Bill Text: CA SB678 | 2009-2010 | Regular Session | Amended

NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft

---

Bill Title: Criminal recidivism.

Spectrum: Slight Partisan Bill (Democrat 7-3)

Status: (Passed) 2009-10-11 - Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 608, Statutes of 2009. [SB678 Detail]

Download: California-2009-SB678-Amended.html

---

BILL NUMBER: SB 678	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 4, 2009
	AMENDED IN SENATE  APRIL 16, 2009

INTRODUCED BY   Senators Leno and Benoit
   (Coauthors: Senators Ducheny, Hancock,  Oropeza,  and
Steinberg)

                        FEBRUARY 27, 2009

   An act to add  and repeal  Chapter 3 (commencing with
Section 1228)  to  of  Title 8 of Part 2 of
the Penal Code, relating to probation  , and making an
appropriation therefor.   . 


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 678, as amended, Leno. Criminal recidivism.
   Existing law establishes provisions authorizing the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation to oversee programs for the purposes
of reducing parolee recidivism.
   This bill would authorize each county to establish a Community
Corrections Performance  Incentive   Incentives
 Fund (CCPIF) and would  require   auth
  orize  the state to annually allocate money into
 each county's fund   a State  
Corrections Performance Incentives Fund  to be used for
specified purposes relating to improving  local  probation
supervision practices and capacities, as specified. This bill would
require the Director of Finance  , in consultation with the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint Legislative
Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officer of California, and the
Administrative Office of the Courts,  to calculate the amount of
money to be appropriated from the  General Fund 
 state fund  into a CCPIF  fund  . This
bill would specify that the calculation would be based on costs
avoided by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation because
of a reduction in the percentage of  people  
adult probationers  sent to prison for a probation failure, as
specified. This bill would also require each county using CCPIF funds
to identify and track specific outcome-based measures, as specified,
and report to the Administrative Office of the Courts on the
effectiveness of the programs paid for by the CCPIF.
   This bill would require the community corrections programs to be
developed and implemented by  the chief  probation 
officer,  as advised by a Community Corrections Partnership.
This bill would require specified local officials to serve as part of
that Community Corrections Partnership. Because this bill would
increase the duties for certain local officials, it would impose a
state-mandated local program.
   The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
   This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these
statutory provisions.
   Vote:  2/3   majority  . Appropriation:
 yes   no  . Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  This act shall be known and may be cited as the
California Community Corrections Performance  Incentive
  Incentives  Act of 2009.
  SEC. 2.  Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 1228) is added to Title
8 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, to read:
      CHAPTER 3.  CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PERFORMANCE
INCENTIVES


