Justice Reinvestment

in North Carolina
What Works & Policy
Examples
from Other States
November 16, 2010

Council of State Governments

Justice Center
Marshall Clement , Project Director
Andy Barbee , Senior Research Associate
Megan Grasso , Policy Analyst
 North Carolina Justice
Ohio Justice Reinvestment
Reinvestment ProcessProcess
1 2 3
Ana Implementation Accountability
lys
is
& examine quantitative data Engage input from
stakeholders
rted crime & arrests Develop &§ present a comprehensive analysis of the state
t disposition & sentencing § Behavioral health &
ü treatment
population providers
ation and community corrections programs
§ Law enforcement
on admissions, population & releases § Judges
§ Prosecutors
ü § Defense bar Develop a framework
§ Victim of policy options
advocates/survivo that together would
rs increase public
§ County officials safety and
reduce / avert taxpayer
§ Community spending
corrections
§ Probation

April - June May – October October - January 2
–
NC Framework

What Works & Effective Policies

Reducing Recidivism & Crime

North Carolina Crime Rate Has Declined
Since 2000

Violent & Property Crime Rates per 100 , 000

( 2000 - 2009 )

US Avg . US Avg .
507 456

- 16 % US Avg .
- 15 %
3 , 618 US Avg .
3 , 213

4
 How Has the State ’ s Prison Population
Increased 29 Percent Since 2000?

DOC Expenditures:
o$899 million –
FY00
o$1.51 billion –
FY09
Ø 68% Increase

FY 1997-2000 FY 2000-2009
Growth: Growth:
Average “County - 2.9% + 29.3%
Jail Backlog” not
included in graph:

FY06: 322
FY07: 32
FY08: 146
FY09: 244

Oct-Dec 2009: 999

Source: North Carolina Department of Correction, Annual Statistical Reports and online Prison Offender Population Statistics;
http://www.doc.state.nc.us/rap/index.htm .

5
 Bottom Line Summary

Previously , Probation Supervision Not Based on Best Practices

Structured Sentencing Doesn ’ t Facilitate Risk - Based S
% Sentenced to Probation Declining

/ H / I Felony Convictions Increasing % Revoked to Prison Increasing

DOC adopted formal changes in approach 9 / 1 / 20

% Sentenced to
Prison Increasing
Prison Sentence

Earned Time Policy Holds Offenders w / Short Sentences beyond 100 % Due to I

No Supervision Upon Release

caseloads and county jail populations

Spend 8 years in prison on average

itual Offenders Increasing ( Most are TriggeredReleased
by G / H / I ) to 9m of Supervision

6
NC Framework

What Works & Effective Policies

Reducing Recidivism & Crime

What works to reduce recidivism
When someone is released does not impact their re-offense rate.
1 . Focus on the offenders
most likely to commit Who
crime they are

2 . Invest in programs that

work , & ensure they are What
they do
working well
3 . Strengthen supervision How
they are
and employ swift & supervise
certain sanctions d

4 . Use place - based Where

they return
strategies
1. Focus on offenders most likely
to re - offend
100 people released from prison

50 re - arrested 50 not re - arrested

?
10 % re - 35 % re - arrested 70 % re -
arrested arrested
Focusing on low risk offenders
can actually increase crime
Impact of Ohio Community Based Correctional Facility Program on
New Felony Conviction Rate Compared with Probation Supervision

Low Risk Mod . Risk

+ 5 + 4
High
Risk
- 5
Overall , the program increased
new felony conviction rate by 3
percentage points .

*2010 Evaluation of Ohio Community Based Correctional Facilities &

Halfway Houses. University of Cincinnati
 Until Recent Changes DOC
Supervised Probationers the Same
Regardless of Risk

Min Risk Low Risk Mod Risk High Risk

9% Rearrested 14% Rearrested 23% Rearrested 31% Rearrested

Within 1 Year Within 1 Year Within 1 Year Within 1 Year

No focus of supervision resources, programs, and

interventions on the highest risk population

Shortage of program capacity to effectively address

needs like substance use treatment

11
 P o st- R e le a se S u p e rv isio n : N o G / H / I
O ffe n d e rs A re S u p e rv ise d A fte r S e rv in g
B rie f P e rio d s o f T im e in P riso n .
G/H/I Offenders G/H/I Offenders
Sentenced to Probation Released from Prison
16,203 13,165
(FY09) (FY09)

100% Supervised No Supervision

1yr ~ 19% 1yr ~ 21%

Rearrest Rates
3yr ~ 35% 3yr ~ 45%
12
Arizona Probation Earned Time Credit Policy

• 20 days for every 30 days that a

probationer:
– Making positive progression on case plan
– Current on court ordered payments &
other obligations
– Current in completing community service
–
• Earned time credits must be taken away
if a probationer is found to be in
violation
•
• Nevada, New Hampshire, and Delaware
2. Invest in programs that work

