Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

California Probation in the Era of Reform Briefing Slides

Database

This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3711 (44) { ["ImageClass"]=> string(12) "Timber\Image" ["PostClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Post" ["TermClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Term" ["object_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["custom"]=> array(5) { ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(37) "eventbriefing_probationreform0917.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "489559" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(5835) "California Probation in the Era of Reform September 12, 2017 Viet Nguyen, Ryken Grattet, Mia Bird Supported with funding from the National Institute of Justice California has enacted major corrections reforms  California saw a sharp rise in the prison population from the 1970s to 2006 – Overcrowding became severe, leading to lawsuits – In 2009, a federal court ordered the state to reduce the prison population, triggering several reforms  Reforms have reduced the state’s reliance on incarceration: – Senate Bill 678 (2009) – Public Safety Realignment (2011) – Proposition 47 (2014) 2 Probation plays a big role in our criminal justice system  Parolees are released from prison and supervised by the state  Probation provides community-based supervision of individuals convicted of felonies or misdemeanors – Historically, probation has been granted by county court judges as an alternative to custody in state prison or county jail  County probation departments are responsible for supervising the largest share (about 60%) of the corrections population – 390,000 individuals under probation supervision in 2015 3 Reforms have changed probation  Reforms shifted probation caseloads toward more serious offenders  Racial disparities in probation are most evident for African Americans  Jail bookings are common among the probation population, especially for realigned offenders 4 The Multi-County Study draws data from 12 counties Twelve California counties Engagement:  California State Association of Counties  County Administrative Officers Association of California  California State Sheriff’s Association  Chief Probation Officers of California  California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation  Department of Justice 5 Overview  How did reforms affect probation?  How did changes in probation affect California’s jails?  Consequences and next steps 6 Realignment added two groups of offenders to probation supervision  Post-release community supervision (PRCS) – Released from prison – Committed on non-violent, non-serious, non-sexual offense  Mandatory supervision – Serve a portion of their sentence in jail – Committed on a felony eligible for sentencing under PC 1170(h) – No prior violent, serious, or sexual offense requiring registration 7 Reforms affected probation caseloads Number under probation supervision 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Oct-11 One year after realignment Prop 47 Felony PRCS Misdemeanor Mandatory supervision Oct-12 Oct-13 Oct-14 Oct-15 8 African Americans are overrepresented in probation 100 80 60 % 40 20 0 7.9 16.0 40.7 33.6 MCS county population 22.9 2.9 37.6 32.1 4.5 MCS probation population African American Asian American Latino White Other 9 Overview  How did reforms affect probation?  How did changes in probation affect California’s jails?  Consequences and next steps 10 People under probation supervision often enter jail % booked into jail 70 60 50 46.7 40 30 20 10 0 All 50.7 53.0 44.8 45.9 PRCS Mandatory supervision Felony Misdemeanor 11 Realigned offenders are booked into jail more often % booked into jail 30 25 20.4 20 15 10 9.3 5 4.4 0 All 26.7 13.7 6.8 26.9 12.7 6.4 17.6 7.5 3.4 Two or more bookings Three or more bookings Four or more bookings 19.6 8.6 3.7 PRCS Mandatory supervision Felony Misdemeanor 12 Felony bookings are common  Overall, 27.5% of those under probation supervision were booked for a felony offense – Those under mandatory supervision (42%) and felony probationers (32.8%) were more likely to be booked for a felony  Those under PRCS had lower rates of felony booking (14.1%) – But the PRCS population had high rates of supervision violations (13.1%) and flash incarcerations (13.7%), compared to other individuals 13 Individuals under mandatory supervision and PRCS stay in custody longer Length of stay (in days) 160 140 120 100 94.1 80 60 40 20 0 All 117.2 150.3 84.9 45.0 PRCS Mandatory supervision Felony Misdemeanor 14 One in four people in jail come from community supervision Number under supervision 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Oct-11 One year after realignment Prop 47 Probation Parole Flash incarceration Oct-12 Oct-13 Oct-14 Oct-15 15 Overview  How did reforms affect probation?  How did changes in probation affect California’s jails?  Consequences and next steps 16 Probation departments are now managing a more challenging population  Realignment added two more types of offenders  Individuals under mandatory supervision and PRCS have more jail contact than traditional felony caseloads  People under probation supervision account for a larger share of the jail population 17 Trends in probation are part of broader changes in corrections  County jail populations have shifted toward more serious drug and property offenders  Reduced reliance on incarceration and pretrial reform  How are counties responding to these trends? – Risk assessment tools and evidence-based practices – Reentry opportunities (e.g., day reporting centers) 18 Next steps  Recidivism for individuals under PRCS and mandatory supervision  Split sentencing  Flash incarceration  Reentry services 19 California Probation in the Era of Reform September 12, 2017 Viet Nguyen, Ryken Grattet, Mia Bird Supported with funding from the National Institute of Justice Notes on the use of these slides These slides were created to accompany a presentation. They do not include full documentation of sources, data samples, methods, and interpretations. To avoid misinterpretations, please contact: Viet Nguyen (nguyen@ppic.org; 415-291-4478) Ryken Grattet (grattet@ppic.org; 916-440-1123) Mia Bird (bird@ppic.org; 415-291-4471) Thank you for your interest in this work. 21" } ["___content":protected]=> string(176) "

