I missed the demise of “California Watch” at the end of May.

The investigative project focused on California stories has dropped its name and its resources folded into its parent organization, the Berkeley-based Center for Investigative Reporting. The change means less focus on California, and more on investigative stories of national interest.

Here’s part of one explanation from a CIR’s executive director:

We know that as long as we are telling the right stories – the stories that no one else is covering, the stories that reveal deeply hidden information, the stories that actually make a difference in people’s lives – it doesn’t matter if they are about San Francisco or Sacramento or Washington, D.C. And if we apply a creative approach to finding and telling those stories – through animation, interactive data apps, video, radio, text, social media and reports in multiple languages – they will serve and engage you, our audience, no matter who and where you are.

In another blog post, Mark Katches, editorial director of California Watch, described how their resources will be redeployed.

First and foremost, we have rededicated ourselves to high-impact investigative reporting – stories that matter. We’ve largely stopped covering routine stories and breaking news, which got in the way of this core mission. Last year, we generated about 1,000 stories. By choice, we expect to produce about 200 stories this year. But the stories we go after will be the ones we think can make a difference.

We also are closely examining the scope of our stories.

Last year, about 95 percent of the stories generated out of this newsroom were either focused on the Bay Area or the state of California. That left a small fraction of our work focused on national or international issues or produced in a way that would appeal to an audience outside California’s borders.

We began 2013 with a new approach – to strike more of a balance among local, statewide and national/international storytelling. We think this balance is important to help CIR reach bigger and more targeted audiences while also building a stronger brand around investigative journalism.

We are working toward a healthier blend – in the ballpark of one-third local, one-third regional/statewide, and one-third national or international.

Do the math. Last year, one thousand stories with 95% “focused on the Bay Area or the state of California.”

This year, 200 stories, with two-thirds about California regional or local issues.

By my count, that means the number of stories focused on California issues will drop from 950 to about 130, a pretty precipitous decline.

It’s hard to tell whether this reflects funding realities and politics specific to the Center for Investigative Reporting, or some broader shift that we might expect to see in other locally-focused investigative centers around the country.

I have to say that I favor investigative reporting grounded in communities. I periodically browse the work being done by other local investigative and gobble up what they have to offer, trying to learn from their approaches and techniques. Those big national investigations that rely on teams of reporters and lots of resources don’t inform in the same way. They’re just a spectator sport, like watching professional sports. Most of us can’t aspire to investigations that require such resources, so the fine work they do doesn’t really inform our ongoing work.

I’m not sure I’ve said that well, but it will have to do for now.