NCJ Number: 43790
Title: STATE SUBSIDIES TO LOCAL CORRECTIONS
Author(s): M KANNENSOHN; T A HENDERSON; D SETTERBO; J R WEBER; R BRUN
Project Director: J D FOSTER
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 79
Sponsoring Agency: Council of State Governments
Grant Number: 77-DF 99-0002
Publication Number: RM-615
Sale Source: Council of State Governments
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: TEN PROGRAMS IN SEVEN STATES ARE ANALYZED TO STUDY THE OBJECTIVES, ADMINISTRATIVE DYNAMICS, FISCAL ASPECTS, INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSHIPS, AND SERVICE IMPACTS OF STATE SUBSIDIES TO LOCAL CORRECTIONS.
Abstract: STATE SUBSIDY PROGRAMS HAVE GROWN FROM 5 IN 5 STATES IN 1960 TO 41 PROGRAMS IN 23 STATES INDENTIFIED IN 1977. STATE SUBSIDIES TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES HAVE VARIOUS OBJECTIVES BUT TEND TO FALL INTO TWO MAJOR CATEGORIES: (1) TO REDUCE COMMITMENTS TO STATE-OPERATED ADULT AND JUVENILE INSTITUTIONS AND (2) TO ENCOURAGE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS. PROGRAMS TO REDUCE POPULATION PRESSURES ON STATE FACILITIES ARE USUALLY FINANCIAL INCENTIVE SUBSIDIES. THOSE DESIGNED TO INCREASE LOCAL STANDARDS ARE USUALLY COST-SHARING SUBSIDIES. TO EXAMINE THE PROBLEM OF STATE SUBSIDIES IN DEPTH, 86 PERSONS IN SEVEN STATES WERE INTERVIEWED AND SUPPORTING RECORDS WERE EXAMINED FOR 10 PROGRAMS: FAMILY COUNSELING PROGRAM (ARIZONA); CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF JUVENILE HOMES, RANCHES, AND CAMPS (CALIFORNIA); STATE AID TO PROBATION SERVICES (CALIFORNIA); COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS ACT (MINNESOTA); FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO COUNTIES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF REHABILITATION FACILITIES (OHIO); ADULT PROBATION SUBSIDY (PENNSYLVANIA); RESIDENTIAL CARE AND SECURE DETENTION PROGRAMS (VIRGINIA); STATE REIMBURSEMENT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR OPERATION OF LOCAL JAILS (VIRGINIA), AND JUVENILE PROBATION SUBSIDY (WASHINGTON). ISSUES EXAMINED INCLUDE THE EASE OR DIFFICULTY OF CARRYING OUT THE PROGRAM FROM BOTH THE STATE AND LOCAL PERSPECTIVE, THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE STATE'S NEED TO ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY AND THE LOCAL DRIVE FOR FLEXIBILITY, THE IMPACT OF THE SUBSIDY ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL AT EACH LEVEL, AND THE PROCESS BY WHICH A LOCAL PROGRAM BECOMES ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE. IMPACT OF EACH PROGRAM, BOTH UPON THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL BODY AND UPON THOSE IT IS DESIGNED TO SERVE, IS EVALUATED.
Index Term(s): Arizona; California; Correctional facilities; Funding sources; Jails; Juvenile group houses; Minnesota; Ohio; Pennsylvania; Probation or parole services; State aid; Virginia; Washington
To cite this abstract, use the following link: http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=43790
. A title search of 
