U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Performance Incentive Funding: Aligning Fiscal and Operational Responsibility to Produce More Safety at Less Cost

NCJ Number
240137
Date Published
November 2012
Length
24 pages
Annotation
This report summarizes proceedings and outcomes of a summit attended by representatives familiar with their States' performance-incentive-funding (PIF) programs, under which agencies or localities receive a financial reward for sentencing fewer offenders to prison; these rewards must be used to fund evidence-based programs in the community.
Abstract
After outlining how PIF programs can lead to better offender outcomes while reducing overall corrections costs, this report discusses seven key challenges and tasks identified by the summit participants as critical in designing and implementing a PIF program. The seven challenges and tasks are choosing an administrative structure; selecting a funding mechanism; deciding whether to provide seed funding; the selection of outcome measures; the determination of baseline measures; the estimation of savings; and engaging stakeholders. Summit participants suggested that including multiple measures in evaluating performance and determining eligibility for incentive funding will ensure that public safety is maintained while positive outcomes are achieved. The summit also noted the importance of incorporating evidence-based practices into the incentive funding structure, while providing agencies and localities with the resources and support needed to implement evidence-based programs. The summit concludes that a successful PIF program can significantly curb prison population growth, along with attendant costs, while increasing public safety; for example, in the first year of its PIF program, California experienced a 23-percent decline in prison commitments of felony probationers; $88 million of the savings was distributed to county probation agencies. This decline in the prison population, together with the creation of evidence-based community supervision and programming, contributes to a reduction in recidivism, crime, and revocation rates. 32 notes