   1228.  The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
   (a) In 2007, nearly 270,000 felony offenders were subject to
probation supervision in California's communities.
   (b) In 2007, out of 46,987 new admissions to state prison, nearly
20,000 were felony offenders who were committed to state prison after
failing probation supervision.
   (c) Probation is a judicially imposed suspension of sentence that
attempts to supervise, treat, and rehabilitate offenders while they
remain in the community under the supervision of the probation
department. Probation is a linchpin of the criminal justice system,
 closely aligned with the courts,  and plays a central role
in promoting public safety in California's communities.
   (d) Providing sustainable funding for improved, evidence-based
probation supervision practices and capacities will improve public
safety outcomes among adult felons who are on probation. Improving
felony probation performance, measured by a reduction in felony
probationers who are sent to prison because they were revoked on
probation or convicted of another crime while on probation, will
reduce the number of new admissions to state prison, saving taxpayer
dollars and allowing a portion of those state savings to be
redirected to probation for investing in community corrections
programs.
   1229.  As used in this chapter, the following definitions apply:
   (a) "Community corrections" means the placement of persons
convicted of a felony offense under probation supervision, with
conditions imposed by a court for a specified period.
   (b) "Chief probation officer" means the chief probation officer
for the county or city and county in which an adult offender is
subject to probation for the conviction of a felony offense.
   (c) "Community  Corrections Program"  
corrections program"  means a program established pursuant to
this act consisting of a system of felony probation supervision
services dedicated to all of the following goals:
   (1) Enhancing public safety through the management and reduction
of offender risk while under felony probation supervision and upon
reentry from jail into the community.
   (2) Providing a range of probation supervision tools, sanctions,
and services applied to felony probationers based on a risk/needs
assessment for the purpose of reducing criminal conduct and promoting
behavioral change that results in reducing recidivism and promoting
the successful reintegration of offenders into the community.
   (3) Maximizing offender restitution, reconciliation, and
restorative services to victims of crime.
   (4) Holding offenders accountable for their criminal behaviors and
for successful compliance with applicable court orders and
conditions of supervision.
   (5) Improving public safety outcomes for persons placed on
probation for a felony offense, as measured by their successful
completion of probation and commensurate reduction in the rate of
felony probationers sent to prison as a result of a probation
revocation or conviction of a new crime.
   (d) "Evidence-based practices" refers to supervision policies,
procedures, programs  ,  and practices demonstrated by
scientific research to reduce recidivism among individuals under
probation, parole, or  post-release  
postrelease  supervision.
   1230.  (a) Each county is hereby authorized to establish in each
county treasury a Community Corrections Performance Incentive Fund
(CCPIF), to receive all amounts allocated to that county for purposes
of implementing this chapter.
   (b) In any fiscal year for which a county receives  money
  moneys  to be expended for the implementation of
this chapter,  the county auditor shall allocate moneys in
the county's CCPIF, including any interest or other return earned on
the investment of those moneys, within 30 days of the deposit of
those moneys into the fund, and shall allocate those moneys in
accordance with all of the following requirements: 
    (1)     One hundred
percent to the chief probation officer in his or her capacity as head
of the county probation department responsible for supervising adult
felony probationers, hereinafter "probation," to implement the
community corrections program authorized by this chapter. 
 the moneys, including any interest, shall be made available to
the chief probation officer (CPO) of that county, within 30 days of
the deposit of those moneys into the fund, for the implementation of
the community corrections program authorized by this chapter. 

