Given the rising cost of maintaining overcrowded U.S. prisons, many states are using PIF to improve public safety and reduce corrections spending.  Under a PIF structure, local agencies are awarded a portion of the costs avoided by using less-expensive diversion and community-based supervision strategies instead of incarceration. This money is then reinvested to expand the use of those services and other evidence-based practices.

In September 2011, Vera and the Pew Center on the States brought representatives from eight states with current or planned PIF programs to a “PIF Summit” in Chicago. Informed by the complexity of their respective programs and the variety of juvenile and criminal justice systems represented, the participants described the successes they have achieved through PIF funding and identified common challenges.

Guided by this discussion, project staff are developing a tool kit for stakeholders engaged in PIF justice reform at the state or local level.

Why are states using performance incentive funding in this economic climate?

States facing a shortage of funds frequently respond by simply cutting services. By providing opportunities to invest a portion of the resulting cost savings in more efficient alternatives, PIF programs have the potential to make justice systems more effective even as they realize spending cuts. Moreover, PIF programs can relieve prison overcrowding by diverting low-level offenders into treatment and community supervision programs.

The following information, developed for the PIF Summit, describes PIF actions in the various states that have passed PIF legislation.

• Summary of Performance Incentive Funding Initiatives chart
• Summary of Performance Incentive Funding Implementation chart
• Pew Center on the States: PIF section  from Policy Framework to Strengthen Community Corrections
• Pre-summit webinar on performance incentive funding (brief registration required)

Read more about PIF initiatives in nine states’ criminal justice systems (Kansas, Arizona, California, Illinois, South Carolina, Arkansas, Kentucky, Texas, and Ohio) and in Ohio and Illinois’s juvenile justice systems.

For more information about Vera's work on performance incentive funding, contact Alison Shames.