based on the individual’s functional abilities, including the ability to care for him- or herself and complete normal household chores, not the medical diagnosis.6 This assessment is conducted within the individual’s current environment and takes int


clude: (1) chore and cleaning services, (2) personal care services, (3) accompaniment for necessary travel, (4) paramedical services (5) protective supervision, and (6) teaching and demonstration services.16 These services include a range of activiti


evices, sterile procedures, and “other activities requiring judgment based on training given by a licensed health care professional.”22 To be covered, there must be a written order by a licensed health professional that includes the patient’s informe


 methods that best suit the demographic makeup of their county.30 However, recipients cannot be compelled to accept services from any individual provider, unless the recipient’s guardian or conservator has chosen that provider.31
Contractor Agencies


pouse nor any other IHSS provider will receive payment for chore and related services, yard work, teaching and demonstration, and heavy cleaning.42 Payment for meal preparation, transportation, and protective services is available only if these servi


uired to have a Quality Assurance Unit that reviews a sample of supportive services cases to guarantee that they meet the appropriate standards for the IHSS program.51 This process begins with a desk review and, for a subsample of reviewed cases, wil


nefits program that provides resources to individuals who otherwise would be unable to obtain those services. Limits on the benefits that one person can receive may be needed in order to ensure that there are some benefits available to all appropriat


nge of motion, assistance with ambulation, and routine activities of daily living.
1 California Department of Health Care Services, Manual of Criteria, “Chapter 9.1, Criteria for Home Health Agency Services,” 2014.
  33
What Services Are Covered?
Med


erly and the disabled, Medi-Cal has waiver programs to provide cost-effective alternatives to institutionalized care by ensuring that a beneficiary’s medical needs can be met appropriately and safely in a home environment. The waiver allows the state


ovide services as an HCBS provider. An individual HCBS provider may not be a parent, stepparent, foster parent, spouse, or legal guardian of the patient. Unlicensed individuals employed by a home health, employment, or personal care agency that meets


f payment and is pertinent only if DWC decides to adopt a Medicaid-based fee schedule. Medi-Cal rates are substantially less than the Medicare rates for comparable services. For example, the national average Medicare skilled nursing rate in 2014 is $


nt (code may not be used to identify services provided by home health aide or certified nurse assistant).
Supportive services to assist an individual to remain at home and includes assistance to independent activities of daily living and adult compan


ite Care, Washington, D.C., 2008, 1140.7(a).
2 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2008, 1140.7(a). 3 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2008.
4 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2008.
  41
What Services May Be Provided?
The VA provides skilled


vide homemaker and/or home health aide services, the VHA must prioritize who may receive such services. Under federal law, it is required to give preference to those veterans who have three or more disabilities that prevent them from performing the a


d on two hours of care per visit. Moreover, if the state has a separate Medicaid rate for homemaker services, VHA’s rate is capped at 110 percent of the established Medicaid rate for that home care agency or geographic area.
Additionally, the costs o


thly stipend, travel expenses to accompany veterans undergoing care, health insurance, mental health services, and counseling and respite care (not less than 30 days per year).
The monthly compensation is monetary compensation paid to the primary fam


WC Programs Methodology
Review of Policies from Other Jurisdictions
To identify policy alternatives from other jurisdictions, we searched state statutes and administrative codes using LEXIS to identify jurisdictions that have policies in this area. W


ol but allowed for flexibility where the subject identified additional issues or concerns. Specifically, we asked questions regarding composition of the fee schedule, limitations on coverage, provision of services by a family member, and the volume a


attendant care services vary from state-to-state. However, it is possible to group state fee schedules based on the general approach they have taken.
Some states have adopted a variable flat rate for home care services provided to WC recipients withi


or LPN
Personal Care Services
Covers personal care services, including assistance with medication and self-help skills
Covers personal care services, such as assistance with bathing and feeding
Covers home health aide services, including assistance w


coverage of services provided by the injured worker’s family. Payer concerns included whether family members were appropriate caregivers, how payment for these services should be calculated, and whether there should be limitations on the types of se


se basis depending on the services rendered.9 At the other extreme, some states set a flat rate for reimbursement of spousal care providers. For example, Washington has assigned a flat rate of $12.88/hour on the services of spouse attendants authoriz


er week of care.13 The OWCP limits personal care services provided by a trained family member to 12 hours per day but does not cover chore services provided by the family member.
Additionally, some states require that the worker provide notice before


s focused on several policy areas: the calculation of the fee schedule, the rules related to coverage of home care services, the provision of home care services by family members, and the cost and volume of services associated with home care services


ized and are reimbursed “by report” based on the explanation for needed services. The worker’s physician must therefore provide justification for the necessity of home health care services. If the physician asserts that these services are medically n


 is to cover family members for providing home health care.
In this regard, we note that most payments for care provided by family caregivers under the California WC program are currently made to the injured worker. The OWCP has discontinued direct p


e the individual to remain safely at home.
• To reduce administrative burden for providers and for DWC, the fee schedule should build on existing fee schedules’ policies, coding systems, and payment amounts. Given the SB 863 requirements, priority sh


d visits and underpays for short visits because some costs are fixed (such as travel time) and are reflected in the rate for the average visit. A per visit rate creates incentives to reduce per visit costs (through reducing the visit length) and to i


erences in the two programs to suggest that basing the OMFS on Medicare’s per episode payments would result in inaccurate payments and, for the more severely disabled workers, create problems with access to long-term nursing and supportive services p


15-minute increments. The Medi-Cal program does not use them.
3. Alphanumeric S-codes are national codes reserved for private payer use. They are not recognized by the Medicare or Medi-Cal programs and are not to be used when the CPT 99500–99602 code


vice used to bill and pay for home health services. The code reported on the billing form should provide information on the units of service needed to price the encounter; however, the reported units need not be the same as fee schedule units of paym


(2) replace those fee schedules. The first approach is most consistent with the Labor Code requirements for the OMFS for home health services. The second approach would reduce administrative burden and provide an integrated approach to covering the


 for home health aide care is need for qualifying skilled services).
• Adoption of a Medicare-based fee schedule is consistent with the intent of the Labor
Code.
IHSS
• Contains rates for hourly attendant care services only. 64
• Rates are determined


are required by the injured worker and which portion of the fee schedule should be used
65
to pay for specific services. In particular, clear rules would be needed to distinguish between “intermittent or part-time care” and more extensive nursing ser


of the individuals completing the assessments. The conditions of participation for home health agencies require that a registered nurse or licensed therapist complete the initial OASIS assessment; an LPN/LVN or medical social worker cannot complete


tives, an assessment by an independent party not directly involved in the provision of the services such as a care management organization or home health agency staff with experience assessing individual needs for supportive services, mental status,


rtion of the fee schedule should be reported using the G-codes that Medicare uses for home health agency services regardless of whether the services are provided by a home health agency or an independent home care provider.
Integrating IHSS into the


lth professional Funding for these services is authorized for IHSS, but registered home care aides who are not under the IHSS program cannot provide services ordinarily performed by a licensed health care professional. IHSS providers may administer m


ined by IHSS public authorities in some counties). Except with regard to family caregivers, a WC requirement that only registered home health aides provide personal care services should address several of the concerns expressed by applicants’ attorne


providing the services in the nearest VA nursing home. The veteran has the choice of deciding whether to pay for any excess costs to remain in the home. A limit on aggregate expenditures is a way to assure that the decision to remain at home is cost


services is a policy choice. While the plain reading of SB 863 suggests that the rates are to be based on IHSS rates, both the variation in rates across counties and the relatively low payment levels suggest that alternatives be considered if permit


een the care covered by each fee schedule, minimizing opportunities for duplication of services and/or shifting services in response to payment incentives (“gaming”), and deciding which codes to use for the services covered by the OWCP fee schedule.


re per visit rates, defines a home health aide visit as two hours of care and allows additional visits provided on the same day. Another approach would be to determine that the limited home health aide services provided under Medicare are not compara


ules might be combined. In our view, there are definite benefits to using the OWCP fee schedule instead of the Medicare fee schedule for the subset of services covered by the Medicare fee schedule. Using multiple fee schedules increases administrativ


e OWCP fee schedule.
Table 8.3 Estimated OWCP per Visit Times Based on Medicare Mean Length of Follow-Up Visits Compared to 1.2 x Medicare per Visit Rate
     Discipline
Skilled nursing Physical therapy
Speeach-language pathology
Mean length of follo


ctor, updated for inflation to 2014 ($43.45), were used in lieu of the OWCP conversion factor. The fee schedule rates using this conversion factor and the OWCP relative weights are shown in the Column C of Table 8.4.9 However, unless DWC determines t


patient's condition, each 15 minutes (the change in the patient's condition requires skilled nursing personnel to identify and evaluate the patient's need for possible modification of treatment in the home health or hospice setting)
1.20 CF) RVUs
Tab


services are lower than for other home health services furnished by a licensed professional in the same discipline. For example, the 15-minute rate for a physical therapist to develop a therapy program is $44.64 per 15-minute increment compared to $5


f specific activities.
• Include the G0159–G0164 codes but price them the same as the G0151–G0158 codes. This addresses the payment differential issues. If the codes are to be reported only when reflecting the primary purpose of the visit, it would a


e health aides or certified nursing assistants.
Medi-Cal uses only two codes: S9122 for services provided by a home health aide and supervised by an RN (hourly rate of $18.90), and T1019 for other personal care services (15- minute increment rate of


ices.
83
Chapter Nine: Summary of Findings and Recommendations for Creating an OMFS for Home Health Care Services
DWC asked RAND for technical assistance in developing fee schedule policies for home health care services. We first consulted with stake


have been developed for a WC population. Fee schedule features that DWC might want to consider include:
• Allowances that differ by the level of training/licensure of the care provider and whether he or she is (1) an employee of a certified home heal


ar household activities. Neither the spouse nor any other IHSS provider will receive payment for chore and related services, yard work, teaching and demonstration, and
86
heavy cleaning.1 Payment for meal preparation, transportation, and protective s


concerns providers billing for services not performed or for the care of more beneficiaries than they can actually serve. Beneficiaries may fail to report all members of their household and changes in their living arrangements or level of disability


are complex and discussed in considerable detail in Chapter Eight. The key factors involve the type of care (intermittent or part-time skilled nursing versus unskilled attendant services) and how the services are delivered (certified home health agen


ex. DWC has authority under Labor Code Section 5307.1(b) to establish different payment parameters from those used in the Medicare payment system to make sure that the OMFS allowances are adequate to ensure a reasonable standard of services and care


isode payment to identify the “border” and “bundling” issues and assess whether the per episode payment might be feasible for selected cases (e.g., postsurgical cases that do not require supportive services).
4. With regard to support services:
a. Co


lineate the services covered under the respective fee schedules. Use the G-codes to describe services covered under the Medicare-based portion of the fee schedule. Select a different set of time-based codes to describe the services payable under the


than either the IHSS or OWCP rates.
3. Adopt billing rules consistent with how they are applied under the OWCP fee schedule.
Our recommendations are based on the Labor Code requirements, which may not
provide DWC with the flexibility needed to implem


workers, payers and defense attorneys, home care providers, and care management organizations. We identified individuals in each key stakeholder group in the California WC system through our prior research and knowledge of California’s WC system and


ngaged in a review of the theoretical literature to determine whether any states were identified as having particularly influential policies in the area of WC and home care services. After this was complete, we engaged in thorough LEXIS searches of s


ribes the interview protocol used to elicit this information.
95
   Fee schedule and related rules Limitations on coverage
Provision of services by family members
Cost and volume of services Data Analysis
Table A.2. Description of Interview Protocol


