Cdcr Recidivism Report 2011
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
7 California Department of Corrections And Rehabilitation 2011 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report Office of Research November 23, 2011 You can obtain reports by contacting the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation at the following address: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Research, Research and Evaluation Branch 1515 S Street, Suite 208S Sacramento, California 95811 916.323.2919 Or On the World Wide Web at: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/adult_research_branch/ CDCR Office of Research "Providing quality research, data analysis and evaluation to implement evidence-based programs and practices, strengthen policy, inform management decisions and ensure accountability." Produced by Office of Research, Research and Evaluation Branch Lee Seale, Director Jay Atkinson, Deputy Director (A) Brenda Grealish, Research Manager III Tina Fitzgerald, Research Manager II Kevin Grassel, Research Program Specialist II Betty Viscuso, Associate Information Systems Analyst Permission is granted to reproduce reports. For questions regarding the contents of this report, please contact Brenda Grealish, Research Manager III of Research and Evaluation. STATE OF CALIFORNIA -.-(l£PARTUENT OF CORRECTIONSANO REHABILITATION EDUUNO G BROWN, JR., GOVERNOft OFFIcE OF THE SECRETARY 1515 s Street, 95814 P.O. Bol( 942883 sacramento. CA 94283-0001 November 23, 2011 Dear Colleagues: The mission of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (COCR) is to protect the public by safely and securely supervising adult and juvenile offenders, providing effective rehabilitation and treatment, and integrating offenders successfully into the community. Consistent with this purpose, we are holding ourselves accountable for data-driven policies infonned by the latest research on what works in corrections and rehabilitation. As a part of this commitment, I am pleased to present the second in a series of annual reports on the outcomes of adult inmates released from COCR correctional institutions. This report features measures of recidivism by which we can gauge improvement, and enable us to compare our performance with that of other similarly situated states. This report is a tangible result of our commitment to transparency and accountability. My hope is that the data contained in this report will provide new insights to policymakers and correctional stakeholders with regard to the dynamics of recidivism. Our goal is to provide infonnation that will be useful in moving the State forward in our attempt to increase public safety through the reduction of recidivism. Sincerely, 1v1~ l t~1-L MATIHEW L. CATE Secretary Table of Contents Definition of Terms..................................................................................................... viii 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................1 2 Evaluation Design ...................................................................................................4 2.1 2.2 3 Objectives and Purpose of the Evaluation ..................................................................... 4 Primary Definition of Recidivism .................................................................................... 4 Methods ...................................................................................................................4 3.1 3.2 Data Sources .................................................................................................................. 5 Data Limitations.............................................................................................................. 6 4 Release Cohort Description ....................................................................................6 5 Overall California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Adult Recidivism Rate ..................................................................................................... 12 6 Time to Return ....................................................................................................... 13 6.1 7 Recidivism Rate by Demographics ...................................................................... 14 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 8 Gender ......................................................................................................................... 15 Age at Release ............................................................................................................. 16 Race/Ethnicity .............................................................................................................. 18 County of Parole........................................................................................................... 20 Offender Characteristics ....................................................................................... 22 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4.1 Commitment Offense Category.................................................................................... 22 Commitment Offense ................................................................................................... 24 Sentence Type ............................................................................................................. 27 Sex Registrants ............................................................................................................ 28 Recommitment Offense for Sex Registrants......................................................... 29 8.5 Comparison of Violent, Drug and Registered Sex Offender Recidivism Rates By Age ......................................................................................................................... 30 Serious or Violent Offenders ........................................................................................ 31 Mental Health Status .................................................................................................... 32 Risk of Recidivism ........................................................................................................ 34 8.6 8.7 8.8 9 Time to Return for the 75,019 Recidivists .................................................................... 13 CDCR Incarceration Experience ........................................................................... 35 9.1 9.2 9.3 Length-of-Stay (Current Term) ..................................................................................... 36 Number of Returns to CDCR Custody Prior to Release (Current Term Only) ............. 38 Number of CDCR Stays Ever (All Terms Combined) ................................................. 40 10 Recidivism by Institutional Missions ................................................................... 42 10.1 10.2 Institution Missions ....................................................................................................... 42 Security Housing Unit ................................................................................................... 44 11 Recidivism by CDCR Program.............................................................................. 46 11.1 11.2 Developmental Disability Program ............................................................................... 46 In-Prison and Community-Based Substance Abuse Treatment Programs ................. 47 i 12 Type of Return to CDCR........................................................................................ 49 13 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 53 Appendix A One-, Two- and Three-Year Recidivism Rates for Arrests, Convictions, and Returns to Prison for Felons Released Between FYs 2002-03 and 2008-09 ...................... 54 Appendix B Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Characteristics Felons Released During Fiscal Year 2006-07 ......................................................................................... 57 Appendix C Recidivism of Convicted Murderers Since 1995 (New Crimes) .......................... 66 Appendix D Mission and Institution Recidivism Rates by Gender ........................................ 69 Appendix E Security Housing Unit by Institution ................................................................ 70 Appendix F Substance Abuse Treatment Programs by Gender and Location ....................... 72 List of Tables and Figures Tables Table 1. Cohort Description ............................................................................................................ 9 Table 2. Overall Recidivism Rates: First releases, Re-Releases and Total................................ 13 Table 3. Three-Year Quarterly and Cumulative Rate of Return Post Release ............................ 14 Table 4. Recidivism Rates by Gender .......................................................................................... 16 Table 5. Recidivism Rates by Age Group .................................................................................... 17 Table 6. Recidivism Rates By Race/Ethnicity .............................................................................. 19 Table 7. Recidivism Rates by County........................................................................................... 21 Table 8. Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense Category .................................................... 23 Table 9. Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense .................................................................... 26 Table 10. Recidivism Rates by Sentence Type............................................................................ 27 Table 11. Recidivism Rates by Sex Registration Flag ................................................................. 28 Table 12. Sex Registrant Recommitment Offense ....................................................................... 30 Table 13. Violent, Drug and Registered Sex Offender Recidivism Rates By Age ....................... 31 Table 14. Recidivism Rates by Serious/Violent Offender Flag .................................................... 32 Table 15. Recidivism Rates by Mental Health Status .................................................................. 34 Table 16. Recidivism Rates by CSRA Risk Category .................................................................. 35 Table 17. Recidivism Rates by Length-of-Stay ............................................................................ 37 Table 18. Number of Returns to CDCR Custody on Current Term Prior to Release ................... 39 Table 19. Recidivism Rates by Total Number of Stays Ever ....................................................... 41 Table 20. Recidivism Rates by Institutional Missions................................................................... 44 Table 21. Recidivism Rates by Institutional Missions, Sorted from Highest to Lowest ................ 44 Table 22. Recidivism Rates by Security Housing Unit Status ...................................................... 45 Table 23. Recidivism Rates by DDP Participation ....................................................................... 47 ii Table 24. Recidivism Rates by Substance Abuse Treatment Program Involvement................... 49 Table 25. Parole Violators Returned to Custody .......................................................................... 51 Figures Figure A. One-Year Recidivism Rates for Arrests, Convictions and Returns to Prison for Felons Released Between Fiscal Years 2002-03 and 2008-09 ................................................ 1 Figure B. Three-year Recidivism Rates for Felons Released From All CDCR Institutions During Fiscal Year 2006-07....................................................................................................... 3 Figure 1. Overall Recidivism Rates .............................................................................................. 12 Figure 2. Three-Year Quarterly and Cumulative Rate of Return Post Release ........................... 13 Figure 3. Recidivism Rates by Gender ......................................................................................... 15 Figure 4. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Age at Release ......................................................... 16 Figure 5. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Race/Ethnicity .......................................................... 18 Figure 6. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by County ...................................................................... 20 Figure 7. Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense Category ................................................... 22 Figure 8. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense ............................................... 24 Figure 9. Recidivism Rates by Sentence Type ............................................................................ 27 Figure 10. Recidivism Rates by Sex Registration Flag ................................................................ 28 Figure 11. Sex Registrant Recommitment Offense ...................................................................... 29 Figure 12. Violent, Drug and Registered Sex Offender Recidivism Rates By Age ...................... 30 Figure 13. Recidivism Rates by Serious/Violent Offender Flag ................................................... 31 Figure 14. Recidivism Rates by Mental Health Status ................................................................. 33 Figure 15. Recidivism Rates by CSRA Risk Category ................................................................. 34 Figure 16. Recidivism Rates by Length-of-Stay ........................................................................... 36 Figure 17. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Number of Returns to CDCR Custody on the Current Term Prior to Release .................................................................................... 38 Figure 18. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Total Number of Stays Ever ................................... 40 Figure 19. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Institutional Missions .............................................. 42 Figure 20. Recidivism Rates by Security Housing Unit Status ..................................................... 45 Figure 21. Recidivism Rates by DDP Participation ...................................................................... 46 Figure 22. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Substance Abuse Treatment Program Involvement ................................................................................................................. 48 Figure 23. Three-Year Outcomes for Inmates Released From All CDCR Adult Institutions in Fiscal Year 2006-07..................................................................................................... 50 iii Executive Summary Introduction purpose of this report. We chose this measure because it is the most reliable measure available and is well understood and commonly used by most correctional stakeholders. To comport with national best practices, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) measures recidivism by tracking arrests, convictions and returns to prison. Although all three measures are displayed in charts and tables in Appendix A, CDCR uses the latter measure, returns to prison, as the primary measure of recidivism for the CDCR has reported recidivism rates for felons released from custody since 1977. During this time, the methodology for reporting recidivism has changed. Figure 1. One-Year Recidivism Rates for Arrests, Convictions and Returns to Prison for Felons Released Between Fiscal Years 2002-03 and 2008-09 1 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 55.5% 48.0% 57.6% 56.3% 58.8% 58.0% 49.1% 47.9% 45.9% 46.5% 21.6% 22.6% 22.1% 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 57.0% 47.5% 57.2% 45.2% 40% 30% 20% 19.7% 23.7% 20.7% 20.0% 2007-08 2008-09 10% 0% 2002-03 Arrests 1 Convictions 2006-07 Returns to Prison Rates for “Arrests” and “Convictions” only include those felons where an automated criminal history record was available from the Department of Justice. These records are necessary to measure recidivism by arrest and conviction. The data contained in this chart were extracted in June 2011 to minimize the effects of the time lag in data entry into state systems. iv Commencing with our 2010 report, all felons are now tracked for the full followup period, regardless of their status as on parole or discharged. In addition, recidivism rates are presented based on numerous characteristics (e.g., commitment offense, length-of-stay). Figure 2. Three-year recidivism rates for felons released from all CDCR institutions during fiscal year 2006-07 This report is intended to provide more detailed information about recidivism to CDCR executives and managers, lawmakers and other correctional stakeholders who have an interest in the dynamics of reoffending behavior and recidivism reduction. Successful 3 Years Out 34.9% Returned Within 3 Years 65.1% Recidivism Definition CDCR measures recidivism by arrests, convictions and returns to prison. CDCR uses the latter measure, returns to prison, as its primary measure of recidivism. Throughout this document, unless otherwise stated, the terms recidivate and recidivism refer to this primary measure. CDCR defines “returns to prison” as follows: N=115,254 released during FY 2006-07 is 65.1 percent (Figure 2). Most felons who recidivate return to prison within a year of release (73.5 percent). Re-released felons recidivate at a rate 19.5 percentage points higher than those released for the first time. An individual convicted of a 21 and incarcerated in a felony CDCR adult institution who was released to parole, discharged after being paroled, or directly discharged from CDCR during a defined time period and subsequently returned to prison during a specified follow-up period. CDCR Inmate Personal Characteristics Females have a 55.1 percent recidivism rate, which is approximately 11 points lower than that of males. Younger felons recidivate at the highest rate. Inmates released at age 24 or younger return to prison at a rate of 71.9 percent. Race/ethnicity appears to influence recidivism rates for first-releases, but this effect is not evident for rereleased inmates. Slightly more than a quarter of all inmates are paroled to Los Angeles County after release. Of these parolees, however, only 57.0 percent recidivated within three years, which is lower than the statewide average. Key Findings Overall CDCR Recidivism Rates The one-year rates have declined slightly under all measures of recidivism since FY 2006-07 with the exception of a small increase in arrests in FY 2008-09 (Figure 1). The total three-year recidivism rate (return to prison) for all felons 2 Due to reporting limitations, civil addicts are currently excluded. It is expected that this limitation will be addressed following implementation of the Strategic Offender Management System (SOMS). v CDCR Offender Length-of-Stay CDCR Offender Characteristics Recidivism rates increase with lengths-of-stay up to two to three years and decrease thereafter. Inmates with a length-of-stay between two to three years recidivate at the highest rate (69.8 percent). Those who served over 15 years in prison recidivated at the lowest rate (40.1 percent). There is little variation in the recidivism rate despite the number of prior returns to CDCR custody within the current term. Although fewer inmates return to prison as the total number of stays increase, recidivism rates for those with more total stays increase with each additional stay at CDCR institutions. CDCR Institutional Missions Inmates committed to prison for a property crime consistently recidivate at a higher rate than those committed for other types of crimes including crimes against persons, drug crimes, and “other” crimes. Inmates committed for more serious crimes do not have higher recidivism rates. For example, inmates released for rape have a lower recidivism rate (51.1 percent) than those who were committed for vehicle theft (74.3 percent). Although few in number, inmates released after having served an indeterminate sentence recidivate at a much lower rate (12.8 percent) than those who served a determinate sentence (65.1 percent). Felons required to register as sex offenders (i.e., sex registrants) recidivate at a higher rate (66.9 percent) as compared to other felons (65.0 percent). Eightyfour percent of sex registrants who recidivate do so because of a parole violation. Inmates designated as serious or violent offenders recidivate at a lower rate than those who are not. Inmates participating in mental health programs recidivate at rates 6 to 11 percentage points higher than other felons. The California Static Risk Assessment performs well at predicting inmate risk for recidivism. Inmates housed in reception centers for at least 30 days prior to release have a recidivism rate that is higher than any other institutional mission. Inmates who had spent time in the Security Housing Unit (SHU) prior to release recidivate at a higher rate than those who had not. CDCR Programs Released felons who had a designated developmental disability recidivate at a rate that is 12.8 percentage points higher than those who did not have a developmental disability designation. Participation in in-prison substance abuse programs, combined with post-release community-based aftercare results in recidivism rates (29.3 percent) that are much lower than those that did not participate in any substance abuse treatment program (65.3 percent). vi Conclusion This report demonstrates how recidivism varies among offenders by their personal characteristics such as gender, race, age, and mental health status, as well as by their arrest histories and behavior while under CDCR custody and supervision. These findings are consistent with other jurisdictions across the United States and have important implications for correctional policy and practice. vii Definition of Terms California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) The CSRA is an actuarial tool that utilizes demographic and criminal history data to predict an offender’s risk of recidivating at the time they are released from CDCR. Offenders are categorized as low, moderate or high risk of incurring a new criminal conviction. Cohort A group of individuals who share a common characteristic, such as all inmates who were released to parole during a given year. Controlling Crime or Commitment Offense The most serious offense on the conviction for which the inmate was sentenced to prison on that term. Correctional Clinical Case Management System (CCCMS) The CCCMS facilitates mental health care by linking inmate/patients to needed services and providing sustained support while accessing such services. CCCMS services are provided as outpatient services within the general population setting at all institutions. Determinate Sentencing Law (DSL) Established by Penal Code Section 1170 in 1976, Determinate Sentencing Law identifies a specified sentence length for convicted felons who are remanded to state prison. Essentially, three specific terms of imprisonment (low, middle, and high) are assigned for crimes, as well as enhancements (specific case factors that allow judges to add time to a sentence). Opportunities to earn “credits” can reduce the length of incarceration. Released felons are automatically placed on parole unless they served all of their prison and parole time while they were incarcerated; in this case they are then discharged. Developmental Disability Program (DDP) CDCR program that ensures inmates with developmental disabilities are accurately identified; provided with appropriate classification, housing, and protection; and not subjected to discrimination. Enhanced Outpatient Program (EOP) A mental health services designation applied to a severely mentally ill inmate receiving treatment at a level similar to day treatment services. First Release The first release on the current term for felons with new admissions and parole violators returning with a new term (PV-WNT). viii Indeterminate Sentencing Law (ISL) Established by Penal Code Section 1168 in 1917, the Indeterminate Sentencing Law allowed judges to determine a range of time (minimum and maximum) a convicted felon would serve. Different felons convicted for the same crimes could spend varying lengths of time in prison; release depended on many factors, including each prisoner’s individual conduct in prison. After the minimum sentence passed, felons were brought to a parole board that would identify the actual date of release. Indeterminate sentencing was replaced by Determinate Sentencing (Penal Code Section 1170) in 1976. Institutional Mission Institutions are designated with a mission that meets the security level or special purpose required for the inmates being housed. Reception centers process incoming inmates. Levels I, II, III, and IV house male general population inmates according to their security classification (low, medium, high-medium, and maximum). Female institutions provide female offenders with gender-responsive supervision, treatment, and services. Camps and “other” facilities