1. Offender Population Forecasting in Virginia

2. 2 Background - Studies by JLARC in 1980s  Staff of the Joint Legislative Audit & Review Commission (JLARC) first reviewed the Department of Corrections’ (DOC) forecasting methodology and procedures in 1985 and reported weaknesses in the methods used by DOC to forecast the adult inmate population. Source: An Overview of Expenditure Forecasting in Four Major State Programs, JLARC (2000)

3. 3 Background - Studies by JLARC in 1980s  A 1987 JLARC report recommended changing the forecasting process toward a more open, participative process. “The process for producing and validating the forecasts should be expanded to include more participants. Such a process would ensure that key actors in the criminal justice system have input into the forecast. Moreover, such a group would promote general understanding of the forecast and the assumptions which drive it.” Source: An Overview of Expenditure Forecasting in Four Major State Programs, JLARC (2000)

4. 4 Background - Consensus Forecasting  A more open, participative forecasting process was implemented in the late 1980s and remains in use today. This process is known as “consensus” forecasting.  Since the late 1980s, the Secretary of Public Safety has overseen this annual process.

5. 5 Authorization – Appropriation Act

6. 6

7. 7 Background - Consensus Forecasting  Forecasts of inmate populations provide key information for budgeting and planning of various criminal justice capital and operational expenditures and provide data for assessing policy needs.

8. 8 Importance of Forecasting  In the 2000-2002 biennium, nearly $15.5 billion (almost two-thirds of Virginia’s general fund biennial budget of $24.7 billion) was appropriated to four State programs. Public education (K-12) Higher education Medicaid Adult corrections Source: An Overview of Expenditure Forecasting in Four Major State Programs, JLARC (2000)

9. 9 Importance of Forecasting  Appropriations for three of these four programs depend heavily upon forecasts of either the population served or expected expenditures.

10. 10 Committee Structure  The forecasting process has involved two committees working in conjunction to produce the official forecast. Technical Advisory Committee Policy Advisory Committee  NEW in 2006 Technical/Policy Liaison Work Group

11. 11 Committee Structure  Technical Advisory Committee Members include personnel from various state agencies who have expertise in statistical and quantitative methods.  Technical/Policy Liaison Work Group - NEW Members include staff of House Appropriations and Senate Finance Committees as well as agency deputy directors and senior managers.  Policy Advisory Committee Members include policy makers and other decision makers who administer the criminal justice system.

12. 12 Technical Advisory Committee Membership  Department of Corrections (DOC)  Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)  Department of Planning and Budget (DPB)  Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS)  Compensation Board (CB)  Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission  Joint Legislative Audit & Review Commission (JLARC)  VCU Economics Professor  Chairperson selected by Secretary of Public Safety - Meredith Farrar-Owens

13. 13 Policy Advisory Committee Membership  Secretary of Public Safety  DOC Director  DJJ Director  DPB Director  DCJS Director  Virginia Parole Board Chair  Virginia State Police Colonel  CB Director  Commonwealth’s Attorney  Sheriff  Police Chief  Members of Senate Finance and House Appropriations Committees  Members Senate and House Courts Committees  Chair of Technical Advisory Committee

14. 14 Four Inmate Population Forecasts Produced  State-responsible (SR) inmate population Population housed in DOC prison facilities State-responsible inmates housed in jails  Local-responsible (LR) prisoner population Prisoners confined in local and regional jails (other than SR)  Juvenile correctional center (JCC) population  Juvenile detention center (JDC) population

15. 15 Development of Forecasts  DOC produces a forecast of the SR inmate population.  DCJS produces a forecast of the LR prisoner population.  DJJ produces forecasts of the JCC and JDC populations.  DPB independently develops forecasts for each of the four offender populations. Confidence in the official forecast is bolstered if the different methods used by the two agencies converge on the same future population levels.

16. 16 Technical Advisory Committee Function  This committee reviews trends, methods, and assumptions employed in the forecasts, to assure that the final forecast has a sound methodological basis.  The committee reviews the various forecasts for statistical performance and recommends which forecasts the policy committee should consider.

17. 17 Technical-Policy Liaison Work Group Function  This group reviews the work of the technical committee and requests additional data or analysis as needed.  The group selects which forecasts the policy committee should consider.

18. 18 Policy Advisory Committee Function  This committee reviews the projections and selects a forecast for each population (SR, LR, JCC and JDC) to recommend to the Secretary.  This committee also considers the effects of recent trend shifts and newly adopted legislation. The committee can approve adjustments to the forecast to account for the impact of such changes, as it deems appropriate.

19. 19 Policy Advisory Committee Function  When divergent views can be reconciled and incorporated into the forecast, overall confidence in the forecast may be improved.  It has not always been possible to achieve a high degree of consensus, however.  The policy committee adopts the forecast on the basis of a vote.  Minority opinions have sometimes been submitted in writing to present disagreements with aspects of the forecast.

20. 20 Unique Approach  The extent of outside participation distinguishes the corrections forecasting process from other State forecasting efforts.

21. 21 Annual Forecasting Process  The Technical Advisory Committee generally begins meeting in the spring of each year and usually concludes its work by September.  The Policy Advisory Committee will meet twice (August and September) to review projections and recommend a particular projection for each population to the Secretary.  The process concludes when the Secretary issues a report documenting the process and stating the official forecast. Due to the General Assembly by September 30 each year.

22. 22 Budget Process  The personnel who generate the forecasts are typically not involved in the final steps of budget preparation.  DPB budget staff convert the forecasts into budgets and proposed appropriations.  Some budget adjustments are made based on DPB’s judgment and experience with prior forecasts.  While these adjustments generally take place after the forecasting processes described here, they are subject to further review and additional adjustments by the General Assembly.

23. State-Responsible Inmate Population* * Average June population for each fiscal year 23

24. State-Responsible Inmate Forecast (2005) 24 40,487 * Average June population for each fiscal year

25. Composition of Population in Jail Facilities 25

26. Composition of Local-Responsible Population in Jails 26

27. Local-Responsible Prisoner Population* * Average population for fiscal year 27

28. Local-Responsible Prisoner Forecast (2005) * Average population for fiscal year 28

29. 29 Examples of Factors Affecting the Forecast  Demographic trends (“crime-prone age group”)  Economic trends  Crime trends  Law enforcement resources and practices  Bail policies and practices  Court case trends (case processing time)  Probation and parole violators  Alternative punishment programs  Sentencing practices  Changes in lengths of stay in prison or jail  Legislative or other policy changes e.g., abolition of parole in 1995

30. Index Crimes in Virginia (per 100,000 residents) Index crimes are: murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft and arson. Source: Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Criminal Justice Research Center, May 2005 30