= 9) of stakeholders. Interviewing other stakeholders might have added to the list of potential issues, and a more complete investigation of issues related to provision of home health services within the WC system could elicit interesting problems w


10.00
Table B.1. California Physician Assistant Hourly Wages, by County
            Monterey
Napa
Nevada
NOTE: The information is as up to date as individual county Public Authorities provided.
11.50 11.50 8.56
Ventura Yolo Yuba
(not a Public Authori


 for providing chore services
Can provide only “nonprofessional attendant care,” cannot be reimbursed for normal family chores
Other Limitations
Cap on maximum number of hours of care covered per month
10–40 hours per week based on level of needed pe


ity Rights California, In Home Supportive Services: Nuts and Bolts, May 2008. ———, In Home Supportive Services Protective Supervision, Publication 5493.01, December
2010.
Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 20, Volume 1, Section 10.3


: Authorization of Appropriations, 2013.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Medicare and Home Health Care, Baltimore, Md., 2010.
———, Centers For Medicare & Medicaid Services, “Home Health Prospect


     Visions of Law Enforcement
Technology in the Period
2024–2034
Report of the Law Enforcement Futuring Workshop
Richard Silberglitt, Brian G. Chow, John S. Hollywood, Dulani Woods, Mikhail Zaydman, Brian A. Jackson
A project of the RAND Corporatio


in Arlington, Virginia, from July 22 to 25, 2014. The workshop was conducted as part of the NIJ/NLECTC Priority Criminal Justice Needs Initiative to explore future visions of law enforcement and identify and prioritize needs in tech- nology, policy,


y Move into the “Tough Love” Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3. Desirable Scenarios That Initially Move into the “Safe Streets” Quadrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4. Scenarios Showing Continuous Movement into an Undesirable Quadrant


entation of different experiences and perspectives, e.g., geographical location, academic versus government, federal versus state and local agencies, size of agency, rank of individual, and type of job responsibility. (The list of participants is giv


eeds.
Trends That Will Affect the Future of Law Enforcement
Prior to the workshop, RAND staff reviewed the literature on law enforcement futures and the more general futures and trends literature, and considered the broad societal and technol- ogy tr


ration method was then used with the full group of participants to prioritize these needs. (Descriptions of the 30 technology needs and the prioritization process can be found in Chapter Four.)
Summary of Scenarios Generated by Workshop Participants


ned the wide applicability of network-centric policing. In this future, law enforcement moves toward cul- tures and systems that emphasize network structures, information sharing, and collaboration. It also features the development of intelligent age


Workshop participants hypothesized that this can be accomplished through (1) proactive use of social media and other means to establish effec- tive communication among law enforcement and with the public, (2) effective education and training of law


ed to develop technologies and processes to support data sharing, including communications infrastructure, equipment standards, integrated data systems, and adaptable/upgradable systems
Need research on recognizing and dealing with legal and policy c


ng Workshop
Workshop participants noted that in many cases criminals currently make more effective use of technology than law enforcement. Because of this, and the rapid rate of advancement of technology, they concluded that doing nothing to improve


; information sharing; and develop- ment and/or adaptation of technology now.
Summary xv
Acknowledgments
The authors first wish to thank the workshop participants, who took time from busy schedules to spend almost a full week discussing and debating


e their missions, law enforcement organizations will need to utilize advanced technologies. The balance between law enforcement and those planning or commit- ting crimes or endangering public safety and security will also be shaped by new technology,


at they deemed important to the future of society and law enforcement, such as the trend toward the militarization of police, which were incorporated into the scenarios they developed.
The 12 trends presented at the workshop follow, along with questi


 unrest?
• How can agencies plan under a high degree of uncertainty in (at least federal) funding
streams?
The U.S. Population Is Aging
In 2009, there were 39.6 million Americans aged 65 years or older, or 12.9 percent of the popu- lation. By 2030, t


?
• Will the increased “trackability” of individuals lead to reduced “in-person” crime?
• Will public or bystanders unknowingly collect valuable physical or digital evidence?
Technology Trends
Development of New Means of Exchange for Products and Ser


s producing items with the potential for extraordinary impact?
– For example, will it be easier for a deranged teenager to make a weapon of mass destruc-
tion in his family’s garage?
Knowledge Itself Is Becoming Much More Dynamic
Specifically, Long a


have been projected to appear as soon as the 2020 model year (Ohnsman, 2013). Personal examples include wearable computing and perhaps even bionics (mechanical devices integrated to some extent with bodies).
Increased automation poses potential socia


ensor net.
All of this data collection, especially when collected or used for governmental purposes, has led to increasing political and legal opposition to “mass surveillance.” This trend has been exacerbated by the “Snowden revelations.” There have


al environment resulting from societal and technology trends?
• How will law enforcement defeat threats and take advantage of opportunities in the future operational environment?
It’s Not Just About Technology
While technology can be a major driver o


 consolidated list of technology needs. Below, we briefly describe each of the methods used.
Discussion of Choice and Application of Methods
When designing this workshop in the context of the three research questions stated in Chapter One, we viewed


prioritization of the 30 technology needs. We accomplished this prioritization using estimates of the expected value of each technology need, and a Delphi method to elicit expected value estimates from each participant. The expected value method is i


e academics, one international, one law enforcement journalist, four federal employees, three state police, five large city police, and two small city police. Many different job responsibilities and rank were represented: professor, chief technol- og


t to which society and law enforcement evolve in concert (in synch)5 or in conflict (out of synch), with the level of compatibility and support increasing from left to right. The four corners of the graph represent four very different possible future


 was one of the assignments to the breakout groups (step 6 in the following section).
The Three Horizons Visioning Method
The Three Horizons visioning method is a method for considering alternative future visions, comparing them, and analyzing how th


ion of the Three Horizons Visioning Method
 First Horizon
Second Horizon
Third Horizon
2014 2019 2024 2029 2034
Year
SOURCE: Adapted from Curry and Hodgson, 2008.
RAND RR908-2.2
5. Explore the role that technology would play in law enforcement missio


y, the expertise, experience, job responsibilities, and perspectives were balanced among the participants. The number of experts was a trade- off between keeping the focus groups in the range of 6–8 to optimize creative discussion and having a large


 These descriptions and definitions are presented in Appendix C. Each workshop participant rated each technology need using the same 1 to 9 scale. We then determined an expected value (EV) from these scores using the following equation:7
EV = Importa


ach technology need. They were then presented with a summary of the first-round results that showed the arithmetic mean (i.e., average) and standard deviation of participant answers to each of the four questions for each of 30 technology needs. They


e availability of technology to criminals with little restriction on its use, and the current restric- tions on law enforcement agencies with respect to both budget and use of technology. There was also uncertainty about whether we are currently to t


nals’ Advantage
 Mean Streets
• Technology advances both assist with and increase requirements for training and educa- tion of law enforcement personnel.
Emerging Uses of Technology
As a prelude to the discussion of future scenarios, the workshop par


 a trend toward militarization of police that can lead to difficulties in developing and retaining public support.
Drivers for Law Enforcement Use of Technology
Participants identified both public expectations and the continuing advance of technology


all four quadrants.1 The consensus was that those scenarios leading to the two quadrants above the x-axis (toward “Tough Love” and “Safe Streets” in Figure 2.1) were desirable futures, because they represent futures in which law enforcement can effe


leading to an initial loss of public support. LE demonstrates and maintains competent
use to regain public support. (Example: “The Transparent Society.”)
Law enforcement supported (in synch)
 Society axis
NOTE: LE = law enforcement.
RAND RR908-3.2
 L


• Technologies to protect the privacy of victims of crime (e.g., preventing access to sexual
exploitation images).
Example of Path 2A: Police Militarization
This future is an extension of the trend of blending warfighting and policing, including both


effectively uses social media to gain public support, fosters alliances with the technology industry to remain current, and is able to demonstrate and maintain competence in the effective use of technology. In scenario 2B, at least one high-profile f


rned there may not be adequate funding to procure the new information technology (IT), much less maintain it and train people to use it properly. Another concern was that there may not be adequate business process knowledge and technical leadership t


ectively use technology, either because technology advances too rapidly and law enforcement does not have the resources or capacity to keep up, or because of failure in recruit- ment, training, implementation, process, or policy. Scenario 4A could co


urces).
   Tough Love
Safe Streets
 Law enforcement supported (in synch)
LE can’t keep up with rapid pace of technology, either because of a lack of resources and capacity or failure(s) in recruiting, training, implementation, process, and/or policy.


 because of lack of funding, mismanagement, or embracing the wrong technologies.
Ineffective use in performing future missions
 Criminals’ Advantage
 Mean Streets
32 Visions of Law Enforcement Technology in the Period 2024–2034
efforts (protecting co


umulative effect of changes in the exter- nal environment or actions by law enforcement. The future, however, is likely to have many such possible branch points. Figure 3.7 illustrates one set of possibilities with several branch points that could le


nt of partnerships with other agencies, citizen groups, and industry to leverage scarce resources, facilitate effective communication, and effectively adapt technology to accomplish law enforcement missions. These enablers led to technology needs, e.


