North Carolina Criminal Justice Performance Measures



Similar documents
Governor Jennifer M. Granholm,

Mercyhurst College Civic Institute. An Overview of the Erie County Criminal Justice System

How To Save Money On Drug Sentencing In Michigan

Adult Criminal Justice Case Processing in Washington, DC

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS

Criminal Justice Quarterly Report January 2009-March 2009

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS

Historical Data. Historical Data 33

A&B UPON A POLICE OFFICER OR OTHER LAW OFFICER A&B WITH A DANGEROUS WEAPON

The Impact of Arizona s Probation Reforms in 2010

Practioner Guide to HB 585. Mississippi Corrections and Criminal Justice Task Force

Truth in Sentencing. Highlights. State prisons, 1996 First releases 62 mo All. sentence. time served Violent. 85 mo offenders 45 mo New admissions

Overall, 67.8% of the 404,638 state

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS

SENTENCING REFORM FOR NONVIOLENT OFFENSES: BENEFITS AND ESTIMATED SAVINGS FOR ILLINOIS

Chapter 938 of the Wisconsin statutes is entitled the Juvenile Justice Code.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE GLOSSARY

Criminal Offenses - On campus

Washington State Institute for Public Policy

Campus Safety and Security Survey 2015

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRENDS January 2012

Reentry on Steroids! NADCP 2013

PROPOSAL. Expansion of Drug Treatment Diversion Programs. December 18, 2007

TEXAS CRIME ANALYSIS 2

Offender Screening. Oklahoma Department of Mental health and Substance Abuse Services

2014 Campus Safety and Security Survey. Screening Questions. Institution: Main Campus ( ) User ID: C

Proposition 5. Nonviolent Offenders. Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation. Statute.

2009 Florida Prison Recidivism Study Releases From 2001 to 2008

Statistics on Women in the Justice System. January, 2014

Table. (Click on the table number to go to corresponding table)

CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE 2014 LEGISLATURE. André de Gruy Capital Defender

Mental Illness and the Criminal Justice System. Ashley Rogers, M.A. LPC

Crime Location Crime Type Month Year Betting Shop Criminal Damage April 2010 Betting Shop Theft April 2010 Betting Shop Assault April 2010

2014 Campus Safety and Security Survey. Screening Questions. Institution: Hebrew College ( ) User ID: C

ONDCP. Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse FACT SHEET John P. Walters, Director Drug-Related Crime

Using Data to Inform Evidence-Based Decision Making. January 8, 2013

2013 Campus Safety and Security Survey Institution: Main Campus ( ) User ID: C

The High Cost of DWI. Ignition interlock license available

In many jurisdictions, state and local government

A Decade of Truth-In- Sentencing in Virginia

Youth and the Law. Presented by The Crime Prevention Unit

Justice Reinvestment in New Hampshire

Three Year Recidivism Tracking of Offenders Participating in Substance Abuse Treatment Programs

THE CIVIL RIGHTS RESTORATION PROCESS

Intermediate Sanctions for Non-Violent Offenders Could Produce Savings

COMPARISON OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS

African American Males in the Criminal Justice System

Determining your parole eligibility

2010 CRIMINAL CODE SENTENCING PROVISIONS. Effective July 29, 2010

CRIME STATISTICS. The U.S., Major Cities and Detroit. Presentation to. Leadership Detroit

California s Criminal Justice System. A Primer

Chapter 22 The Economics of Crime

CHAPTER 23. BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

3 Sources of Information about Crime:

New Mexico Corrections Department (NMCD) Mike Estrada Program Manager Community Corrections

Anthony N. Lawrence, III

2015 Campus Safety and Security Survey. Screening Questions

Chapter TEXAS CRIME ANALYSIS

Fresno County Public Safety Realignment: One Year of Data. Interim Report

2014 Campus Safety and Security Survey. Screening Questions

CRIMINAL CODE REVISION BILL H.B. 1006, 2013

OWI SENTENCING GUIDELINES

Within populations that face longstanding historical disadvantage, antisocial behaviors among

System Overview ~~~~~ Presented by: Darcie McElwee

CHAPTER 93. BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: 1. N.J.S.2C:35-14 is amended to read as follows:

APPENDIX F. Sentencing Revocation Report and Probation Violation Guidelines. Probation Violation Guidelines 1

Community Corrections

The PARCA Quarterly A Progress Report on Research Aimed at Improving State and Local Governments

RHODE ISLAND SEX-OFFENDER REGISTRATION AND NOTIFICATION

LANCASTER COUNTY ADULT DRUG COURT

Colorado Legislative Council Staff

Special Report Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997

The Honorable Kevin G. Sasinoski. Assistant District Attorney: Lawrence Mitchell. Paralegal: Aleta Pfeifer. Public Defender: Richard Romanko

Ch. 451 INTERMEDIATE PUNISHMENT 37 CHAPTER 451. INTERMEDIATE PUNISHMENT PROGRAMS GENERAL

GETTING TO KNOW THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Crime Rates and Youth Incarceration in Texas and California Compared: Public Safety or Public Waste?