   (2) 
    (1)  The community corrections program shall be
developed and implemented by probation and advised by a local
Community Corrections Partnership. 
   (3) 
    (2)  The local Community Corrections Partnership shall
be chaired by the chief probation officer and comprised of the
following membership:
   (A) The presiding judge of the superior court, or his or her
designee  ;   . 
   (B) The chief administrative officer for the county.
   (C) The district attorney.
   (D) The public defender.
   (E) The sheriff.
   (F) A chief of police.
   (G) The head of the county department of social services.
   (H) The head of the county department of mental health.
   (I) The head of the county department of employment.
   (J) The head of the county alcohol and substance abuse programs.
   (K) The head of the county office of education.
   (L) A representative from a community-based organization with
experience in successfully providing rehabilitative services to
persons who have been convicted of a criminal offense. 
   (4) 
    (3)  Funds allocated to probation pursuant to this act
shall be used to provide supervision and rehabilitative services for
adult felony offenders subject to probation, and shall be spent on
evidence-based community corrections practices and programs,  as
defined in subdivision (c) of Section 1229,  which may include,
but are not limited to, the following:
   (A) Implementing and expanding evidence-based risk and needs
assessments.
   (B) Implementing and expanding intermediate sanctions that
include, but are not limited to, electronic monitoring, mandatory
community service, home detention, day reporting, restorative justice
programs, work furlough programs, and incarceration in county jail
for up to 90 days.
   (C) Providing more intensive probation supervision.
   (D) Expanding the availability of evidence-based rehabilitation
programs including, but not limited to, drug and alcohol treatment,
mental health treatment, anger management, cognitive behavior
programs, and job training and employment services.
   (E) Evaluating the effectiveness of rehabilitation and supervision
programs and ensuring program fidelity. 
   (5) 
    (4)  The chief probation officer shall have discretion
to spend funds on any of the above practices and programs consistent
with this act but, at a minimum, shall devote at least 5 percent of
all  funding received to expanding the availability of
rehabilitation programs and evaluating   funding
received to evaluate  the effectiveness of those programs 
and practices implemented with the funds provided pursuant to this
chapter  . A chief probation officer may petition the
Administrative Office of the Courts to have this restriction waived,
and the Administrative Office of the Courts shall have the authority
to grant such a  petition, if there is already sufficient
availability of evidence-based programs for adult probationers in
that jurisdiction.   petition, if the CPO can
demonstrate that the department is already devoting sufficient funds
to the evaluation of these programs and practices.  
   (6) 
    (5)  Each probation department receiving funds under
this chapter shall maintain a complete and accurate accounting of all
funds received pursuant to this chapter.
   1231.  (a) Community corrections programs funded pursuant to this
act shall identify and track specific outcome-based measures
consistent with the goals of this act.
   (b) The Administrative Office of the Courts, in consultation with
the Chief Probation Officers of California, shall specify and define
minimum required outcome-based measures, which shall include, but not
be limited to, all of the following:
   (1) The percentage of persons on felony probation who are being
supervised in accordance with evidence-based practices.
   (2) The percentage of state moneys expended for programs that are
evidence-based, and a descriptive list of all programs that are
evidence-based.
   (3) Specification of supervision policies, procedures, programs,
and practices that were eliminated.
   (4) The percentage of persons on felony probation who successfully
complete the period of probation.
   (c) Each  probation department   chief
probation officer  receiving funding pursuant to 
Section 1233   Sections 1233 to 1233.6, inclusive, 
shall provide an annual written report to the Administrative Office
of the Courts  and the Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation  evaluating the effectiveness of the community
corrections program, including, but not limited to, the data
described in subdivision (b). 
   (d) The Administrative Office of the Courts shall, in consultation
with the chief probation officer of each county and the Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation, provide a quarterly statistical
report to the Department of Finance including, but not limited to,
the following statistical information for each county:  
   (1) The number of felony filings.  
   (2) The number of felony convictions.  
   (3) The number of felony convictions in which the defendant was
sentenced to the state prison.  
   (4) The number of felony convictions in which the defendant was
granted probation.  
   (5) The adult felon probation population.  
   (6) The number of felons who had their probation revoked and were
sent to prison for that revocation.  
   (7) The number of adult felony probationers sent to state prison
for a conviction of a new felony offense, including when probation
was revoked or terminated. 
   1232.  Commencing no later than 18 months following the initial
receipt of funding pursuant to this act and annually thereafter, the
Administrative Office of the Courts, in consultation with the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Department of
Finance  ,  and the Chief Probation Officers of California,
shall submit to the Governor and the Legislature a comprehensive
report on the implementation of this act. The report shall include,
but not be limited to, all of the following information:
   (a) The effectiveness of the community corrections program based
on the reports of performance-based outcome measures required in
Section 1231.
   (b) The percentage of felony probationers whose probation was
revoked for the year on which the report is being made.
   (c) The percentage of felony probationers who were convicted of
crimes during their term of probation for the year on which the
report is being made.
   (d) The impact of the moneys appropriated pursuant to this act to