t estimates and use either the average or the median as a ranking metric. We chose the latter path because, most importantly, it does not require any assumptions about the shape of the distribution. Further, there is a statistical test that provides


nked as the top seven by both methods. The tables in Appendix D show that there is a very low probability that any of the other five needs in Tier 1 should be ranked above any of these seven.
 Table 4.1
Ranking of Needs, by Median and Average Expecte


 under 2.1 2.8 the influence or impaired from future legal and custom-made
drugs and other biological agents (could reflect behavioral
screening, chemical screening, or combinations of the two)
14.5 11
Need to develop means for measuring public and c


ral damage minimization, deconfliction technologies)
Need research on approaches for providing “honest brokers” to 1.4 assess performance of technological systems and disseminate
the results (could include validation testing of emerging
technologies


e findings are completely consistent with those for the top current information technol- ogy–related needs for law enforcement (Hollywood et al., 2015); those needs fell into the same three broad topic areas, as well.
There are five knowledge and pra


ack and share details of law enforcement personnel training, certification, and record over the course of their careers; and research on leadership and leadership development suited for the network- enabled era. The Tier 2 information sharing need is


 applies to all subcategories in its category, as indicated in the table.
Table 4.3 shows the breakdown of needs by tier across taxonomy categories. Within top levels of the taxonomy, needs were fairly evenly scattered throughout categories and tiers


ring mechanisms, and updating training academy processes for future network-enabled training
environments
Need methods to permit LE personnel to create and use artificial identities for valid LE purposes
Need technology to identify in the field when


tate LE agencies’ recognizing new needs and updating and using technologies effectively
Need improved technologies—including both tactics and physical systems—for safely defusing or disabling people, groups, and vehicles (specifically includes altern


s performance of technological systems and disseminate the results (could include validation testing of emerging technologies and/
or variants of “reputation/peer review” forums with comments for purchasers of tools [Yelp, Tripadvisor, etc.])
Need re


ent use of technology would inevitably lead to an undesirable future in which criminals have the upper hand and public support for law enforcement agen- cies is eroded.
The third research question was
3. What are the priority needs of law enforcement


itization of current law enforcement technology needs, focusing on information technology (Hollywood et al., 2015). The earlier assessment also found general themes focusing on improving the sharing and use of information, improv- ing law enforcement


licy. Policy and legal constraints routinely prevent or limit information shar- ing; in fact, there have been claims that policy and process barriers are actually significantly larger barriers to information sharing than technical interoperability is


 technology know-how in today’s job market.
Beyond the specific needs listed above, workshop participants discussed at length the need to improve the development and selection of leaders at all levels of law enforcement agencies. They noted that lead


turing Workshop
The above examples of high-priority technology needs are by no means a comprehensive set. They do, however, represent the participants’ highest-ranked tier of needs, consisting of 12 of the 30 identified needs. The balance of the need


Consensus on possible future locations on scenario axes, problems
and opportunities, and the role of technology
Day 3: July 24, 2014
Breakout Groups Continue
8:30–10:30
10:30–10:45 10:45–12:00
Possible Pathways (Second Horizon)
• Desirable and undesi


of South Carolina College of Criminal Justice
 55
APPENDIX C
Delphi Questions and Ranking Scales
  Ques%on 1 – How Important Will This Need Be in Enabling or Preven%ng/Mi%ga%ng Scenarios?
• For this answer, consider the scenario in which this need wo


ill be useful in the discussion below as identifiers of specific needs.
During the workshop, participants scored these needs by answering the questions described in Appendix C using the scales also shown there. This gave a value for importance rangin


media to better engage the public and improve internal communications. Includes (1) informing the public, (2) getting incident reports from the public, and (3) getting assistance in solving crimes. Training material needs to include good examples. C


stitutes “good” and “bad” leadership and research on what leadership courses and methods “work” [and what “work” means], for whom, and in what contexts, specifically including emerging network-enabled organizations)
Need to identify LE resource needs


HR” systems that can track details about LE personnel’s training, certification, record, etc., over the course of their careers and share this information as appropriate (would also include “scores” and “badges” reflecting experiences, training, rep


egal 2.1 12 and custom-made drugs
Develop means for measuring public and criminal uses of technology and 2.0 13.5 countermeasures to LE uses of technology
Identify and adapt business models that will facilitate LE agencies’ recognizing new 2.0 13.5 n


Need B should be ranked the same or higher than Need A as one-sixth, or 17 percent. The test can statistically calculate for any pair of needs and for any number of estimates, the probability that one need should be ranked above or below the other. I


Law Enforcement Technology in the Period 2024–2034
Table D.3
Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test for Comparing the Rankings of Need 1 and Need 21
 Score or Need # Observation
1 0.0
21 0.0
21 0.4
21 0.5
1 0.9
21 0.9
1 1.1
1 1.5
21 1.6
21 1.8
21 2.0
21 2.1
21 2.1
1


servations for B, both from the same distribution. The low P-value shows that it is highly unlikely that Need 1 and Need 21 should be ranked the same, and the higher rank-sum for Need 1 shows that it is properly ranked higher than Need 21.
    0
0.16


age Chance Up is zero, it means the ranking scheme is perfect, because all needs have no chance to be ranked higher. For the average-based ranking, the Average Chance Up is 0.15, which is the sum of all the entries (66.7) in Table D.7 divided by the


isabling people, groups, and vehicles 2.2 14.5
More R&D on ethics development 2.2 14.5
Research on social aspects of improving information sharing and collaboration 2.1 17.5
Develop collaborations with CDC and other public health agencies to prepare


can be based on the observation above that the median and average metrics provide equally valid rankings, according to the Wilcoxon rank-sum test analysis. In this case, we would include in Tier 1 all the needs ranked in the top ten using either met


ologies effectively
Improve technologies for safely defusing or disabling people, groups, and vehicles
Research on technologies that can “see” or sense threats at a distance
Identify LE resource needs and roles emerging from new technologies and uses


s of Police, 2013.
Aitchison, J., and J. A. C. Brown, The Lognormal Distribution, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
1957.
Anderson, Chris, Makers: The New Industrial Revolution, New York: Crown Business, 2012.
Batts, Anthony W., Sean Michael


ng?” Police: The Law Enforcement Magazine, December 30, 2013. As of January 16, 2015:
http://w w w.policemag.com/blog/technolog y/stor y/2013/12/ future-trends-in-accelerating-technology-conference.aspx
Coates, Crawford, “A Look Ahead,” Law Officer,


uary 16, 2015:
http://www.policeone.com/police-products/police-technology/ articles/6678598-2013-in-Review-Tech-gifts-for-your-police-officer-friends/
The Economist, “Third-Party Dreaming: You Can Go Your Own Way,” Democracy in America blog, October


anuary 16, 2015: http://www.wired.com/2014/10/1200-machine-making-untraceable-guns-just-sold-36-hours/
Greengard, Samuel, “Policing the Future,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 55, No. 3, March 2012, pp. 19–21.
Griffith, David, and Paul Clinton, “IAC


2014:
http://futuresworkinggroup.cos.ucf.edu/docs/Volume%205/JacksonV5.pdf
Jackson, John, Richard Myers, and Thomas Cowper, “Leadership in the Net‐Centric Organization,”
Advancing Police Leadership: Considerations, Lessons Learned, and Preferable Fut


s,” Design Engineering, July 31, 2014. As of January 16, 2015: http://www.design-engineering.com/general/nasas-jpl-develops-multi-metal-3d-printing-process-132113
McShane, Owen, and Anne Dowling, “A Practical Application: Facial Recognition Technolog


ucf.edu/docs/Volume%205/PeteeV5.pdf
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association, “Can a Nasal Spray Curb Social Anxiety? Six Innovations in the Fight Against Mental Illness,” Talking Points Memo (sponsored message), June 18, 2014. As of Jan


ning for the Future in an Uncertain World, New York: Currency Doubleday, 1991.
Shoemaker, Paul J. H., “When and How to Use Scenario Planning: A Heuristic Approach with Illustration,” Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 10, No. 6, 1991, pp. 549–564.
Silbergl


Volume%204/vol4Weaver.pdf
Weiss, Todd R., “Cool Cop Tech: 5 New Technologies Helping Police Fight Crime,” Computerworld, February 16, 2012. As of January 16, 2015:
http://w w w.computer world.com/article/2501178/government-it/ cool-cop-tech--5-new-te


 Bankruptcy’s Effect on Product Identification in Asbestos Personal Injury Cases
Lloyd Dixon and Geoffrey McGovern
 CORPORATION
For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/rr907
  Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data


 A sub- sequent report examines how the establishment of trusts potentially
1 Lloyd Dixon, Geoffrey McGovern, and Amy Coombe, Asbestos Bankruptcy Trusts: An Overview of Trust Structure and Activity with Detailed Reports on the Largest Trusts, Santa M


 with Both Interrogatories and Depositions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tables
1.1. Bankruptcy’s Potential Effects on Plaintiff Compensation and Payments by Remaining Solvent Defendants . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1. Number of Bankruptcies and Case


om- pensation for plaintiffs and payments by solvent defendants.
The outcome of an asbestos lawsuit crucially depends on whether evidence of exposure to the products of bankrupt parties is introduced in the tort case. If it is not, then all fault can


efers to the date on which a firm files for bankruptcy.
 Figure S.1
Frequency of Product Identification in Interrogatories After Bankruptcy
    36
    32
    28
    24
    20
    16
    12
8 4 0
RAND RR907-S.1
Confidence interval
Case filing date rel


n the number of firms identified in interrogatories, such as by exploring exposures to bankrupt parties not identified in interrogatories.
Views Are Sharply Divided About Whether These Findings Are a Cause for Concern
Are these findings a cause for c


posures to asbestos-containing products, regardless of whether the product was produced by a currently bankrupt firm.
This report does not take a position in this debate but offers empirical evidence that should help elected officials, judges, and la


no cure, unless the disease is found extremely early and the tumor can be completely removed with surgery. Most of the time when the disease is diagnosed it is too advanced for surgery. Chemotherapy or radiation may be used to reduce symp- toms. Com


