Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateSouth DakotaEnacted
HB 1140: permit a court to impose as a condition of probation, or parole in certain circumstances, treatment at a nonprofit entity awarded an alternative care program grant.
Tamara Grove
HB 1140 status: Enacted — Signed by the Governor on 2026-03-30 H.J. 578 (updated Mar 30, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
63OUT OF 100
Score:63/100 civic fit
Risk:Moderate Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 55/100
Constitutionality85%
Bipartisan70%
Public opinion60%
Bill summary
What changes
Judges are authorized to mandate attendance at state-grant-funded non-profit treatment programs as a condition of probation or parole.
Who is affected
Individuals on probation or parole, judges, and non-profit organizations receiving alternative care program grants.
Requirements and enforcement
The bill requires non-profits to be recipients of state alternative care program grants to be eligible for judicial referrals.
Costs and funding
Existing grant funding mechanisms are utilized; no new costs are explicitly identified in the summary.
When it takes effect
Enacted as of March 30, 2026.
Potential benefits
Expands rehabilitative options, provides community-based support, and links court supervision to established care programs.
Risks and tradeoffs
Potential lack of standardized care, risks associated with judicial referral bias, and potential for inconsistent program quality.
What is still unknown
The effectiveness of specific non-profit programs and the mechanisms for reporting progress to the court remain unstated.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Positive outlook
60%
Benefits
- Provides steady client pipelines for grant-funded non-profits
- Optimizes state investment in existing alternative care programs
- Supports community-based workforce participation for individuals in care
Risks
- Potential for uneven distribution of referrals among competitors
- Risk of creating dependency on judicial referral trends
- Inconsistent fiscal demand based on judicial sentencing patterns
Society
Positive outlook
65%
Benefits
- Increases availability of treatment options for individuals under supervision
- Facilitates reintegration through community-based support services
- Provides alternatives to traditional incarceration models
Risks
- Risk of coercive treatment mandates without clear exit criteria
- Variability in quality of care across different non-profit locations
- Potential for socioeconomic bias in referral patterns
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Mixed / Neutral
55%
Benefits
- Formalizes judicial sentencing options in state statute
- Establishes a defined relationship between courts and state-funded entities
- Provides clearer pathways for compliance for those on probation
Risks
- Absence of specific public auditing requirements for participating non-profits
- Limited transparency in the selection criteria for grant-funded entities
- Judicial discretion may lead to inconsistent outcomes
Public Health & Safety
Positive outlook
70%
Benefits
- Increases access to essential behavioral health and rehabilitation services
- Reduces recidivism through community-based care
- Offers therapeutic alternatives to jail-based supervision
Risks
- Variability in clinical standards across different grant-funded sites
- Potential for inadequate staffing at some non-profit facilities
- Lack of standardized medical reporting for court-ordered participants
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
LegiScan returned a PDF-only document. PDF extraction is not enabled in this build, so the pipeline used a safer fallback.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a brief summary from OpenStates.
04
Where it stands
Official recordSigned by the Governor on 2026-03-30 H.J. 578
- IntroducedComplete
- CommitteeComplete
- Chamber votesComplete
- Final agreementComplete
- GovernorComplete
- EnactedComplete
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.