Frequently-Asked Questions:Restoration of Parolee Services Network (PSN) Funding in FY 2011-2012
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) recently announced the restoration of PSN funding for FY 2011-12. At the July 21, 2011 CADPAAC Executive Committee meeting several questions were asked in follow up regarding the provision of PSN services in FY 2011-12. This is to restate the questions and to provide responses, following consultation with CDCR staff. Other questions and responses will be posted as quickly as possible.
Additional questions are invited from Parolee Services Network stakeholders. A convenient e-mail submission link follows the final question/answer set.
CDCR and ADP are committed to keeping PSN stakeholders fully informed on the latest developments and options at every step of the transition process. The answers below, which are associated with CDCR actions, decisions, or policies, have been approved by CDCR.
Questions and Answers
How soon will the start date for FY 2011-12 PSN services be confirmed? Can counties provide services in advance of that date?
- Following the decision to reinstate PSN funding in FY 2011-12, the PSN Interagency Agreement will not be fully executed by the Department of General Services (DGS) until mid-August or later. CDCR has prepared a special request to ask DGS to allow the effective date for services to be backdated to July 1, but the success of that effort will not be known until the IA is finally approved. Therefore, until counties receive notification of full execution of the IA, including the start date, counties should not presume that early PSN services will be reimbursable.
With regard to the additional case management-related funding in the preliminary allocation for the nine Bay Area Services Network (BASN) counties, will the State impose new requirements tied specifically to the case management augmentations?
- No, there will be no new "strings", requirements, or restrictions on the new BASN funds.
Beginning in FY 2011-12, CDCR has redirected BASN case management contract funds to the direct control of the counties which were previously served under that contract. The case management-related augmentations for the nine BASN counties added an across-the-board increase of approximately 16% of previous-year allocations for each county. The increases represent a proportionate share of the SASCA Region II funds which had previously supported contracted BASN case management services.
Historically, PSN interagency agreements and workplan guidelines have contained specific provisions which guided case management activities for the eight Sacramento Valley and Southern California PSN counties which have been directly responsible for their own case management operations. With the June 30, 2011 discontinuation of contract case management services to the BASN counties, all 17 PSN counties will now follow the same program guidelines and treatment standards for case management activities.
For the convenience of those who are new to case management or wish to fine-tune existing case management procedures, links are provided to two related source documents:
(1) Case management elements have been highlighted in the Parolee Services Network Program Guidelines and Treatment Standards (Work Plan Exhibit G).
(2) More detailed guidance on case management can be found in Exhibit A of the final Region II SASCA contract that previously provided services to the nine BASN counties.
CDCR and ADP anticipate that each PSN county will have its own unique approach to case management. Although some state-level forms will change this year with the shift to quarterly invoicing of actual costs, county-level reporting of total case management expenditures will continue, along with reporting of other PSN data. BASN counties may spend any portion of their additional PSN monies not needed for case management support on direct services or other PSN-reimbursable uses.
How can providers distinguish between new AB 109 referrals and other parolees who would be eligible for the Parolee Services Network?
- PSN's eligibility criteria have not changed and will still effectively exclude violent
or sex offenders. Whenever existing PSN resources are fully utilized, any additional parolees
would need to either find alternate services or go on a waiting list, regardless of the avenue
by which they were referred.
AB 109 relates primarily to the realignment of where certain felons would be housed, and also directs how existing Parole supervision functions will be integrated at the local level. It is not yet clear how many parolees released under AB 109 provisions would be eligible for PSN services. That may be an irrelevant consideration anyway, since PSN funding is capped and expected to be fully utilized.
Regarding CalOMS' ability to differentiate between AB 109 and PSN parolees, both PSN and AB 109-related referrals would normally be categorized on CalOMS reports as "Non-SACPA Court/Criminal Justice" referrals. PSN admissions are further identified by a unique CalOMS data element that specifically distinguishes PSN clients from other court/criminal justice clients.
Under the 2011 Public Safety Realignment (AB 109), some felons will be released directly to local supervision of county probation departments or other designated county agencies. Will those who would have previously been supervised by state Parole agents be eligible for PSN services under Public Safety Realignment local supervision?
- No. Effective October 1, 2011,
Post-Release (County-Level) Community Supervision (PRCS) will substitute for the historical
state-level Parole supervision of lower-level offenders, but those on PRCS will not be on parole
and therefore will be ineligible for PSN treatment services.
In order to be eligible for PSN, the participant must be a CDCR parolee and:
- Must have a history of substance abuse.
- If a parolee is a registered sex offender, he or she is eligible for PSN as long as the provider meets the statutory requirements for housing and treatment of sex offenders.
- Must be absent of arson arrests/convictions for the past five years.
- Must have no serious psychosis that would prevent the individual from participation in a substance abuse program.
- Must not pose a threat to the physical safety of others.
- Additional Information on the AB 109 implementation