Social innovation financing.
This bill significantly modifies the existing law regarding recidivism reduction initiatives by increasing the number of counties eligible for funding and updating the maximum grant amounts. It sets out a more comprehensive application process for counties seeking grants, which will involve demonstrating the potential for measurable outcomes and performance-based evaluations. Each funded program must deliver quantifiable results that meet the specified performance targets, thus tying the success of the investment directly to its societal impact.
AB862, titled the Social Innovation Financing Program of 2018, aims to establish a framework that enables counties to secure funding through public-private partnerships for social programs aimed at reducing recidivism. The bill extends the existing Social Innovation Financing Program, originally set to expire on January 1, 2022, allowing for a broader scope of operation until January 1, 2025. The Board of State and Community Corrections will oversee the program, selecting up to six counties to receive grants between $300,000 and $2,000,000, with a total cap of $10,000,000 for the initiative.
The general sentiment surrounding AB862 includes support for its innovative approach to funding social programs through measurable outcomes. Supporters, including various legislative authors and stakeholders, argue that this model encourages accountability and ensures that taxpayer money is spent effectively. However, there may be concerns about the feasibility of performance-based funding, especially regarding whether counties can consistently meet the performance metrics required to secure the grants.
Opponents may worry that the reliance on performance metrics could create pressure on counties to prioritize quantifiable outcomes over holistic community needs, potentially sidelining other important social issues. Additionally, the requirement for matching funds may disadvantage smaller counties that do not have the same level of resources or philanthropic support as larger urban areas. The bill thus raises critical discussions about equity in access to funding and the overall effectiveness of outcome-based funding models in addressing complex social challenges.