enhance public safety by reducing the percentage and number of felony
probationers whose probation was revoked for the year being reported
on for probation violations or new convictions, and to reduce the
number of felony probationers who are sent to prison for the year on
which the report is being made.
   (e) Any recommendations regarding resource allocations or
additional collaboration with other state, regional, federal, or
local entities  , or other  for improvements to this
act. 
   1233.  (a) Baseline Calculation. The Director of Finance, in
consultation with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,
the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, and the Administrative Office
of the Courts, shall calculate a baseline felony probation
revocation rate for each county based on the average number of felony
probationers who entered state prison from that county for the
fiscal years 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 as a result of a probation
revocation or conviction for a new offense while on probation.
   (b) Annual Calculation. For the 2009-10 fiscal year, and each
fiscal year thereafter, the Director of Finance, in consultation with
the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee, and the Administrative Office of the
Courts, shall calculate costs to the Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation that have been avoided, including costs associated
with incarceration, community supervision, and parole revocations and
revocation proceedings, due to reductions, calculated for each
county and statewide, in the percentage of people on supervised
felony probation whose probation is revoked and who are sentenced to
serve a term of imprisonment in state prison, or who while on
supervised probation are admitted to state prison after a conviction
for a new offense, based on all of the following:
   (1) The felony probation revocation rate for each county based on
the number of felony probationers who entered state prison from that
county as a result of revocation of probation.
   (2) The felony probation revocation rate for each county based on
the number of felony probationers who entered state prison from that
county as a result of a conviction of a new felony while on
probation.
   (c) The Legislature shall annually appropriate to the
Administrative Office of the Courts 50 percent of any cost savings
calculated pursuant to subdivision (b), to be deposited into the
Community Corrections Performance Incentive Fund (CCPIF) of each
county established pursuant to Section 1230 pursuant to all of the
following provisions:
   (1) Twenty percent of the savings calculated pursuant to
subdivision (b) attributable to that county, divided by 50 percent,
as calculated pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b),
where the county's felony probation revocation rate for that year is
less than the baseline felony probation revocation rate established
pursuant to subdivision (a).
   (2) Forty percent of the savings calculated pursuant to
subdivision (b) attributable to the county, divided by 50 percent, as
calculated pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b),
where the county's felony probation revocation rate for that year is
at least 5 percent less than the baseline felony probation revocation
rate established pursuant to subdivision (a).
   (3) One hundred percent of the savings calculated pursuant to
subdivision (b) attributable to the county, divided by 50 percent, as
calculated pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b),
where the county's felony probation revocation rate for that year is
at least 10 percent less than the baseline felony probation
revocation rate established pursuant to subdivision (a).
   (d) The moneys appropriated pursuant to this section shall be used
to supplement, not supplant, any other state or county appropriation
for the chief probation officer or the probation department.
   (e) Up to 3 percent of moneys appropriated to the Administrative
Office of the Courts pursuant to subdivision (c) shall be used for
the costs of administering this program.
   (f) Any funds remaining in the CCPIF not allocated pursuant to
subdivision (c) may be awarded to chief probation officers for
counties that have achieved no reduction in the baseline set for
their county as follows:
   (1) Applications for assistance grants under this subdivision
shall be competitive, based on grant applications which demonstrate
the applicant's ability to apply awarded funding as prescribed in
paragraph (2).
   (2) Awards shall be limited to the following purposes:
   (A) Assessing the county's current community corrections practices
and programs.
   (B) Identifying any deficiencies in those practices and programs
which may be the basis for the county's felony probation revocation
rate.
   (C) Implementing evidence-based community corrections strategies
authorized by this act.
   (3) Awards granted pursuant to this subdivision shall be awarded
to one county for no more than two fiscal years.
   (4) Awards granted pursuant to this subdivision shall not exceed
10 percent of a county's maximum allocation as calculated in
subdivision (c).
   (5) The moneys appropriated pursuant to this section shall be used
to supplement, not supplant, any other state or county appropriation
for the chief probation officer or the probation department.
   (g) Funds unexpended by county probation departments at the end of
the fiscal year in which they are awarded may, with the approval of
the Administrative Office of the Courts, be carried over into the
next fiscal year if such funds constitute no more than 10 percent of
the total funding. Unexpended funds in excess of 10 percent of the
total funding awarded, or funds not approved by the Administrative
Office of the Courts to be carried over into the next fiscal year,
shall be returned to the CCPIF for purposes consistent with this
section.
   (h) Moneys received through appropriations pursuant to this title
shall be used for purposes set forth in paragraph (4) of subdivision
(b) of Section 1230.
   (i) Notwithstanding any other provision, none of the savings
calculated in subdivision (b) shall be appropriated to any CCPIF
where there is no reduction under the baseline set in subdivision (a)
in the percentage of individuals supervised by probation in that
county who are convicted of a new felony offense, or revoked from
probation and sent to prison, as determined in subdivision (b).
 
