The Brief

Researchers recommend more funding for a program that diverts people with behavioral health conditions away from the criminal justice system after a new report showed that program has been successful at keeping recidivism rates low.

Out of the 669 people who graduated from the county’s Rapid Diversion Program since it began five years ago, 91% have avoided having a new criminal case filed, according to a study released last week by the Santa Monica-based RAND corporation.

Retired Judge Songhai Armstead, who heads up the county’s Justice, Care, and Opportunities Department, called the results “pretty phenomenal.” She added that diversion programs like this one are important because they step in to help people before their mental health and/or substance use conditions worsen.

“I saw so many people who I knew that we could stabilize with lighter touches ... but we never did,” Armstead said.

According to the RAND study, between 2022 and 2024, more than 4,300 people were evaluated for the program, and about two-thirds were approved. The researchers found that some 35% of people who participated in rapid diversion were unhoused.

The budget for the program in the last fiscal year was $6.7 million, according to the county.

Although it is not the only option in L.A. County for mental health diversion, the Rapid Diversion Program is considered by some to be "the most suitable" for people accused of lower-level offenses and those with less-serious clinical needs, according to the RAND report.

In short, the Rapid Diversion Program is seen as "truly rapid" compared to other options.

How it started

The rapid diversion program started in 2019, with the goal of keeping people whose mental health played a direct role in the crimes they were accused of committing out of jail. Since then, hundreds of people with mental health diagnoses have seen their Superior Court cases dismissed by following through with treatment and other requirements.

The program started at one local courthouse and has since expanded to seven. It is overseen by L.A. County’s Justice, Care and Opportunities Department, in cooperation with the Public Defender’s Office, the L.A. City Attorney's Office, the county Department of Mental Health and other local agencies.

Stephanie Brooks Holliday, a senior behavioral scientist who led the RAND study, said rapid diversion was particularly helpful because it allows the court to intervene before a defendant who is accused of a crime pleads guilty.

That means participants in the program can avoid the consequences of having a conviction on their record, which can cause problems when looking for a job or trying to find housing.

When the program started, it only accepted cases involving low-level misdemeanor charges — like vandalism or trespassing — but has since expanded to some felonies. Some charges are ineligible from the get go, including: murder, voluntary manslaughter and DUIs.

How it works

Most cases are referred to the program from the county Public Defender's Office, which represents clients who cannot afford to pay for a private attorney. Certain types of cases are not eligible by law, including murder, voluntary manslaughter, rape and other sex offenses.

The typical process for a person to move through the system is as follows: the case is referred to the program; a clinical team evaluates the person to determine needs and possible treatment; the person is linked to services, and if successful, eventually graduates. The criminal charges are then dismissed.

It takes about two months on average from when someone is evaluated to when they are actually diverted into treatment, Holliday said. If a participant completes a one- to two-year treatment plan for mental health and/or substance use disorder, their case is dismissed.

She pointed to dedicated case managers as a crucial part of the program’s success. They help with everything from getting people medical benefits to transportation. And sometimes they act as cheerleaders, urging people to stay in the program.

“Because a year or two years is a long commitment,” Holliday said.

Armstead said that before she she would see people charged with lower-level offenses frequently, and sentenced to jail or probation, only to see the same people again after their mental health condition had deteriorated. “It would just break my heart that I’m like, had we helped them earlier on and helped to stabilize them they never would have made it to this point,” Armstead said.

Recommendations from researchers

The RAND report offers several recommendations to improve and expand the program, including increased funding and more dedicated treatment beds so that clients can get treatment faster. The report does not specify how much funding would be needed to expand.

Other recommendations include:

• Increasing awareness of the program: That could look like more trainings for attorneys on how the program works.
  
• More support for case managers: These workers wear many hats and some study participants said they were stretched thin. “They have a challenging job, and strategies to mitigate burnout could include reducing caseloads, sharing caseloads, and providing professional development opportunities,” the report reads.
  
• Strengthen relationships between the defense and prosecution teams.

The report notes that the Rapid Diversion Program has faced challenges as it has grown, including its reliance on a "brief evaluation and diversion report" when determining how to handle people facing more serious charges, high turnover for case managers, and resistance from some county authorities.

