Скачать презентацию CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION A Blueprint Скачать презентацию CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION A Blueprint

09bb6a9e8faca1fc421950a06e59f18e.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 30

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION A Blueprint to Save Billions of Dollars, End CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION A Blueprint to Save Billions of Dollars, End Federal Court Oversight, and Improve the Prison System 1

All Time High • On October 25, 2006, CDCR reached an all time high All Time High • On October 25, 2006, CDCR reached an all time high for inmate population • 173, 479 inmates • 159, 977 were in institutions (excluding camps) • Design Capacity was 79, 828 beds • Overcrowding rate = 200. 4% 2

Three Judge Panel Order § Reduce Overcrowding to 137. 5% § Supreme Court Upheld Three Judge Panel Order § Reduce Overcrowding to 137. 5% § Supreme Court Upheld June 2011 § The State must reduce overcrowding to 137. 5% by June 27, 2013 § 112, 032 inmates in prisons § Excludes contracts and camps 3

4 4

Current Population § On June 20, 2012 § 135, 471 inmates § 121, 129 Current Population § On June 20, 2012 § 135, 471 inmates § 121, 129 were in institutions (excluding camps) § Design Capacity was 79, 756 beds § Overcrowding rate = 152% 5

Realignment Impact on Prison Crowding 6 Realignment Impact on Prison Crowding 6

Non-Traditional Beds 7 Non-Traditional Beds 7

Projections vs Actual Population Projected Actual Projected Male Female Grand Fiscal Year Total Difference Projections vs Actual Population Projected Actual Projected Male Female Grand Fiscal Year Total Difference Total September 30 151, 644 151, 078 566 9, 459 9, 404 55 161, 103 160, 482 621 October 31 150, 015 147, 083 2, 932 9, 081 9, 065 16 159, 096 156, 148 2, 948 November 30 144, 961 143, 204 1, 757 8, 562 8, 619 -57 153, 523 151, 823 1, 700 December 31 140, 979 139, 653 1, 326 8, 096 8, 101 -5 149, 075 147, 754 1, 321 January 31 137, 591 136, 050 1, 541 7, 706 7, 607 99 145, 297 143, 657 1, 640 February 28 134, 952 133, 832 1, 120 7, 392 7, 297 95 142, 344 141, 129 1, 215 March 31 133, 190 132, 391 799 7, 149 7, 005 144 140, 339 139, 396 943 April 30 131, 817 6, 946 138, 763 May 31 130, 850 6, 752 137, 602 June 30 129, 973 6, 641 136, 614 2011 -12 Actual Difference 8

ICSS Score System Changes Current Security Levels Post July 1, 2012 Level Points I ICSS Score System Changes Current Security Levels Post July 1, 2012 Level Points I 0 -18 II 19 -27 II 19 -35 III 28 -51 III 36 -59 IV 52+ IV 60+ 9

Administrative Determinants AGE ENEMIES MEDICAL SECURITY ARSON ESCAPE POTENTIAL OUT-TO-COURT SEX OFFENSE BEHAVIOR FAMILY Administrative Determinants AGE ENEMIES MEDICAL SECURITY ARSON ESCAPE POTENTIAL OUT-TO-COURT SEX OFFENSE BEHAVIOR FAMILY TIES POPULATION PRESSURES SEXUAL ORIENTATION CAMP GANG AFFILIATION PRE-RELEASE TIME TO SERVE DEATH SENTENCE HOLD PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITION VIOLENCE DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW BOARD INACTIVE GANG STATUS PUBLIC INTEREST CASE VOCATIONAL PROGRAM DISCIPLINARY HISTORY LIFE SENTENCE SCHOOL WORK SKILLS 10

Custody Levels • Minimum – Dormitory housing outside of security perimeter. • Medium – Custody Levels • Minimum – Dormitory housing outside of security perimeter. • Medium – Dormitory or celled housing within security perimeter. • Close – Celled housing within security perimeter. • Maximum – Administrative Segregation 11

Aging Population 12 Aging Population 12

Shifting Population 1. Changing the Close Custody Criteria – Potential shift of 3, 446 Shifting Population 1. Changing the Close Custody Criteria – Potential shift of 3, 446 from level III to II 2. Eliminating Mandatory Minimum – “C” Category - shift of 1, 573 from level III to II – LWOPs - Shift of 2, 173 from level IV to III 3. Increasing level II from 27 to 35 points – Shift of 7, 730 from level III to II 4. Increasing level III from 51 to 59 points – Shift of 5, 495 from level IV to III 13