 pp. 1039–1044.
4 See Lloyd Dixon and Geoffrey McGovern, Asbestos Bankruptcy Trusts and Tort Compensa- tion, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, MG-1104-ICJ, 2011.
 Introduction and Background on Asbestos Bankruptcies 3
and postbankruptcy. Chapte


stos litigation. At a basic level, asbestos litigation has changed because now more than 100 companies have claimed the protections of Chapter 11 of the Bank- ruptcy Code in part because of their asbestos liabilities.8 These compa- nies, many of whic


s by parties that remain solvent. As can be seen, the outcomes depend significantly on whether evidence of exposures to the products of bankrupt parties is developed in the tort case.
In states with joint and several liability, one would expect the c


h the intent of joint and sev-
Joint and Several Liability,” Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 4, Summer 2005, pp. 469–478.
13 A defendant that pays the full judgment in a joint-and-several-liability jurisdiction gai


ith whose representatives we spoke during the course of this study argue that reducing the number of other exposures identified in the case can increase the likelihood that the products of the remaining parties will be found to have substantially con


and persuasive,” Judge Hodges concluded that
Garlock demonstrated that exposure evidence was withheld in each and every one of [the 15 cases.] The discovery in this pro- ceeding showed that what had been withheld in the tort cases— on average plainti


e bankruptcy wave. Scarcella, Kelso, and Cagnoli (2012) presented evidence that the exposure histories of the two groups are similar; how- ever, in their statistical analysis, they did not explicitly control for dif- ferences in plaintiff exposure hi


vant case documents. Finally, we describe the firms used to examine changes in product identification pre- and postbankruptcy.
Case Selection
We chose two different sets of cases for the study: one consisting of cases filed in California state court


d recklessly or to have acted in concert with other parties to conceal the danger of asbestos (Dixon and McGovern, 2011, pp. 62, 67).
2 This provider maintains an extensive database of asbestos personal-injury cases.
 Data Used to Assess Bankruptcy’s


ffer- ence in causation standard might affect incentives and party behavior.4
Collection of Case Documents
Firms that are defendants in a substantial number of asbestos personal- injury cases were asked to provide the complaints, interrogatories, and


e case. The New York interrogatory includes ques- tions on the plaintiff’s family, medical history, work history, and detailed questions about asbestos exposure. For example, question 16 in the case-management order in effect as of 2001 asks,
As to e


g physician, diagnosing physician, B readers,9 indus- trial hygienists, and physical therapists, because these depositions typi- cally do not contain product-identification information. Depositions come later in the case than interrogatories and are


 at time of case filing (years)a Percentage deceased at time of case filing Plaintiffs’ attorney
Firm A Firm B Firm C Firm D Firm E
BNS Sample
47
4 12 17 12 2 0 0 0
4 34 9 0 0 0
80.3 36
29 9 6 0 0
WCN Sample
39
0 1 3 0
10 11 11
3
1 1 3
11 11 12
68.0


rrogatories or depositions might not yet have been completed for some of the cases filed toward the end of the study period. The last row of the table reports the number of cases for which both interrogatories and depositions were located. This subse


 how the identification rates change following bankruptcy.
10 Including trust submissions as an indicator of exposure might be questioned. Some bank- ruptcy trusts will pay compensation on the basis of evidence that would be insufficient to establish


dentification
Rate (%) N
10 545 7 244
4 845 7 1,634
     NOTE: N refers to number of case–firm combinations.
a Based on 1,634 case–firm combinations (38 cases with interrogatories times
43 firms). Five of the 43 firms were not mentioned in any of the


den- tified prebankruptcy. To control for case and firm characteristics, we included two sets of indicator variables in the logistic regression—one for the case and one for the firm.2
2 That is, the logistic regression includes a set of case fixed ef


n the error term of the logistic regression caused by multiple case–firm combinations for the same case and for the same firm. The effect of potential cor-
3 The identification rate considers exposure to be indicated when a claim has been sub- mitted


 reduces the odds that the products of bankrupt parties are identified WCN cases should thus be viewed as tentative. A larger sample of cases would increase the precision of the estimates.
30 Bankruptcy’s Effect on Product Identification in Asbestos


the bankrupt firm’s products). Over time, however, new, younger attorneys come into the firm who might have no knowledge about the bankrupt party. The party is no longer named on the complaint, and the new attorneys have no reason to inquire into exp


rcella, Kelso, and Cagnoli (2012) found that, on average, approximately eight defen- dants that eventually filed for bankruptcy were identified in the prebankruptcy period versus four in the postbankruptcy period (see discussion in Chapter One).
7 Ac


 postbankruptcy.
34 Bankruptcy’s Effect on Product Identification in Asbestos Personal Injury Cases
Bankruptcy’s impact on product identification controlling for case and firm characteristics is reported in Table 3.5. Including the products identifie


osure was affirmed. The “don’t know or unsure” rows show the rate at which plaintiffs said they did not know or were unsure whether they were exposed to products of each of the 43 firms included in the analysis. And the “exposure denied”
Table 3.6
Pr


t will pay more than it would if all expo- sure were identified. Failure to identify exposure to the products of bankrupt parties might also result in greater plaintiff compensation than otherwise from bankruptcy trusts and the tort case combined. As


rk history to establish exposure, and they can also typically intro- duce into evidence depositions and interrogatories from other cases with similar plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ attorneys point out that, even though this study shows a drop in product ide


only increase their liability. For these reasons, defendants conclude
1 For discussion of causation requirements in asbestos cases, see S. Todd Brown, “Bank- ruptcy Trusts, Transparency and the Future of Asbestos Compensation,” Widener Law Jour- nal,


Act would require bankruptcy trusts to provide quarterly the name and exposure history of each claimant and the basis for any payment made to such claimant (U.S. House of Representatives, Furthering Asbes- tos Claim Transparency Act of 2013, H.R. 982


facturing
Rutland Fire and Clay Company
Shook and Fletcher Skinner Engine Company
Stone and Webster Engineering Company
Bankruptcy Date
June 1, 2009
September 18, 2008 February 12, 2002 August 9, 2005
July 12, 2010 January 13, 1998 January 4, 2002
Oc


ect on Product Identification in Interrogatories (for 43 firms that filed for bankruptcy between 1998 and 2010)
   Ordinary Least Squares
Cameron, Gelbach, and Miller Estimate
  Case–Firm Combination
BNS casea
Case filed within one year of bankruptcy


the logistic regression, the bankruptcy effects manifest gradually over time, and the changes when cases are filed one to two years and two years or more after bankruptcy are statistically different from 0. As expected, the coefficients remain the sa


firms). We ran the logistic regression on the 1,932 combinations that remained after combinations dropped for which there was no variation in product identification within a case or within a defendant.
b We input 2,107 case–firm combinations into the


 with Detailed Reports on the Largest Trusts, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, TR-872-ICJ, 2010. As of March 24, 2015:
http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR872.html
In re Complex Asbestos Litig., “Defendants’ Standard Interrogatories t


ensation filed with the specially created asbestos bankruptcy trusts. The outcome of an asbestos lawsuit crucially depends on whether litigants in the tort case introduce evidence of exposure to the products of bankrupt parties. If some of these expo


  CORPORATION
The Impact of Adopting Time-of-Day Tolling
Case Study of 183A in Austin, Texas
Thomas Light, Sunil Patil, Gregory D. Erhardt, Flavia Tsang, Peter Burge, Paul Sorensen, Mia Zmud
For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.or


er aspects of science and technology policy. Program research is supported by government agen- cies, foundations, and the private sector.
This program is part of RAND Justice, Infrastructure, and Environment, a division of the RAND Corporation dedica


vels to $2.25 to Use All Three Mainline Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.6. Change in 183 and 183A Traffic Volumes Associated with Reducing Off-Peak Toll Le


ft from the parallel, untolled roadway (183) to the tolled 183A when off-peak toll rates are reduced. Consequently, reducing off-peak toll rates has little effect on peak-period traffic conditions on 183 or on downstream facilities, such as MoPac.
•


rture times and route choices change in response to changes in the 183A tolling structure. The tool has been calibrated to other data collected from the 183/183A corridor to facilitate the estimation of traffic and revenue impacts associated with mod


or use electronically with a TxTag device or via mail.1 Drivers who pay electronically pay 25 percent less than those that pay via mail. Furthermore, toll charges increase with the number of vehicle axles. For example, someone with a TxTag who travel


lack of thorough understanding of the behavioral impacts of pricing “stems from the fact that the number of actual implementations of road pricing is very small, and that only a portion of these are the subject of behavior research.” The approach tak


o be contacted for the 183/183A survey, we leveraged license plate reader (LPR) data. The LPR data were collected during the morning peak period (approxi- mately 6 a.m. to 10 a.m.) over the course of five weekdays during November 2012. The LPR data w


tend to have relatively high income, with more
3 It is important to note that our sample excludes those who do not use the 183/183A corridor because (1) they did not make any trips to a relevant destination, (2) they were not auto users, or (3) they


choose from two routes, each associated with different travel times and costs. Each respondent was asked to evaluate six pairs of such routes.
An example of the screen for the second stated preference experiment is shown in Figure 2.3. This experimen


rs are more likely to switch routes than switch time periods.
Separate models were estimated for mandatory versus nonmandatory trips. The survey data indicated that mandatory trips, which include work, employer business, school, and escorting others


ta are on the order of half to a third as large as those obtained from revealed preference data. Because our analysis is based on stated preference data, we would expect that our value of time estimates to be lower than estimates obtained using revea


  * Statistically significant at 90-percent confidence level.
** Statistically significant at 95-percent confidence level.
NOTE: Standard errors are calculated using a bootstrap procedure.
required to shift one hour earlier is $6.66 and $5.75 to shi


Hirschman et al., 1995).
Figure 3.2 shows the changes in revenue obtained from southbound motorists between 5 a.m. and noon on weekdays as the toll level varies; this applies to motorists with a TxTag in a two-axle vehicle on all three mainline segme


(3-hour morning peak: 6 to 9 a.m.)
Revenue
(2-hour morning peak: 7 to 9 a.m.)
         RAND RR969-3.4
2.50 2.75 3.00
Off-peak toll rate to use all mainline segments ($)
Figure 3.5
Change in Traffic Volumes Associated with Reducing Off-Peak Toll Level


vailable resources. While we expect that impacts for the evening peak and off-peak periods would be similar, they have not been analyzed and could be different. For example, the evening peak tends to be wider and includes more discre- tionary trips.