It also notes the difficulty of linking certain people to treatment that aligns with their needs, including people with complex medical issues or physical disabilities.

As Los Angeles homeowners grapple with the expense of rebuilding after last year’s devastating fires, an L.A. City Councilmember is putting forward an idea that could lower some costs.

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, has introduced a motion to explore waiving part of the city’s portion of the local sales tax for fire victims who purchase rebuilding materials in the city.

The 1% of the local 9.75% sales tax that goes into the city’s general fund would be given back to consumers under the proposal. The waiver could apply to lumber, appliances and other rebuilding goods purchased within the city.

The motion, introduced Friday by Park and seconded by Councilmember John Lee, says: “The City should do everything within its power to alleviate the financial burden for these residents and businesses in order to facilitate their return and stabilize the Pacific Palisades community.”

Would it make much of a difference? 

Economists told LAist the proposal could help many homeowners mitigate the high cost of rebuilding, but likely wouldn’t tip the scales for under-insured, under-resourced property owners.

“It wouldn't hurt if it's very well designed and easy to use,” said Alexander Meeks, a director at the Santa Monica-based Milken Institute. “But I'm not sure if it's really going to tackle the scale of the financial challenge that survivors are facing.”

Meeks noted that the tax waiver wouldn’t lower up-front costs such as environmental testing, architectural design and permitting. And it may not help homeowners sourcing raw materials from outside the city.

Zhiyun Li, a UCLA Anderson School of Management economist, said the waiver could help some homeowners justify the additional cost of rebuilding more fire-safe structures.

“Homeowners must typically pay out of pocket to upgrade to IBHS+ standards, which are more stringent,” Li said. “The tax waiver could encourage upgrading to IBHS+ standards or investing more in mitigation, thereby reducing future risk and improving the likelihood of maintaining insurance coverage.”

What’s next for the proposal? 

The proposed tax relief would not be available to properties that have been sold since the fires started in January 2025.

The motion has been sent to the City Council’s budget and fire recovery committees. If approved by the full council, it would require the city administrative officer, the Office of Finance and the city attorney to report back to the council within 60 days on options for crafting a tax relief plan.

The motion calls for the report to consider factors such as how to minimize the burden of administering the tax relief, what documentation homeowners would have to submit and what it would cost the city to oversee the program.

Senate and House Republican leadership have resurrected a stalled plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security after a record 47-day funding lapse.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in a joint statement on Wednesday that the House will take up a measure passed by the Senate last week to fund most of DHS except Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through the end of September.

Republicans would then attempt to fund ICE and Border Patrol for three years using a party-line budget reconciliation bill that would not require support from Democrats.

"In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited," Thune and Johnson wrote.

The agreement comes nearly a week after House Republicans dismissed an identical plan, refusing to take up the Senate-passed measure and instead passing a 60-day short term funding bill for all of DHS that had little chance of overcoming Democratic opposition in the Senate.

Johnson called the agreement a "joke" and President Donald Trump declined to publicly endorse the deal. Trump had previously resisted any package that did not include his push to overhaul federal elections known as the Save America Act.

"I think any deal they make, I'm pretty much not happy with it," Trump told reporters last week.

Democrats welcomed the agreement as in line with their pledge not to give ICE any more money without reforms after immigration enforcement agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. But the deal does not include any of the policy demands Democrats are pressing for, such as a ban on masks for immigration enforcement officers and requiring warrants issued by a judge, not just the agency, to enter homes.

"For days, Republican divisions derailed a bipartisan agreement, making American families pay the price for their dysfunction," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered."

Trump seemed to bless the revived plan earlier Wednesday, writing on social media that he wants a party-line bill to fund immigration enforcement on his desk by June 1.

"We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won't be able to stop us," Trump wrote.

Despite the shutdown, ICE has been minimally impacted because Republican lawmakers approved $75 billion for ICE through another party-line budget reconciliation bill last year.

Congress is on a two-week recess, but the Senate and House could move to fund all of DHS except ICE and CBP as early as Thursday using a procedure known as unanimous consent that allows the chambers to circumvent formal voting as long as no member objects.