REALIGNMENT AND CRIME IN 2014: CALIFORNIA S VIOLENT CRIME IN DECLINE

Select Florida Mandatory Minimum Laws

Criminal Justice 101. The Criminal Justice System in Colorado and the Impact on Individuals with Mental Illness. April 2009

Population Challenges at the Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections (DRC) Analyst: Kevin Stockdale, OBM

DO I QUALIFY TO SEAL MY RECORD WORKSHEET When Answering These Questions You Must Review Each Arrest/Offense One at a Time

Adult Plea Negotiation Guidelines

Preprinted Logo will go here

Contra Costa County: A Model for Managing Local Corrections

Evaluation of the San Diego County Community Corrections Programs

Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Division Stuart Jenkins, Director 8610 Shoal Creek Boulevard Austin, Texas 78757

Transcription:

North Carolina Criminal Justice Performance Measures November 17, 214

Prison Population North Carolina Prison Population: 1997 214 45, 4, 35, 31,581 4,824 41,3 37,665 3, 25, 2, 15, 1, 5, 1997-2 Growth: -3% 2 29 Growth: + 29% Justice reinvestment (211) 211 214 Growth: -8% 1997 1998 1999 2 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 214 In 29, the state s prison population was growing significantly. Since enactment of JRA in 211, prison population has decreased 8 percent. Reduced prison population allowed the state to remain out of jail backlog for the past three fiscal years saving what was a $1 million dollar per month cost during first 6 months of 211. Average Daily Backlog Yearly Cost (Millions) 27 27 $.4 28 125 $1.83 29 28 $3.4 21 659 $9.67 211* 42 $5.85 212 $. 213 $. 214 $. *through only first 6 months of 21 211 Page 2

Prison Composition North Carolina Prison Admissions 21 214 18, 16, Probation Revocations 15,976 15,118 14, 12, 11,586 5% Drop in Revocation Entries 1, New Offense Convictions 8, 6, Justice reinvestment (211) 7,44 4, Other 2, 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 214 Probation Revocations as % of Total Prison Admissions 21 5% 22 49% 23 51% 24 51% 25 52% 26 53% 27 51% 28 51% 29 53% 21 52% 211 52% 212 46% 213 37% 214 37% 76% of the probation revocations to prison were for technical violations of supervision in 29 1% of technical violators now serve a 9 day period of confinement in response to violation (CRV) CRV Entries: 212 214 3 25 2 15 1 5 544 2,429 2,731 212 213 214 Page 3

Population Trends 45, Prison Population at JRA Passing June 211 41,3 Baseline Projected Prison Population 43,22 5% increase from June 211 population 4, JRA Projected Prison Population 38,264 35, 25 Actual Prison Population 36,663 214 Actual Prison Population 37,665 8% drop in prison population 5% drop in probation revocations 3, 25 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 11.5 percent drop in the projected 217 prison population: from 43,22 to 38,264 8 percent drop in prison population between 211 and 214: from 41,3 to 37,665 5 percent drop in admissions due to probation revocation between 211 and 214: from 15,118 to 7,44 Page 4

Prison Releases 2, 18, 16, 14, 12, 1, 8, 6, 4, 2, 17,814 Prison Exits 18,244 15,147 Exits without Supervision 8,716 29 21 211 212 213 214 In 211, 84% of all structured sentencing felony prison releases did not receive supervision In 214, 48% of structured sentencing prison releases received no supervision and the trend continues to decline Page 5

Probation Revocations Probation Revocation Rates: 27 214 4.% 36.% 37.6% 35.% 3.% 25.% 2.% 15.% 47 percent drop in revocation rate between 211 and 214: from 37.6% to 19.7% 53 percent drop in offenders exiting probation due to revocation between 211 and 214: from 24,995 to 11,686 Justice reinvestment (211) 19.7% 1.% 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 214 Average Caseload Post JRA Pre JRA 2 4 6 8 1 Impact of reduced case loads: Greater emphasis on high risk offenders. Quality contacts; more ability to focus on offender needs. Page 6

Probation Revocation by Risk Level Revocation Rate by Risk Level 7% 6% 61% 64% 65% 58% 62% 53% 5% 4% 3% 2% 39% 39% 37% 31% 27% 2% 23% 13% 33% 15% 3% 12% 1% % 29 21 211 212 213 214 High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk JRA codified existing practice of using risk assessment to drive supervision and re focused probation practice. Association between risk and revocation rates indicate renewed focus on risk assessment is on target; offenders with higher risk profiles are more likely to be have probation revoked. 214 revocation rates declined for all risk levels; higher risk offenders had greater reductions: High risk decreased from 62% to 53% Medium risk decreased from 33% to 3% Low risk decreased from 15% to 12% Page 7

