S T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A D E P A R T M E N T O F F I N A N C E C A P I T A L O U T L A Y 915 L Street B U D G E T C H A N G E P R O P O S A L ( C O B C P ) S a c r a m e n t o , C A 95814 C O V E R P A G E ( R E V 06/15) IMS Mail C o d e : A15

B U D G E T Y E A R 2016-17

BUSINESS UNIT: 5225 COBCP NO: 3 PRIORITY: 1 P R O J E C T ID: 0000922

D E P A R T M E N T : California Department of Correct ions and Rehabil i tat ion

P R O J E C T TITLE: Statewide: Master Plan for Renovat ion/Replacement of Original Prisons

T O T A L R E Q U E S T (DOLLARS IN T H O U S A N D S ) : $5,406 MAJOR/MINOR: Major

PHASE(S) T O BE FUNDED: S PROJ CAT: CR\: N /A

S U M M A R Y OF PROPOSA L :

Th is proposal reguests funding for consultant services to perform a study of the prisons constructed prior to 1 9 80. T he study will evaluate the e x ist ing housing, program, and services buildings and infrastructure systems and develop recommendat ions regarding renovat ions or replacements necessary to maintain the current level of operat ions. Th is study is necessary to ensure cont inued compl iance with the Three J udge Panel occupancy benchmar k .

H AS A B U D G E T P A C K A G E BEE N C O M P L E T E D FOR T H IS PRO JEC T ? (E /U / N / ? ) : _ N

RE QU IRES LEGIS LA T IO N (Y / N ) : JS IF YES, L IS T CO DE SEC T IO NS :

RE QU IRES PRO V IS IO NA L L A N G U A G E (Y/ N ) N

I M PAC T O N S U P P O R T BU DGE T : O NE - T I M E COS TS (Y / N ) : N _ FU TURE COS TS (Y / N ) : N_

F U T U R E SA V I NGS (Y / N ) : RE VE NUE (Y / N ) : _ N _

D OES T H E P R O P O S A L A F F E C T A N O T H E R D E P A R T M E N T (Y / N ) : _ N _ IF YES, A T T A C H

C O M M E N T S OF A F F E C T E D D E P A R T M E N T S IG NE D BY I TS D IREC TOR OR DESIG NEE.

S I G N A T U R E A P P R O V A L S :

JDean Borg. Deputv Direcxtdr. FPCM PREPARED BY DATE REVIEVVED BY \E

l ^ g f i H f e i i b - ^ Q o r . FPCM ^ "^'"^^ i ' ^ DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR DATE AGENCY SECReTARY DATE

****************************************** D O F A N A L Y S T U S E

DOE ISSUE # PROGRAM CAT: PROJECT CAT: BUDG PACK STATUS: ADDED REVIEW: SUPPORT: OCIO: FSCU/ITCU: OSAE: CALSTARS:

PPBA: Original S igned by: DATE SUBMITTED TO LEGISLATURE: Koreen Hansen (J

DF-151 (Rev 06/15) Page 1 of 6

BUSINESS UNIT: 5225 COBCP NO. 3 PRIORITY: 1 PROJECT ID: 0000922

A. P U R P O S E OF THE P R O J E C T Introduction: The California Department of Correct ions and Rehabil i tat ion (CDCR) requests funding for consultant services to perform a study of the original prisons in the CDCR portfolio. The study will evaluate the exist ing housing, program, and services buildings and infrastructure systems and develop recommendat ions regarding renovations or replacements necessary to maintain the current level of operat ions. This study is necessary to ensure cont inued compl iance with the Three Judge Panel occupancy benchmark.

Background/History:

Prior to the New Prison Construct ion Program of the 1980s and 1990s, CDCR consisted of twelve prisons. These prisons are listed below, along with the year they were opened and design capacity:

Pr ison Y e a r O p e n e d Des ign Capaci ty

San Quent in State Prison (SO) 1852 3,082 beds

Folsom State Prison (FSP) 1880 2,469 beds

California Institution for Men (CIM) 1941 2,976 beds

Correct ional Training Facility (CTF) 1946 3,312 beds

California Institution for W o m e n (CIW) 1952 1,078 beds

Deuel Vocat ional Institution (DVI) 1953 1,681 beds

Cali fornia Correct ional Institution (CCl) 1954 2,783 beds

Cali fornia Men's Colony (CMC) 1954 3,838 beds

California Medical Facility (CMF) 1955 2,361 beds

Cali fornia Rehabil i tat ion Center (CRC) 1962 2,491 beds

California Correct ional Center (CCC) 1963 1,733 beds

Sierra Conservat ion Center (SCC) 1965 1,726 beds

In February 2014, CDCR was ordered by the Three Judge Panel to meet the 137.5 percent statewide occupancy percentage set by the Supreme Court no later than February 28, 2016. Through a combinat ion of actions directly authorized by the Supreme Court, and the impact of Proposit ion 47 (approved by the voters in November 2014), this benchmark was achieved by CDCR in January 2015. Compl iance with this occupancy standard is an ongoing requirement upon CDCR. Any reduct ions in prison capacity that may result f rom infrastructure or building fai lures would jeopard ize CDCR's ongoing compl iance with this standard.

