Report 2010-116 Recommendation 3 Responses

Report 2010-116: Sex Offender Commitment Program: Streamlining the Process for Identifying Potential Sexually Violent Predators Would Reduce Unnecessary or Duplicative Work (Release Date: July 2011)

Recommendation #3 To: Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of

To eliminate duplicative effort and increase efficiency, Corrections should not make unnecessary referrals to Mental Health. For example, Corrections should better leverage the time and work it already conducts by including in its referral process (1) determining whether the offender committed a predatory offense, (2) reviewing results from any previous screenings and evaluations that Mental Health completed and considering whether the most recent parole violation or offense might alter the previous decision, and (3) using STATIC-99R to assess the risk that an offender will reoffend.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2017

same response as previous years

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement


Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2014

CDCR has not changed our course of action. Our determination remains the same as what has been previously submitted.

The California Supreme Court discussed the SVPA's "predatory" provisions in the case Torres v. Supreme Court (2001) 25 Cal.4th 680. The Court rejected the argument that the SVPA required the Trier of fact at the SVP trial to find that the prior sex offenses were predatory. Because non-predatory offenses can form the basis of a court's ultimate SVP determination, CDCR must not screen out offenders on this basis. CDCR/BPH determined that the DSH clinical assessment is the preferred method to predict future predatory behavior.

Due to the Public Safety Realignment Act, CDCR no longer receives parole violators. CDCR/BPH reviews previous screening results and refers the case to the DSH. CDCR/BPH believes that DSH is better qualified to determine whether the current offense would alter a prior determination based on a clinical evaluation of the current offense and its possible physiological connectedness with the previous sex offense.

Further, CDCR does not agree with the recommendation. With the implementation of Public Safety Re-alignment, referrals to DSH have decreased significantly (reduced by 55 to 60 Percent) due to the loss of the Revocation Cases.

CDCR/BPH/DSH concluded that the collaborative screening between CDCR and DSH is the most efficient method to eliminate duplicative efforts, and to best utilize each agencies resources to best conserve the limited resources of qualified and available mental health clinicians that otherwise would not be a cost savings to the State.

Predicting future sexual dangerousness is an extraordinarily complex undertaking, and there are a limited number of clinicians available; however, since the 2012 Corrective Action Plan response, DSH has increased its pool of available clinicians.

  • Estimated Completion Date:

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement


Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2013

The California Supreme Court discussed the SVPA's "predatory" provisions in the case Torres v. Supreme Court (2001) 25 Cal.4th 680. The Court rejected the argument that the SVPA required the Trier of fact at the SVP trial to find that the prior sex offenses were predatory. Because non-predatory offenses can form the basis of a court's ultimate SVP determination, CDCR must not screen out offenders on this basis. CDCR/BPH determined that the DSH clinical assessment is the preferred method to predict future predatory behavior.

Due to the Public Safety Realignment Act, CDCR no longer receives parole violators. CDCR/BPH reviews previous screening results and refers the case to the DSH. CDCR/BPH believes that DSH is better qualified to determine whether the current offense would alter a prior determination based on a clinical evaluation of the current offense and its possible physiological connectedness with the previous sex offense.

Further CDCR does not agree with the recommendation. With the implementation of Public Safety Re-alignment referrals to DSH has decreased significantly (reduced by 55 to 60 Percent) due to the loss of the Revocation Cases.

CDCR/BPH/DSH concluded that the collaborative screening between CDCR and DSH is the most efficient method to eliminate duplicative efforts, and to best utilize each agencies resources to best conserve the limited resources of qualified and available mental health clinicians that otherwise would not be a cost savings to the State.

Predicting future sexual dangerousness is an extraordinarily complex undertaking, and there are a limited number of clinicians available. However, since the 2012 Corrective Action Plan response, DSH has increased its pool of available clinicians.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement


Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From September 2012

The California Supreme Court discussed the SVPA's "predatory" provisions in the case Torres v. Supreme Court (2001) 25 Cal.4th 680. The Court rejected the argument that the SVPA required the Trier of fact at the SVP trial to find that the prior sex offenses were predatory. Because non-predatory offenses can form the basis of a court's ultimate SVP determination, CDCR must not screen out offenders on this basis.

Due to the Public Safety Realignment Act, CDCR no longer receives parole violators.

The CDCR, BPH and DSH agree that the STATIC-99R scores should continue to be considered during the clinical evaluation of the review.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement


All Recommendations in 2010-116

Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader