Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

Eventbriefing Impactofprop470618

Database

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

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3742 (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(36) "eventbriefing_impactofprop470618.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "348399" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(4387) "The Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime and Recidivism June 21, 2018 Mia Bird, Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin, Steven Raphael, and Viet Nguyen with research support from Justin Goss Prop 47 led to major criminal justice changes  Reduced penalties for lower-level offenses like drug possession, thefts, shoplifting, and others  Succeeded in reducing prison and jail populations – Incarceration rate is now at levels not seen since the early 1990s  Remains controversial – Supporters hoped to limit lower-level offenders’ involvement with the criminal justice system and redirect funds to treatment – Opponents were concerned about burdening local jails and communities and potential increases in crime 2 Did Prop 47 affect crime and recidivism?  We examine changes in crime rates over time within California and in comparison to other states – Data from the FBI and the California Department of Justice  We assess changes in jail bookings and recidivism – Data from the BSCC–PPIC Multi-County Study, a collaborative effort among the Board of State and Community Corrections, PPIC, and counties – The 12 participating counties are representative of the state 3 California’s crime rates are still at historic lows Property crime rate per 100,000 residents Violent crime rate per 100,000 residents 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 Property crime Violent crime 3,000 2,500 2,000 4,000 1,500 3,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 500 00 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 4 Changes in violent crime were similar to other states Violent crime rate per 100,000 residents 550 Prop 47 500 450 California (without LAPD) Comparison states 400 350 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 5 California’s larceny theft rate deviated from other states Larceny theft rate per 100,000 residents 2,100 2,000 1,900 1,800 1,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 2000 California Comparison states 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 Prop 47 2014 2016 6 Jail bookings for Prop 47 offenses declined dramatically 18,000 15,000 12,000 9,000 6,000 3,000 0 Oct-13 Feb-14 Jun-14 Prop 47 Oct-14 Feb-15 Misdemeanor Felony Total Jun-15 Oct-15 7 Two-year rearrest rates declined after Prop 47, driven by reductions in lower-level drug offenses Rearrest rate (%) 80 72.6 70.8 60 40 20 0 Any offense 45.3 35.0 19.5 19.6 Before Prop 47 After Prop 47 32.3 21.0 Prop 47 offense Prop 47 property offense Prop 47 drug offense 8 Two-year reconviction rates declined after Prop 47 for both lower-level property and drug offenses Reconviction rate (%) 60 50 49.1 46.0 40 30 20 10 0 Any offense Before Prop 47 After Prop 47 25.4 14.1 Prop 47 offense 11.9 7.7 15.4 7.5 Prop 47 property offense Prop 47 drug offense 9 Prop 47 increased funding for behavioral health programs  Prop 47 redirected 65% of state correctional savings toward mental health and substance-use treatment programs  BSCC oversees the allocation of behavioral health funding  BSCC provided grants to public agencies, with $104 million available from 2017–2020 – However, it is too early to tell whether this funding played a role in reducing recidivism 10 Understanding the impact of Prop 47 is critical  Our study finds: – Prop 47 did not affect violent crime but may have increased property crimes, particularly larcenies – It reduced both overall jail bookings and the number of individuals entering the jail system – Prop 47 offenders have lower two-year rearrest and reconviction rates when compared with their pre-reform counterparts  Policymakers are continuing to pursue criminal justice reforms – Should work with practitioners to identify programs and policies that will reduce recidivism and maintain public safety 11 The Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime and Recidivism June 21, 2018 Mia Bird, Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin, Steven Raphael, and Viet Nguyen with research support from Justin Goss 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: Mia Bird (bird@ppic.org; 415-291-4471) Magnus Lofstrom (lofstrom@ppic.org; 415-291-4454) Brandon Martin (martin@ppic.org; 916-440-1131) Viet Nguyen (nguyen@ppic.org; 415-291-4478) Justin Goss (goss@ppic.org; 916-440-1132) Thank you for your interest in this work. 13" } ["___content":protected]=> string(150) "

