February 23, 2023 - We recommend that the Legislature reject the Governor’s proposal for two primary reasons. First, the proposed funding is likely not needed. Second, given the state’s budget problem, dedicating new General Fund to this purpose would come at the expense of previously identified priorities, and we do not find it sufficiently justified for prioritizing limited state resources.
February 2, 2021 - This publication provides our analysis of the Governor’s 2021-22 January budget proposals to provide additional General Fund support for county probation departments including a $10.3 million modification to the grant program created by Chapter 608 of 2009 (SB 678, Leno), a new one-time $50 million grant, and $12.1 million in one-time funding for supervising people released from prison due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
October 10, 2023 - In order to reduce admissions into state prison from people on county probation, the state enacted Chapter 608 of 2009 (SB 678, Leno) to establish the Community Corrections Performance Incentive grant program, commonly referred to as the SB 678 grant program. This report provides (1) background on the program—discussing its goals, funding formula, and modifications; (2) an assessment of the program; and (3) recommended steps to better achieve the goals of the program.
November 19, 2020 - In this analysis, we (1) provide an overview of the state correctional population; (2) discuss our projections of the population through 2024-25, and (3) comment on how changes in the sizes of these populations could impact state correctional costs in both the near and long term. Specifically, we estimate that the number of inmates, parolees, and wards in the state’s correctional system will significantly decline due to two main factors—operational changes that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has taken to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and various policy changes recently enacted that will further reduce the size of the state correctional population in the long term. We also estimate that these population declines will substantially slow the expected growth in CDCR’s overall projected costs through 2024-25—partially through the closure of five prisons. This publication is part of our The 2021-22 Budget: California’s Fiscal Outlook series.
June 24, 2020 - Presented to: Committee on Revision of the Penal Code
February 11, 2020 - Presented to: Senate Public Safety Committee Hon. Nancy Skinner, Chair and Assembly Public Safety Committee Hon. Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr., Chair
April 11, 2024 - Presented to: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 5 on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor and Transportation
February 15, 2013 - The Governor’s 2013-14 budget for criminal justice programs is relatively flat. It contains few major proposals for the judiciary or corrections compared with recent years when the state budget included significant budget cuts to programs, as well as major policy changes. In total, the Governor's budget provides $13.2 billion for criminal justice programs in 2013-14. This is an increase of about 2 percent over estimated current-year expenditures. In this report, we review the Governor’s 2013-14 budget proposals for criminal justice programs, including the judicial branch, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Board of State and Community Corrections, and the Department of Justice. We identify concerns with several of the proposals and make recommendations for legislative consideration. In some cases, we identify proposals that we think should be rejected or modified, resulting in several million dollars of General Fund savings. We also identify several issues that we think would benefit from additional legislative oversight. These include (1) how trial courts will implement budget reductions in coming years, particularly in the absence of reserves beginning in 2014-15, (2) the new staffing methodology being implemented by the federal court-appointed Receiver currently managing the state’s inmate medical system, and (3) efforts by the Board of State and Community Corrections to meet its statutory mission to assist local agencies improve criminal justice outcomes through technical assistance and data collection.
February 22, 2012 - In 2011, the state enacted several bills to enact a wide-ranging “realignment,” shifting several state programs and a commensurate level of revenues to local governments. Perhaps the most significant programmatic change implemented as part of the 2011 realignment was realigning to county governments the responsibility for managing and supervising certain felon offenders who previously had been eligible for state prison and parole. This report provides an update on the status of realignment, reviews changes proposed by the Governor, and makes several recommendations designed to promote the long-term success of realignment, such as creating a reserve fund for revenue growth as well as designing an ongoing allocation formula that is responsive to future demographic changes.
February 17, 2015 - On November 4, 2014, voters approved Proposition 47 which makes significant changes to the state’s criminal justice system. Specifically, it reduces the penalties for certain non-violent, nonserious drug and property crimes and requires that the resulting state savings be spent on (1) mental health and substance use treatment services, (2) truancy and dropout prevention, and (3) victim services. In this report, we describe the impact of Proposition 47 on state corrections, state courts, and the county criminal justice system, as well as the Governor’s budget proposals related to the proposition. We also provide recommendations for ensuring that the resulting state savings are spent in an effective manner.