Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Reentry Programs topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Advocates push for sustained RITE funding and modernized vocational training for women leaving prison

2901821 · April 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Advocates, formerly incarcerated speakers and CDCR officials debated the scope and quality of rehabilitative and reentry programs for women in California prisons and pressed for sustained funding of community‑based programs, updated vocational training and expanded female reentry housing.

Advocates, formerly incarcerated people and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation officials appeared before the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 to discuss rehabilitative programs and reentry supports for women in state prisons. Witnesses debated the quality of existing vocational training, community‑based rehabilitative programs and a proposed state grant to fund outside providers.

Why it matters: testimony linked access to meaningful rehabilitative programming with lower recidivism and safer reentry. Advocates urged the Legislature to sustain one‑time pilot investments and fund established community providers to expand trauma‑informed, gender‑responsive services for incarcerated women.

CDCR’s Division of Rehabilitative Programs director Amy Casillas reported enrollment and completion statistics: in the past three fiscal years nearly 6,000 incarcerated students earned a GED or high‑school diploma, about 2,800 earned associate/bachelor or master degrees, and more than 8,000 combined career technical education and industry certifications were completed. Casillas highlighted college programs at CCWF and CIW, new laptop access for some students, expansion of career technical education and plans to add gender‑responsive curricula to contracts beginning July 2025.

Formerly incarcerated witnesses said vocational training in many facilities is outdated and poorly aligned with current labor demands. Precious Johnson, of the California Coalition for Women Prisoners, said programs often do not teach digital literacy, resume writing, Zoom interview skills or modern administrative tools and that budget cuts and cumbersome approval processes restrict community organizations’ access to provide hands‑on training.

Transformative Programming Works and other community providers asked for sustained funding through the RITE (Rehabilitative Investment Grants for Healing and Transformation) program. Norhan Avili, advocacy manager for Transformative Programming Works, said prior one‑time rounds of RITE reached roughly 33,000 incarcerated participants and asked the Legislature to allocate $20 million in the next budget to sustain and expand the grant. She cited recidivism differentials in CDCR data: people participating in credit‑bearing rehabilitative programs showed substantially lower recidivism than those who did not.

Assemblymember Rob Bonta summarized additional proposals from the incarcerated women’s working group that are under consideration by the committee: a $20 million RITE ask, $10 million to fund Project Rebound (community college support), $1.6 million for menopause‑related services, expanded funding for female community reentry programs and housing, and $1.5 million to expand youth female fire camp programs. Committee members asked CDCR to provide more detail on program alignment with local labor markets and geographic release patterns.

CDCR and wardens said the department assesses occupational demand using Employment Development Department data, the California Workforce Development Board and local American Job Centers and that program design seeks industry certifications with livable‑wage potential. Warden Anissa Dela Cruz and Warden Lavelle Parker listed institution graduation metrics and program enrollments and emphasized partnerships with community organizations and peer‑support certification programs.

What was not decided: the subcommittee did not vote on funding during the hearing. Members asked for additional program quality metrics, waitlist counts, geographic alignment of training with release destinations and data on outcomes for formerly incarcerated people who completed programs.