has
completed a report on the local implementation of
community corrections plans, has made data available
on its Web site, developed a partnership with the
Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) for a
multi-county individual level study, and begun
implementing longer term strategies for its broader
data collection and reporting responsibilities.
First Phase Baseline and Ongoing Realignment-Related
Data Collection Instruments : Commencing on or after
July 1, 2012, the BSCC is required to consult with the
California State Association of Counties (CSAC),
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), Chief
Probation Officers of California (CPOC), and the
California State Sheriff's Association (CSSA) to
support the development and implementation of first
phase baseline and ongoing data collection instruments
to reflect the local impact of the 2011 Realignment
Legislation, specifically related to dispositions for
felony offenders and post-release community
supervision; make the data available on the BSCC Web
site; and promote collaboration and the reduction of
duplication of data collection and reporting, where
possible.
Completed : In December 2012, the BSCC consulted with
representatives from CSAC, AOC, CPOC, and CSSA and
reached agreement that the realignment-related data
currently collected by the BSCC, CPOC, and the AOC
will serve as the first phase baseline and ongoing
data collection instruments for this fiscal year. . .
. . .
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageT
Data Integration : Due to staggered implementation
dates, the baseline data collection efforts as well as
the CCP report are all being reported separately.
After September 2013, the BSCC will work to integrate
the data from the baseline instruments with data
collected from the report on the implementation of
county CCP plans to provide a broader realignment
perspective.
In Progress : The BSCC has initiated a request for
technical assistance from the Integrated Justice
Information Systems Institute (IJIS) to identify the
needs and specifications of an information technology
system to collect and synthesize a variety of data
from multiple sources. IJIS is a nonprofit membership
organization dedicated to joining forces with its
member companies to unite the private and public
sectors for improving mission-critical information
sharing. These members are information technology
companies and consultancies that provide solutions to
the justice, public safety, and homeland security
sectors to help these communities share information. .
. . The purpose of this request is to assist the
BSCC to develop a "road map" and plan to design an
information system to support and provide relevant
adult and juvenile criminal justice data to our
stakeholders, constituents, research community, and
the public.
Future Activities : After September 2013, when the AOC
begins to report its data, the BSCC plans to work
toward integrating the data from all baseline
instruments with data collected from the BSCC report
on the implementation of county CCP plans to provide a
broader realignment perspective. The BSCC's data
collection efforts will continue to be refined and
expanded in conjunction with the development of longer
term research questions.
. . .
Partnerships : The BSCC is working to build
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageU
partnerships with research organizations, academia,
and others on research projects related to
California's corrections system.
In Progress : The BSCC is working with the PPIC to
develop a multi-county data collection project, which
will track offender behavior at the individual level
and system responses in custody and in the community.
This project will assist the BSCC to achieve its
mission of aligning fiscal policy and correctional
practices to improve public safety through
cost-effective, promising, and evidence-based
strategies for managing criminal justice populations.
. . The BSCC is partnering with the United States
DOJ's Office of Justice Programs' Diagnostic Center on
several issues, including strategic planning,
developing an information systems plan, developing
statewide technical assistance strategies, and grant
funding.
Future Activities : The BSCC will continue to expand
its research partnerships to support research efforts
that can inform state and local policy and decision
making.
In January 2013, the Board approved the establishment
of a standing committee on data and research. The
purpose of this committee is to work with the BSCC
staff on the development of a comprehensive data
collection plan, the coordination of data collection
efforts by the BSCC with other entities to avoid
duplication of effort, and to leverage resources of
various groups focusing on the same or similar data
collection goals and objectives. . . .
In Progress : The BSCC is currently working to
identify individuals with expertise in data and
research to serve on the Data and Research Standing
Committee.
Future Activities : The Data and Research Standing
Committee will coordinate with the BSCC staff on the
(More)
SB 1097 (Nielsen)
PageV
development of a long-term research plan.
Other Strategies and Activities : Other strategies and
activities that the BSCC anticipates completing as
part of its data and research responsibilities and to
complement the activities currently underway include:
developing a long-term data collection and reporting
strategy; determining the needs and capabilities of a
consolidated realignment baseline database; helping
counties develop appropriate outcome measures to be
collected locally and inform data driven decision
making; developing processes for the reporting and
collecting of juvenile out-of-home and adult
out-of-county placements; and, developing standardized
definitions/dictionary of terms.
Members of the Committee and the author may wish to discuss how
this bill differs from work now underway at the BSCC with
respect to data collection and analysis.
HOW DOES THIS BILL COMPARE TO THE CURRENT DATA-RELATED
ACTIVITIES AND FUTURE PLANS OF THE BSCC?
5. Grants
(More)
As currently structured, this bill would establish a grant
program to provide state funding in support of local data
infrastructure. With respect to local data collection
capacities, grant awards would take into consideration, but not
be limited to:
(a) Size of the county.
(b) Demonstrated efforts to report data prior to January 1,
2016.
(c) Demonstrated ability to report data prior to January 1,
2016.
Members and the author may wish to discuss how these granting
factors may affect local behavior in terms of dedicating county
resources to data infrastructure. For example, would these
factors incentivize counties to invest in their own data
systems? Or, would these factors incentivize counties to
demonstrate their inability to report data without state
assistance? Members may wish to consider whether there are
additional or different factors to both incentivize local
resource commitments to data collection and reflect the range of
existing resource capacity among counties. For example, would
the grant program be strengthened by requiring or adding a
preference to counties that show a substantial local investment,
relative to the county's budget, in the types of infrastructure
this bill would support?
COULD THIS BILL BE REVISED TO BETTER MARSHAL ITS GRANT AWARD
FACTORS TO INCENTIVIZE LOCAL COMMITMENT TO DATA COLLECTION?
***************
(More)