Transcript Slide 1

Overview of Connecticut
Correctional Re-entry and
Recidivism Statistics
Presentation by: Andrew Clark
Director of the Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice and the
Institute for Municipal and Regional Policy at CCSU
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Prison Population
Connecticut's Prison Population, 1986-2008
21,000
17,305
18,000
19,656
Number of Inmates
19,603
14,744
15,000
10,573
12,000
9,000
17,928
5,771
6,000
3,000
0
1986 1988 1990
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
2002 2004 2006
2008
Prison Population
•CT’s prison population increased 242% from 1986 to 2008.
•This led the state to undertake a series of initiatives to stem the
steady growth in the number of people incarcerated.
•Some of these initiatives involved increased funding for DOC
and CSSD.
•This increased funding enhanced programs and services that
allowed more inmates to be released to community supervision
or helped them to successfully remain in the community.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Common Misconceptions
More people live in Connecticut
only 11% Increase
More CT residents are of
prime crime committing
age (18-24 yrs old)
12% Decrease
More people are being arrested
10% Decrease
More people are being arrested
for drug offenses
only 10% Increase
More violent crimes are being
committed
30% Decrease
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Common Misconceptions
250%
Changes in Prison Population Compared to
Misconceptions
211%
1986 - 2006
200%
150%
100%
50%
11%
-12%
-43%
10%
-30%
4) Total
Police
Arrests
5) Drug
Arrests
6) Reported
Violent
Crimes
0%
-50%
CT Prison
Pop
1) CT State
Pop
2) CT
Residents
Ages 18-24
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Accused vs. Sentenced
Accused and Sentenced Prison Population
1986-2008
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
1986
1989
1992
1995
Accused
1998
Sentenced
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
2001
2004
2007
Accused vs. Sentenced
•DOC houses both accused offenders who are awaiting trial
and sentenced offenders.
•While the accused prison population has more immediate
effects on the overall prison population, the significant
increase in the prison population is primarily due to increases
in the sentenced population.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Recidivism in Connecticut
2001
Prepared by: Legislative Program
Review and Investigations Committee
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Recidivism 2001
Conducted by: the Program Review Committee
Definition: New criminal activity by a person after a criminal
conviction that resulted in either imprisonment or another
sanction (i.e., probation, diversionary sentence, or fine).
Methodology:
Three measures were used: re-arrest for a new misdemeanor or felony
offense; reconviction on those new charges; and re-imprisonment or
sentence to another court-imposed sanction such as probation, a
diversionary program, or a fine.
They examined re-arrest, reconviction, and sentencing data for
all convicted felons discharged from prison or sentenced to
probation from 1997-2000.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Recidivism 2001
Findings: Within 3 yrs of discharge, 70% were rearrested at
least once for a new crime.
Almost half of the discharged inmates were reconvicted of a
new crime.
Felony inmates had significantly higher rates of re-arrest,
reconviction, and re-incarceration than felony probationers.
• Males had significantly higher recidivism rates than females.
• Young offenders were more likely to reoffend than older inmates.
Age, race, and gender were significant predictors of repeat
criminal activity.
Purpose and Recommendation
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Annual Report
2007 & 2008 Connecticut Recidivism
Studies
Prepared By: Office of Policy & Management
Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division
&
Central Connecticut State University
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Recidivism 2007 & 2008
Conducted by: the ISCJ under OPM
Findings: offenders released to post-release supervision were
less likely to return to prison.
Offenders released with no community supervision were
more likely to be arrested, convicted, and incarcerated for a
new offense.
Offenders released end of sentence with no post-release
supervision had the highest recidivism rate: 56% were
rearrested, 39% were convicted, and 21% received a new
prison sentence.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Annual Report
2009 Connecticut Recidivism Study
Prepared By: Office of Policy &
Management Criminal Justice Policy
and Planning Division
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Recidivism 2009
Conducted by: OPM
Methodology: the study tracked 16,486 sentenced inmates for 3yrs following their discharge from prison or release to a
community program in 2004.
Using data provided by the DOC, CSSD and the DPS, the study
captured any subsequent arrests, readmissions to prison,
convictions and re-incarcerations for new offenses for each
offender in the cohort.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Recidivism 2009
Findings:
•67% of offenders were arrested for new offense (new arrest)
•56% of offenders were incarcerated (any re-incarceration)
•55.6% were convicted of a new offense (new conviction)
•36.7% of offenders received a new prison sentence for a
new offense.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline of Significant CJ Initiatives
1981
Supervised Home Release (SHR) was created
which produced Indeterminate Sentencing.