Problem:

Twelve of CDCR's 34 prisons were constructed between the mid/late 1800's and the 1960's. These prisons contain more than one-third of the total design capacity within CDCR. Most of the housing units at these prisons are between 50 and 75 years old, along with most of the program and support bui ldings. The security systems and physical plant layouts reflect the evolut ion of both national and state correctional policies. Whi le CDCR has adjusted operat ions to reflect the older styles of these buildings (for example, downgrading security levels f rom III to II at specif ied

DF-151 (Rev 06/15) Page 2 of 6

celled prisons), these facilit ies are more difficult to maintain and more likely to suffer catastrophic building or system fai lures than prisons constructed during the last 30 years.

CDCR util izes an annual call letter process to have each prison identify and prioritize both special repair and deferred maintenance requirements, along with capital outlay requests for new or expanded facil i t ies. Through this process, CDCR has identif ied that many of the housing units at the original prisons are in need of signif icant renovat ions or replacements. The reasons for these needs include housing areas that compromise direct supervis ion by custody staff; f ire/l ife/safety improvements ; and bui lding-wide infrastructure replacement needs. These prisons also suffer f rom shortages of program space available to meet modern rehabil i tat ive program requirements due to reasons such as leaking roofs, inadequate mechanica l systems, and l imited electrical and te lecommunicat ions capabil i t ies. Many prisons have augmented their space through the purchase/rental of modular spaces, but these spaces have a l imited useful life and are becoming severely di lapidated over t ime. A downside of utilizing the call letter process is that it does not provide a comprehens ive review of the prison and all renovat ion/replacement needs.

There is little uniformity in the types of physical plants in the prisons to be studied. Because of this, every prison must be studied rather than performing a study of just a few prisons and applying the results to all of the original prisons. The types of housing units include four- to f ive-tier housing units at SQ and FSP, three-t ier housing units at pr isons built during the 1940s and 1950s, and dormitory housing units at CCC and SCC. Dormitory housing units at two locations were not originally des igned for use in a correct ional sett ing, but were repurposed as prisons. Water lines in the cel led housing units have signif icant leakage due to their age and mechanical systems are no longer adequate due to new code requirements. Academic and vocat ional program buildings reflect the program modali t ies of the period in which they were constructed, often requiring renovat ion/repair and upgrades (especial ly of electrical and te lecommunicat ions systems) to provide current program models.

The responsibi l i ty to maintain compl iance with the 137.5 percent occupancy rate places a high priority on maintaining operat ions at these original prisons. Because of the age and condit ion of these prisons, CDCR needs to perform a comprehensive analysis of these facil i t ies.

B. RELATIONSHIP T O THE STRATEGIC PLAN This project is consistent with Goal 3 of the 2010/2015 Strategic Plan:

Goal 3: Employ Best Practices In Correctional Custody, Care, and Rehabilitation

Outcome: Superior prisons and youth facil it ies

Key Per formance Indicator: National Correct ional Standards

Object ive 3.2: By June 30, 2015, 70 percent of offenders are housed in a prison commensura te with their custody, health care and rehabil i tative needs.

CDCR has faced chal lenges in our ability to appropriately house inmate and youth populat ions in beds commensura te with their housing needs. Efforts towards accommodat ing housing needs have been chal lenged by compet ing interests that include court mandates and physical plant design. CDCR will increase bed capacity and program space, which will provide us with the ability to house offenders consistent with their needs and enhance our ability to respond to the changing demographics of the inmate and youth populat ions. CDCR will also make the nature of

DF-151 (Rev 06/15) Page 3 of 6

our classif ication process more dynamic to improve our ability to respond to the changing demograph ics of the offender populat ion and implement national best practices.

C. A L T E R N A T I V E S Alternat ive # 1 : Provide funding for a consultant to prepare a Master Plan for Renovat ion/Replacement of the original prisons.