house low-level inmates while providing rehabilitative treatment through work, vocation, academic and substance abuse programs. Institutions may have one or more missions according to the security needs and/or special purposes. Manual California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) Inmates who do not have automated criminal history data available from the Department of Justice (DOJ) must have their CSRA score calculated manually. This is done with a review of a paper copy of the inmate’s rap sheet. Manual scores are not available for a certain percentage of inmates because CSRA scores for the FY 2006-07 cohort were computed retroactively as of their date of release during that time period. Parole A period of conditional supervised release following a prison term. Parole Violation (Law) A law violation occurs when a parolee commits a crime while on parole and returns to CDCR custody (RTC) by action of the Board of Parole Hearings rather than by prosecution in the courts. Parole Violation (Technical) A technical violation occurs when a parolee violates a condition of his/her parole that is not considered a new crime and returns to CDCR custody (RTC). Parole Violator Returning With a New Term (PV-WNT) A parolee who receives a court sentence for a new crime committed while under parole supervision and returned to prison. Registered Sex Offender An inmate is designated as a registered sex offender if CDCR records show that the inmate has at some point been convicted of an offense that requires registration as a sex offender under Penal Code Section 290. This designation is permanent in CDCR records. ix Re-Release After a return to prison for a parole violation, any subsequent release on the same (current) term is a re-release. Serious Felony Offenses Serious felony offenses are specified in Penal Code Section 1192.7(c) and Penal Code Section 1192.8. Stay A stay is any period of time an inmate is housed in a CDCR institution. Each time an inmate returns to prison it is considered a new stay, regardless of the reason for returning. Substance Abuse Program (SAP) CDCR in-prison and post-release, community-based substance abuse treatment programs designed to reduce/eliminate offender drug and alcohol abuse and dependence. Term A term is a sentence an inmate receives from a court to be committed to CDCR for a length-of-time. If an inmate is released after serving a term and is later returned to prison for a parole violation, the inmate returns and continues serving the original (current) term. If that inmate returns for committing a new crime, the inmate begins serving a new term. Violent Felony Offenses Violent felony offenses are specified in Penal Code Section 667.5(c). x 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 2011 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 1 Introduction The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) is pleased to present the 2011 Outcome Evaluation, our second in an annual series of reports analyzing recidivism for felons released from California prisons. This report provides information about recidivism to CDCR executives, lawmakers and other correctional stakeholders who have an interest in the dynamics of reoffending behavior and reducing recidivism. Figure A. One-Year Recidivism Rates for Arrests, Convictions and Returns to Prison for Felons Released Between Fiscal Years 2002-03 and 2008-09 1 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 55.5% 48.0% 57.6% 56.3% 45.9% 46.5% 21.6% 22.6% 58.8% 58.0% 49.1% 47.9% 57.0% 47.5% 57.2% 45.2% 40% 30% 20% 19.7% 22.1% 23.7% 20.7% 20.0% 2007-08 2008-09 10% 0% 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Arrests 2005-06 Convictions 2006-07 Returns to Prison As with our prior 2010 recidivism report, this report measures recidivism by tracking arrests, convictions and returns to prison at one-, two-, and three-year intervals. 1 Rates for “Arrests” and “Convictions” only include those felons where an automated criminal history record was available from the Department of Justice. These records are necessary to measure recidivism by arrest and conviction. 1 2 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 We continue to focus on the three-year return-to-prison rate as our primary measure of recidivism. Our return-to-prison measure, as described in our 2010 report, includes offenders released from prison after having served their sentence for a crime as well as offenders released from prison after having served their term for a parole violation. It also includes all offenders released from prison, whether on parole or discharged from parole during the three-year follow-up period. We employ an approach that is consistent with that set forth in last year’s report so that policymakers and researchers can have year-over-year comparisons. Accordingly, this year’s cohort will supplement last year’s data, providing a progressively fuller picture of trends in recidivism with each successive report. This year’s three-year return cohort focuses on those who were released from prison during FY 2006-07. Additionally, we are excited to present for the first time analyses in this report that examine trends in recidivism among new populations of offenders. This year we’ve added analyses focusing on recidivism rates for the developmentally disabled, murderers, offenders who have received substance abuse treatment, and those who have paroled from Security Housing Units (SHU). We hope that you find these analyses to be topical and relevant. Each year we look forward to adding still more. The focus of this year’s report – the cohort of offenders released from prison in FY 2006-07 – provides an opportunity to gauge the success of correctional practices that governed that cohort, both in prison prior to their release in FY 2006-07, and on parole up to three years afterward. At its outermost reaches, this report begins to capture parole practices reaching into the first half of 2010, a period marked by the implementation of reforms set forth in Senate Bill (SB) 18 (3rd Ex. Sess) (Ducheny). These reforms include the creation of non-revocable parole, incentive funding for probation departments that adopt best practices, and parole reentry courts, among others. We look forward to seeing how these types of changes in correctional practices affect our recidivism rates in the coming years. Enthusiasm for this year’s recidivism discussion was also stoked by a significant report issued by the Pew Center on the States entitled “State of Recidivism: The Revolving Door of America’s Prisons,” which examined recidivism rates among many states across the country. California is pleased to be among the 33 states that provided data to Pew for this valuable comparative purpose. The Pew report confirmed that when measured by “returns to prison,” California’s recidivism rates are near the highest nationwide. However, the report also made clear that when recidivism is measured by re-imprisonment for new crimes only, California’s recidivism rates are lower than the nationwide 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 average. The Pew report observed that it was two particularities of California’s parole structure – the placement of virtually every offender on a period of mandatory parole, and the routine use of prison stays for punishment of parole violators – that contributed to California’s high “return to prison” recidivism rates since this measure includes offenders returned for not only new crimes, but also parole violations. Absent those practices, California’s recidivism rate may be similar to those of other states. In future reports we will monitor how changes to California’s parole structure impacts its recidivism rates not only with respect to non-revocable parole, which prohibited certain low-level offenders from being returned to custody, but also Governor Brown’s historic realignment legislation, which requires that all parole violators who are returned to custody serve their time at local jails instead of prison. California is now in line with many other states that similarly use jail, not prison, as custody for parole violators. As a result, we expect to see changes to our recidivism rates in the coming years as California moves away from some of the practices that contributed to our high rates. Ultimately, our goal is that this report and future reports will continue to spur discussion of the best possible ways for California to reduce recidivism and better protect public safety. Figure B. Three-year recidivism rates for felons released from all CDCR institutions during FY 2006-07 Successful 3 Years Out 34.9% Returned Within 3 Years 65.1% N=115,254 3 4 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 2 Evaluation Design 2.1 Objectives and Purpose of the Evaluation This report presents the recidivism rates for CDCR inmates and examines how these rates vary across time and place, by person (personal and offender characteristics), by incarceration experience (e.g., length-of-stay), and by CDCR missions and institutions. In this report, a recidivist is defined as a convicted felon who was released from CDCR in FY 2006-07 and subsequently returned to CDCR within a three-year follow-up period. 2.2 Primary Definition of Recidivism Although there are numerous ways to define recidivism (e.g., arrests, convictions, returns to prison), CDCR employs returns to prison as its primary indicator of a recidivist defined as follows: An individual convicted of a felony 2 and incarcerated in a CDCR adult institution who was released to parole, discharged after being paroled, or directly discharged from CDCR during a defined time period (recidivism cohort) and subsequently returned to prison during a specified follow-up period (recidivism period). The recidivism rate is calculated using the ratio of the number of felons in the recidivism cohort who were returned to prison during the recidivism period to the total number of felons in the recidivism cohort, multiplied by 100. Recidivism Rate = Number Returned to Prison X 100 Recidivism Cohort See Appendix A where this definition is expanded by depicting recidivism rates using re-arrest and reconviction in addition to returns to prison. Results for each of these measures are available for FYs 2002-03 through 2008-09. 3 Methods This report presents recidivism rates from a three-year follow-up period for all felons who were released from the CDCR Division of Adult Institutions (DAI) between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2007 (FY 2006-07). The cohort includes inmates who were released to parole for the first time on their current term and inmates who 2 Due to reporting limitations, civil addicts are currently excluded. It is expected that this limitation will be addressed following implementation of the Strategic Offender Management System (SOMS). 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 were directly discharged, as well as inmates who were released to parole on their current term prior to FY 2006-07, returned to prison on this term, and were then re-released during FY 2006-07. Figures, charts and graphs illustrate the relationship between descriptive variables (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, age at parole) and recidivism rates. Expanded analyses of these variables are available in Appendix B. 3.1 Data Sources CDCR Offender-Based Information System (OBIS) Data were extracted from the CDCR Offender-Based Information System (OBIS) to identify the inmates who were released during FY 2006-07, as well as to determine which of these individuals were returned to prison during the three-year follow-up period. Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) Data were also derived from the DOJ, Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS), California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS), arrest and convictions data to compute California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) recidivism risk scores at the time of release, and to compute the re-arrest and reconviction figures included in Appendix A. CDCR Office of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (OSATS) Interim Computerized Attendance Tracking System (ICATS) The dataset containing the release cohort was matched to data reported to the CDCR Office of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (OSATS) Interim Computerized Attendance Tracking System (ICATS). ICATS is a repository for attendance and completions for inmates/parolees who participate in the CDCR In-Prison Substance Abuse Programs (SAPs) and CommunityBased Substance Abuse Programs. CDCR Clark Developmental Disability Automated Tracking System (CDDATS) The Clark Developmental Disability Automated Tracking System (CDDATS) was used to record inmates who have been screened for a developmental disability upon entry into CDCR and identifies their developmental disability level designation and housing location as part of the CDCR Developmental Disability Program (DDP). CDDATS data are entered by staff at each institution. Although DECS (Disability and Effective Communications System) is currently the system of record, CDDATS was the system of record at the time the cohort was released from CDCR. 5 6 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Revocation Scheduling and Tracking System (RSTS) For those parolees whose parole was revoked, the CDCR Revocation Scheduling and Tracking System (RSTS) was used to identify the type of parole revocations (technical or nontechnical). 