Parole was abolished for those currently serving a
determinate sentence.
“Good time” was reduced from 15 to 12 days a
month.
1983
1986
Sentence length increased by 25%
To accommodate the state’s growing prison
population the DOC began its expansion project,
creating new facilities as well as expanding existing
ones.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline
1987
The General Assembly enacted mandatory
minimum sentencing laws for drug sale offenses.
1990
DOC facilities experienced a serious overcrowding
issue. At that time, SHR program phase-out begins;
parole was reinstated for all inmates serving a
sentence of more than 2 years.
1991
“Time served” increased by 25% for court
imposed sentences
1992
“Time served” increased by 40% for court
imposed sentences
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline
1993
P.A. 93-219 established the Board of Parole
which now had discretionary release and
supervision authority over inmates who received a
sentence of more than 2 years.
1995
“Truth in Sentencing”- time served was increased
to 85% for serious violent offenders.
1996
Prison expansion project was completed. DOC
added 12 new prisons and renovated 13 existing
facilities to increase capacity
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline
1999
DOC contracted with the VA DOC to transfer 484
inmates from CT to a maximum security prison
2001
P.A. 01-99 authorized judges to depart “for good
cause” from mandatory minimum sentences for
certain drug offenses
2003
Building Bridges: From Conviction to Employment
CT’s Justice Reinvestment Initiative was presented
and issues relating to reentry were discussed. The
creation of additional community correction
programs became the primary focus of these
discussions.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline
2003
The Board of Parole and the Board of Pardons
were merged into DOC. This increased DOC
authorization to transfer an additional 2,000
inmates for a total out-of-state contract of 2,500
beds for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 (PA 03-6).
2004
P.A. 04-324 An Act Concerning Prison
Overcrowding enacted a new offender reentry
strategy based on the justice reinvestment model.
This contained many initiatives to help control
the state’s prison overcrowding issue. One of its
major goals was to decrease the prison population
by 20%.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline
2004
In July, Governor Rell ordered the DOC to:
•Return all inmates transferred out-of-state back to CT.
•Develop a comprehensive offender re-entry strategy intended
to control prison overcrowding and assist offenders as they
transition from prison to the community while maintaining
public safety and supporting victims’ rights (PA 04-324).
2005
By November, all 500 out-of-state inmates were
returned to CT. $13 million was invested into
DOC and CSSD for initiatives outlined in the
comprehensive offender re-entry strategy (PA 04216).
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Timeline
2006
July 1st, the Criminal Justice Policy & Planning
Division was created within OPM and tasked with
developing a plan to promote a more effective and
cohesive state criminal justice system (PA 05-249).
2007
The Connecticut Sentencing Task Force was
created (PA 06-193) effective to review CT’s
criminal justice and sentencing policies and laws;
and make recommendations to create a more just,
effective and efficient system of criminal
sentencing.
Sources:
P.A. 04-234 Compliance Project: Program Review and Investigations Staff, 01/12/06. Connecticut
Correctional Population Projections Study. The Office of Policy and Management, Criminal Justice Policy
and Planning Division.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Justice Reinvestment
In 2003, Rep. Dyson, Chair of the Appropriations
Committee, gathered policy makers and CJ agency
representatives to discuss re-entry at “Building Bridges: From
Conviction to Employment” held at CCSU.
The justice reinvestment initiative was presented, and policy
makers were proposing ways to balance the state’s budget
without having to lay-off any state employees.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Justice Reinvestment
The funding DOC received annually far surpassed the budget
of any other state agency, so efforts to balance the state’s
budget were directed toward DOC expenditures.
This created additional community correction, and re-entry
programs became a primary focus of these discussions.
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Contact Information
Community Based
New Haven Re-entry Roundtable
Contact: Deborah Marcuse
[email protected]
Bridgeport Re-Entry Roundtable:
Contact: Dan Braccio, Program Director
CO-OP Center/ The Council of Churches of Greater
Bridgeport
[email protected]
Juvenile:
The Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance
website: www.ctjja.org
Institute for the Study of Crime & Justice
Central Connecticut State University
Contact Information
Statewide
Office of Policy and Management
(OPM)CriminalJustice Policy & Planning
Division
website: www.ct.gov/opm