Exploring How Fines and Fees Finance Community Supervision

Abstract

Every state relies on fines and fees to defray the costs of community supervision, and many rely on a combination of monetary sanctions and government aid to operate these programs. Texas is one such state that designs their system to provide approximately two-thirds of funding necessary for supervision operations while the rest is meant to be obtained via local supervisee fees. This study questions the accuracy of the 65/35 split in counties involved in the Community Corrections Fines and Fees (CCFF) Study and examines how programs’ offender fees and state appropriated funding have changed over time. Gathering data from local fiscal reports, three programs covering six counties are studied. Our findings indicate that fees are over-relied upon in every jurisdiction examined, with increasing contributions each year while supervisee counts fall. Further, these individuals also supply money to other funds used for supervision and/or criminal justice not accounted for in the core programming (i.e., local supplemental programs, general fund contributions). Though few, the CCFF programs examined appear representative of state-wide trends and data suggests the fluctuations in fee reliance may largely result from targeted funding changes to competitive program grants. In all, Texas and specific program appropriations and fees are all increasing, but the state appears to be failing to keep up with local needs. This has large potential for collateral consequences to system and supervisee alike.