South Dakota can put an exact price on its new men’s prison: $650 million.

Finding out how much the state spends helping people successfully return home from prison is considerably harder.

A Native Sun Media Foundation review of South Dakota’s enacted corrections budget, Department of Corrections reentry materials and legislative reports found that adult reentry costs are spread across parole supervision, transitional housing contracts, treatment referrals, release planning, employment preparation and other programs. The FY2027 budget does not present one standalone figure labeled as the state’s total adult reentry investment.

That makes a basic public-policy comparison difficult: How much is South Dakota investing in incarceration, and how much is it investing in preventing people from returning to incarceration?

$650MAuthorized for land and construction of the new men’s prison.
$9.37MFY2027 Parole Services appropriation, including supervision and enforcement—not just supportive reentry.
$179.46MTotal FY2027 Department of Corrections operating appropriation.

The $650 million authorization was enacted during South Dakota’s September 2025 special session. Senate Bill 2 appropriated the money from the Incarceration Construction Fund for the land purchase and construction of the Minnehaha County prison. The state broke ground in April 2026.

A clear prison price, a fragmented reentry picture

The Department of Corrections describes its SAFER SD Reentry Initiative as a statewide continuum intended to prepare people for release and support their move back into the community.

DOC’s own description of the reentry team shows the breadth of that work. Staff manage community housing placement contracts, coordinate treatment funded through the Department of Social Services, help people obtain vital documents, provide job-placement materials, assist with housing and release plans, and work with high-need parolees during their first weeks in the community.

But those responsibilities do not appear in the enacted FY2027 budget as one consolidated “reentry” line. Some costs sit within DOC administration or Inmate Services. Others fall under Parole Services, treatment funding, provider contracts or another agency.

What the public record showsThe state publishes an exact capital authorization for the new prison. The adult reentry system, by contrast, must be reconstructed from multiple budget units, programs and contracts before a total can be calculated.

Parole is the clearest current number—but it is not the same as reentry

South Dakota’s enacted FY2027 budget appropriates $9,367,886 in general funds for Parole Services and authorizes 74 full-time-equivalent positions.

That is one of the cleanest adult community-corrections numbers available. But it would be wrong to label all $9.37 million as supportive reentry spending. Parole also includes supervision, enforcement, violation response and other public-safety functions.

The budget itself illustrates the distinction. Of the FY2027 increase, $275,000 was added for increased payments to counties for housing parolees in local jails.

That raises a question NSMF intends to pursue: When South Dakota spends more money on parole, how much is spent helping people remain stable in the community, and how much is spent responding after a violation occurs?

A comparison that needs contextThe $650 million prison authorization is a one-time capital appropriation, while $9.37 million is one year of Parole Services operations. They should not be described as a direct spending ratio. The scale is still notable: $650 million equals roughly 69 years of the current annual Parole Services appropriation and about 3.6 times the entire FY2027 DOC operating budget.

Housing exists. The current statewide price is harder to see.

DOC says its Reentry Corrections Specialist manages community housing placement contracts, while Transitional Case Managers assist people with housing as part of release planning.

Yet the FY2027 enacted budget does not provide a clear provider-by-provider total for adult transitional housing placements.

Older state budget documents show that South Dakota has identified some of these costs more explicitly in the past. In FY2021 budget materials, DOC identified $350,838 for the Community Transition Program, including funding for 21 new placements and rate increases at existing placements. The program was described as providing community housing for parolees.

That history creates a measurable records question for today: How much does South Dakota currently pay for community housing placements, how many beds are purchased, what are the per-day rates and which providers receive the money?

Employment assistance is spread between prison programming and post-release support

DOC says Reentry Coaches host job fairs, mock interviews, résumé-building and interview workshops and provide job-placement packets before release.

South Dakota also funds vocational and educational programs inside correctional facilities. In April 2026, the administration announced $1.5 million in Future Funds for equipment to launch a diesel heavy-equipment training program.

That is a real rehabilitation investment. It is not the same as a statewide annual budget for helping people obtain and keep jobs after release.

Treatment funding crosses agency lines

DOC’s Reentry Corrections Specialist coordinates referrals for parolees whose community treatment is funded through the Department of Social Services. Transitional Behavioral Health staff also coordinate mental-health care, substance-use treatment, psychotropic medications and Medication Assisted Treatment.