ak toll rates has little effect on peak-period traffic conditions on 183 or on downstream facilities, such as MoPac.
• To remain revenue neutral, modest reductions in off-peak toll levels would need to be accompanied with modest increases in peak tol


.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_722v2.pdf
Perez, Benjamin G., Tiffany Batac, Peter Vovsha, and Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., Assessing Highway Tolling and Pricing Options and Impacts: Vol. 1, Decision-Making Framework, Washington, D.C.: Transportation


  CORPORATION
Los Angeles County
Juvenile Justice Crime
Prevention Act
Fiscal Year 2013–2014 Report Terry Fain, Susan Turner, Sarah Michal Greathouse
For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1023
  Published by the RAND Corpor


ounty’s JJCPA programs, including analyzing data and reporting findings to the BSCC. This report summarizes the fiscal year (FY) 2013– 2014 findings reported to the BSCC, as well as additional program information gathered by the Los Angeles County Pr


WR-218-LACPD, February 2005a
• Susan Turner, Terry Fain, and Amber Sehgal, Validation of the Risk and Resiliency Assess- ment Tool for Juveniles in the Los Angeles County Probation System, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, TR-291-LACPD, June 20


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.9. Outcomes for After-School Enrichment and Supervision, FY 2013–2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.10. Outcomes for School-Based Probation Supervision for At-Risk High School Youth,


xvi
S.2. Programs in the Three JJCPA FY 2013–2014 Initiatives, Comparison Groups, and Numbers of Participants for Whom Probation Reported Outcomes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
S.3. Results from Simple Comparisons in Programs That Used t


y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.9. Estimated Juvenile Justice Costs for Housing-Based Day Supervision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.10. Estimated Juvenile Justice Costs for Inside-Out Writers. . . . . . . . . . .


JJCPA. The legislation identified six specific outcome measures (the “big six”) to be included in annual reports from each of the individual JJCPA programs: (1) successful comple- tion of probation, (2) arrests, (3) probation violations, (4) incarcer


e–post measurement design. Generally, we measure outcomes for program participants for a six-month period after they start the program (for community programs) or after they are released into the community (for camp and juvenile hall programs). In ad


he receives services and could therefore count that juvenile more than once.
Table S.1 lists the JJCPA programs in each initiative in FY 2013–2014 and the number of participants who received services in each program. Table S.2 shows the number of par


chool- and Community-Based Services
Abolish Chronic Truancy ACT
Housing-Based Day Supervision HB
Inside-Out Writers IOW
After-School Enrichment and Supervision PARKS
School-Based Probation Supervision for Middle School and High School SBHS-AR
Partici


am participants. MH reported outcomes only for youths who received treatment services.
• With the exception of SBHS-PROB, programs that used contemporaneous comparison groups were small and showed no significant differences between program participan


in the Enhanced Mental Health Services initiative than for comparison-group youths. Program and comparison groups did not differ significantly for the other big six outcomes. The difference-in-differences analyses for MH showed no significant differ


e, suspensions, expulsions, and overall strength and risk scores) following program entry. For big six outcomes, SBHS-PROB participants had significantly lower arrest rates and higher rates of completion of probation, restitution, and community servi


MH SBHS-AR SBMS-AR YSA
— FY2013–2014 — — — —
— — — — — —
— — n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
— — n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. ——————
 this table indicates that the FY 2013–2014 cohort had a significantly more positive result.
NOTE: FY 2013–2014 in
A dash indicates no si


gram discrepan- cies in percentage who report supplemental outcomes also tend to be fairly consistent from year to year.
Estimated JJCPA Per Capita Costs
A total of 29,207 participants were served in Los Angeles County JJCPA programs in FY 2013– 2014


ograms in each initiative, as well as the type of participants served (probationers, at-risk youths, or both).
Estimated Total Cost of Programs and Initiatives
Table S.6 shows the estimated mean baseline and follow-up costs per participant in each JJ


t extend the time frame to measure changes, however, because not enough time has elapsed to allow us to obtain data beyond a six-month period. With a longer follow-up period, reductions in subsequent arrests and court appearances could offset initial


 Juvenile Justice Cost Services
Arrest 417 Camp –2,981 Court –735 Juvenile hall –3,423 Program –587 Supervision –286 Total –7,594
Enhanced Services to High- Risk/High-Need Youth
18 4,193 69 179 –2,764 –76 1,624
Enhanced School- and Community-Based Se


lemental out- comes tend to be more favorable than state-mandated big six outcomes, although samples tend to be considerably smaller than for big six outcomes. Los Angeles County expects to continue to receive JJCPA funding on an annual basis and to


R School-Based Probation Supervision for At-Risk High School Youth SBHS-PROB School-Based Probation Supervision for High School Probationers SBMS-AR School-Based Probation Supervision for At-Risk Middle School Youth
SBMS-PROB School-Based Probation S


e legislation requires the BSCC to submit annual reports to the California state legislature measuring the success of JJCPA. The legislation identified six specific outcome measures (the “big six”) to be included in annual reports from each of the in


community level as well. The use of JJCPA and other resources allows the deputy probation officer (DPO) to shape a plan that builds on each juvenile’s strengths and is uniquely responsive to service needs. In collaboration with school officials, par


• severity of the instant offense.
The assumption is as follows: The more closely the comparison group matches the treat- ment group, the more confidently one can assert that treatment effects, not differences in other characteristics, caused the di


in the original application to BOC. During FY 2003–2004 and again in FY 2004–2005, RAND researchers worked with Probation to modify supplemental outcomes in several programs to reflect program goals and to identify more-appropriate comparison groups


 use pre–post designs. All programs used the same evaluation designs in FY 2013–2014 as they have since FY 2008–2009.
We have applied standard statistical techniques (chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, McNemar’s test, and difference-of-means test)


ia.
3 For programs based in juvenile halls, we measure the big six outcomes for the six months after the youth returns to the community, rather than from program start.
Background and Methodology 5
 6 Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevent


fference-in-differences analysis, only a simple comparison between the two cohorts.
5 If p is the probability of a binary outcome, we define the odds ratio for that outcome as (p/(1 – p)). Logistic regres-
sion analysis predicts the logarithm of the


de any participants in the YWAR program.
Organization of This Report
The remainder of this report focuses specifically on JJCPA programs in Los Angeles County in FY 2013–2014. Chapter Two details JJCPA programs and presents brief summaries of each pr


ng areas: family dysfunction (problems of parental moni- toring of child behavior or high conflict between youth and parent), school problems (truancy, misbehavior, or poor academic performance), and delinquent behavior (gang involvement, substance a


es during the fiscal year, which went from July 1, 2013, to June 30, 2014. To allow a six-month eligibility period for recidivism, however, the number for whom a program reported outcomes uses a reference period of January 1, 2013, through December 3


istically matched routine probationers used as members of comparison groups for SBHS- PROB and SBMS-PROB to program participants. MH reported outcomes only for participants who received treatment services.
Programs and Outcomes in Initiative I: Enhan


ssessment, and intervention functions. Staff refer youths who, according to the initial screen- ing, require a more thorough review for a more comprehensive assessment.
In addition to providing screening, assessment, and treatment services for newly


 the agencies and does not imply an out- come evaluation.
Mental Health America (MHA)5 has called for effective treatment programs for juvenile offenders. MHA recommends an integrated, multimodal treatment approach as an essential requirement because


 from juvenile hall, whichever came first.7
Outcomes
For outcome analyses, we examined 1,077 participants in the MH program who received mental health treatment in FY 2013–2014 and 1,324 comparison-group youths who received mental health treatment in


delinquency and drug use, MST posits that multiple factors determine youth anti- social behavior, which is linked with characteristics of the individual youth and his or her family, peer group, school, and community contexts (Henggeler et al., 1998)


lemen- tal outcomes for MST participants—school attendance, suspensions, and expulsions—during the school term before program entry and the term following program entry.
Outcomes
Outcome analyses examined 63 MST participants and 46 comparison-group y


pulation.
A 1997 DOJ survey reported that drug courts had made great strides in the past ten years in helping drug-abusing offenders stop using drugs and lead productive lives. Recidivism rates for drug program participants and graduates range from 2


y for the treatment process, the SNC program incorporates several major design elements of existing drug and mental health courts across the country, including a multidisciplinary team approach involving mental health professionals and the juvenile c


in the six months after entering the program.
SNC participants did not differ significantly from comparison-group youths in any of the big six outcomes. No SNC participants or comparison-group youths completed community service.
For big six outcomes,


hes.
We evaluated the three programs in this initiative—GSCOMM, HRHN, and YSA—by comparing their outcome measures with those reported for participants in the same program in FY 2012–2013. For this reason, we include difference-in-differences analyses


to reduce problems caused by risky behaviors and prevent further development of problems (Center for Sub- stance Abuse Prevention, 1993; Mulvey and Brodsky, 1990). Examples of interventions for girls in the juvenile justice system include educationa


rom the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, S. Hawkins et al. (2009) identified four main protective factors for girls: the presence of a caring adult, school connectedness, school success, and religiosity. However, risk and protective


er big six outcomes, the difference-in-differences analyses indicated no significant difference between the two cohorts. This finding is consistent with a simple comparison for all outcomes.
Current JJCPA Programs and FY 2013–2014 Outcome Measures 25


tigate risks and meet needs. As we discuss in Chapter Three, this makes HRHN one of the more costly JJCPA programs per capita.
The HRHN program employs a social learning curriculum (SLC) in its home-based ser- vice components. It targets services not


ers. Although MTFC does not prevent out-of-home placement, both biological and foster parents receive parental training. The program trains parents to monitor daily peer associations and the whereabouts—at all times—of their children. In addition, th


at parole agencies cannot effectively provide the range and depth of services required for high-risk and high-need parolees unless they broker services through a host of community resources (Altschuler and Arm-
strong, 1994; Wiebush, McNulty, and Le,


