Kevin Grassel March 20, 2014

Realignment redirected: non-serious, non-violent, non-sex registrant (non-non-non) offenders from State to local jurisdictions Intended to reserve State prison for those with serious or violent charges (current or prior), sex registrants, and a few other offense types (e.g., battery against a juror, sale of a person for immoral purposes) PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT ACT 2011

CDCR now has two full years of data to evaluate how offenders released from prison after October 1, 2011, fared on parole and local post-release community supervision This report evaluates the impact of Realignment by comparing the rates of arrest, conviction, and returns to prison of those released after completing their State prison term in the first year of Realignment with those released one year earlier THIS PRESENTATION

To evaluate the impact of Realignment, two groups were created: 1) a pre-Realignment release cohort that includes all offenders paroled from a CDCR State prison between October 1, 2010, and September 30, ) a post-Realignment release cohort that includes all offenders paroled or discharged to PRCS from a CDCR State prison between October 1, 2011, and September 30, 2012 METHODOLOGY

An arrest is defined as the first felony, misdemeanor, or supervision violation offense occurring within State of CA A conviction is defined as the first felony or misdemeanor conviction within State of CA, regardless of whether the conviction resulted in incarceration A return-to-custody is defined as a return to a CDCR facility or CDCR contracted facility METHODOLOGY CONTINUED…

= Number Returned ÷ Recidivism Cohort X 100

Pre- and Post-Realignment One-Year Arrest Rates

ARREST TYPES

Number of Arrests Per Person Released

Number of Times Offenders Were Arrested

Pre- and Post-Realignment One-Year Conviction Rates

Conviction Types

Number of Convictions Per 1,000 Released

Number of Times Offenders Were Convicted

Pre- and Post-Realignment One-Year Return to Prison Rates

Pre- and Post-Realignment Types of Returns to Prison

Arrest rates have been on a decline since Realignment and the initial gap observed between pre- and post-Realignment has diminished Conviction rates also gradually declined after October 2011 and remained lower than pre-Realignment rates through the end of the time frame studied Return to prison rates have held steady post-Realignment, much lower than the pre-Realignment rate, with RTCs being virtually non-existent CONCLUSION

Denise Allen, Chief Research and Evaluation Branch OFFICE OF RESEARCH - CDCR