Scope of work includes an evaluat ion of whether housing units and support and program buildings can be renovated or should they be replaced with new construct ion and whether the buildings are adequate for the populat ion and mission of the prison. The study will also evaluate the potential operat ional cost savings due to a prison being closed or f rom efficiencies gained f rom infrastructure improvements, and detail which improvements are capital outlay, special repair, or deferred maintenance. The infrastructure and utilities servicing these buildings will also be reviewed, and a phasing plan for performing construct ion while the prison maintains operat ions will be developed. Finally, the analysis will prioritize the renovat ion/replacement efforts among the original prisons.

Project Advantages: • Will provide detai led information necessary to prioritize and develop future capital outlay

and special repair/deferred maintenance requests. • Will provide the information necessary for CDCR to develop a long-term plan for

maintaining existing prison capacity and ensur ing ongoing compl iance with Three Judge Panel occupancy benchmark.

Project Disadvantages: • None.

Est imated Project Cost: . $5,406,000.

Funding Source:

• General Fund

Alternat ive #2: Do Nothing.

Project Advantages: • None.

Project Disadvantages: • CDCR will cont inue to use existing information to make capital outlay and special

repair/deferred maintenance funding decisions at the original prisons, rather than utilizing a comprehensive review of the overall needs at the pr ison.

• Funding will be requested and expended for short- term needs at these prisons without a long-term plan that indicates whether renovat ion or replacement is appropriate for the facility as a whole.

Est imated Project Cost: • None.

Funding Source: . N/A

DF-151 (Rev 06/15) Page 4 of 6

D. R E C O M M E N D E D SOLUTION

1. Wh ich alternative and why? Alternat ive #1 is the recommended solut ion. Alternative #1 provides a comprehensive study of the original prisons and will al low for the development and priorit ization of funding requests necessary to maintain long-term capacity at these prisons.

2. Detail scope descript ion. Scope of work includes an evaluat ion on whether housing units and support and program buildings can be renovated or should they be replaced with new construct ion and whether the buildings are adequate for the populat ion and mission of the prison. The study will also evaluate the potential operat ional cost savings due to a prison being closed or f rom eff iciencies gained from infrastructure improvements, and detail which improvements are capital outlay, special repair, or deferred maintenance. The infrastructure and utilities servicing these buildings will also be reviewed, and a phasing plan for performing construct ion whi le the prison maintains operat ions will be developed. Finally, the analysis will prioritize the renovat ion/replacement improvements among the original pr isons.

3. Basis for cost information. A conceptual cost est imate was developed by CDCR staff and CDCR's program management consultant.

4. Factors/benef i ts for recommended solution other than the least expensive alternative. Al ternat ive #1 is the only solut ion that provides a proact ive plan for maintaining existing CDCR capacity necessary to ensure cont inued compl iance with the Three Judge Panel occupancy benchmark.

5. Complete descript ion of impact on support budget. None.

6. Identify and explain any project risks. None.

7. List requested interdepartmental coordinat ion and/or special project approval . CDCR and the consultant performing the study will consult with the State Fire Marshal in evaluat ing exist ing buildings and identifying recommendat ions for renovation or replacement.

8. Project schedule. Study: Start 10/16 Complete 04/18

E. C O N S I S T E N C Y W I T H G O V E R N M E N T CODE SECTION 65041 .1 : 1. Does the recommended solution (project) promote infill deve lopment by rehabil i tat ing existing

infrastructure and how? Explain.

Yes, this study will be completed at existing CDCR facil i t ies.

2. Does the project improve the protect ion of envi ronmental and agricultural resources by protecting and preserving the state's most valuable natural resources? Explain.

Yes, this study will be completed at existing CDCR facil i t ies.

DF-151 (Rev 06/15) Page 5 of 6

3. Does the project encourage efficient development patterns by ensur ing that infrastructure associated with development , other than infill, support efficient use of land and is appropriately p lanned for growth? Explain.

Yes, this study will be completed at existing CDCR facil i t ies.

DF-151 (Rev 06/15) Page 6 of 6

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Year 2016-17 CAPITAL OUTLAY BUDGET CHANGE PROPOSAL (COBCP) Pro] ID: 0000922 FISCAL IMPACT WORKSHEET BU/Entlty; 5225 Department Title: California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation Progarm ID 4615 Project Title: Statewide: Master Plan for Renovation/Replacement of Original Prisons COBCP #: 3 Program Category: Other - Critical Infrastructure Priority: 1 Program Subcategory: MA/MI: MA

Existing Authority

January 10 April 1 Action Action

Mayl Action

May 14 : Action

Special Action Project Total

FUNDING bu-ref-fund-eny-year ph action 5225-301-0001-16-16 S ;BA 5,406_ 5,406

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

- - - - -- - ~

- 4 - - - 1-. , .