3). Because we had no demographic data other than age for either cohort of HRHN youths, we could not compare the two groups’ characteristics to ensure compatibility. For both HRHN and comparison-group youths, we measured big six outcomes in the six m


fferences analyses found no statistically significant difference between the two cohorts in any of the other big six outcomes.
Youth Substance Abuse Intervention
The Camp Community Transition Program (CCTP), Intensive Gang Supervision, and school- ba


rug use”).
Evidence Base for the Program
YSA is based on the National Institute on Drug Abuse’s relapse-prevention behavioral-therapy research (Whitten, 2005). The relapse-prevention approach to substance abuse treatment con- sists of a collection of


program exit, whichever came first.
Outcomes
We based outcome measures on the performance of 168 YSA participants in FY 2013–2014 and 166 in FY 2012–2013. Differences between the two cohorts were not statistically signifi- cant for any of the big six


te odds ratios for successful completion of probation or successful completion of community service because the baseline for both outcomes was 0 in FY 2013–2014. The difference-in-differences analyses produce results for YSA that are consistent with


 the JJCPA program’s FY 2013–2014. Of the three initiatives, only this one delivered service to more at-risk youths (12,670) than probationers (5,996).
Whenever possible, we evaluated participants in the Enhanced School- and Community- Based Services


ure that youths who are at risk of truancy or excessive absences attend school. The program goals are to
• reduce truancy at selected ACT schools
• address attendance problems at the earliest possible time before the child’s behavior is
ingrained
• i


fice of the City Attorney sends a second letter to the parent notifying him or her of its intent to request a criminal filing. In lieu of formal criminal proceedings, the prosecutor can refer the family to counseling or family support programs (Garry


s, we do not present a figure illustrating outcomes for ACT.
 Current JJCPA Programs and FY 2013–2014 Outcome Measures 37
Housing-Based Day Supervision
The HB program provides day, evening, and weekend supervision and services for probationers, at-ri


reatment
38 Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: Fiscal Year 2013–2014 Report
decisions that are based on research; and (5) have program staff who understand the principles of effective interventions (Latessa, Cullen, and Gendrea


ce a spirit of honest introspection, respect for others (values), and alternative
11 Because of leveraging resources and personnel, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles did not provide JJCPA services to two housing sites (Ramona Garden an


 decreased crime and antisocial behaviors in programs that, like IOW, are based on the six points listed above (OJJDP, 2000).
Drakeford (2002) found that an intensive literacy program among juveniles confined in correctional facilities was associated


Differences in Differences, Odds Ratios, and Confidence Intervals for Outcomes for Inside- Out Writers
    Mean: Current Year (%)
Mean: Previous Year (%)
  Outcome Baseline
Arrest 49.07
Incarceration 18.41
Completion 2.23 of community
service
Complet


e crime by
• monitoring peer associations of probationers
• providing homework assistance for participant youths
• involving participant youths in prosocial activities.
Evidence Base for the Program
The PARKS program is largely a manifestation of the


youths, the program goals are to keep at-risk youths out of the juvenile justice system. In the JJCPA programs in FY 2013–2014, 1.9 percent of the participants were arrested in the six months following program entry, compared with 2.1 percent in the


ilding resiliency through DPO advocacy and mentorship for caseload youths
• increasing parental involvement in the education process
• providing homework and class assistance for caseload youths
• providing skill-building activities for caseload yout


e two fiscal years differ in gender composition and in the location of those who received services. In FY 2013–2014, there were significantly more male participants than in FY 2012–2013. Clusters 3, 4, and 5 show statisti- cally different percentages


ves only at-risk youths. Figure 2.10 shows outcomes, with details for all outcomes in Table E.11 in Appendix E.
Cluster data were available for all but eight at-risk participants in the school-based high school program. Because participants in this p


r for a cluster indicates that no one in the cluster had the indicated outcome.
Table 2.13
Means, Differences in Differences, Odds Ratios, and Confidence Intervals for Outcomes for School- Based Probation Supervision for At-Risk High School Youth


d suspensions decreased significantly (from 16.9 percent to 5.1 percent), as did expulsions (from 2.2 percent to 0.2 percent) in the term after entering the program compared with the term immediately before entering. SBHS-PROB participants also had s


ted in the SBMS-AR program during FY 2012–2013.
For both SBMS-AR participants and comparison-group youths, we measured big six outcomes during the six months following entry into the program. For supplemental school outcomes—attendance, suspensions,


e-in-Differences Analyses for School-Based Probation Supervision for At-Risk Middle School Youth
We include difference-in-differences analyses for SBMS-AR because the program uses the previous year’s cohort as a comparison group. For arrest and incar


probationer and comparison-group youth had at least one prior arrest, we did not include criminal history as a factor in propensity-score matching of the two groups.
 54 Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: Fiscal Year 2013–2014


I
0.368–3.301 —
      NOTE: We could not compute the odds ratio for incarceration because the baseline for the both years was zero. Diff – Diff gives the percentage change of the current year compared with the previous year. A negative value in that


FY 2012–2013 cohort.
Current JJCPA Programs and FY 2013–2014 Outcome Measures 57
Figure 2.17
Outcomes for School-Based Probation Supervision for Middle School Probationers, FY 2013–2014
 NOTE: A star indicates a statistically significant difference (


preprogram juvenile justice costs. Probationers, by contrast, might have been under supervision prior to program entry and might have also incurred other juvenile justice costs. This implies that JJCPA programs that predominantly target probationers


er a six- month period.
It should be emphasized that these are estimated costs, calculated using the best informa- tion available at the time of this writing. Most involve calculations using estimates that Proba- tion provided or from publicly availa


days served for all program participants, and dividing this total into the total budget for the program. Program costs varied considerably, from a daily average of $0.23 for participants in ACT to $92.88 per day for SNC participants. Overall, JJCPA


mputed a weighted average cost of $2,109.75 per arrest.
Court Costs
Court costs include several components, including the DA, the public defender, and the costs of the court itself. Whenever possible, we obtained estimates of these costs directly fro


ates
Many cost-of-crime studies calculate victim-related costs per crime using an accounting approach (see, e.g., Miller, Cohen, and Wiersema, 1996). Other estimates can include nonmar- ket goods, such as environmental quality, or the effects that cr


e follow-up period than in the baseline period, with large increases in costs for juvenile hall and camp. As a result, participants showed a much higher mean cost per youth in the follow-up ($21,593) than in the baseline ($13,871).
Table 3.2
Estimate


ve
For this initiative, we again estimated the costs of the program along with other juvenile justice costs during the baseline and follow-up periods. None of the programs in this initiative was
Table 3.3
Estimated Juvenile Justice Costs for Multisys


e costs, for juvenile hall ($34) and court ($45). Supervision and arrest costs were only slightly higher in the follow-up period than in the baseline period. Taken together, savings were suf- ficient to offset high program costs, resulting in a savin


in the Enhanced School- and Community- Based Services Initiative
As with the other FY 2013–2014 initiatives, we compared baseline and follow-up costs for each program. We based baseline and follow-up periods on program start dates for all programs in


 higher per participant in the follow-up period than in the baseline period, primarily because of the high cost of administering the program.
in the six
months after
Table 3.8
Estimated Juvenile Justice Costs for Abolish Chronic Truancy
Table 3.9
Est


chool Youth
Table 3.12 shows the estimated juvenile justice costs of the SBHS-AR program. Although pro- gram costs were relatively modest compared with those for other JJCPA programs, they none- theless made up the lion’s share ($1,169) of the progra


t
Arrest 2,109.75 Arrest
Camp 490.43 Day
Court 2,992.58 Appear.
Juvenile 701.44 Day hall
Units
0.24 0.46 0.56 4.44
153.53 149.36 8.34
    0.00 0 0
   NOTE: A positive number in a difference column indicates that the cost was lower in the six months a


,344 39,455 13,619
1,580 19,417 11,668
4,645
ACT 20 HB 423 IOW 21,825 PARKS 302 SBHS-AR 117 SBHS-PROB 8,444 SBMS-AR 41 SBMS-PROB 5,444
All programs 8,685
  NOTE: A positive number in the “Difference” column indicates that the mean cost was lower in t


avings, by Initiative
For each of the three FY 2013–2014 initiatives, Table 3.17 shows the estimated mean net cost for each juvenile justice cost—i.e., the mean difference between the cost in the six months before entering the program and the six mon


halls and therefore include no at-risk youths, such as IOW and MH, will always have relatively high supervision costs, making these programs look worse on these cost comparisons for supervision. Arrest, juvenile hall, camp, and court costs, by contr


rgest contribu- tor to total juvenile justice cost was the cost of administering the JJCPA program itself. – Comparing costs in the six months following program entry and those from the six
months before program entry, we see that several programs di


cantly higher and, for risk and barriers, significantly lower in the six months following program entry than at the time of program entry. HB housing-project crime rates were slightly higher in FY 2013–2014 than in FY 2012–2013, but, because these ar


in all 34 outcomes. In three outcomes, the current year’s cohort performed significantly better than its counterpart from the year before.
Summary and Conclusions 81
82 Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: Fiscal Year 2013–2014 R


ll stay during which program services were received.
FY 2013–2014 — — — — —
FY 2013–2014 — n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
— — n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
  Table 4.2
Results of Difference-in-Differences Analyses for Programs That Used the Previous Year’s Cohorts as Com


rams
84 Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: Fiscal Year 2013–2014 Report
that measured school attendance, we also included a benefit (saving) of improved attendance. Although our cost estimates have several limitations, these es


PA, which is mandated to serve all youths who need services. Other design weaknesses, such as pre–post comparisons, will be evident to readers familiar with quasi-experimental designs.
As we have noted, we used no randomized designs, and we could not


 involvement, severity of the instant offense, and the presence of a gang order.
Future Direction
The severe recession that began in late 2007, as well as budget issues specific to California, con- tinued to affect JJCPA funding in Los Angeles County


ed persons
Case management
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling, anger management, counseling and mental health care
Hotline services, youth services
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling, health care and drug prescription services
Alcohol and sub


tion Center Arid Club
Behavioral Medicine
Antelope Valley Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependency (AVCADD)
Table A.1—Continued
Agency
Antelope Valley Domestic Violence Council Valley Oasis Shelter
Antelope Valley Foundation for the Developmentally


HC) Alhambra Hospital 24-Hour Crisis Intervention
Cathy M. Belfuso, LMFT
Bereavement Support Group Pro Care Hospice
Mark E. Berman, Ph.D., licensed clinical psychologist, Antelope Valley Therapy Center
Black Infant Health
Black Infant Health of Antel