3.2 Data Limitations Data quality is of paramount importance with any and all data analyses performed by the CDCR Office of Research. The intent of this report is to provide “summary statistical” (aggregate) rather than “individual-level” information. Overall, the aggregate data are robust in that a large number of records are available for analyses. At an individual level, the data become less robust as the smaller number of records is easily influenced by nuances associated with each case. Consequently, caution must be exercised when interpreting results that involve a small number of cases. Within this analytical framework, recidivism rates are only presented for inmate releases (i.e., denominators) that are greater than or equal to 30. In addition, recidivism rates are “frozen” at three years, meaning that after three years the follow-up period is considered to be completed and no further analyses are performed. As such, reported rates may fluctuate slightly for the one- and two-year rates as data used in subsequent reporting years will likely be updated, particularly for the ‘Arrests’ and ‘Convictions’ presented in the Appendix since these data are routinely updated in accordance with criminal justice system processing. Re-released felons made up 41.8 percent of the recidivism cohort. 4 Release Cohort Description Nearly 60 percent of the release cohort was made up of first releases while 41.8 percent were re-releases. Almost all of the distributions for the personal and offender characteristics of first releases were similar to those of the total recidivism cohort. Personal Characteristics A total of 115,254 adult men and women were released from CDCR adult institutions in FY 2006-07 (Table 1). Males outnumbered females approximately nine to one. There was a nearly even distribution of inmates between the age of 20 and 44 at release; few inmates were between the age of 18 and 19 (0.6 percent). After 45 to 49 years of age, the number of inmates declined; individuals over age 60 represented roughly 1 percent of the cohort. The majority of inmates were Hispanic/Latino (37.5 percent), followed by White (32.1 percent) and Black/African American (26.0 percent). Less than 5 percent were Native American/Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander or Other. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Offender Characteristics The top 20 counties receiving the largest number of parolees are presented in Table 1, with the remaining counties grouped into the “All Others” category. The majority of the inmates paroled to Los Angeles County (26.4 percent). Of the remaining large counties in California, the top three that received paroled inmates were San Bernardino (8.5 percent), Orange (7.6 percent), San Diego (6.5 percent), and the bottom three were Santa Clara (3.2 percent), San Joaquin (2.3 percent), and Stanislaus (1.5 percent). In the previous 2010 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report, San Francisco was depicted since it had a release population within the top 20 of all county releases. This year, San Francisco was replaced by Stanislaus. About two-thirds of the FY 2006-07 recidivism cohort include inmates who had served their current term for a property crime or a drug crime. Slightly more than 20 percent were committed to CDCR for a crime against persons and approximately 12 percent were committed for “other” crimes. Almost all inmates had a determinate sentence. Approximately seven percent of the release cohort were required to register as a sex offender. In addition, roughly 20 percent of the release cohort were committed for a crime that was considered to be serious and/or violent. These percentages remain consistent for both first released and re-released sex offenders and serious/violent offenders. Nearly 86 percent of the release cohort had not been enrolled in any type of mental health treatment program 3 while incarcerated at CDCR. Those designated as Enhanced Outpatient Program (EOP) (severely mentally ill) made up 4.7 percent of the release cohort and those assigned to the Correctional Clinical Case Management System (CCCMS) made up the remaining 9.7 percent. When assessed for recidivism risk using the CSRA, approximately 53 percent of the inmates were identified as being at a high risk for being convicted of a new crime, 28.4 percent were medium risk and 16.3 percent were low risk. CDCR Incarceration Experience More than half (58.5 percent) of the FY 2006-07 cohort inmates served 18 months or less in CDCR institutions. Approximately 71 percent who were released for the first time served 18 months 3 EOP and CCCMS are CDCR designations and do not necessarily reflect a clinical (e.g., Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) mental health diagnosis. Almost 30 percent of the recidivism cohort had never been previously incarcerated at CDCR. 7 8 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 or less in CDCR institutions compared to 41.8 percent of re-releases who served 18 months or less. The majority of the cohort (58.2 percent) is comprised of first releases with no returns on their current term. Of those with returns on their current term, many (45.9 percent) had returned once. Thereafter, the number of returning inmates gradually decreases. Almost half (49.2 percent) of the first releases had only one stay in a CDCR adult institution, and approximately one-fifth (20.8 percent) of re-releases stayed two times. Regardless of type of release, 13.6 percent of the FY 2006-07 cohort had 10 or more stays in CDCR when released. Institutional Mission 4 Twenty-two percent of the FY 2006-07 cohort released from a Level II institution. Another 26.6 percent were released from a reception center. Combined, this accounts for almost half of all releases during FY 2006-07. Among first releases only, slightly more than 20 percent released from a Level III or Level IV institution. Over half of re-releases were released from a reception center. The vast majority (94.8 percent) of the release cohort had never been assigned to a SHU at any point during their term, while 5.2 percent has been assigned to a SHU. Programs Only 1.5 percent of the release cohort were in the DDP. Over 12.5 percent of the release cohort had participated in the SAP while incarcerated. Eight percent completed the program while 4.6 did not complete the program prior to release from prison. 4 Since inmates are often transferred just prior to release to institutions close to their release county, the last institution where an inmate spent at least 30 days prior to being released in FY 2006-07 is the inmate’s institution of release. The “Under 30 Days” category reflects those inmates who were not incarcerated in any one institution for at least 30 days prior to release. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 1. Cohort Description First Releases Characteristics Re-Releases Total N % N % N % Total 67,029 100.0 48,225 100.0 115,254 100.0 Sex Male Female 59,154 7,875 88.3 11.7 44,062 4,163 91.4 8.6 103,216 12,038 89.6 10.4 Age at Release 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60 and over 689 11,039 13,433 10,434 10,070 9,123 6,714 3,370 1,381 776 1.0 16.5 20.0 15.6 15.0 13.6 10.0 5.0 2.1 1.2 47 5,019 9,399 7,436 8,057 7,716 5,868 2,977 1,155 551 0.1 10.4 19.5 15.4 16.7 16.0 12.2 6.2 2.4 1.1 736 16,058 22,832 17,870 18,127 16,839 12,582 6,347 2,536 1,327 0.6 13.9 19.8 15.5 15.7 14.6 10.9 5.5 2.2 1.2 Race/Ethnicity White Hispanic/Latino Black/African American Native American/Alaska Native Asian Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Other 20,168 27,816 15,980 518 416 96 2,035 30.1 41.5 23.8 0.8 0.6 0.1 3.0 16,821 15,410 14,015 576 308 49 1,046 34.9 32.0 29.1 1.2 0.6 0.1 2.2 36,989 43,226 29,995 1,094 724 145 3,081 32.1 37.5 26.0 0.9 0.6 0.1 2.7 County of Parole Alameda Fresno Kern Los Angeles Orange Riverside Sacramento San Bernardino San Diego San Joaquin Santa Clara Stanislaus All Others 2,727 2,052 2,270 21,782 5,954 4,198 3,329 5,585 4,063 1,238 1,816 872 11,118 4.1 3.1 3.4 32.5 8.9 6.3 5.0 8.3 6.1 1.8 2.7 1.3 16.6 2,564 2,479 1,777 8,672 2,774 2,932 2,355 4,161 3,385 1,444 1,830 830 11,588 5.3 5.1 3.7 18.0 5.8 6.1 4.9 8.6 7.0 3.0 3.8 1.7 24.0 5,291 4,531 4,047 30,454 8,728 7,130 5,684 9,746 7,448 2,682 3,646 1,702 22,706 4.6 3.9 3.5 26.4 7.6 6.2 4.9 8.5 6.5 2.3 3.2 1.5 19.7 Commitment Offense Crime Against Persons Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes 14,179 22,802 22,124 7,924 21.2 34.0 33.0 11.8 12,141 16,025 14,599 5,460 25.2 33.2 30.3 11.3 26,320 38,827 36,723 13,384 22.8 33.7 31.9 11.6 9 10 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 1. Cohort Description (continued) First Releases Re-Releases Total N % N % N % Sentence Type Determinate Sentence Law Indeterminate Sentence Law 72 67,029 0.1 100.0 14 48,225 0.0 100.0 86 115,254 0.1 100.0 Sex Offenders Yes No 3,606 63,423 5.4 94.6 4,223 44,002 8.8 91.2 7,829 107,425 6.8 93.2 Serious/Violent Offenders Yes No 13,312 53,717 19.9 80.1 10,171 38,054 21.1 78.9 23,483 91,771 20.4 79.6 2,337 3.5 3,096 6.4 5,433 4.7 Characteristics Mental Health Enhanced Outpatient Program Correctional Clinical Case Management System Crisis Bed No Mental Health Code Department Mental Health 5,660 8.4 5,471 11.3 11,131 9.7 8 59,024 0 0.0 88.1 0.0 8 39,649 1 0.0 82.2 0.0 16 98,673 1 0.0 85.6 0.0 CSRA Risk Score Low Medium High N/A 13,223 21,024 31,378 1,404 19.7 31.4 46.8 2.1 5,621 11,760 29,608 1,236 11.7 24.4 61.4 2.6 18,844 32,784 60,986 2,640 16.3 28.4 52.9 2.3 Length of Stay 0 - 6 months 7 - 12 months 13 - 18 months 19 - 24 months 2 - 3 years 3 - 4 years 4 - 5 years 5 - 10 years 10 - 15 years 15 + years 10,126 26,128 11,082 6,250 5,706 2,546 1,670 2,828 575 118 15.1 39.0 16.5 9.3 8.5 3.8 2.5 4.2 0.9 0.2 2,301 8,147 9,708 7,983 9,777 4,440 2,014 3,313 468 74 4.8 16.9 20.1 16.6 20.3 9.2 4.2 6.9 1.0 0.2 12,427 34,275 20,790 14,233 15,483 6,986 3,684 6,141 1,043 192 10.8 29.7 18.0 12.3 13.4 6.1 3.2 5.3 0.9 0.2 Prior Returns to Custody None 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ 67,029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 22,128 11,313 6,505 3,705 2,077 1,205 640 357 170 125 0.0 45.9 23.5 13.5 7.7 4.3 2.5 1.3 0.7 0.4 0.3 67,029 22,128 11,313 6,505 3,705 2,077 1,205 640 357 170 125 58.2 19.2 9.8 5.6 3.2 1.8 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 1. Cohort Description (continued) First Releases Characteristics N % Total Re-Releases N % N % Number of CDCR Stays Ever 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 + 32,983 7,926 5,137 3,964 3,285 2,719 2,190 1,846 1,440 1,163 944 777 595 479 1,581 49.2 11.8 7.7 5.9 4.9 4.1 3.3 2.8 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.2 0.9 0.7 2.4 0 10,012 7,485 5,544 4,245 3,467 2,892 2,519 2,089 1,782 1,478 1,315 1,086 878 3,433 0.0 20.8 15.5 11.5 8.8 7.2 6.0 5.2 4.3 3.7 3.1 2.7 2.3 1.8 7.1 32,983 17,938 12,622 9,508 7,530 6,186 5,082 4,365 3,529 2,945 2,422 2,092 1,681 1,357 5,014 28.6 15.6 11.0 8.2 6.5 5.4 4.4 3.8 3.1 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.2 4.4 Institutional Mission Level I Level II Level III Level IV Female Institutions Camps Reception Centers Other Facilities Under 30 days 12,663 16,951 7,654 6,229 5,337 2,837 5,745 8,876 737 18.9 25.3 11.4 9.3 8.0 4.2 8.6 13.2 1.1 5,534 8,416 2,790 1,684 3,053 1 24,903 1,839 5 11.5 17.5 5.8 3.5 6.3 0.0 51.6 3.8 0.0 18,197 25,367 10,444 7,913 8,390 2,838 30,648 10,715 742 15.8 22.0 9.1 6.9 7.3 2.5 26.6 9.3 0.6 Security Housing Unit (SHU) Status SHU No SHU 2,863 64,166 4.3 95.7 3,139 45,086 6.5 93.5 6,002 109,252 5.2 94.8 Developmental Disability Program (DDP) Status DDP No DDP 813 66,216 1.2 98.8 919 47,306 1.9 98.1 In-Prison Substance Abuse Program Completed Program Did Not Complete Program Did Not Participate in Program 7,103 4,038 55,888 10.6 6.0 83.4 2,091 1,317 44,817 4.3 2.7 92.9 1,732 113,522 9,194 5,355 100,705 1.5 98.5 8.0 4.6 87.4 11 12 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Inmates released from CDCR in FY 2006-07 have a 65.1 percent three-year recidivism rate. 5 Overall California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Adult Recidivism Rate Figure 1. Overall Recidivism Rates: First Releases, Re-Releases and Total 100% 90% 80% 76.4% 72.7% 70% Re-releases recidivate at a higher rate than first-releases. 