   1233.  (a) The Director of Finance, in consultation with the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint Legislative
Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of California, and the
Administrative Office of the Courts, shall calculate for each county
a baseline probation failure rate that equals the average number of
adult felony probationers sent to state prison during calendar years
2006 to 2008, inclusive, as a percentage of the average adult felony
probation population during the same period.
   (b) For purposes of calculating the baseline probation failure
rate, the number of adult felony probationers sent to prison shall
include those adult felony probationers sent to state prison for a
revocation of probation, as well as adult felony probationers sent to
state prison for a conviction of a new felony offense. The
calculation shall also include adult felony probationers sent to
prison for conviction of a new crime who simultaneously have their
probation term terminated.  
   1233.1.  After the conclusion of each calendar year following the
enactment of this section, the Director of Finance, in consultation
with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of
California, and the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall
calculate the following for that calendar year:
   (a) The cost to the state to incarcerate in prison and supervise
on parole a probationer sent to prison. This calculation shall take
into consideration factors, including, but not limited to, the
average length of stay in prison and on parole for probationers, as
well as the associated parole revocation rates, and revocation costs.

   (b) The statewide probation failure rate. The statewide probation
failure rate shall be calculated as the total number of adult felony
probationers statewide sent to prison in the previous year as a
percentage of the statewide adult felony probation population as of
June 30 of that year.
   (c) A probation failure rate for each county. Each county's
probation failure rate shall be calculated as the number of adult
felony probationers sent to prison from that county in the previous
year as a percentage of the county's adult felony probation
population as of June 30 of that year.
   (d) An estimate of the number of adult felony probationers each
county successfully prevented from being sent to prison. For each
county, this estimate shall be calculated based on the reduction in
the county's probation failure rate as calculated annually pursuant
to subdivision (c) of this section and the county's baseline
probation failure rate as calculated pursuant to Section 1233. In
making this estimate, the Director of Finance, in consultation with
the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of
California, and the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall adjust
the calculations to account for changes in each county's adult
felony probation caseload in the most recent completed calendar year
as compared to the county's adult felony probation population during
the period 2006 to 2008, inclusive.
   (e) In calculating probation failure rates for the state and
individual counties, the number of adult felony probationers sent to
prison shall include those adult felony probationers sent to state
prison for a revocation of probation, as well as adult felony
probationers sent to state prison for a conviction of a new felony
offense. The calculation shall also include adult felony probationers
who are sent to prison for conviction of a new crime and who
simultaneously have their probation terms terminated.  
   1233.2.  Annually, after the conclusion of each calendar year, the
Director of Finance, in consultation with the Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of California, and the
Administrative Office of the Courts, shall identify the appropriate
Probation Revocation Tier for each county for which it was estimated
that the county successfully prevented any number of adult felony
probationers from being sent to state prison, as provided in
subdivision (d) of Section 1233.1. The tiers shall be defined as
follows:
   (a) Tier 1. A Tier 1 county is one which has a probation failure
rate, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 1233.1, that is no
more than 25 percent higher than the statewide probation failure
rate, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 1233.1.
   (b) Tier 2. A Tier 2 county is one which has a probation failure
rate, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 1233.1, that is more
than 25 percent above the statewide probation failure rate, as
defined in subdivision (b) of Section 1233.1.  
   1233.3.  Annually, the Director of Finance, in consultation with
the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of
California, and the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall
calculate a probation failure reduction incentive payment for each
eligible county, pursuant to Section 1233.2, for the most recently
completed calendar year, as follows:
   (a) For a county identified as being in Tier 1, as defined in
subdivision (a) of Section 1233.2, its probation failure reduction
incentive payment shall equal the estimated number of probationers
successfully prevented from being sent to prison, as defined by
subdivision (d) of Section 1233.1, multiplied by 45 percent of the
costs to the state to incarcerate in prison and supervise on parole a
probationer who was sent to prison, as defined in subdivision (a) of
Section 1233.1.
   (b) For a county identified as being in Tier 2, as defined in
subdivision (b) of Section 1233.2, its probation failure reduction
incentive payment shall equal the estimated number of probationers
successfully prevented from being sent to prison, as defined by