California Probation in the Era of Reform Briefing Slides

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(93) "https://www.ppic.org/event/california-probation-era-reform/eventbriefing_probationreform0917/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(11683) ["ID"]=> int(11683) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "4" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2017-09-12 12:20:53" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(11460) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(57) "California Probation in the Era of Reform Briefing Slides" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(33) "eventbriefing_probationreform0917" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(37) "eventbriefing_probationreform0917.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "489559" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(5835) "California Probation in the Era of Reform September 12, 2017 Viet Nguyen, Ryken Grattet, Mia Bird Supported with funding from the National Institute of Justice California has enacted major corrections reforms  California saw a sharp rise in the prison population from the 1970s to 2006 – Overcrowding became severe, leading to lawsuits – In 2009, a federal court ordered the state to reduce the prison population, triggering several reforms  Reforms have reduced the state’s reliance on incarceration: – Senate Bill 678 (2009) – Public Safety Realignment (2011) – Proposition 47 (2014) 2 Probation plays a big role in our criminal justice system  Parolees are released from prison and supervised by the state  Probation provides community-based supervision of individuals convicted of felonies or misdemeanors – Historically, probation has been granted by county court judges as an alternative to custody in state prison or county jail  County probation departments are responsible for supervising the largest share (about 60%) of the corrections population – 390,000 individuals under probation supervision in 2015 3 Reforms have changed probation  Reforms shifted probation caseloads toward more serious offenders  Racial disparities in probation are most evident for African Americans  Jail bookings are common among the probation population, especially for realigned offenders 4 The Multi-County Study draws data from 12 counties Twelve California counties Engagement:  California State Association of Counties  County Administrative Officers Association of California  California State Sheriff’s Association  Chief Probation Officers of California  California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation  Department of Justice 5 Overview  How did reforms affect probation?  How did changes in probation affect California’s jails?  Consequences and next steps 6 Realignment added two groups of offenders to probation supervision  Post-release community supervision (PRCS) – Released from prison – Committed on non-violent, non-serious, non-sexual offense  Mandatory supervision – Serve a portion of their sentence in jail – Committed on a felony eligible for sentencing under PC 1170(h) – No prior violent, serious, or sexual offense requiring registration 7 Reforms affected probation caseloads Number under probation supervision 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Oct-11 One year after realignment Prop 47 Felony PRCS Misdemeanor Mandatory supervision Oct-12 Oct-13 Oct-14 Oct-15 8 African Americans are overrepresented in probation 100 80 60 % 40 20 0 7.9 16.0 40.7 33.6 MCS county population 22.9 2.9 37.6 32.1 4.5 MCS probation population African American Asian American Latino White Other 9 Overview  How did reforms affect probation?  How did changes in probation affect California’s jails?  Consequences and next steps 10 People under probation supervision often enter jail % booked into jail 70 60 50 46.7 40 30 20 10 0 All 50.7 53.0 44.8 45.9 PRCS Mandatory supervision Felony Misdemeanor 11 Realigned offenders are booked into jail more often % booked into jail 30 25 20.4 20 15 10 9.3 5 4.4 0 All 26.7 13.7 6.8 26.9 12.7 6.4 17.6 7.5 3.4 Two or more bookings Three or more bookings Four or more bookings 19.6 8.6 3.7 PRCS Mandatory supervision Felony Misdemeanor 12 Felony bookings are common  Overall, 27.5% of those under probation supervision were booked for a felony offense – Those under mandatory supervision (42%) and felony probationers (32.8%) were more likely to be booked for a felony  Those under PRCS had lower rates of felony booking (14.1%) – But the PRCS population had high rates of supervision violations (13.1%) and flash incarcerations (13.7%), compared to other individuals 13 Individuals under mandatory supervision and PRCS stay in custody longer Length of stay (in days) 160 140 120 100 94.1 80 60 40 20 0 All 117.2 150.3 84.9 45.0 PRCS Mandatory supervision Felony Misdemeanor 14 One in four people in jail come from community supervision Number under supervision 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Oct-11 One year after realignment Prop 47 Probation Parole Flash incarceration Oct-12 Oct-13 Oct-14 Oct-15 15 Overview  How did reforms affect probation?  How did changes in probation affect California’s jails?  Consequences and next steps 16 Probation departments are now managing a more challenging population  Realignment added two more types of offenders  Individuals under mandatory supervision and PRCS have more jail contact than traditional felony caseloads  People under probation supervision account for a larger share of the jail population 17 Trends in probation are part of broader changes in corrections  County jail populations have shifted toward more serious drug and property offenders  Reduced reliance on incarceration and pretrial reform  How are counties responding to these trends? – Risk assessment tools and evidence-based practices – Reentry opportunities (e.g., day reporting centers) 18 Next steps  Recidivism for individuals under PRCS and mandatory supervision  Split sentencing  Flash incarceration  Reentry services 19 California Probation in the Era of Reform September 12, 2017 Viet Nguyen, Ryken Grattet, Mia Bird Supported with funding from the National Institute of Justice Notes on the use of these slides These slides were created to accompany a presentation. They do not include full documentation of sources, data samples, methods, and interpretations. To avoid misinterpretations, please contact: Viet Nguyen (nguyen@ppic.org; 415-291-4478) Ryken Grattet (grattet@ppic.org; 916-440-1123) Mia Bird (bird@ppic.org; 415-291-4471) Thank you for your interest in this work. 21" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-09-12 19:20:53" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(33) "eventbriefing_probationreform0917" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2017-09-12 12:21:45" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-09-12 19:21:45" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(76) "http://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/eventbriefing_probationreform0917.pdf" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_mime_type"]=> string(15) "application/pdf" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["attachment_authors"]=> bool(false) }