60% 56.9% 47.9% 50% 40% 65.1% 60.5% 60.5% 51.6% 38.7% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years First Releases Re-Releases Three Years Total Figure 1 and Table 2 shows the total three-year recidivism rate for the FY 2006-07 cohort is 65.1 percent. The recidivism rate for re-releases is 19.5 percentage points higher than for first releases. When examining the recidivism rates as time progresses, most inmates who return to prison do so in the first year after release. The overall recidivism rate for the FY 2006-07 cohort is 2.4 percentage points lower than the FY 2005-06 cohort. This reduction is primarily due to the reduction in the recidivism rates for the first releases, which decreased by 3.8 percentage points, although there was also a small (1.1 percentage point) reduction for those who were re-releases. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 13 November 2011 Table 2. Overall Recidivism Rates: First releases, Re-Releases and Total One Year Total Released Two Years, Cumulative Three Years, Cumulative Number Returned Recidivism Rate Number Returned Recidivism Rate Number Returned Recidivism Rate First Releases 67,029 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% Re-Releases 48,225 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% 115,254 55,167 47.9% 69,692 60.5% 75,019 65.1% Total 6 Time to Return This “Time to Return” section only examines the 75,019 inmates who returned to prison within three years of release (identified previously in Figure 1 and Table 2) to assess how long inmates are in the community before recidivating and returning to prison. 6.1 Time to Return for the 75,019 Recidivists Figure 2. Three-Year Quarterly and Cumulative Rate of Return Post Release 100% n = 75,019 Recidivists 89.9% 90% 92.9% 95.2% 97.0% Almost 50 percent of inmates who recidivate within three years do so within the first six months. 100.0% 98.6% 86.0% 80.9% 80% 73.5% 70% At one year, this rate increases to almost 75 percent. 62.2% 60% 50% 46.1% 40% 30% 24.0% 20% 22.1% 16.1% 10% 11.3% 7.4% 5.1% 0% 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 3.9% 7th 3.0% 8th 1.8% 2.3% 9th 10th Quarters (Three-Month Periods) After Release Percent Recidivating Each Quarter Cumulative Percent Recidivating 1.4% 1.6% 11th 12th 14 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Figure 2 and Table 3 illustrate the percentage of inmates who recidivate during each quarterly (three-month) period, as well as the total percent of inmates who had recidivated through the end of the quarter. Of the 75,019 inmates who return to prison, nearly equal percentages return during the first quarter and the second quarter (24.0 and 22.1 percent, respectively). Altogether, nearly half (approximately 46 percent) of the inmates released returned to prison after having been in the community for only six months. Almost 75 percent of the recidivists returned to prison within 12 months of release. The number of inmates recidivating over time decreases as most have already returned to prison by the end of the first year. Since this analysis only focuses on those inmates identified as recidivists, and because few individuals returned to prison within the final months of the follow-up period, the 12th quarter represents the final, cumulative results (i.e., 100 percent) of the 75,019 recidivists. Collectively, these results mirror those reported for the FY 2005-06 cohort. Table 3. Three-Year Quarterly and Cumulative Rate of Return Post Release 2nd 3rd 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th Percentage of Recidivists 24.0% 1st 22.1% 16.1% 11.3% 4th 7.4% 5.1% 3.9% 3.0% 2.3% 1.8% Cumulative Percent 24.0% 46.1% 62.2% 73.5% 80.9% 86.0% 89.9% 92.9% 95.2% 97.0% 7 Recidivism Rate by Demographics Demographics include the following personal characteristics of felons: gender, age at time of release, race/ethnicity, and county of parole. Research has shown that recidivism varies by some of these demographic factors, and these findings are corroborated by the data provided below. 10th 11th 1.6% 12th 1.4% 98.6% 100.0% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 7.1 Gender Figure 3. Recidivism Rates by Gender 100% 90% 80% 70% 66.3% 61.6% 60% 50% 40% 65.1% 60.5% 55.1% 49.0% 50.4% 47.9% 38.3% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years Male Female Three Years Total Because males outnumber females almost nine to one in the FY 2006-07 cohort, gender differences in rates of recidivism are masked. It is important, therefore, to examine male and female recidivism rates individually to see if differences exist. As shown in Figure 3 and Table 4, recidivism rates are considerably lower for females compared to males. By the end of three years, the recidivism rate for females is approximately 11 percentage points lower than that of males. Males and females who were released for the first time recidivate at lower rates than those who were re-released, with female first releases and re-releases recidivating at lower rates than males. There is an 18.7 percentage point difference in the recidivism rate between first-released and re-released males. Females have a 24.1 percentage point difference in the recidivism rate between first and re-releases. Females who were re-released recidivate at a rate only six percentage points lower than their male counterparts. Both males and females experienced an almost equal decline in recidivism rates from those reported for the FY 2005-06 cohort. Despite the fact that female offenders represent a small proportion of the CDCR inmate population and they have a lower recidivism rate than males, CDCR continues to emphasize the importance of increasing rehabilitative opportunities for female inmates through a commitment to the provision of gender-responsive programs. Females recidivate at a lower rate than males. 15 16 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 4. Recidivism Rates by Gender First Releases Number Released 59,154 7,875 67,029 Gender Male Female Total Number Returned 34,475 3,683 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 58.3% 46.8% 56.9% Number Released 44,062 4,163 48,225 Number Returned 33,908 2,953 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 77.0% 70.9% 76.4% Number Released 103,216 12,038 115,254 Number Returned 68,383 6,636 75,019 7.2 Age at Release Figure 4. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Age at Release In general, recidivism rates decrease with age. 100% 90% 80% 75.7% 71.7% 70% 67.8% 63.3% 65.0% 64.0% 62.8% 60% 58.4% 54.3% 50% 46.3% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60 + Age Groups Conforming to the general theory that people age out of criminal activity 5, the overall recidivism rate for inmates released in FY 2006-07 declines with age. Felons in the 18 to 19 year-old group have a 75.7 percent recidivism rate and those ages 60 and older have a 46.3 percent recidivism rate (Figure 4 and Table 5). The exception is a 1.7 percentage point increase from the 30 to 34 year-old age group to the 35 to 39 year-old age group. Thereafter, the declining trend in the recidivism rate resumes. The pattern in the recidivism rate for each age group within first and re-releases mirrors that of the total recidivism rate (i.e., the gradual decline over time with the exception of the increased recidivism rate for the 35 to 39 age group). 5 Andrews, D.A. and J. Bonta (2006). The Psychology of Criminal th Conduct, 4 ed. Neward, NJ: LexisNexis. Recidivism Rate 66.3% 55.1% 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 When compared to FY 2005-06 cohort first releases, FY 2006-07 cohort first releases reflect a reduction in recidivism rates that range from two to six percentage points across all but one age group. This exception is the 18 to 19 age group, which has a one percentage point recidivism rate increase. Although the reductions are smaller, the FY 2006-07 re-release cohort reflects a similar pattern of reduction in recidivism rates, with the exception that the 18 to 19 age group had a larger increase in their recidivism rate (eight percentage points). Table 5. Recidivism Rates by Age Group First Releases Age Groups 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60 + Total Number Released 689 11,039 13,433 10,434 10,070 9,123 6,714 3,370 1,381 776 67,029 Number Returned 516 7,322 8,087 5,700 5,531 4,975 3,537 1,597 602 291 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 74.9% 66.3% 60.2% 54.6% 54.9% 54.5% 52.7% 47.4% 43.6% 37.5% 56.9% Number Released 47 5,019 9,399 7,436 8,057 7,716 5,868 2,977 1,155 551 48,225 Number Returned 41 4,188 7,382 5,603 6,260 5,810 4,369 2,110 774 324 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 87.2% 83.4% 78.5% 75.3% 77.7% 75.3% 74.5% 70.9% 67.0% 58.8% 76.4% Number Released 736 16,058 22,832 17,870 18,127 16,839 12,582 6,347 2,536 1,327 115,254 Number Returned 557 11,510 15,469 11,303 11,791 10,785 7,906 3,707 1,376 615 75,019 Recidivism Rate 75.7% 71.7% 67.8% 63.3% 65.0% 64.0% 62.8% 58.4% 54.3% 46.3% 65.1% 17 18 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 7.3 Race/Ethnicity Figure 5. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Race/Ethnicity Total three-year recidivism rates are highest among White, Black/AfricanAmerican, and Native American/ Alaska Native race/ethnicity groups. 100% 90% 80% 70% 59.5% 60% 72.4% 71.4% 67.1% 58.7% 59.3% 56.2% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% White Recidivism rates for race/ethnicity vary by first releases and re-releases. Hispanic/ Latino Black/ African-American Asian Native American/ Native Hawaiian/ Alaska Native Pacific Islander Others Figure 5 and Table 6 show the three-year recidivism rates for all releases are highest among White, Black/African-American, and Native American/Alaska Native race/ethnicity groups, ranging from 67.1 percent to 72.4 percent. The overall recidivism rate for all other race/ethnicity groups is roughly 60 percent. Although small in number, the Native American/Alaska Native, Asian and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander first and re-release groups recidivate at rates similar to the other race/ethnicity groups. Moreover, the recidivism rate for first releases who are Hispanic/Latino (the largest group represented in the cohort) is over 10 percentage points lower than that of all other race/ethncity groups combined (51.2 percent versus 61.0 percent). The 2010 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report showed that recidivism rates by race/ethnicity for the FY 2005-06 cohort varied between first releases and re-releases. This finding is not evident for the FY 2006-07 cohort as the dispersion between the recidivsm rates decreased within first releases and increased within re-releases, leaving little difference between the two groups. Comparison of the FY 2005-06 and FY 2006-07 cohort first releases shows that not only did the Native American/Alaska Native group no longer have the highest recidivism rate, this group also had the greatest decline in recidivism rate for first releases 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 19 November 2011 (-5.8 percentage points). In turn, the Black/African American first releases had a 4.5 percentage point decrease in their recidivism rate. The recidivism rates for both Native American/African American groups are still quite similar. For FY 2006-07 re-releases, the Native American/Alaska Native group still had the highest recidivism rate (79.5 percent), but the lowest switched from Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander to Asian. In fact, the Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander re-release group had the greatest increase in their recidivism rate as compared to the FY 2005-06 cohort (+1.8 percentage points). Furthermore, the Asian re-releases had a recidivism rate that was six percentage points lower that that which was reported for FY 2005-06. Table 6. Recidivism Rates By Race/Ethnicity Re-Releases First Releases Race/Ethnicity White Hispanic/Latino Black/African-American Asian Native American/Alaska Native Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Others Total Number Released 20,168 27,816 15,980 416 518 96 2,035 67,029 Number Returned 11,935 14,228 10,419 212 334 50 980 38,158 Recidivism Rate 59.2% 51.2% 65.2% 51.0% 64.5% 52.1% 48.2% 56.9% Number Released 16,821 15,410 14,015 308 576 49 1,046 48,225 Number Returned 12,885 11,509 11,010 213 458 36 750 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 76.6% 74.7% 78.6% 69.2% 79.5% 73.5% 71.7% 76.4% Number Released 36,989 43,226 29,995 724 1,094 145 3,081 115,254 Number Returned 24,820 25,737 21,429 425 792 86 1,730 75,019 Recidivism Rate 67.1% 59.5% 71.4% 58.7% 72.4% 59.3% 56.2% 65.1% 20 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 7.4 County of Parole 6 Figure 6. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by County Los Angeles 57.0% Orange 57.5% Sacramento 60.8% Alameda 62.9% Santa Clara Recidivism rates may vary by county due to a number of factors: local jail overcrowding, cost avoidance, prosecutorial discretion, community characteristics and variability in law enforcement and Board of Parole Hearings practices. Statewide Recidivism Rate 65.1% 68.0% Riverside 69.3% All Others 70.1% Kern 70.3% San Diego 71.5% San Bernardino 72.0% Stanislaus 74.2% Fresno 76.3% San Joaquin 77.6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Despite the fact that over a quarter of all inmates who were paroled in FY 2006-07 were released into Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles County recidivism rate (57.0 percent) is the lowest of the twelve largest counties (see Figure 6 and Table 7). Stanislaus, Fresno, and San Joaquin counties have the highest overall three-year recidivism rates, ranging from 74.2 percent to 77.6 percent, respectively. As shown throughout the report, re-released inmates generally have higher recidivism rates than those released for the first time. This may also explain Los Angeles County’s low recidivism rate as it received roughly two-and-a-half times as many first-release as re-release inmates. This large proportion of first-release inmates (and their low rate of recidivism) reduced the overall recidivism rate for inmates released to Los Angeles County. The difference in the recidivism rate between first-release inmates and re-release inmates varies greatly by county. Alameda County has the widest range (31.7 percentage points), with first-release inmates recidivating at a rate of 47.6 percent and re-releases recidivating at a rate of 79.3 percent. Fresno County has the 6 Direct discharges are not included since these individuals do not have a parole county. 100% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 narrowest range (10.4 percentage points), with first-release inmates recidivating at a rate of 70.6 percent and re-releases recidivating at a rate of 81.0 percent. Minor changes in recidivism rates have occurred since data were reported for the FY 2005-06 cohort. Despite the fact that the Kern County recidivism rate decreased by 1.4 percentage points in FY 2006-07, it moved up two positions on the recidivism ranking because Riverside County and all others had larger decreases in their recidivism rates (-3.8 and -3.0 percentage points, respectively). San Diego and San Bernardino switched positions, with San Diego having a slightly lower recidivism rate. The increase in the number of Stanislaus County releases bumped San Francisco off this chart; this year San Francisco releases are reflected in the all others category. In sum, first-releases experienced recidivism rate decreases across all counties, with Alameda having the greatest decrease (-6.2 percentage points). The exception was Kern County, which had no recidivism rate change. Recidivism rate decreases also occurred for re-releases, although there were slight increases for Alameda, Sacramento, and San Joaquin counties (2.1 percentage points and less). Note that these results represent the county to which the inmates were paroled; however, inmates may not have remained in the county to which they were paroled. In addition, inmates may recidivate in a county other than that of his/her parole. In such cases, the recidivism is counted in the parole county. Table 7. Recidivism Rates by County 7 First Releases County of Commitment Alameda Fresno Kern Los Angeles Orange Riverside Sacramento San Bernardino San Diego San Joaquin Santa Clara Stanislaus All Others Total 7 Number Paroled 2,727 2,052 2,270 21,782 5,954 4,198 3,329 5,585 4,063 1,238 1,816 872 11,118 67,004 Number Returned 1,298 1,449 1,457 11,119 2,866 2,649 1,591 3,634 2,658 882 1,138 578 6,831 38,150 Total Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 47.6% 70.6% 64.2% 51.0% 48.1% 63.1% 47.8% 65.1% 65.4% 71.2% 62.7% 66.3% 61.4% 56.9% Number Paroled 2,564 2,479 1,777 8,672 2,774 2,932 2,355 4,161 3,385 1,444 1,830 830 11,588 46,791 Number Returned 2,032 2,007 1,388 6,250 2,154 2,295 1,867 3,380 2,668 1,200 1,341 685 9,089 36,356 Recidivism Rate 79.3% 81.0% 78.1% 72.1% 77.6% 78.3% 79.3% 81.2% 78.8% 83.1% 73.3% 82.5% 78.4% 77.7% Direct discharges are not included since these individuals do not have a parole county. Number Paroled 5,291 4,531 4,047 30,454 8,728 7,130 5,684 9,746 7,448 2,682 3,646 1,702 22,706 113,795 Number Returned 3,330 3,456 2,845 17,369 5,020 4,944 3,458 7,014 5,326 2,082 2,479 1,263 15,920 74,506 Recidivism Rate 62.9% 76.3% 70.3% 57.0% 57.5% 69.3% 60.8% 72.0% 71.5% 77.6% 68.0% 74.2% 70.1% 65.5% 21 22 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 8 Offender Characteristics Offender characteristics include the categories for the controlling crime of the current term; sentence type; special classifications of inmates including registered sex offenders, serious or violent offenders, mental health status; developmental disability, substance abuse program participation, and risk to reoffend, as measured by the California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA) at the time of release. 8.1 Commitment Offense Category Figure 7. Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense Category 100% 90% At 69.1 percent, inmates committed to CDCR for property crimes have the highest three-year recidivism rate. 80% 69.1% 70% 64.5% 58.8% 57.9% 60% 50% 60.5% 63.3% 63.0% 65.1% 51.9% 46.5% 45.2% 47.9% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Property Crime Two Years Drug Crime Three Years Other Crime Total Figure 7 and Table 8 reveal that inmates committed for property crimes have the highest overall, three-year recidivism rate. Over half of the inmates released with a property crime commitment recidivated within the first year of release and 69.1 percent recidivated within three years of their release. Inmates committed for crimes against persons, drug crimes or other offenses recidivate at an almost identical lower rate, whether it was at one, two, or three years of follow-up. Re-release inmates with drug crime commitments have a threeyear recidivism rate that is 21.9 percentage points higher than first-release inmates with a drug crime commitment (76.5 percent versus 54.6 percent, respectively). Similarly, re-releases with a crime against a person commitment have a three-year recidivism 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 23 November 2011 rate that is approximately 19 percentage points higher than first releases with a crime against a person commitment (73.1 percent versus 53.8 percent, respectively). There were slight declines (up to five percent) in the recidivism rates by Commitment Offense Category for first releases, re-releases and overall groupings from the FY 2005-06 cohort to the FY 2006-07 cohort. Table 8. Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense Category First Releases Offense Categories Crime Against Persons Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes Total Number Released 14,179 22,802 22,124 7,924 67,029 Number Returned 7,633 14,081 12,086 4,358 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 53.8% 61.8% 54.6% 55.0% 56.9% Number Released 12,141 16,025 14,599 5,460 48,225 Number Returned 8,874 12,749 11,167 4,071 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 73.1% 79.6% 76.5% 74.6% 76.4% Number Released 26,320 38,827 36,723 13,384 115,254 Number Returned 16,507 26,830 23,253 8,429 75,019 Recidivism Rate 62.7% 69.1% 63.3% 63.0% 65.1% 24 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 8.2 Commitment Offense 8,9,10 Figure 8. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense Murder Second 7.3% Vehicular Manslaughter 33.5% Sodomy 38.8% CS Manufacturing 41.8% Kidnapping 44.3% Driving Under Influence 45.7% Lewd Act With Child 46.5% Attempted Murder Second 47.0% Manslaughter 49.9% Marijuana Other 50.3% Sexual Penetration with Object 50.5% Rape 51.1% CS Possession for Sale 54.9% Marijuana Possession for Sale 57.1% Oral Copulation 58.7% Forgery/Fraud 58.7% CS Sales 60.2% Hashish Possession 60.4% Marijuana Sale 60.9% Assault with Deadly Weapon 61.9% Arson 62.0% Grand Theft 63.5% Robbery 64.3% Other Offenses 64.5% Escape/Abscond 65.5% Other Property 66.0% Other Assault/Battery 66.9% Burglary - First Degree 67.0% CS Other 67.5% Burglary - Second Degree 69.0% Possession Weapon 69.3% CS Possession 69.4% Petty Theft With Prior 71.4% Receiving Stolen Property 71.5% Other Sex Offenses 71.5% Vehicle Theft 74.3% 0% 8 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Other sex offenses include failure to register as a sex offender, unlawful sex with a minor, and indecent exposure. 9 Other offenses include false imprisonment, accessory, and malicious harassment. 10 CS is an abbreviation for “Controlled Substance.” 100% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Figure 8 and Table 9 show the top three highest three-year recidivism rates for all releases occurs for inmates who were committed to a CDCR adult institution for vehicle theft, other sex offenses and receiving stolen property (ranging from 71.5 to 74.3 percent). The lowest three recidivism rates for all releases occur for inmates committed to CDCR for murder second, vehicular manslaughter, and sodomy (ranging from 7.3 to 38.8 percent). Inmates committed for more serious crimes do not have higher recidivism rates. For example, approximately 74 percent of inmates convicted of vehicle theft recidivate within three years, whereas approximately 51.1 percent of inmates convicted of rape (more than 20 percentage points less) recidivate within three years. There are also differences when examining commitment offense grouping by type of release. Despite their commitment crime, all re-releases have at least a 59 percent recidivism rate ranging from as low as 59.2 percent (vehicular manslaughter) to 82.6 percent (vehicle theft). However, such a broad statement cannot be made for first releases due to the wide range in their recidivism rates, which vary by as much as 66.1 percentage points. Murder second is the lowest at 2.8 percent and vehicle theft is the highest at 69.0 percent. Comparison to the FY 2005-06 cohort shows overall declines in the FY 2006-07 cohort recidivism rates across most of the offenses. The largest overall decline was for sodomy (-22.2 percentage points) and the largest overall increase was for marijuana sale (+4.8 percentage points). With respect to first releases, the largest decline was for escape/abscond (-24.4 percentage points); however, the recidivism rates increased for three offenses [attempted murder second (+0.8 percentage points), marijuana sale (+5.6 percentage points) and oral copulation (+11.8 percentage points)]. For re-releases, the largest decline was for sexual penetration with object (-15.6 percentage points); however, the recidivism rates increased for several offenses [ranging from CS posession for sale (+0.2 percentage points) to marijuana sale (+2.7 percentage points)]. Please also see Appendix C for an in-depth analysis of the recidivism behavior of murderers who returned to CDCR either as a new admission or with a new term over a 15-year time period. Although this 15-year murderer recidivism report is not directly related, or necessarily comparable, to the data presented in this 2011 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report, it is included for informational purposes. The seriousness of an inmate’s commitment crime may be inversely related to his/her recidivism risk. 25 26 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 9. Recidivism Rates by Commitment Offense 11 First Releases Offense Murder First Murder Second Attempted Murder First Vehicular Manslaughter Sodomy CS Manufacturing Kidnapping Driving Under Influence Lewd Act With Child Attempted Murder Second Manslaughter Marijuana Other Sexual Penetration with Object Rape CS Possession for Sale Marijuana Possession for Sale Oral Copulation Forgery/Fraud CS Sales Hashish Possession Marijuana Sale Assault with Deadly Weapon Arson Grand Theft Robbery Other Offenses Escape/Abscond Other Property Other Assault/Battery Burglary - First Degree