Anticipated Crowding Rates Pre and Post Classification Changes Current Classification Regulations New Classification Regulations Anticipated Crowding Rates Pre and Post Classification Changes Current Classification Regulations New Classification Regulations Reception Centers 157% Level I 124% Level II 100% 157% Level III 199% 154% Level IV 181% 125% Special (SHU/PSU/PHU) 125% Condemned 100% Security Level (June 2016)

15 15

(Data from 10/3/11 – 4/30/12) 16 (Data from 10/3/11 – 4/30/12) 16

Standardized Staffing § 6: 1 Ratio § Unallocated Cuts § Lack of Uniformity § Standardized Staffing § 6: 1 Ratio § Unallocated Cuts § Lack of Uniformity § Principle of Programming 17

Standardized Staffing Savings • Fiscal Year 12 -13: – 5, 500 positions reduced – Standardized Staffing Savings • Fiscal Year 12 -13: – 5, 500 positions reduced – $1 billion savings • Fiscal Year 13 -14 and beyond: – 6, 400 positions reduced – $1. 5 billion savings 18

Construction • The California Health Care Facility (CHCF) – 1, 010 High and Low Construction • The California Health Care Facility (CHCF) – 1, 010 High and Low Acuity inmate-patient beds • In-patient care • De. Witt Correctional Facility Annex – 180 Level II beds – 528 Specialized General Population dormitory beds – 425 Enhanced Out Patient Program beds (including ASU) • Provides continuum of care for both Mental Health and Medical inmate-patients housed at the CHCF • Health Care Facility Improvement Program – $700 million to improve health care for outpatients and general population requiring basic care 19

In-Fill Projects • Three In-Fill projects at existing prisons – Will house approximately 800 In-Fill Projects • Three In-Fill projects at existing prisons – Will house approximately 800 Level II inmates in each facility • Approximately 2, 400 beds – Designed like the Substance Abuse Treatment Units at SATF – Provides flexibility in a therapeutic environment – Will be at intermediate institutions – Reduces the gap for Level II ADA capacity – Will be able to house the aging Life Term population – Can be used for EOP population and CCCMS population – Can be used to cluster Clark class members – Outside the Valley Fever area 20

SATF ADA Accessible Yards 21 SATF ADA Accessible Yards 21

SATF Living Unit 22 SATF Living Unit 22

Prison Closure • Closure of California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) in Norco by FY 15/16 Prison Closure • Closure of California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) in Norco by FY 15/16 – 2, 491 design beds • Severely dilapidated wooden structure housing units • More than $200 million cost avoidance in repairs • $160 million annual operation cost savings 23

CRC Built on a Hill (No ADA Housing) 24 CRC Built on a Hill (No ADA Housing) 24

CRC Restroom 25 CRC Restroom 25

CRC Restroom 26 CRC Restroom 26

CONSTRUCTION COST COMPARISON 2011 Revised Integrated Strategy Infill Health Care Reentry New Level II CONSTRUCTION COST COMPARISON 2011 Revised Integrated Strategy Infill Health Care Reentry New Level II Dorms TOTAL: 2012 Blueprint $2, 324, 000 $1, 006, 369, 000 $972, 000 $900, 419, 000 $2, 556, 000 $0 $0 $810, 000 $5, 852, 000 $2, 716, 788, 000 27

Contract Capacity and 145% Crowding Level • California Out of State Facility (COCF) – Contract Capacity and 145% Crowding Level • California Out of State Facility (COCF) – – – Current Capacity 9, 588 beds Reduce 600 beds FY 12/13 Reduce to 4, 596 beds by December 2013 Reduce to 2, 696 beds by June 2014 Reduce to 1, 160 beds by June 2015 Closure by FY 15/16 • $300 million annual savings • Modified Community Correctional Facilities (MCCF) – FY 11/12 • 4, 451 CCF/MCCF beds • $103. 2 million budget – Currently 600 bed capacity – Expansion to 1, 825 beds by December 2013 • $50. 75 million annual savings 28

Support Budget Savings With Realignment • Fiscal Year 12 -13: – $1 billion • Support Budget Savings With Realignment • Fiscal Year 12 -13: – $1 billion • Fiscal Year 13 -14: – $1. 3 billion • Fiscal Year 14 -15: – $1. 46 billion • Fiscal Year 15 -16: – $1. 54 billion 29

QUESTIONS? 30 QUESTIONS? 30