Century Anger Management (Action Family Counseling)
Service
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling Referrals to social services and CBOs
Advocacy services, hotline services, youth services Hotline services
Counseling and mental health care
Hotline s


ms
Child abuse services, hotline services
Child abuse services, hotline services, housing services and shelter, website link to services, youth services
Anger management, child abuse services, child care, counseling and mental health care, parenting


d services
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling
Employment services, hotline services
Domestic violence services, hotline services, housing services and shelter
Referrals to social services and CBOs Website link to services
Educational programs, yo


ams (DMH)
Gamblers Anonymous
Gary Center
Gay and Lesbian Adolescent Social Services (GLASS)
Genesis (DMH) Get on the Bus
Girl Blue Project
Goals for Life
Going Beyond Boundaries
Grace Thrift Super Center Grandparents as Parents
Grief Helpline
Habitat


 abuse counseling, case management, counseling and mental health care, domestic violence services
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling, counseling and mental health care
Counseling and mental health care, parenting information and services
Parentin


olence services
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling, counseling and mental health care
Advocacy services
Counseling and mental health care
Counseling and mental health care, hotline services, parenting information and services, educational program


l programs
Educational programs
Case management, health care and drug prescription services Services for disabled persons
Educational programs Hotline services
Assistance with immigration issues Housing services and shelter Employment services
Hotlin


ealth care and drug prescription services, hotline services, website link to services
Assistance with immigration issues
100 Los Angeles County Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: Fiscal Year 2013–2014 Report
Table A.1—Continued Agency
New Beginni


ion Review Unit (PAUR)
Providence Center for Community Health Improvement
Providence Tattoo Removal Program
Public Counsel Law Center (Child Rights Project)
Pueblo Psychotherapy
Quartz Hill Foursquare Church
Rape Survivors Anonymous
Rape, Abuse and I


social services and CBOs
Case management
Parenting information and services
Food services, housing services and shelter
Employment services
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling
Hotline services, website link to services Counseling and mental health


 hotline services, housing services and shelter
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling, anger management, counseling and mental health care, youth services
Alcohol and substance abuse counseling Employment services
Outpatient sex offender services
Co


nse severity of first arrest, and whether assigned a gang-avoidance order.
We calculate propensity-score weights by performing a logistical regression to predict whether a given youth is in the treatment group or the comparison group. The independent


quency, not all arrests result in sustained petitions by the court. Therefore, Probation considers arrest an important indicator with this caveat and qualifier.
3. violation of probation: As with arrests, violations are a key indicator of recidivism


l Treatment and Training (SPIRITT) Family Services
Stars View Children and Family Services Starview Community Health
Tarzana Treatment Centers
Primary Service Offered
Substance abuse treatment Home-based HRHN, female Substance abuse treatment MST
MST


ists of youths who qualified for MST in FY 2011–2012, FY 2012–2013, or
FY 2013–2014 but did not participate in the program and were agreed on by MST staff, Probation Department staff, and RAND staff. The MST team identified these cases. We measured m


iles. We measured mandated outcomes during the six months after the youth entered the program. We measured the supplemental outcome when the youth entered the program and at six months after that or when the youth exited the program, whichever came f


tically significant (p < 0.05).
BSCC-Mandated and Supplemental Outcomes for Individual JJCPA Programs, FY 2013–2014 117
Initiative III: Enhanced School- and Community-Based Services
Table E.7
Outcomes for Abolish Chronic Truancy, FY 2013–2014
     BS


 1,085
1,702 1,180 1,702
Sample Size
1,673
   Completion of community service
Completion of probation Completion of restitution Probation violation
BSCC Supplemental Outcome
Juvenile hall behavioral violations—SIRs
94
208 162 161
          NOTE: The


outh entered the program. We measured school-based supplemental outcomes for the last complete academic period before the youth entered the program and for the first complete academic period after the youth entered the program. We measured strength a


Comparison
Percentage Sample Size
3.38 444 0.68 444
n.a.
n.a. n.a. n.a.
Follow-Up
Mean Sample Size
97.17a 516 0.00 387 10.84a 415 3.62a 587 17.73a 587
             NOTE: The comparison group consists of all program participants whose outcomes we rep


FY 2013–2014, gender informa- tion was not available for ACT, GSCOMM, HRHN, IOW, MH, PARKS, or YSA.
 Table F.1
Outcomes for Housing-Based Day Supervision, FY 2013–2014
BSCC- Female Participants Male Participants Mandated
Outcome Number Percentage Sam


e F.6
Outcomes for School-Based Probation Supervision for Middle School Probationers, FY 2013–2014
   BSCC- Mandated Outcome
Arrest Incarceration
Completion of community service
Completion of probation
Completion of restitution
Probation violation
Fe


hool-Based Probation Supervision for At-Risk Middle School Youth, FY 2013–2014
      Cluster
12345
          Outcome %
Arrest 2.73
Incarceration 0.00
Completion n.a. of
community
service
Completion n.a. of probation
Completion n.a. of restitution
Pro


Arrest History
Prior Runaway
Current Abuse
Past Abuse
Neglect
Substance Abuse: Alcohol Substance Abuse: Drugs
TOTAL CHECKS
Poor School Behavior: Grades Poor School Behavior: Attendance Learning Disabilities
TOTAL CHECKS
Gang Membership Negative Peer


eles County Sheriff’s Department, email to the authors, November 4, 2014.
Alexander, James, and Bruce V. Parsons, Functional Family Therapy, Monterey, Calif.: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, 1982.
Altschuler, David M., and Troy L. Armstrong, Intensiv


ice Crime Prevention Act: Fiscal Year 2013–2014 Report
Cocozza, Joseph J., and Kathleen Skowyra, “Youth with Mental Health Disorders: Issues and Emerging Responses,” OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2000, pp. 3–13. As of January


anuary 5, 2015.
Fain, Terry, Sarah Michal Greathouse, Susan F. Turner, and H. Dawn Weinberg, “Effectiveness of Multisystemic Therapy for Minority Youth: Outcomes over 8 Years in Los Angeles County,” OJJDP Journal of Juvenile Justice, Vol. 3, No. 2, S


Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, Guiding Principles for Promising Female Programming: An Inventory of Best Practices, Rockville, Md.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevent


dicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts, Trial Court Allocations: Funding for General Court Operations and Specific Costs in Fiscal Year 2014–2015, July 22, 2014. As of January 28, 2015: http://w w w.courts.ca.gov/documents/


al Offending for Juveniles and Adults,” Campbell Systematic Reviews, Vol. 2012:4, 2012. As of January 28, 2015:
http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/2356/
Mulvey, Edward P., and Anne E. Brodsky, “Secondary Prevention of Delinquency: More


Colorado, Boulder, 1994.
Turner, Susan, and Terry Fain, “Validation of the Risk and Resiliency Assessment Tool for Juveniles in the Los Angeles County Probation System,” Federal Probation, Vol. 70, No. 2, September 2006, pp. 49–55.
Turner, Susan, Ter


tschnitt, Peggy Giordano, Denise C. Gottfredson, Allison A. Payne, Barry C. Feld, and Meda Chesney-Lind, Causes and Correlates of Girls’ Delinquency, Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Bulletin NCJ 226358, April 2


  CORPORATION
Public Safety Realignment in Twelve California Counties
Susan Turner, Terry Fain, Shirley Hunt
For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR872
  Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 20


mplement- ing realignment, utilizing data from each county’s annual report, as well as data available from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the Chief Proba- tion Officers of California (CPOC). In addition, we con


levels of prior use of incarceration at the state level, high and low levels of service provision, and a range of plans for adding jail capacity. Our study counties were Alameda, Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardin


se counties are now responsible for supervising lower-level offenders, county pro- bation departments have had to deal with increased numbers of clients. What is apparent is the very steep climb and more-recent leveling off of the numbers of postrele


eration. Many counties indicated a balanced approach, although counties that faced jail population capacity issues mentioned incarceration and jail beds as the focus. However, the issue was not as simple as building beds—many expressed the challenge


alignment funding to enhance programs and services already in existence for education, employment, substance abuse treatment, and mental health services for realigned offenders. GED® test preparation was a fre- quent program for funding under educati


vidence of movement toward RNR, although SB 678 set some of that in motion. We go into more detail below.
Realignment appears to have shifted the responsibility for, but not the total numbers of, offenders in the system (at least those under the prim


ent that these organizations provide.
Jail populations continue to be a major concern with realignment. Mechanisms are available to counties to increase jail capacity—namely, reducing the presentence population. Although some counties are using pretr


nte, Veronica Casas, Vaughn Byers, Marlene Romo, Brante Ruaro, Rebecca Spodick, and Yonina Tsai. As always, we are grateful to Lisa Bernard for superb editing of the manuscript.
We would also like to thank each of the representatives of probation and


postrelease community supervision
RNR risk-need-responsivity
SB senate bill
STRONG Static Risk and Offender Needs Guide
xvii
CHAPTER ONE
Research Designs and Methods
Background
Beginning with the Uniform Determinate Sentencing Act of 1976 (Senate Bil


ts counties a great deal of flexibility in how they treat these offenders and allows them to choose alternatives to custody for realignment offenders. Options available to counties
 1
2 Public Safety Realignment in Twelve California Counties
include


alignment’s impact on several aspects of California corrections, including whether counties have made fundamental changes or expanded business as usual. We look at changes at both the state and county levels. The areas we address include the followin


Designs and Methods 3
4 Public Safety Realignment in Twelve California Counties
defined by the percentage of jail capacity (low, medium, or high) to be added. This gives us a range of counties along a continuum from those that are low coverage and hi