CS Other Burglary - Second Degree Possession Weapon CS Possession Petty Theft With Prior Other Sex Offenses Receiving Stolen Property Vehicle Theft Total Number Released 6 36 11 190 27 545 143 1,901 1,018 213 303 86 56 191 6,762 716 90 2,203 2,049 29 284 3,229 149 2,106 2,817 2,088 78 676 4,873 1,883 373 4,417 3,708 11,280 3,585 976 3,103 4,829 67,029 11 Number Returned 1 1 0 51 10 141 48 705 368 81 120 26 22 73 3,094 356 48 1,055 1,013 18 152 1,758 75 1,152 1,590 1,145 39 395 2,824 1,080 223 2,733 2,394 7,063 2,298 638 2,036 3,332 38,158 Total Re-Releases Recidivism Rate N/A 2.8% N/A 26.8% N/A 25.9% 33.6% 37.1% 36.1% 38.0% 39.6% 30.2% 39.3% 38.2% 45.8% 49.7% 53.3% 47.9% 49.4% N/A 53.5% 54.4% 50.3% 54.7% 56.4% 54.8% 50.0% 58.4% 58.0% 57.4% 59.8% 61.9% 64.6% 62.6% 64.1% 65.4% 65.6% 69.0% 56.9% Number Released 0 5 5 49 22 369 92 767 804 119 184 63 45 169 3,380 397 106 1,438 1,190 24 181 2,507 154 1,419 2,238 1,931 99 449 4,478 1,583 354 3,052 2,509 8,641 2,872 1,318 2,103 3,109 48,225 Number Returned 0 2 3 29 9 241 56 515 479 75 123 49 29 111 2,478 280 67 1,082 936 14 131 1,795 113 1,088 1,659 1,449 77 348 3,434 1,243 268 2,421 1,917 6,770 2,310 1,003 1,688 2,569 36,861 Recidivism Rate N/A N/A N/A 59.2% N/A 65.3% 60.9% 67.1% 59.6% 63.0% 66.8% 77.8% 64.4% 65.7% 73.3% 70.5% 63.2% 75.2% 78.7% N/A 72.4% 71.6% 73.4% 76.7% 74.1% 75.0% 77.8% 77.5% 76.7% 78.5% 75.7% 79.3% 76.4% 78.3% 80.4% 76.1% 80.3% 82.6% 76.4% Number Released 6 41 16 239 49 914 235 2,668 1,822 332 487 149 101 360 10,142 1,113 196 3,641 3,239 53 465 5,736 303 3,525 5,055 4,019 177 1,125 9,351 3,466 727 7,469 6,217 19,921 6,457 2,294 5,206 7,938 115,254 Recidivism rates were not calculated when fewer than 30 inmates were released. Number Returned 1 3 3 80 19 382 104 1,220 847 156 243 75 51 184 5,572 636 115 2,137 1,949 32 283 3,553 188 2,240 3,249 2,594 116 743 6,258 2,323 491 5,154 4,311 13,833 4,608 1,641 3,724 5,901 75,019 Recidivism Rate N/A 7.3% N/A 33.5% 38.8% 41.8% 44.3% 45.7% 46.5% 47.0% 49.9% 50.3% 50.5% 51.1% 54.9% 57.1% 58.7% 58.7% 60.2% 60.4% 60.9% 61.9% 62.0% 63.5% 64.3% 64.5% 65.5% 66.0% 66.9% 67.0% 67.5% 69.0% 69.3% 69.4% 71.4% 71.5% 71.5% 74.3% 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 27 November 2011 8.3 Sentence Type Figure 9. Recidivism Rates by Sentence Type 100% 90% 80% 70% 65.1% 60.5% 60% 50% 47.9% 40% 30% 20% 12.8% 10.5% 10% 4.7% 0% One Year Two Years Determinate Sentence Law Three Years Indeterminate Sentence Law California’s Determinate Sentencing Law 12 had been in effect for about 35 years by the time the inmates in this FY 2006-07 cohort were released. As a result, the vast majority of individuals who were released served a determinate sentence. Figure 9 and Table 10 show that despite this fact, the 72 inmates who were released after having served an indeterminate sentence recidivated at a rate that was much lower than those who served a determinate sentence (12.8 percent versus 65.1 percent, respectively). Those who served an indeterminate sentence are more likely to be older than those who served a determinate sentence. Although few in number, inmates released after having served an indeterminate sentence recidivate at a much lower rate (12.8 percent) than those who served a determinate sentence (65.1 percent). Table 10. Recidivism Rates by Sentence Type 13 First Releases Sentence Type Determinate Sentence Law Indeterminate Sentence Law Total 12 13 Number Released 66,957 72 67,029 Number Returned 38,153 5 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 57.0% 6.9% 56.9% Number Released 48,211 14 48,225 Number Returned 36,855 6 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 76.4% NA 76.4% Number Released 115,168 86 115,254 The Uniform Determinative Sentencing Act was enacted by the California Legislature in 1976. Recidivism rates were not calculated when fewer than 30 inmates were released. Number Returned 75,008 11 75,019 Recidivism Rate 65.1% 12.8% 65.1% 28 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 8.4 Sex Registrants Figure 10. Recidivism Rates by Sex Registration Flag 100% 90% Offenders who are required to register as a sex offender have a slightly higher recidivism rate than those who do not. 80% 70% 66.9% 62.5% 60% 50% 51.3% 65.0% 60.3% 47.6% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years Sex Registration Flag Three Years No Sex Registration Flag Figure 10 and Table 11 show that for total releases, the three-year recidivism rate for offenders required to register as a sex offender (sex registrants) is 1.9 percentage points higher than those who do not. First-release sex registrants have a slightly higher recidivism rate than nonsex registrants (0.9 percentage points) while re-release flagged sex offenders have a lower recidivism rate than nonsex registrants (1.9 percentage points). There was a reversal of the total recidivism rates from FY 2005-06 to FY 2006-07, with the 2006-07 cohort showing an increase in recidivism in each of the three follow-up years. Examination into this finding reveals that across the three years, the greatest increase occurred in the one-year recidivism rates for sex registrants (+4.8 percentage points). This may be an artifact of the initial implementation of policies related to Jessica’s Law, passed in November 2006, which led to increased supervision of sex registrants. Table 11. Recidivism Rates by Sex Registration Flag First Releases Sex Registration Flag Yes No Total Number Released 3,606 63,423 67,029 Number Returned 2,083 36,075 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 57.8% 56.9% 56.9% Number Released 4,223 44,002 48,225 Number Returned 3,155 33,706 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 74.7% 76.6% 76.4% Number Released 7,829 107,425 115,254 Number Returned 5,238 69,781 75,019 Recidivism Rate 66.9% 65.0% 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 29 November 2011 8.4.1 Recommitment Offense for Sex Registrants Figure 11. Sex Registrant Recommitment Offense 84.4% Parole Violation 5.9% New Sex Crime 9.7% N=5,238 New Nonsex Crime Recidivating sex registrants are most often returned to prison for a new nonsex crime than for a new sex crime. As seen in Figure 11 and Table 12, a larger proportion of sex registrants return to prison for a new nonsex crime offense (9.7 percent), exceeding those who return to prison for a new sex crime (5.9 percent). A slightly higher proportion of sex registrants return to prison for a new sex crime or for a new nonsex crime after having served more than one prison sentence (an increase of 2.2 and 0.7 percentage points, respectively). Regardless of the release type, 84.4 percent of sex registrants return to prison for parole violations. From FY 2005-06 to FY 2006-07, there was a slight decrease in the proportion of parole violators (-1.6 percent) and an increase in those who returned for a new sex crime (+0.9 percent) and a new nonsex crime (+0.8 percent). Offenders who are required to register as a sex offender are more likely to be recommitted to CDCR for a new nonsex crime than for a new sex crime. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 12. Sex Registrant Recommitment Offense First Releases Returned Re-Releases Returned Reason for Recidivism New Sex Crime New Nonsex Crime Parole Violation Total Number 95 193 1,795 2,083 Percent 4.6 9.3 86.2 100.0 Number 216 315 2,624 3,155 Total Returned Percent 6.8 10.0 83.2 100.0 Number 311 508 4,419 5,238 Percent 5.9 9.7 84.4 100.0 8.5 Comparison of Violent, Drug and Registered Sex Offender Recidivism Rates By Age Figure 12. Violent, Drug and Registered Sex Offender Recidivism Rates By Age 72.4% 74.1% 18-19 68.1% 70.3% 70.5% 20-24 58.6% 25-29 54.5% 30-34 Age Groups 30 61.1% 57.3% 35-39 56.7% 40-44 51.2% 45-49 48.1% 50-54 38.4% 55-59 23.3% 60 + 0% 10% 20% 65.6% 63.6% 67.3% 62.1% 61.8% 57.2% 52.9% 65.5% 69.2% 69.8% 69.6% 65.6% 58.8% 47.3% 50.0% 30% Violent Offenders 40% 50% Drug Offenders 60% 70% 80% 90% Registered Sex Offenders Figure 12 and Table 13 depict recidivism rates for violent, drug and registered sex offenders stratified by age. Individuals who were identified as a violent offender had the lowest total recidivism rates (58.1 percent) followed by drug offenders (62.8 percent) and registered sex offenders (66.9 percent). This same pattern was found within each age grouping. Recidivism rates by age followed the same pattern found in the age at release analysis, except for the youngest age group, which had the highest rates for these types of offenses. There were less than 30 registered sex offenders released in this age group, so a rate was not calculated. Consistent with these earlier findings, 100% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 31 November 2011 recidivism rates peaked at age 35-39 and declined thereafter for each group, with the exception that registered sex offender recidivism rate declines did not begin until after age 45. Again, the higher recidivism rates for registered sex offenders may be an artifact of increased supervision requirements. Table 13. Violent, Drug and Registered Sex Offender Recidivism Rates By Age 14 Violent Offenders Age Groups 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60 + Total Number Released 58 1,641 2,252 1,368 944 735 529 270 112 86 7,995 Number Returned 42 1,117 1,319 745 541 417 271 130 43 20 4,645 Recidivism Rate 72.4% 68.1% 58.6% 54.5% 57.3% 56.7% 51.2% 48.1% 38.4% 23.3% 58.1% Drug Offenders Number Released 81 3,351 6,029 5,461 6,170 6,009 4,725 2,399 906 370 35,501 Number Returned 60 2,357 3,952 3,334 3,927 3,731 2,922 1,372 479 175 22,309 Registered Sex Offenders Recidivism Rate 74.1% 70.3% 65.5% 61.1% 63.6% 62.1% 61.8% 57.2% 52.9% 47.3% 62.8% Number Released 11 404 918 986 1,243 1,412 1,279 800 400 376 7,829 Number Returned 11 285 635 647 837 985 890 525 235 188 5,238 Recidivism Rate N/A 70.5% 69.2% 65.6% 67.3% 69.8% 69.6% 65.6% 58.8% 50.0% 66.9% 8.6 Serious or Violent Offenders Figure 13. Recidivism Rates by Serious/Violent Offender Flag 100% 90% 80% 70% 66.2% 61.6% 60% 60.9% 56.0% 49.2% 50% 42.8% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years Serious/Violent Offenders 14 Three Years No Serious/Violent Flag Recidivism rates were not calculated when fewer than 30 inmates were released. Inmates identified as being serious/violent recidivate at a rate lower than those without a serious/violent offense. 32 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Figure 13 and Table 14 show that across all three years serious/violent offenders return to prison at a lower rate than inmates not flagged for serious/violent offenses. Within the first year of release, roughly 50 percent of the nonserious/nonviolent inmates return to prison and 42.8 percent of serious/violent offenders return to prison. By the third year, nonserious/nonviolent inmates recidivate at a rate of 66.2 percent and serious/violent offenders recidivate at a rate of 60.9 percent. First-release serious/violent and nonserious/nonviolent inmates recidivate at lower rates (52.1 percent and 58.1 percent, respectively) than re-release serious/violent and nonserious/nonviolent inmates (72.5 percent and 77.5 percent, respectively). When compared to the FY 2005-06 cohort, overall the FY 2006-07 cohort showed the greatest decline in recidivism rates for the nonserious/nonviolent offenders, particularly those who were first releases. Table 14. Recidivism Rates by Serious/Violent Offender Flag Re-Releases First Releases Serious/Violent Offense Yes No Total Number Released 13,312 53,717 67,029 Number Returned 6,932 31,226 38,158 Recidivism Rate 52.1% 58.1% 56.9% Number Released 10,171 38,054 48,225 Number Returned 7,378 29,483 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 72.5% 77.5% 76.4% Number Released 23,483 91,771 115,254 Number Returned 14,310 60,709 75,019 8.7 Mental Health Status 15 Approximately 14 percent of the felons released from CDCR in FY 2006-07 were designated as either EOP or CCCMS. EOP is designed for mentally ill inmates who experience adjustment difficulties in a general population setting, but are not so impaired that they require 24-hour inpatient care. Similar to secure daytreatment services in the community, the program includes 10 hours of structured clinical activity per week, individual clinical contacts at least every 2 weeks, and enhanced nursing services. Inmates receiving CCCMS services are housed within the general population and participate on an outpatient basis. Services include individual counseling, crisis intervention, medication review, group therapy, social skills training, clinical discharge and pre-release planning. This is similar to an outpatient program in the community. 