California's Public Safety Realignment: Examining the Offending Patterns of Proxy-state Parole and Proxy-post-release Community Supervision Groups

California's AB 109 and AB 117 (together known as "Realignment") made major changes to felony sentencing and supervision of released offenders as a response to a Supreme Court order to significantly reduce California's prison population. Together, these bills moved the responsibility of certain adult offenders from the state to the counties. Although it is too early to declare the end of the mass incarceration era, many states are beginning to reduce their prison populations by making "smart on crime" criminal justice decisions. California's Realignment, though successfully reducing the prison population, forgoes the evidence-based practice of risk assessment, relying almost entirely on the severity of the inmate's current offense to decide sentencing and supervision. This reliance on "stakes" rather than "risk" raises concerns for public safety, particularly because "low-stakes" offenders released to county-level supervision look quite similar to state parolees when criminal histories are considered. This study uses the California Department of Corrections (CDCR) 2005-2006 Recidivism Data to examine the potential effects of AB 109 and AB 117 on offender supervision groups. The distinction between `stakes'--perceived risk to public safety based on type of offense-- and `risk'--likelihood to recidivate--is analyzed by examining two proxy groups' (state parole and post-release community supervision) arrest and conviction rates, as well as the return status of returned offenders, and what this now means for the counties under Realignment. Policy implications for supervision--and ultimately, how to save the state and counties money in a time of looming debt--derive from the observed patterns of arrest and conviction and the pace at which the various parolee groups received a new violation