Fact Sheet The California Economy: Employment Update By Sarah Bohn, Marisol Cuellar Mejia Apr 5, 2017
blog post Governor’s Funding Plan for Climate, Drought By Caitrin Chappelle, Jelena Jezdimirovic Jan 24, 2017 A summary of key proposals in the governor’s proposed budget that reaffirm the state’s commitment to boosting drought resiliency and battling climate change.
Report Public Safety Realignment: Impacts So Far By Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin Sep 28, 2015 Prompted by a federal court order to reduce prison overcrowding, California’s 2011 historic public safety realignment shifted many correctional responsibilities for lower-level felons from the state to counties. The reform was premised on the idea that locals can do a better job, and it was hoped that incarceration rates and corrections costs would fall. At the same time, critics predicted crime would rise. Four years since its implementation, realignment has made several important impacts: Realignment significantly reduced the prison population, but the state did not reach the court-mandated population target until after the passage of Proposition 47 in November 2014, which reduced penalties for many property and drug offenses. The reform challenged county jails and probation departments by making them responsible for a greater number of offenders with a broader range of backgrounds and needs. The county jail population did not rise nearly as much as the prison population fell, reducing the total number of people incarcerated in California. Realignment did not increase violent crime, but auto thefts rose. Research so far shows no dramatic change in recidivism rates. State corrections spending remains high, but there is reason to believe expenditures could drop in the future. Realignment has largely been successful, but the state and county correctional systems face significant challenges. The state needs to regain control of prison medical care, which is now in the hands of a federal receiver. And the state and counties together must make progress in reducing stubbornly high recidivism rates.
blog post Three California Leaders Join PPIC Board By Mark Baldassare Sep 17, 2015 California leaders A. Marisa Chun, Gerald Parsky, and Gaddi Vasquez join PPIC’s board of directors.
blog post Video: Realignment and Crime By David Lesher May 26, 2015 PPIC researchers presented their report showing that property crime remains higher than it would have been without realignment. But there has been no observable impact on violent crime.
Report Realignment, Incarceration, and Crime Trends in California By Steven Raphael, Magnus Lofstrom May 19, 2015 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 Evaluating Corrections Reforms By Joseph Hayes, Sonya Tafoya Jun 12, 2014 Three years into public safety realignment, we know little about which programs and services are most effective at reducing recidivism. This is not the first time California has made a major corrections policy change without the tools to evaluate it.
