Donate
PPIC Logo Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

Search Results

Filters Sort by:
blog post

Expanding Education, Reducing Recidivism

By Mia Bird, Amy Lerman

A federal pilot program to allow access to Pell Grants to those incarcerated in prisons could not only expand access to higher education, but it could also improve public safety and reduce correctional costs.

Report

Pretrial Detention and Jail Capacity in California

By Sonya Tafoya

California’s persistently overcrowded jails are facing additional challenges now that public safety realignment has shifted many lower-level offenders from state prisons to county supervision. Jail capacity challenges are prompting a reconsideration of California’s heavy reliance on holding unsentenced defendants in jail pending trial—known as pretrial detention. The legal rationale for pretrial detention is to ensure court appearances and preserve public safety. But California’s high rates of pretrial detention have not been associated with lower rates of failure to appear or lower levels of felony rearrests. This report concludes that pretrial services programs—if properly implemented and embraced by the courts, probation, and the jails—could address jail overcrowding and improve the efficiency, equitability, and transparency of pretrial release decision making.

event

Realignment, Incarceration, and Crime Trends in California

About the Program
One of the major effects of California's public safety realignment has been to decrease the state's reliance on incarceration. In its first year, the reform reduced the prison population dramatically, with a limited effect on crime. What has happened since then? PPIC researcher Magnus Lofstrom will outline the findings of a new report on realignment's continuing impact.

Report

Realignment, Incarceration, and Crime Trends in California

By Steven Raphael, Magnus Lofstrom

When California’s historic public safety realignment was implemented in October 2011, many were concerned about the impact it would have on crime rates. In a 2013 report, we found that realignment did not increase violent crime in its first year, but that it did lead to an increase in auto thefts. In this report, we assess whether these trends continued beyond realignment’s first year. We find that both the prison and jail populations increased slightly since 2012, which means that the number of offenders on the street did not rise from the 18,000 during realignment’s first year. This is likely to change with the implementation of Proposition 47, which further reduces California’s reliance on incarceration. Our analysis of updated state-level crime data from the FBI confirms our previous findings. Violent crime rates remain unaffected by realignment, and although California’s property crime rate decreased in 2013, it did not drop more than in comparable states—so the auto theft gap that opened up in 2012 has not closed. Research indicates that further reductions in incarceration may have a greater effect on crime trends; the state needs to implement effective crime prevention strategies—and it can learn about alternatives to incarceration successfully implemented by the counties as well as other states.

blog post

Video: Alternatives to Incarceration

By Linda Strean

A panel of state and local corrections officials talk about alternatives to prison and jail that are cost-effective, hold offenders accountable, and don’t harm public safety.

Report

Alternatives to Incarceration in California

By Ryken Grattet, Brandon Martin

Three-plus years after implementing a major realignment of its public safety systems, California continues to face pressure to reduce both its prison and jail populations. California relied on some alternatives to custody-based punishment before realignment but it has been expanding its use of others. Current research on the effects of incarceration and its alternatives offers a general endorsement of the idea that increasing reliance on community-based alternatives is not likely to result in large increases in crime and recidivism. The evidence suggests that the effectiveness of both incarceration and community-based supervision depends on a number of factors, including the rate of incarceration in a given community, the offender characteristics, and the nature of the response to violations during and after supervision. Finally, intensive data collection on county implementation efforts can help the state identify the community-based strategies that produce the best outcomes.

Search results are limited to 100 items. Please use the Refine Results tool if you are not finding what you are looking for.