Even during a recess when most members are not in Washington, this could be unpredictable, especially in the House, where many hard-line conservatives oppose a deal that does not fully fund DHS.

"Let's make this simple: caving to Democrats and not paying CBP and ICE is agreeing to defund Law Enforcement and leaving our borders wide open again," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, wrote on X. "If that's the vote, I'm a NO."

If a member does object, that could require waiting for another vote when all members are back from recess.

Claudia Grisales contributed reporting.
Copyright 2026 NPR

California clocked its second-worst snowpack on record Wednesday, a potentially troubling signal ahead for fire season.

It’s an alarming end to a winter that saw abnormally dry conditions briefly wiped from California’s drought map in January, for the first time in a quarter-century.

Though precipitation to date has been near average, much of it fell as rain rather than snow. Then March’s record-breaking heat melted most of the snow that remains. The state’s major reservoirs are nevertheless brimming above historic averages and are flirting with capacity, and a smattering of snow, rain and thunderstorms are dousing last month’s heat wave.

But experts now warn that California’s case of the missing snowpack could herald an early fire season in the mountains.

On Wednesday, state engineers conducting the symbolic April 1 snowpack measurement at Phillips Station south of Lake Tahoe found no measurable snow in patches of white dotting the grassy field.

“I want to welcome you call to probably one of the quickest snow surveys we’ve had — maybe one where people could actually use an umbrella,” joked Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources. “We’re getting a lot of questions about are we heading into a hydrologic drought? The answer is, I don’t know.”

State data reports that California’s snowpack is closing out the season at an alarming 18% of average statewide, and an even more abysmal 6% of average in the northern mountains that feed California’s major reservoirs.

Only the extreme drought year of 2015 beat this year’s snowpack for the worst on record, measuring in at just 5% of average on April 1st, when the snow historically is at its deepest.

“I think everyone's anticipating that it will be a long, busy fire season,” said Lenya Quinn-Davidson, director of the UC Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Fire Network.

“Without a snowpack, and with an early spring, it just means that there’s much more time for something like that to happen.”

‘It’s pretty bizarre up here’ 

In the city of South Lake Tahoe, which survived the massive Caldor Fire in the fall of 2021 without losing any structures, fire chief Jim Drennan said his department is already ramping up prevention efforts.

“It's pretty bizarre up here right now. It really seems like June conditions more than March,” Drennan said. “People are already turning the sprinklers on for their lawns.”

Without more precipitation, an early spring may complicate prescribed burning efforts. But Drennan said fire agencies in the Tahoe basin can start mechanically clearing fuels from forest areas earlier than usual.

“That means we can get more work done,” he said.

It also means homeowners need to start hardening their homes now, said Martin Goldberg, battalion chief and fuels management officer for the Lake Valley Fire Protection District, which protects unincorporated communities in the Lake Tahoe Basin’s south shore.

Goldberg urges residents to scour their yards for burnable materials, create defensible space and reach out to local fire departments with questions. The risks are widespread — from firewood, wooden fences, gas cans, plants, pine needles — even lawn furniture stacked against a house.

“In years past, I wouldn't even think of raking and clearing until May,” Goldberg said. “But my yard's completely cleared of snowpack, and it has been for a couple weeks now.”

‘A haystack fire’

Battalion chief David Acuña, a spokesperson for Cal Fire, said fire season is shaped by more than just one year’s snowpack.

Climate change has been remaking California’s fire seasons into fire years. And California’s recent average to abundant water years have fueled what Acuña called “bumper crops of vegetation and brush.”

“Most of California is like a haystack. And if you’ve ever seen a haystack fire, they burn very intensely because there's layers of fuel,” Acuña said.

Like Quinn-Davidson, Acuña wasn’t ready to make specific predictions about fires to come.

But John Abatzoglou, a professor of climatology at UC Merced, said the temperatures and snowpack conditions this year offer a glimpse of California in the latter decades of this century, as fossil fuel use continues to drive global temperatures higher.

How this year’s fires will play out will depend on when, where and how wind, heat, fuel and ignitions combine. But it foreshadows the consequences of a warmer California for water and fire under climate change.

“This,” Abatzoglou said, “is yet another stress test for the future in the state.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.