Drug Treatment
Cognitive BehavioralIntensive
TreatmentSupervision
Intensive Supervisio
in the Community
-8% + Treatment
0%
-8% - 18 %

Elizabeth Drake, Steve Aos, and Marna Miller (2009). Evidence-Based Public Policy Options
to Reduce Crime and Criminal Justice Costs: Implications in Washington State. Victims
… and ensure those programs are
working well .
Impact of Ohio Residential Correctional Programs
on Recidivism (Annual State Funding: $104m)

* Results for all participants

Texas
3. Strengthen supervision

Ensure that the offenders most likely

to reoffend receive the most
intensive supervision
Higher risk offenders

Initial months of supervision

Develop a supervision plan that

balances monitoring compliance with
mandating participation in programs
that can reduce their risk to public
safety
Respond to violations with swift ,
certain , and proportional sanctions
 An Increasing Number of People Are
Failing on Probation and Being Revoked to
Prison .

Probation
Revocations as %
of
FY Total
50%Prison
Admissions
2001
FY 53%
2009

76% of the
probation
revocations to
prison were for
violating the
conditions of
supervision (2009)

Source: North Carolina Department of Correction Annual Statistical Reports

18
NC Stakeholder Concerns with Probation

• Probation “lacks teeth”

• Probation needs swift and certain
sanctions to immediately respond
to violations.
• Probation officers indicate they
spend a lot of time waiting in court
for probation violation hearings.
• Probation officers indicate they
spend a lot of time doing
paperwork and not enough time
supervising probationers. 19
Kansas
Kansas: Significant Decline in
Recidivism
Revocations from Post - Release Supervision

Technical
Violations

46 %

New Offenses

40 %
 Research Suggests Short, Swift & Certain
Sanctions
Work Best to Reduce Recidivism
Georgia POM Hawaii HOPE
Enabling Court-run intensive, random drug testing with
probation swift, certain, and brief jail sanctions.
officers to
employ
administrative
sanctions &
probationers to
waive violation
hearings
reduced jail
time three-fold,
reduced time
spent in court,
and increased
swiftness of
responses to
violations.

The full Hawaii HOPE evaluation from NIJ is available at: 21

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/229023.pdf
4. Use place - based strategies

Prison Admissions
Hotspots
Arizona, 2004

60% of the State’s prison population comes

from and returns to the Phoenix-Mesa
metropolitan area.
Prison Admissions, 2006
Maricopa County
1/2 Mile Grid Map

A single neighborhood in Phoenix

is home to 1% of the state’s total
population but 6.5% of the state’s
prison population

South Mountain Zip Code 85041

Prison Admissions = 31.8 per 1000 adults
Jail Bookings = 96.5 per 1000 adults
Probation = 25.1 per 1000 adults
 Deer Valley
Prison Expenditures
Dollars, 2004
Paradise Valley

Maricopa County
North Mountain 1/2 Mile Grid Map

GLENDALE

Alhambra

Camelback East
Maryvale
Encanto

Central City
Estrella

$1.1 Million
Within high expenditure
neighborhoods there are
Laveen $1.8 Million
South Mountain numerous, smaller area,
$1.6 Million
million dollar block groups
High Density of Probationers in South Phoenix
NC Framework

What Works & Effective Policies

Reducing Recidivism & Crime

What percent of arrests are attributable
to probationers?
Lessons from NY state
Probationers Account for Only a Fraction of
Arrests
Estimated * 2009 NC Arrests Attributable to
Probationers
Crime Type Statewide Probationer %
Arrests Arrests Probationers

Total 446,267 43,573 10%

Violent** 74,824 7,220 10%
Property 96,926 14,494 15%
Drug 36,812 10,517 29%
Other 237,705 11,341 5%
* Based on analysis of FY06 probation placement sample with arrests
within 3 years of placement
** Includes non-aggravated assault

27
Lessons from New York

28
P o licin g S tra te g ie s C a n D riv e D o w n B o th
C rim e
a n d C rim in a l Ju stice P o p u la tio n s
In New York But , criminal justice
City , police populations actually
increased declined
arrests …

NYC Jail PopulationProbation Pop . Prison Population

Total Arrests - 40 % - 19 % - 20 %
+ 32 % 1991-2009 1998-2008 2000-2009
1992-2009

Because police increased misdemeanor All while

arrests crime dropped
and decreased felony arrests
Felony Arrests UCR Index Crimes
Misd . Arrests - 20 %
+ 84 % - 72 %
1993-2009 1988-2008
1993-2009
 Next Steps

• October
Stakeholder meetings
• November
JR Work Group meeting
• December
Develop a policy framework tailored
for NC
• January
JR Work Group meeting to review
framework
Conference to share findings and
policy options
30
Thank You

Megan Grasso
Policy Analyst , Justice Reinvestment
mgrasso@csg . org

31