. .0 •'4/.C'' : ' 0

0 TOTAL FUNDING 0 5,406; : 0 : 0 0 0 5,406

PROJECT COSTS Study Acquisition Performance Criteria Preliminary Plans Working Drawings Total Construction or Design-Build Equipment (Group 2)

0

5,406 '

0 04

- -

0 0 0

: : 4 0 5.406

0 0 0 0

.. 4:4: ' . .O 0

TOTAL COSTS 0 5,406 0 0 0 0 : 5,406

CONSTRUCTION OR DESIGN-BUILD DETAIL

Contract Contingency A&E Agency Retained Other

. . ....... _^ . . — ..... .

0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION OR DESIGN-BUILD 0 0 0 0 0 0 F'O

FUTURE FUNDING 0 0; , 0 , 0 :. : 0 , 0

SCHEDULE Study Completion

mm/dd/yyyy ;

4/30/2018 PROJECT SPECIFIC CODES

::. Pro] Mgmt: ,: D .Location: , STWD

Acquisition Approval N/A Budg Pack: N •County: • STWD

Start Preliminary Plans/Performance Criteria N/A Pro] Cat: CRI City; STWD

Preliminary Plan/Performance Criteria Approval N/A Req Legis; N Cong Dist: 99

Approval to Proceed to Bid N/A ReqProv: N SenDist, 99

Contract Award Approval N/A SO/LA Imp: N AssmDIst: 99

Project Completion N/A

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Year 2016-17 CAPITAL OUTLAY BUDGET CHANGE PROPOSAL (COBCP) ProjiD: 0000922 FISCAL DETAIL WORKSHEET BU/Entity: Department Title: California Department of Corrections & Refiabilitation Progarm ID

5225 FISCAL DETAIL WORKSHEET BU/Entity: Department Title: California Department of Corrections & Refiabilitation Progarm ID 4615 Project Title: Statewide: Master Plan for Renovation/Replacement of Original Prisons C0BCP#: 3 Program Category: Other - Critical Infrastructure Priority: 1 Program Subcategory: mm-. MA

Identify all items which fit into the categories listed below. Attach e detailed list if funding is included in this request. Provide descriptions and summary estimates for items for which you pian to request funding in the future. When possible, identify funding needs by fiscal year (BY+1 through BYU).

PROJECT RELATED COSTS COST TOTAL AGENCY RETAINED:

TOTAL AGENCY RETAINED 0

GROUP 2 EQUIPMENT

: TOTAL GR0UP2 EQUIPMENT . : : 0

IMPACT ON SUPPORT BUDGET COST TOTAL ONE-TIME COSTS

TOTAL SUPPORT ONE-TIME COSTS 0

ANNUAL ONGOING FUTURE COSTS

TOTAL SUPPORT ANNUAL COSTS 0

ANNUAL ONGOING FUTURE SAVINGS

TOTAL SUPPORTANNUAL SAVINGS: , 0

ANNUAL ONGOING FUTURE REVENUE

TOTALSUPPORT ANNUAL REVENUE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Year 2016-17 CAPITAL OUTLAY BUDGET CHANGE PROPOSAL (COBCP) ProjlD: 0000922 SCOPE/ASSUMPTIONS WORKSHEET BU/Entity;. 5225 Department Title: California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation Progarm iD:, 4615 Project Title: Statewide: Master Plan for Renovation/Replacement of Original Prisons COBCP #: 3 Program Category: Other - Critical Infrastructure Priority: 1 Program Subcategory: MA/lvll: MA

Pfoyecf Specific Proposals: For new projects provide proposed Scope language. For continuing projects provide the latest approved Scope language. Enter Scope language in cell A110. ' Y W 3 " T.' i

Conceptual Proposals: Provide a brief discussion of proposal defining assumptions supporting thd level of funding proposed by fiscal year in relation to outstanding need identified for that fiscal year. (Also include scope descriptions for BYvtthrough :EY+4 in cellAilO). Thiis proposal requests funding for consultant services to perform a study of the prisons constructed prior to 1980. The study will evaluate the exist ing housing, program, and services buildings and infrastructure systems and develop recommendat ions regarding renovat ions or replacements necessary to maintain the current level of operat ions. This study is necessary to ensure cont inued compl iance with the Three Judge Panel occupancy benchmark.