 11 sher- iff’s departments and 11 probation departments.2
Chapter Two examines how the counties responded to realignment, based on publicly available data, such as county budgets and crime rates. Chapter Three presents the findings from our intervie


n in standing prison population, with a 12.8-percent reduction. By comparison, at the state level, the prison population was 20.4 percent lower in 2012 than in 2009 and dropped by 17.4 percent between the third quarter of 2011, just before AB 109 was


anisms for reducing jail populations. Specifically, the presentenced populations might be candidates for new or enhanced prerelease programs, such as GPS monitoring. We return to the issue of pretrial release program interest later in our report.
Inc


ion 1170(h) of the California Penal Code with a term of mandatory supervision, county probation departments have had to deal with increased numbers of clients. Figure 2.6 shows the numbers of PRCS and mandatory supervision (MS) clients for our study


 low or high coverage (that is, whether it has historically tended to heavily use prison
  Figure 2.6
Active Postrelease Community Supervision and Mandatory Supervision, Fourth Quarter 2011 Through Third Quarter 2013
SOURCE: CPOC, 2015.
NOTE: In this


rasted with 650,279 at year-end 2010, but the rate per 100,000 has remained about
County Responses to Realignment 17
 County
Alameda Fresno
Kern
Los Angeles Orange Riverside Sacramento San Bernardino San Diego
 San Francisco
Santa Clara
Stanislaus 13


ies.
Funding for Realignment
The Realignment Allocation Committee developed funding formulas for county allocations, initially basing them on the county’s projected full roll-out realignment population (weighted at 60 percent); the county’s adult pop


how counties’ realignment plans proposed to spend
county resources. There was a good deal of variation in the original plan for how each county
4 As in the first year’s allocation, Los Angeles County continued to receive an enhanced level of funding


fectively canceled each other out when looking at the 12 counties as an aggregate.
In contrast to the overall county budgets, probation budgets increased in all 12 counties between FY 2009–2010 and FY 2013–2014, virtually doubling in Stanislaus Count


, 2012, 2013, 2014; San Francisco Adult Probation Department, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014; San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015; Santa Clara County Probation Department, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014; Stanis


tion and sheriff’s depart- ments. We draw out themes based on the questions asked, as well as responses received from our respondents. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 summarize several aspects of the realignment experience, primarily gathered from interviews, but


 the jails. In general, probation representatives were somewhat more likely to say the county plans placed an equal emphasis on incarceration and rehabilitation.
What is interesting from the interviews is that they do not always reveal the same ratin


014, also mentioned early challenges in hiring. “Staffing” was also rated as the top-priority area in county responses to the BSCC realignment survey for FY 2011–2012 through FY 2013–2014 (BSCC, 2014b).
We asked how the CCP and realignment affected i


cally noting an increase in violence, criminal sophistication, appeals, and medical and mental health care needs. Reflecting a focus on services, approximately two-thirds of sheriff’s depart- ment respondents commented on a change in culture toward


vided them the opportunity to engage with evidence-based practices (EBPs). Riverside mentioned that it was a great precursor in terms of providing incentives for good outcomes; Santa Clara men- tioned that SB 678 helped build the foundation for the d


ion officers before realignment, but sev- eral counties indicated that they have increased the numbers of armed officers to deal with realignment offenders. For example, the chief probation officer in Los Angeles County, Jerry Powers, reported, “It i


op shopping for offenders. The concept has been around for decades and widely used across the country. In fact, the CDCR utilizes DRCs as part of its community and reentry services. They are designed as comprehensive service-delivery programs, provid


fore realignment, but several counties adopted new tools right around the time of the legislation. Although we do not show this in Table 3.1, several counties, including Fresno, Orange, Riv- erside, and San Bernardino, forged new partnerships with la


cials. Jails could often enhance programming in education, substance abuse treatment, and mental health areas. Additionally, some counties increased the use of cognitive–behavioral programming and other services targeted to successful integration, su


 systems.
For example, San Francisco’s reentry pod, which opened in February 2013, provides ser- vices and community connections to inmates who are soon to be released. State prison inmates who are within 90 to 120 days of the ends of their sentences


isms to reduce jail popula- tion pressures as a result of the influx of realigned offenders. Jail populations can be reduced on the front end, for example, by increased use of own-recognizance (OR) programs for the presentenced population. And given


rtment parole, and the sheriff’s department’s electronic monitoring program. An inmate is eligible for the program if the inmate does not pose a risk and is a non-non-non offender. Once the inmate completes at least 10 percent of the sentence and has


we find that counties are doing a variety of things but that there are a lot of unanticipated challenges and unknowns about the effects of strategies. For the second question, we find that many things that are being implemented are enhancements of e


ed areas in the jails—are gaining momentum. San Francisco’s reentry pod is a good example of this. Reentry centers have long been part of the programming in U.S. prisons (Seiter and Kadela, 2003), and the concept is beginning to be translated to the


rnatives to state prison. (Executive Committee of the Community Corrections Partnership, 2012)
In Los Angeles, the Alternative Treatment Caseload program was established with SB 678 funding. This funding enabled the department to create 76 new positi


. Contracting out to community-based organizations is a routine mechanism for providing treatment and services. Service providers are often where the “rubber meets the road” in terms of providing evidence-based programming, including risk assessment


plementation of Proposition 47, 2,700 prisoners have been released from the CDCR (Gutierrez, 2015). It is still too early to determine the proposition’s impact on crime rates, although some observers feel that it has contributed to an increase in pro


porting of numbers of offenders, sentences, and jail capacity reports to county constitu- encies, including boards of supervisors. County websites routinely post information for county agencies related to realignment. One major effort of note is unde


06 59,134,657 17,078,602 33,746,839 12,183,027
 San Bernardino
San Diego
San Francisco
Santa Clara
Stanislaus 12,021,399
51,571,199 50,211,396 10,099,676 25,132,625
 SOURCE: “Recommended AB 109 Allocation Years 2 and 3,” attachments 1 and 2, undated.


2, pp. 987–1084.
47
48 Public Safety Realignment in Twelve California Counties
Ball, W. David, and Robert Weisberg, The New Normal? Prosecutorial Charging in California After Public Safety Realignment, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Criminal Justice Cent


le, Douglas J., Laura Ragusa, Jennifer Lanterman, and Andrea Marcus, Outcomes of a Randomized Trial of an Intensive Community Corrections Program: Day Reporting Centers—for Parolees, Newark, N.J.: Violence Institute of New Jersey at the University of


 Public Safety Realignment, Sacramento, Calif., May 2013c. As of December 11, 2014:
http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/realignment/docs/ Realignment%206%20Month%20Report%20Final_5%2016%2013%20v1.pdf
California Department of Finance, California Budget 2010–11, c.


Bill 678, October 11, 2009. As of May 18, 2015: http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/sb678.pdf
———, Vehicles: Vehicle License Fee and Registration Fee, Senate Bill 89, June 28, 2011. As of May 18, 2015: h t t p : // w w w. l e g i n f o . c a . g o v /


urvey: 2009, 4th Quarter Survey Results, Sacramento, Calif., c. 2009d. As of May 18, 2015:
http://www.bscc.ca.gov/downloads/2009_4th_Qtr_JPS_full_report.pdf
———, Jail Profile Survey: 2010, 1st Quarter Survey Results, Sacramento, Calif., c. 2010a. As


nsive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2012, Fresno, Calif., December 28, 2012. As of May 20, 2015:
http://www2.co.fresno.ca.us/0410/CAFR/CAFR2012.pdf
———, County Budget for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2014, June 13, 2013


/financial/cafr/2012
———, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2013, Santa Ana, Calif., January 16, 2014a. As of May 20, 2015:
http://ac.ocgov.com/info/financial/cafr/2013
———, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report


ardino, Calif., December 17, 2010. As of May 20, 2015: http://www.sbcounty.gov/atc/DBMFiles/2009-2010%20CAFR.pdf
———, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011, San Bernardino, Calif., December 23, 2011. As of May


g Change, c. 2014. As of May 20, 2015: http://www.sccgov.org/sites/opa/resources/reports/Documents/2013AnnualReport%20Online%20FINAL.pdf
Dansky, Kara, “Understanding California Sentencing,” University of San Francisco Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 1, Summ


ne, working paper, revised December 2013. As of May 15, 2015: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/2014/01/ CAs-Public-Safety-Realignment-Correctional-Policy-Based-on-Stakes-Rather-than-Risk.pdf
Golaszewski, Paul, “A Status Report: Reducing Pris


.pdf
LAO—See Legislative Analyst’s Office
Lawrence, Sarah, Court-Ordered Population Caps in California County Jails, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Stanford Law School, December 2014. As of April 14, 2015:
http://w w w.law.stanfo


olicy Institute of California, April 2015. As of April 22, 2015:
http://w w w.ppic.org/main/publication_quick.asp?i=1146
McCray, Angela, Kathryn McCann Newhall, and Jessica Greenlick Snyder, Realigning the Revolving Door? An Analysis of California Co


/main/files/file-attachments/ 12.05.16_attachments_1_and_2_for_5-14-12_caoac_briefing.pdf
Riverside County Probation Department, Annual Report, c. 2010.
———, Annual Report, c. 2011.
———, Annual Report, c. 2012.
———, Service and Business Plan: Fiscal


 2012.
———, 2012 Annual Report, c. 2013. As of May 20, 2015: http://www.sdsheriff.net/documents/2012-annualreport.pdf
———, 2013 Annual Report, c. 2014. As of May 20, 2015: http://www.sdsheriff.net/documents/2013-annualreport.pdf
———, Annual Report, c


t: Budget Year 2010–2011, c. 2010. As of May 20, 2015: h t t p : // w w w. s t a n c o u n t y. c o m / b u d g e t / f y 2 010 -2 011 / fi n a l -2 010 -2 011- b u d g e t . s h t m
———, Adopted Final Budget: Fiscal Year 2011–2012, c. 2011. As of Ma


e for Public Policy, 2015. As of
April 14, 2015:
http://wsipp.wa.gov/BenefitCost/ProgramPdf/502/Day-reporting-centers
Willison, Janeen Buck, Jesse Jannetta, Hannah Dodd, S. Rebecca Neusteter, Kevin Warwick, Kaitlin Greer, and Andrea Matthews, Process


                 i
                                                             THE FuTurE oF MobiliTy
Scenarios for China in 2030
Liisa Ecola, Johanna Zmud, Kun Gu, Peter Phleps, Irene Feige
                       The Future of Mobility
Scenarios fo


erve mixed signals, with some cities strongly regulating the mobility market and others still pondering such measures. The way public transport systems in urban areas will be promoted in the future will also have a tremendous impact on the way the Ch


was conducted in the RAND Transportation, Space, and Technology Program, which addresses topics relating to transportation systems, space exploration, information and tele- communication technologies, nano- and biotechnologies, and other aspects of s


n China in 2030? Responses to this question will help trans- portation decisionmakers in China—national, provincial, and local officials—and the private sector better prepare for the future. Long-range transportation planning involves many difficult