Because those dollars can flow through another agency, a DOC-only budget review will not capture the full cost of treatment for people leaving prison.

NSMF has not identified a current standalone FY2027 figure showing exactly how much South Dakota spends on community behavioral-health and substance-use treatment specifically for adult parolees.

Transportation and identification matter even when the dollar amounts are small

South Dakota law addresses transportation when a person is discharged from a correctional facility. In 2026, lawmakers revised that statute through Senate Bill 139.

DOC also says Reentry Coaches work to ensure people obtain vital documents before release and have access to health insurance or Medicaid when needed.

Yet the current enacted DOC budget does not present separate public totals for release transportation or identification documents.

Older records again show that these costs have been identifiable. FY2021 budget material included $37,458 for IDs and National Career Readiness Certificates.

The larger issue is not only what those services cost, but whether people actually receive them. A person released without identification, transportation, medication or a way to reach required appointments may face immediate barriers to housing, employment, treatment and parole compliance.

What happened to clearly labeled tribal parole funding?

The accounting question is especially important for Native people returning to tribal communities.

Historical state budget documents explicitly identified separate tribal parole items. FY2019 materials listed $118,000 for a Tribal Parole Program and $111,000 in Tribal Parole Funding.

The FY2027 enacted budget reviewed by NSMF does not present a similarly labeled standalone tribal reentry or tribal parole appropriation.

That does not establish that tribal reentry funding disappeared. It means the current amount is not apparent from the top-level budget lines reviewed for this story.

The next questions are concrete: Which tribes or Native organizations currently have agreements with the state? How much does each receive? How many people are served? What services are funded? And has that investment kept pace with the number of Native people returning home from state custody?

South Dakota lawmakers have already identified reentry gaps

In 2025, the Legislature’s Initial Incarceration, Reentry Analysis, and Comparison of Relevant States Interim Committee studied barriers including housing, job training and substance use.

Its final report recommended restoring substance-abuse and mental-health counseling and allowing nonprofits to contract with the state for comprehensive residential programming. The committee also identified the need to reestablish community partnerships with Glory House and other transitional programs, reestablish work release, reduce parole-agent caseloads and create a post-release caseworker program.

Those words matter: restore, reestablish, add resources.

If lawmakers themselves concluded that portions of the reentry system needed to be restored or rebuilt, the public deserves to know what happened to those systems, how much the state currently spends on them and what outcomes the state expects in return.

The state has announced new rehabilitation investments

This story is not evidence that South Dakota is doing nothing on rehabilitation.

In April 2026, DOC announced a $160,000 contract with the Council of State Governments Justice Center for a programming and reentry assessment, recommendations and implementation support through March 2027. The state also announced the $1.5 million diesel-equipment training investment and said it had applied for a $891,721 federal grant for its Smarter Supervision Initiative.

The federal figure was described at the time as a grant application, not as money already awarded. NSMF is therefore not counting it as current state reentry spending.

What NSMF is asking for next

The available records do not justify saying that South Dakota spends little or nothing on reentry. The state clearly spends money on parole, treatment, transitional services, staffing, education and other programs.

The accountability problem is different: the public can identify the $650 million prison authorization immediately, while determining the full adult reentry investment requires piecing together multiple agencies and budget categories.

NSMF intends to seek actual FY2023–FY2027 expenditures—not just appropriations—for:

  • SAFER SD staffing and operating costs;
  • community and transitional housing contracts, including providers, beds and per-diem rates;
  • employment and job-placement assistance;
  • treatment paid for parolees and other justice-involved adults;
  • release transportation;
  • identification and vital-document assistance;
  • release-planning staff and services;
  • parole spending separated into supervision, jail detention, monitoring and supportive services;
  • tribal parole and reentry contracts, agreements and payments; and
  • community-based reentry grants and contracts.

Only then can South Dakota’s incarceration spending and reentry investment be compared responsibly.

The accountability questionSouth Dakota can tell taxpayers what the new prison is authorized to cost. Can it tell them just as clearly what it spends to give people a realistic chance of never coming back?

Primary records reviewed

Editor’s note: This article is part of Native Sun Media Foundation’s continuing examination of incarceration, reentry, public spending and community safety in South Dakota. NSMF will update its reporting as additional expenditure, contract and outcome records are obtained.