The 2012-13 Budget: The 2011 Realignment of Adult Offenders—An ...

2012-13 Budge ton what other counties are doing that is effective.For example, the BSCC could be a repository forcounties to access current research and data bothwithin California and nationally. We have alsoheard that counties, particularly those that haveless experience using correctional best practices,would benefit from having an agency that canprovide assistance in implementing and evaluatingthose practices. It may be that BSCC could providethat function. Alternatively, BSCC may not need toprovide that type of assistance directly, but it couldprovide counties with information about whichresearchers, practitioners, and universities offerthose services in California. Technical assistanceperformed by BSCC, in whatever shape it takes, canassist counties in identifying and implementingbest practices, as well as evaluating how effectivelyand efficiently local programs are operating. In sodoing, counties can make better decisions on howto implement realignment to achieve improvedoutcomes and reduce costs.Local Accountability. Current law also requiresBSCC to collect and disseminate Californiacorrections data. A state role in data collectioncan help promote public safety and the success ofrealignment if that role is focused on providinglocal accountability. To the extent that usefulinformation is available to local stakeholders—corrections managers, county elected officials,local media, and the public—local governmentscan be held accountable for their outcomes andexpenditures. For example, county boards of supervisorscan hold their jail and probation managersaccountable for how effectively and efficiently theirprograms are managed, and the general public canraise concerns with their elected officials if they seethat their county’s outcomes are significantly worsethan other counties. Because decisions about howto manage realignment populations and resourcesare inherently local decisions, the focus of accountabilityshould be local. For this reason, the role ofBSCC should not be to collect data for the sake ofinforming the state of what is happening locally.Instead, the role of BSCC should be to facilitatelocal accountability, such as by assisting countiesin providing transparency and uniformity in howthey report outcomes.A good example of a statewide system thatpromotes local accountability is in the area ofchild welfare. In this system, information onindividual child welfare cases is entered into a casemanagement information technology (IT) systemby county workers. The University of California atBerkeley then consolidates this data and posts aggregateddata on the Internet where it can be accessedby anyone. Individual level data is not available onthe public website, but people using this site cancreate different reports showing various outcomesacross counties and across years. This accountabilitysystem is comprehensive, ensures uniform reporting,and is readily accessible to the public. We have heardthat this system has allowed state and local policymakersto make more informed program decisions,identify areas for improvement, and hold programmanagers publicly accountable. Unfortunately,developing a similar IT system for local correctionsaccountability is probably not practical in the nearterm, since creating such a statewide IT system takesyears to complete and would be very expensive. Forexample, a case management system currently beingimplemented by CDCR for the state prison andparole system will cost about $400 million by thetime it is completed.Even in the absence of a comprehensive ITsystem to promote local accountability, like in thechild welfare field, BSCC should play an activerole in ensuring local accountability. Thus, werecommend that the board, after being establishedin July, take a leadership role in implementing auniform process for counties to report local correctionsoutcomes. We understand that various stakeholders(including counties, the administration,18 Legislative Analyst’s Office www.lao.ca.gov