Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Association for Criminal Justice Research (California) 76th Semi-Annual Meeting October 18, 2012 HEADLINE TEXT HERE California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation A Preliminary Examination of Public Safety Realignment CDCR Institution and State Parole/PRCS Data

Public Safety Realignment Enacted on October 1, 2011 Lower-level offenders serve their sentences locally Offenders convicted of violent, sex-related, or other serious offenses continue to serve their sentences in prison Lower-level offenders released from state prison are supervised by local probation officers under Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS), instead of by state parole agents State parole violators serve their revocation terms in local jails rather than state prison Lower-Level Offenders “realigned” to county, rather than state, supervision.

Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Part I: CDCR Institutions Institution Population Institutional Misconduct Serious Incidents Violent Incidents Office of the Inspector General Medical Scores Offender Needs

CDCR Institution Population Sharp decline in the CDCR Institution Population since the implementation of Realignment

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Definition of Incidents Serious (Melee/Riot): A violent disturbance involving three or more inmates. Violent: Assault and/or battery on a staff member or an inmate, as well as homicide.

HEADLINE TEXT HERE There are few (less than 30) serious incidents each month. The number of serious Post- Realignment incidents is higher than that which was reported during the previous year for the months of October through February. This trend reverses from March through June, when the number of serious Post-Realignment incidents is lower. There were almost ½ as many serious incidents in June 2012 as there were in June Institutional Misconduct: Number of Serious Incidents

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Institutional Misconduct: Rate of Serious Incidents The trend depicting the rate of serious incidents almost mirrors the number of serious incidents. Adjusting for the decline of the CDCR Institution population shows that the rate for October, March, and May is the same Pre- and Post- Realignment. The June 2012 serious incident rate is much lower than the June 2011 rate.

HEADLINE TEXT HERE With the exception of October and January, the number of violent Post-Realignment incidents is lower than those reported Pre-Realignment. The greatest difference in the number of Pre- and Post-Realignment violent incidents occurs in May as there were 86 fewer incidents in Institutional Misconduct: Number of Violent Incidents

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Institutional Misconduct: Rate of Violent Incidents Adjusting for the decline of the CDCR Institution population shows that the Post- Realignment violent incident rate is higher in October through January, as well as March The Post- Realignment violent incident rate is lower in February and April through June, 2012.

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize OIG Medical Inspection Scores Medical inspections designed to identify instances of CDCR institution non-compliance with CDCR medical policies and procedures. Assesses whether the care meets medical community standards. Inspection program that contains up to 151 “yes/no” questions covering 20 essential components of medical delivery. Results in a “percentage of compliance” score for each institution. Weighting system to factor in importance of each component (and questions within each component). Inspection team consists of physicians, registered nurses, deputy inspectors general and analysts. Source: “Medical Inspection Results: Comparative Summary and Analysis of the First and Second Medical Inspection Cycles of California’s 33 Adult Institutions” (July 2012).

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize OIG Medical Inspection Scores (cont’d) All 14 institutions that have been assessed Post- Realignment have scores that are notably above the 75% minimum / moderate adherence cutoff.

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Several institutions had low adherence scores during the Pre-Realignment period. Post-Realignment, five institutions have high adherence scores. OIG Medical Inspection Scores

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize CDCR Incarcerated Offender Needs CDCR’s Strategic Plan tracks offender’s access to rehabilitative programs. Throughout Fiscal Year , most offenders who had an identified need (as measured by COMPAS), did not receive rehabilitative programming for their need(s) before being released from CDCR. As stated in the CDCR Blueprint, the goal is for 70% of all target population offenders to have their needs met prior to leaving CDCR.

Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Part II: PRCS AND State Parole State Parole Population PRCS / State Parole Demographics

CDCR Parole Population Sharp decline in the CDCR Parole Population since the implementation of Realignment

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Post-Realignment Release Demographics Examination of post-Realignment demographics for offenders released to either Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS Offenders) or State Parole. Gender Age at Release Race/Ethnicity Commitment Offense Category Release Type California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) Score at Release Release period: October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2012

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Overall, more male than female offenders were released. There are slightly more male State Parolees than there are male PRCS offenders. Conversely, there are more female PRCS offenders than there are female State Parolees. Gender

HEADLINE TEXT HERE The age groups from 18 through 29 are represented by more State Parolees than PRCS Offenders. From age 30 to 59, there is a greater percentage of PRCS offenders than State Parolees. There are more age 60+ State Parolees than PRCS Offenders. Age

HEADLINE TEXT HERE Most Post-Realignment releases were Hispanic/Latino, White or Black/African American. There are 2.1% more Hispanic/Latino State Parolees than Hispanic/Latino PRCS Offenders. There are 5.6% more White PRCS Offenders than White State Parolees. There are 2.9% more Black/African American State Parolees than Black/African American PRCS Offenders. Race/Ethnicity

HEADLINE TEXT HERE State Parolees are much more likely than PRCS Offenders to have been committed to CDCR for “Crime Against Persons.” PRCS Offenders are much more likely than State Parolees to have been committed to CDCR for “Property Crimes” or “Drug Crimes” Commitment Offense Category

HEADLINE TEXT HERE There are more PRCS Offenders than State Parolees who left CDCR Post- Realignment as a first release on their current term. Conversely, there are more State Parolees than PRCS Offenders who left CDCR as a re- release. Release Type

HEADLINE TEXT HERE The CSRA measures risk of reconviction. PRCS Offenders are more likely to have a “High” CSRA score. State Parolees are more likely to have a “Low” CSRA score. This is likely due to the fact that in addition to violent crimes, the “High” CSRA category represents drug and property convictions, which are often characteristic of PRCS Offenders. California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) Score

Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize Next Steps: PRCS and State Parole Outcomes Evaluation Methodology Comparison Group  October 1, 2010 – September 30, 2011 releases  PRCS “Flag” Arrests Convictions

Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize CDCR CONTACTS

Click Here to Add Text This could be a call out area. Bullet Points to emphasize HEADLINE TEXT HERE California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Lee Seale, Director Internal Oversight and Research Brenda Grealish, Deputy Director Office of Research