subdivision (d) of Section 1233.1, multiplied by 40 percent of the
costs to the state to incarcerate in prison and supervise on parole a
probationer who was sent to prison, as defined in subdivision (a) of
Section 1233.1.  
   1233.4.  (a) It is the intent of the Legislature for counties
demonstrating high success rates with adult felony probationers to
have access to performance-based funding as provided for in this
section.
   (b) On an annual basis, the Department of Finance, in consultation
with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers of
California, and the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall
calculate 5 percent of the savings to the state attributed
                                 to those counties that successfully
reduce the number of adult felony probationers sent to state prison.
   (c) The savings estimated pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be
used to provide high performance grants to county probation
departments for the purpose of bolstering evidence-based probation
practices designed to reduce recidivism among adult felony
probationers.
   (d) County probation departments eligible for these high
performance grants shall be those with adult probation failure rates
more than 50 percent below the statewide average in the most recently
completed calendar year.
   (e) A county probation department may receive a high performance
grant under this section in a year in which it does not also receive
a probation failure reduction incentive payment as provided for in
Section 1233.3. The CPO of a county that qualifies for both a high
performance grant and a probation failure reduction incentive payment
shall indicate to the Administrative Office of the Courts, by a date
designated by the Administrative Office of the Courts, whether the
CPO chooses to receive the high performance grant or probation
failure reduction payment.
   (f) The grants provided for in this section shall be administered
by the Administrative Office of the Courts. The Administrative Office
of the Courts shall seek to ensure that all qualifying probation
departments that submit qualifying applications receive a
proportionate share of the grant funding available based on the
population of adults ages 18 to 25, inclusive, in each of the
counties receiving the grants.  
   1233.5.  If data of sufficient quality and of the types required
for the implementation of this act are not available to the Director
of Finance, then the Director of Finance, in consultation with the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Joint Legislative
Budget Committee, and the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall
use the best available data to estimate probation failure reduction
incentive payments and high performance grants utilizing a
methodology that is as consistent with that described in this act as
is reasonably possible.  
   1233.6.  (a) Probation failure reduction incentive payments and
high performance grants calculated for any calendar year shall be
provided to counties in the following fiscal year. The total annual
payment to each county shall be divided into four equal quarterly
payments.
   (b) The Department of Finance shall include an estimate of the
total probation failure reduction incentive payments and high
performance grants to be provided to counties in the coming fiscal
year as part of the Governor's proposed budget released no later than
January 10 of each year. This estimate shall be adjusted by the
Department of Finance, as necessary, to reflect the actual
calculations of probation revocation incentive payments and high
performance grants completed by the Director of Finance, in
consultation with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,
the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, the Chief Probation Officers
of California, and the Administrative Office of the Courts. This
adjustment shall occur as part of standard budget revision processes
completed by the Department of Finance in April and May of each year.

   (c) There is hereby established a State Community Corrections
Performance Incentives Fund. Moneys budgeted for purposes of
providing probation revocation incentive payments and high
performance grants authorized in Sections 1230 to 1233.6, inclusive,
shall be deposited into this fund. Any moneys deposited into this
fund shall be administered by the Administrative Office of the Courts
and the share calculated for each county probation department shall
be transferred to its Community Corrections Performance Incentives
Fund authorized in Section 1230. The Legislature may allocate up to 3
percent of the funds annually deposited into the State Community
Corrections Performance Incentives Fund for use by the Administrative
Office of the Courts for the costs of administering this program.
 
   1233.7.  The moneys appropriated pursuant to this chapter shall be
used to supplement, not supplant, any other state or county
appropriation for the chief probation officer or the probation
department.  
   1233.8.  This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2015, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2015, deletes or extends
that date. 
   SEC. 3.    The Judicial Council shall consider the
adoption of appropriate modifications to the Criminal Rules of Court,
and of other judicial branch policies, procedures, and programs,
affecting felony probation services that would support implementation
of the evidence-based probation supervision practices described in
this chapter. 
   SEC. 3.   SEC. 4.   If the Commission on
State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by
the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for
those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section
17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.