U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

California's County Justice System Subvention Program

NCJ Number
69894
Journal
California Youth Authority Quarterly Volume: 32 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer/Fall 1980) Pages: 43-53
Author(s)
J Phelan
Date Published
1980
Length
11 pages
Annotation
California's County Justice System Subvention Program (CJSSP) was established in July 1978 to encourage local sentencing alternatives and to improve local justice system offender-centered services.
Abstract
Intended for the reimbursement of State-mandated county costs for status offenders, the CJSSP replaced previous State subsidies for probation supervision and the construction and maintenance of juvenile homes, ranches, and camps. The program aims to reduce the number of offenders reentering the local criminal justice system, protect and care for children and youth, and assist counties in providing appropriate local services and facilities for youth and adults. The program establishes new county funding sources, assumes costs of Chapter 1071 of the Statutes of 1976, appropriates a total of $63.3 million, and allows county selection of funding formulas. Moreover, CJSSP requires counties to maintain their commitment limits, and requires repayment or withholds funds if counties exceed their commitment limit, establishes a 16-person county justice system advisory group. Controversy arose over the need for carryover of funds from one year to the next. In addition, there were problems with the lack of required local program evaluations, the need to expand the list of serious offenses not charged against the county's commitment limit, and the impact of plea bargaining. The program's first year of implementation showed that the greatest shift in funds was received by private agencies (whose funds increased), that most counties exceeded their commitment limits without having to repay, and that the cost for 1979-80 was $219,313. Areas that must be resolved included the funding level uncertainty, commitment limits, and the need for comprehensive and timely information. Overall, the program appears to be meeting a definite need in California. Tables show the first-year costs of the program.