CA: CDCR Agrees to Change Treatment Requirements for Registrants on Parole

Source: ACSOL

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has agreed in writing to change treatment requirements for registrants while on parole.  As a result of this agreement, the number of registrants who are discharged early from parole is expected to increase significantly.

The improvements to which CDCR have agreed include the possibility of ending treatment in as little as one year.  The improvements also require parole officers and treatment providers to decide after the first year of treatment and then once a year after the initial decision whether additional treatment is required.  Their decision must be written and shared with the registrant on parole.  If their decision is not reasonable, it can be challenged in court.

The changes to which CDCR have agreed will be included in regulations to be issued by that agency on an emergency basis.  As a result of this procedure, implementation of the changes is expected to begin in about six months.  If the regulations were issued on a non-emergency basis, their implementation would be delayed for at least two years.

“This agreement is a significant victory for almost 7,000 registrants currently on parole,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “No longer will every registrant on parole be required to undergo treatment the entire time they are on parole.”

Currently CDCR is requiring every registrant on parole to participate in treatment the entire time they are on parole.  State law, however, requires treatment for a minimum of one year although it allows treatment for the entire time on parole if necessary.  The same state law allows Superior Court judges to terminate treatment at any time after the first year.

CDCR agreed to these changes in order to settle a case filed in Los Angeles Superior Court last year.  That lawsuit alleged that CDCR’s policy requiring all registrants to undergo treatment the entire time they are on parole was unlawful.  CDCR has not admitted their policy was unlawful.

Treatment for registrants on parole can include group meetings, individual counseling and polygraph exams.  All three forms of treatment will be addressed in the annual decisions to be made by parole officers and treatment providers.


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This is great progress, and proof that incremental change is the only solid, lasting way to break down the boulder of the registry one chunk at a time.

Thank you Janice!!!

My opinion is that the providers are initially going to circle the wagons, and it is going to take further lawsuits/court action to get them to abide by this new change. The providers do not act against their own best interests currently and will likely try to do do the same in the future.

I am currently in a group and there has been a marked change recently. Multiple people who were on maintenance have had it rescinded. People that were promised maintenance were then denied for no valid reason. I’m not sure if they are trying to milk every $ they can in anticipation of losing money because of this law, or if it is a new posture that they will try to continue when this  policy change goes into effect.

Either way thank you Janice for all of your hard work, and for giving us poor retched souls some hope. I will encourage everyone in my group to contact you if the providers try to continue on with business as usual. 

This is a great first step! Did they discuss or are there discussions on how to implement improved assessments herein required for the determinations beyond what they use today?

This is SO important and such simple common sense! If someone completes “treatment”, that’s it – it’s completed! Done is done. Period. The ongoing attendance requirement was just more punishment! 😡

Hallelujah! What wonderful news from ACSOL that registrants will no longer be required to stay in treatment for their whole time on parole, and thus may be complete parole sooner.

Thank you so much, Janice, and everyone who helped win this victory! God bless you!

Thank you for your diligent efforts Janice. This was a great way for CDCR to do the right thing without having to go through the full-blown legal process to the inevitable unconstitutional ruling, not to mention the impressive, time and money saving way we achieved this victory. Is it too soon to start dismantling the use of polygraph exams for treatment? Fortunately I graduated from treatment just prior to that implementation which seems unconstitutional and a waste of taxpayer money.

Obviously, this is fantastic news!! Thank you for your efforts. I am weary about these for-profit treatment programs willingness to basically, “Give up the business = $.” It should be noted that many of these people on parole do not have the funds to pay for an attorney to fight the system if they feel that they have a right to be released from the requirement. There needs to be set OBJECTIVE standards in place that can be easily measured (i.e. attendance, participation, completed lessons). If not, there still will be hurdles to overcome. My fingers are crossed that there will be some type of organization and proper, humane handling of the entire process. Also, the next step is for CASOMB to move away from the containment model to a better system. I understand that such a change then will need to be approved by the CA Legislature.

Great job Janice and team. Another step towards freedom from the oppressive opinions of government workers.

The fact that we are told that “no registrant” paroles early is proof that opinion is paramount and not the law. We will get there slowly but surely.

Thank You Janice on behalf or our families and loved ones as well.

Wow this is a huge victory. Thank you so much for the work you do on our behalf.

This is huge – very impressive work and outcome that will impact thousands. Thank you for your dedication and selfless service. I’m hoping at some point we can kill the poly altogether as it is a useless “gotchya” governmental toy.

Janice continues to rack up the W’s in California for the outcasts! This is another incredible victory! If California’s COL wasn’t so high, I’d move in a heartbeat.

Honestly, this is an utterly meaningless change. Treatment providers have the exact same financial incentive to keep people in their programs for as long as possible. No judge is ever going to override the recommendation of the treatment provider.

But kumbaya I guess.

Good for them. Just 15 years ago, most of us were forced to be homeless, weren’t allowed internet access, forced into unnecessary “treatment,” etc. The week before I discharged, the psychologist for my group “treatment” admitted to the group that, after going through the details of my case, he believed my case should was wrongly prosecuted and that I shouldn’t be there.

In my group, the woman who owns and runs the program, won’t even allow the therapist to sit in on containment meetings. She comes up with her own conclusions and discounts what is said through the counselor. I firmly believe that money is the ultimate underlying factor and everyone will be told they need another year. I only have 14 months left on a five year parole and would bet i will stay in group for the duration.

Janice this is great progress because I have to be honest with you, I am in treatment right now and it is a major joke there is no treatment happening at all and just the other day I was threatened with incarceration by the director of the treatment center I’m at because I touched a paper and I said that paper is public information on the casomb website and she said I could have you violated and I’m going to call your parole officer and I got triggered and I was in a very bad state as I suffer from depression and anxiety already but treatment is a joke there because there was no treatment happening and I have been on parole for 2 and 1/2 years and I have only talked about my case once and that was during a polygraph! There is no treatment happening at this treatment place and I’ve been threatened with incarceration for trivial issues! This should be the next step of change that we be treated with dignity as treatment providers and certified counselors are to be bound by ethics and are bound to be treating people with dignity and environment that’s conducive to rehabilitation! Do they treat paying clients who have no criminal record like this! Please help Janice my name is Juan and I put in a request to contact with you because I do want to file a lawsuit for discrimination and the way they’ve treated me and I want to call the board of behavioral sciences and I want to make complaints but I fear retaliation I really want to report this place and do everything I can to make changes myself and I want to advocate but I need to know how please contact me!

Great work Janice, The next step is to change the way parolees are treated at these treatment facilities instead of being threatened and put an environments that are not conducive to rehabilitation and proper treatment! It’s scary to think that the California department of corrections and the treatment providers are going to get together to decide the new policies! Currently there is no treatment happening at all where I am getting treatment! There was no curriculum there is no tools being taught and the those of us who have committed sex crimes are treated very negatively and create at times of hostile environment rather than a safe environment as a treatment facility should be so it’s great that you put forth these efforts and litigation so that people forced to register don’t have to endure pointless of pointless and ineffective treatment! Thank you Janice