Eventbriefing Impactofprop470618

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(113) "https://www.ppic.org/event/the-impact-of-proposition-47-on-crime-and-recidivism/eventbriefing_impactofprop470618/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(15349) ["ID"]=> int(15349) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "9" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2018-06-21 09:33:25" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(15004) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(32) "Eventbriefing Impactofprop470618" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(32) "eventbriefing_impactofprop470618" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(36) "eventbriefing_impactofprop470618.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "348399" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(4387) "The Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime and Recidivism June 21, 2018 Mia Bird, Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin, Steven Raphael, and Viet Nguyen with research support from Justin Goss Prop 47 led to major criminal justice changes  Reduced penalties for lower-level offenses like drug possession, thefts, shoplifting, and others  Succeeded in reducing prison and jail populations – Incarceration rate is now at levels not seen since the early 1990s  Remains controversial – Supporters hoped to limit lower-level offenders’ involvement with the criminal justice system and redirect funds to treatment – Opponents were concerned about burdening local jails and communities and potential increases in crime 2 Did Prop 47 affect crime and recidivism?  We examine changes in crime rates over time within California and in comparison to other states – Data from the FBI and the California Department of Justice  We assess changes in jail bookings and recidivism – Data from the BSCC–PPIC Multi-County Study, a collaborative effort among the Board of State and Community Corrections, PPIC, and counties – The 12 participating counties are representative of the state 3 California’s crime rates are still at historic lows Property crime rate per 100,000 residents Violent crime rate per 100,000 residents 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 Property crime Violent crime 3,000 2,500 2,000 4,000 1,500 3,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 500 00 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 4 Changes in violent crime were similar to other states Violent crime rate per 100,000 residents 550 Prop 47 500 450 California (without LAPD) Comparison states 400 350 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 5 California’s larceny theft rate deviated from other states Larceny theft rate per 100,000 residents 2,100 2,000 1,900 1,800 1,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 2000 California Comparison states 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 Prop 47 2014 2016 6 Jail bookings for Prop 47 offenses declined dramatically 18,000 15,000 12,000 9,000 6,000 3,000 0 Oct-13 Feb-14 Jun-14 Prop 47 Oct-14 Feb-15 Misdemeanor Felony Total Jun-15 Oct-15 7 Two-year rearrest rates declined after Prop 47, driven by reductions in lower-level drug offenses Rearrest rate (%) 80 72.6 70.8 60 40 20 0 Any offense 45.3 35.0 19.5 19.6 Before Prop 47 After Prop 47 32.3 21.0 Prop 47 offense Prop 47 property offense Prop 47 drug offense 8 Two-year reconviction rates declined after Prop 47 for both lower-level property and drug offenses Reconviction rate (%) 60 50 49.1 46.0 40 30 20 10 0 Any offense Before Prop 47 After Prop 47 25.4 14.1 Prop 47 offense 11.9 7.7 15.4 7.5 Prop 47 property offense Prop 47 drug offense 9 Prop 47 increased funding for behavioral health programs  Prop 47 redirected 65% of state correctional savings toward mental health and substance-use treatment programs  BSCC oversees the allocation of behavioral health funding  BSCC provided grants to public agencies, with $104 million available from 2017–2020 – However, it is too early to tell whether this funding played a role in reducing recidivism 10 Understanding the impact of Prop 47 is critical  Our study finds: – Prop 47 did not affect violent crime but may have increased property crimes, particularly larcenies – It reduced both overall jail bookings and the number of individuals entering the jail system – Prop 47 offenders have lower two-year rearrest and reconviction rates when compared with their pre-reform counterparts  Policymakers are continuing to pursue criminal justice reforms – Should work with practitioners to identify programs and policies that will reduce recidivism and maintain public safety 11 The Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime and Recidivism June 21, 2018 Mia Bird, Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin, Steven Raphael, and Viet Nguyen with research support from Justin Goss 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: Mia Bird (bird@ppic.org; 415-291-4471) Magnus Lofstrom (lofstrom@ppic.org; 415-291-4454) Brandon Martin (martin@ppic.org; 916-440-1131) Viet Nguyen (nguyen@ppic.org; 415-291-4478) Justin Goss (goss@ppic.org; 916-440-1132) Thank you for your interest in this work. 13" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2018-06-21 16:33:25" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(32) "eventbriefing_impactofprop470618" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2018-06-21 09:33:25" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2018-06-21 16:33:25" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(75) "http://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/eventbriefing_impactofprop470618.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) }