in Indiana Detailed Analysis

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "in Indiana Detailed Analysis"

Carmella Dorsey
6 years ago
Views:

1 Justice Reinvestment in Indiana Detailed Analysis October 5, 2010 Councilof of State Governments Justice Center Marshall Clement, Project Director Dr. Tony Fabelo, Director of Research Anne Bettesworth, Policy Analyst

2 2

3 Justice Reinvestment Strategy Bipartisan, inter-branch, bicameral structure 1 Analyze Data & Develop Policy Options Analyze data to look at crime, court, corrections, and supervision trends Solicit input from stakeholders Map allocation of resources Develop ppolicy options & estimate cost savings 2 Adopt New Policies Identify assistance needed to implement policies effectively Deploy targeted reinvestment strategies to increase public safety Review implementation progress 3 Measure Performance Track the impact of enacted policies/programs Monitor recidivism rates & other key measures 3

4 Stakeholder Engagement Stakeholders Contacted (September/October) Prosecutors Defense Bar Judges Business Community Probation Community Corrections Parole Law Enforcement Behavioral Health Local Government Victims/Advocates Workforce 4

5 Indiana s crime rate has been stable since 2000 Violent & Property Crime Rates per 100,000 ( ) Violent 4% US Avg Property 3412 US Avg , %

6 But, the prison population increased over 40 percent since 2000 Statet Pi Prison Pop Pi Prison Pop Change in Prison Incarceration Pop Rate 2008 Indiana 20,125 28,322 41% 442 Wisconsin 20,754 23,380 13% 374 Ohio 45,833 51,686 13% 449 Missouri 27,543 30,186 10% 509 Michigan 47,718 48,738 2% 488 Illinois 45,281 45,474 0% 351 Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, Prisoners in

7 And is projected to continue to increase, costing taxpayers $1.2 billion by , ,000 Prison Population Projection, ,794 increase projected from 28,474, ,000 21% 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5, year cumulative costs to house additional population = $1.2 billion Construction: $630 million Operating: $571 million Source: Indiana Dept. of Corrections 7

8 Property & Drug Offenders Account for Much of the Growth in Admissions in Each Felony Group 74% of the increase due to drug sale % of the increase due to drug sale/poss % of the increase due to drugs, forgery, or theft Property & Drug Offenders Account for 55% of the Overall Increase in Prison Admissions from A B C D Source: 2008 Indiana Probation Report, The Supreme Court of Indiana 8

9 Overview The number of nonviolent (property and drug) offenders being sentenced to prison has increased Theft & drug offenders are sentenced with a mostly one size fits all policy Supervision in the Community is Overlapping & Uncoordinated Most property & drug offenders do not receive treatment in prison or under supervision ii 9

10 Community Supervision is Fragmented & Uncoordinated Misdemeanor Probation Felony Probation Community Corrections Each offender may be supervised by four or more different supervision officers, working for four different agencies, each with their own database, intake assessments, filing systems, and policies. Prison Parole 10

11 The Felony Probation Population Has Increased by 56% in the Last 10 Years Felony Probation Population: ,000 56,392 50,000 40,000 36,228 30,000 20,000 10, Source: 2008 Indiana Probation Report, The Supreme Court of Indiana 11

12 Probation Staffing & Funding Has Also Increased 23% 88% Source: 2008 Indiana Probation Report, The Supreme Court of Indiana

13 Probation Revocations Have Increased from 25% of All Terminations in 1999 to 34% in 2008 Percent of Terminations That Were Revocations: % 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 34% 25% Source: 2008 Indiana Probation Report, The Supreme Court of Indiana 13

14 Probation Revocations for Property & Drug Offenders Have Increased Significantly Burglary Drug Drug Theft Possession Trafficking Source: 2008 Indiana Probation Report, The Supreme Court of Indiana 14

15 Current Policies Make the Cost Effectiveness of Community Corrections Unclear Reduce costs for the state? Reduce crime? Unclear if offenders on CC would Many of the CC programs otherwise be on probation or in funded by the state have not prison. been shown in the research to reduce crime. The lack of policy guiding who probation should supervise Most programs are geared versus communitycorrections, towards sanctioningand and makes it impossible to prove monitoring offenders. Little is either way. done to affect behavior change. 15

16 Community Corrections Serves Mostly D Felony & A Misdemeanor Offenders A 132=1% Felonies: 5077=51% B 608=6% C 1058=10% New Cases Received=10,300 1 st quarter FY D 3279=32% A 3235=31% Misdemeanors: 4917=49% Source: Community Corrections Quarterly Report for Active Clients Adults (1 st quarter, FY ) B 737=7% C 945=9% 9% Other 306=3% 16

Program Models Supported With Community Corrections Have Little to No Evidence of Reducing Crime Percent Change in Recidivism Percentage* DrugTreatment in the Community 8% Intensive Supervision:

17 Program Models Supported With Community Corrections Have Little to No Evidence of Reducing Crime Percent Change in Recidivism Percentage* DrugTreatment in the Community 8% Intensive Supervision: Treatment oriented 18% Intensive Supervision: Surveillance oriented 0% $23.9 m Electronic Monitoring 0% Work Release 1 4% pdf *Results based on fidelity to best practices in the implementation of the program model. 17

18 Over Half of D Felons Admitted to Prison Have No Prior Felony Offenses Felony A 66% Percent of Prison Admissions with No Prior Felony Convictions B 58% Between , 2009, over 24,746 first time felony offenders were C 51% D 56% admitted to prison Source: CSG Justice Center Analysis of Admissions to IDOC, by Felony Level and Number of Prior Felony Convictions 18

19 Judges & Prosecutors Prefer People Coming out of Prison to be Supervised by Probation Instead of Parole Felony A 39% B 38% C 32% D 27% Percent Released from Prison to Probation With a Suspended Sentence 19

20 Overview The number of nonviolent (property and drug) offenders being sentenced to prison has increased Theft & drug offenders are sentenced with a mostly one size fits all policy Supervision in the Community is Overlapping & Uncoordinated Most property & drug offenders do not receive treatment in prison or under supervision ii 20

21 Few D Felony Offenders Receive Intensive Substance Use Treatment While in Prison Few, if any, D Felony Offenders Access Programs Due to Short Length of Stay, Limited Incentive of Program Credits, and Large # in Held in Jail All Releases Completed TC Program 9,632 4,134 5, A B C D 21

22 75% of Prison Admissions are C & D Felony Offenders; Programs and Program Credits Mostly Benefit A & B 19,600 Prison Admissions in 2009 Felony Level A: 689 4% Sentencing Range A: y Avg. Sentence (Non-Suspended) 18 y Earned Time 7 y Average Program Credit 4 y Time Served 7y % Served 38% B: 4,213 21% B: 6-20 y 68y y 2.8 1y 3y 44% C: 4,909 25% C: 2-8y 34y y y y % 14,698 75% D: 9,789 50% D: y 1.4 y 0.7 y ~0y 0.7 y 50% 22

23 The Amount of Program Credit Earned Varies Widely and Unpredictably People Released from Prison, 2009 # % No Program Credit % < 12 months % months % months % >36 months % The current program credit policy rewards offenders in need of programs; and causes lower riskoffenders to be held in prison longer. 23

24 Overview The number of nonviolent (property and drug) offenders being sentenced to prison has increased Supervision in the Community is Overlapping & Uncoordinated Theft & drug offenders are sentenced with a mostly one size fits all policy Most property & drug offenders do not receive treatment in prison or under supervision ii 24

25 Indiana Lacks Graduated Penalties for Drug Offenders Felony Penalty Thresholds for Sale of Cocaine INDIANA TEXAS OHIO MICHIGAN WISCONSIN < 3 g. < 1 g. 1 4 g. < 50 g g g g. < 1 g. 1 5 g g g. > 3 g g g g. > 40 g. > 400 g g g. > 1000 g. > 1000

26 Indiana s Sentencing Policy for Low Level Sale of Cocaine is Among the Most Severe and Costly 3 grams Minimum Maximum Indiana 20 years 50 years Texas 2 years 20 years Wisconsin Up to 12.5 years Ohio Probation 1 year

27 Indiana Also Lacks Graduated Theft Thresholds INDIANA OHIO TEXAS WISCONSIN MICHIGAN 0 $100,000 $1,500 20,000 $1,000 20,000 $2,500 5,000 $500 5,000 $5, ,000 $20, ,000 $5,000 10,000 > $10,000 > $20,000 > $100,000 $100,000 $100, , ,000 $500,000 1 million > $200,000 > $1 million

28 The Average Sentence is Longer for Some Nonviolent Offenders than More Violent or Serious Offenders Crime Type Drug Sale 96 Burglary 79 Sexual Assault 65 Sentence (Months) 28

29 Summary The number of nonviolent (property and drug) offenders being sentenced to prison has increased Supervision in the Community is Overlapping & Uncoordinated Theft & drug offenders are sentenced with a mostly one size fits all policy Most property & drug offenders do not receive treatment in prison or under supervision ii 29

30 Thank You Anne Bettesworth Policy Analyst, Justice Reinvestment 30

Nature of Risk and/or Needs Assessment

Nature of Risk and/or Needs Assessment Criminal risk assessment estimates an individual s likelihood of repeat criminal behavior and classifies offenders based on their relative risk of such behavior whereas