Swift & Certain Sanctions 13 14 1,389 615 515 853 12 13 1,166 412 99 184 11 12 267 Cases 5 1, 1,5 2, 2,5 3, 3,5 4, Delegated Authority High Risk Delegated Authority Quick Dip (2 Day) Quick Dip (3 Day) JRA created additional tools for probation officers to increase offender accountability with swift and certain responses to negative behavior. Use of JRA tools has increased significantly; especially utilization of administrative jail sanction ( quick dip ). No Quick Dip Quick Dip Quick Dip Outcomes.2%.1% 7.9% 1.6% 16.6% 19.5%.% 5.% 1.% 15.% 2.% 25.% Absconded Revoked Unsatisfactory Termination Compared outcomes for 368 offenders who had a quick dip to a group of matched offenders who did not have a quick dip as a response to similar non compliance. 91.8 percent (338) of the offenders with a quick dip had a positive outcome compared to only 53.3 percent (196) of offenders from the comparison group, who did not have a quick dip. Page 8

Arrests and Crime Trends 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, Arrests Down 16.9% 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 Total Arrests Arrest Rate CY26 519,26 5,844.5 CY27 57,527 5,587.8 CY28 59,828 5,5. CY29 499,461 5,299.4 CY21 489,725 5,135.8 CY211 479,135 4,956.9 CY212 469,885 4,811.8 CY213 431,65 4,376.9 45, 4, 35, 3, 25, 2, 15, 1, 5, Murder, Rape, Robbery, Aggravate Assault, Burglary, Larceny, Motor Vehicle Theft Index Crimes 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 Total Index Index Crime Crimes Rate CY26 398,613 4,487. CY27 44,863 4,457.5 CY28 46,479 4,385.1 CY29 374,322 3,971.7 CY21 359,854 3,773.8 CY211 368,58 3,813.1 CY212 357,74 3,656,6 CY213 334,928 3,396.2 45, 4, 35, 3, 25, 2, 15, 1, 5, Murder, Rape, Robbery, Aggravate Assault Violent Crimes Down 21.7% 26 27 28 29 21 211 212 213 Total Violent Violent Crime Crimes Rate CY26 41,48 466.1 CY27 41,757 459.7 CY28 42,33 456.7 CY29 37,26 395.3 CY21 34,16 356.7 CY211 33,341 344.9 CY212 33,985 348. CY213 32,433 328.9 Page 9

Spending Fiscal Year Budget Allocations Fiscal Year DPS Authorized Budget Probation Authorized Budget Parole Authorized Budget 26 27 $1,28,819,47 $143,968,694 $1,49,133 27 28 $1,311,798,56 $148,234,414 $1,46,583 28 29 $1,58,499,24 $164,813,62 $1,488,674 29 21 $1,43,28,42 $173,391,28 $1,535,166 21 211 $1,365,379,681 $167,415,122 $1,52,511 211 212 $1,412,886,261 $168,248,47 $1,696,677 212 213 $1,423,972,223 $171,775,13 $1,938,747 7.6% 7.4% 7.2% 7.% 6.8% 6.6% 6.4% 6.2% 6.% 5.8% 5.6% Budget as a Percent of Total NC Appropriations Budget as a Percent of Total NC Appropriations: 26 27 6.4% 27 28 6.3% 28 29 7.1% 29 21 7.4% 21 211 7.2% 211 212 7.2% 212 213 7.1% While overall spending on corrections and public safety continues to increase, the proportion of public funds spent in this area has begun to decline. Page 1

Reinvestments $1. $5. Millions $ Savings Savings Achieved as of January 215 11 Prison Closures $ 55.8 million Regional Office Closure $ 1.2 million Eliminate Double Celling (Pamlico) $ 2.4 million Operating Budget Reduction $ 1. million Prison Conversions (Eastern & Johnston) $ 6.94 million Diagnostic Center Reduction $.82 million Remove Misdemeanants from State Prison $ 6.64 million Total JRA Reductions $ 83.62 million Reinvestments to Date Reinvestment 175 Additional Probation Parole Officers & Equipment $ 14.63 million Increase Parole Commission Staff $.38 million Expand Electronic Monitoring Program $ 1.8 million Provide Substance Abuse Treatment for High Risk/High $ 4. million Need Individuals Fund Treatment for Effective Community Supervision $ 4.14 million Program Fund CRV Centers $ 7.43 million Total JRA Reinvestments $ 32.38 million Page 11