15 EOP and CCCMS are CDCR designations and do not necessarily reflect a clinical (e.g., Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) mental health diagnosis. Recidivism Rate 60.9% 66.2% 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 33 November 2011 Figure 14. Recidivism Rates by Mental Health Status 100% 90% 80% 60% 75.1% 71.0% 70% 70.3% 66.3% 63.9% 59.2% 59.3% 53.2% 50% 46.6% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Enhanced Outpatient Program Two Years Correctional Clinical Case Management System Three Years No Mental Health Code Figure 14 and Table 15 show that inmates with identified mental health issues recidivate at higher rates than those who are not. The recidivism rate is higher for inmates who received mental health treatment services in the CDCR EOP than those who received services in the CCCMS. Specifically, the recidivism rates for the EOP and CCCMS inmates are higher (75.1 and 70.3 percent, respectively) than that for inmates who did not have a mental health code designation (63.9 percent). At the end of three years, first-release inmates with an EOP designation recidivate at higher rate (69.9 percent) than those designated as CCCMS (62.7 percent). In addition, first releases who were served by the EOP have a recidivism rate that is 14 percentage points higher than those who did not have a mental health code designation, and first-release inmates served by the CCCMS recidivated at a rate that was 6.8 percentage points higher. In contrast, the recidivism rates for re-released mental health inmates did not differ much from nonmental health inmates. Re-released inmates who were EOP or CCCMS have a higher recidivism rate (79.0 percent and 78.2 percent, respectively) than nonmental health inmates (76.0 percent). When compared to the FY 2005-06 cohort, CCCMS inmates had the greatest recidivism rate decline (-4 percentage points). Overall, inmates with identified mental health issues recidivate at a higher rate than those without mental health issues. 34 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 15. Recidivism Rates by Mental Health Status 16 First Releases Mental Health Code Enhanced Outpatient Program Correctional Clinical Case Management System Crisis Bed No Mental Health Code Department Mental Health Total Number Released 2,337 5,660 8 59,024 0 67,029 Number Returned 1,633 3,551 4 32,970 0 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 69.9% 62.7% N/A 55.9% N/A 56.9% Number Released 3,096 5,471 8 39,649 1 48,225 Number Returned 2,447 4,278 7 30,128 1 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 79.0% 78.2% N/A 76.0% N/A 76.4% Number Released 5,433 11,131 16 98,673 1 115,254 Number Returned 4,080 7,829 11 63,098 1 75,019 8.8 Risk of Recidivism Observed recidivism rates increase in line with predicted recidivism rates, as measured by the CSRA. The CSRA is a tool used to calculate an offender’s risk of being convicted of a new offense after release from prison. Based on their criminal history, offenders are designated as having either a low, medium or high risk of being convicted of a new offense after release, with the high risk being further delineated with three subcategories (high drug, high property and high violence). Over half of all inmates released from CDCR in FY 2006-07 were designated as being at high-risk of recidivism. Figure 15. Recidivism Rates by CSRA Risk Category 100% 90% 80% 75.6% 70.9% 70% 60% 59.0% 57.6% 54.2% 50% 41.4% 40% 30% 42.8% 38.6% 28.4% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years Low 16 Medium Three Years High Recidivism rates were not calculated when fewer than 30 inmates were released. Recidivism Rate 75.1% 70.3% N/A 63.9% N/A 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 As expected, the three-year recidivism rate for all releases is lowest for those with a low-risk score (42.8 percent) followed by those with a medium-risk score (59.0 percent), and the high-risk inmates have the highest recidivism rate (75.6 percent) (see Figure 15 and Table 16). Similarly, recidivism rates for first releases and re-releases increase as inmate risk level increases. However, the lower the risk score, the larger the difference in recidivism rate between first releases and re-releases. Low-risk re-releases recidivate at a rate about 27 percentage points higher than low-risk first releases. Medium-risk re-releases recidivate at a rate 20 percentage points higher than medium-risk first releases. High-risk re-releases recidivate at a rate 11 percentage points higher than high-risk first releases. The greatest decline in recidivism rates by risk score from the FY 2005-06 cohort occurred for first releases, which range from a decrease of 3.4 to 4.2 percentage points. Table 16. Recidivism Rates by CSRA Risk Category 17 First Releases Number Released 13,223 21,024 31,378 1,404 67,029 Risk Score Low Medium High N/A Total Number Returned 4,579 10,882 22,048 649 38,158 Total Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 34.6% 51.8% 70.3% 46.2% 56.9% Number Released 5,621 11,760 29,608 1,236 48,225 Number Returned 3,481 8,446 24,079 855 36,861 Recidivism Rate 61.9% 71.8% 81.3% 69.2% 76.4% Number Released 18,844 32,784 60,986 2,640 115,254 Number Returned 8,060 19,328 46,127 1,504 75,019 9 CDCR Incarceration Experience For the purpose of this report, length-of-stay refers to the total amount of time an inmate served in CDCR adult institutions on the term from which she/he was released in FY 2006-07, regardless of the number of times an inmate cycled in and out of incarceration prior to the FY 2006-07 release. Example: Prior to being released in FY 2006-07, an inmate who was initially committed to CDCR on August 1, 2002, initially paroled on August 1, 2004 (24 months served at CDCR), returned to prison on the same term on December 1, 2004, was released again on April 1, 2005 (4 more months served at CDCR), then 17 N/A reflects scores computed manually for inmates whose CII numbers did not match to the Department of Justice rap sheet data files. Consequently, the CSRA scores for these inmates are currently unavailable. Recidivism Rate 42.8% 59.0% 75.6% 57.0% 65.1% 35 36 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 returned to prison on the same term on April 1, 2006, and was released during the FY 2006-07 cohort period on August 1, 2006 (4 months served at CDCR). Added together, this inmate would have a total of 32 months in CDCR for the current term. 9.1 Length-of-Stay (Current Term) Figure 16. Recidivism Rates by Length-of-Stay 100% 90% Recidivism rates peak for inmates who serve 2 to 3 years (69.8 percent) and decline thereafter, which may be attributed to the effects of age. 80% 68.7% 70% 60% 58.3% 69.3% 69.8% 67.0% 62.7% 61.5% 60.4% 57.2% 50% 40.1% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0-6 months 7 - 12 months 13 - 18 months 19 - 24 months 2-3 years 3-4 years 4-5 years 5 - 10 years 10 - 15 years 15 + years Figure 16 and Table 17 show that the FY 2006-07 cohort recidivism rate is 58.3 percent for inmates who served 0 to 6 months on their current term. From that point, the recidivism rate increases incrementally until it peaks at 69.8 percent for those who served 2 to 3 years on their current term. Thereafter, the recidivism rate drops steadily as the length-of-stay increases, ending with inmates who served 15 or more years having a recidivism rate of 40.1 percent. First releases show a different pattern than that of the overall cohort. First releases peak at 13 to 18 months (60.3 percent) ending with inmates who served 15 or more years having a 28.0 percent recidivism rate. Re-releases show a similar pattern to that of the overall cohort, peaking at 13 to 18 months and 19 to 24 months (78.3 percent) and then decreasing thereafter. Diverging from the first releases and the overall cohort, rereleases end with inmates who served 15 or more years having a much higher recidivism rate (59.5 percent). The effects of lengthof-stay may also be confounded by the effects of age. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 There were declines in all length-of-stay categories from FYs 2005-06 to 2006-07, with the slightest decrease occurring for those who stayed 2 to 3 years (-0.2 percentage points) to those who stayed 0 to 6 months (-4.8 percentage points). The exception was for those who stayed 15-plus years, as their recidivism rates increased by 2.3 percentage points. Table 17. Recidivism Rates by Length-of-Stay First Releases Length-of-Stay 0 - 6 months 7 - 12 months 13 - 18 months 19 - 24 months 2 - 3 years 3 - 4 years 4 - 5 years 5 - 10 years 10 - 15 years 15 + years Total Number Released 10,126 26,128 11,082 6,250 5,706 2,546 1,670 2,828 575 118 67,029 Number Returned 5,606 15,340 6,680 3,607 3,245 1,310 775 1,292 270 33 38,158 Total Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 55.4% 58.7% 60.3% 57.7% 56.9% 51.5% 46.4% 45.7% 47.0% 28.0% 56.9% Number Released 2,301 8,147 9,708 7,983 9,777 4,440 2,014 3,313 468 74 48,225 Number Returned 1,645 6,159 7,599 6,252 7,556 3,369 1,490 2,420 327 44 36,861 Recidivism Rate 71.5% 75.6% 78.3% 78.3% 77.3% 75.9% 74.0% 73.0% 69.9% 59.5% 76.4% Number Released 12,427 34,275 20,790 14,233 15,483 6,986 3,684 6,141 1,043 192 115,254 Number Returned 7,251 21,499 14,279 9,859 10,801 4,679 2,265 3,712 597 77 75,019 Recidivism Rate 58.3% 62.7% 68.7% 69.3% 69.8% 67.0% 61.5% 60.4% 57.2% 40.1% 65.1% 37 38 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 9.2 Number of Returns to CDCR Custody Prior to Release (Current Term Only) Re-released Inmates who return to CDCR incarceration at least one time during their current term have a recidivism rate similar to inmates who have multiple returns to custody. Figure 17. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Number of Returns to CDCR Custody (RTC) on the Current Term Prior to Release 100% 90% 80% 75.5% 77.7% 78.7% 77.8% 76.2% 72.8% 70% 60% 70.0% 72.5% 68.8% 61.2% 56.9% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% None 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ Number of Prior RTCs Figure 17 and Table 18 show the number of returns to CDCR custody on the current term for inmates released from CDCR during FY 2006-07. The “None” category represents inmates released for the first time (i.e., these individuals have no prior returns for their current term). There is little variation in the recidivism rate despite the number of prior returns to CDCR custody within the current term. A re-released inmate who returns once on the current term has a recidivism rate similar to that of a re-released inmate who returns twice, three times, four times, etc. This relationship changes when all stays on all terms are taken into account (see Section 9.3, below). From FY 2005-06 to FY 2006-07, there were minor shifts in the recidivism rates for each number of RTCs (with some increasing 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 and some decreasing). The greatest change was for those who had 10-plus returns, which increased 10.5 percentage points. 18 Table 18. Number of Returns to CDCR Custody on Current Term Prior to Release Total RTCs on Current Term None 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ Total 18 Number Released 67,029 22,128 11,313 6,505 3,705 2,077 1,205 640 357 170 125 115,254 Number Recidivism Returned Rate 38,158 56.9% 16,711 75.5% 8,794 77.7% 5,119 78.7% 2,881 77.8% 1,582 76.2% 877 72.8% 448 70.0% 259 72.5% 104 61.2% 86 68.8% 75,019 65.1% This increase is likely due to a manual correction that was applied to a small number of records in the FY 2006-07 cohort dataset. This relatively minor update presents with a notable change in the recidivism rate since there are so few individuals who return to CDCR 10-plus times on their current term. 39 40 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 9.3 Number of CDCR Stays Ever (All Terms Combined) Figure 18. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Total Number of Stays Ever Over an inmate’s entire criminal career, recidivism rates increase with each additional stay at a CDCR institution. 1 47.3% 2 64.1% 3 69.0% 4 70.1% 5 70.8% 6 73.5% 7 74.7% 8 76.1% 9 78.4% 10 79.4% 11 79.6% 12 81.2% 13 81.5% 14 81.8% 15+ 86.5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% A stay is defined as any period of time an inmate is housed in a CDCR institution. Each time an inmate returns to prison it is considered a new stay, regardless of whether the return represents a new admission, a parole violation with a new term, or a return to prison following a parole violation. The number of stays is cumulative over any number of convictions or terms in an offender’s criminal career. As the number of prior incarcerations in CDCR adult institutions increases, so does the likelihood of return to prison (see Figure 18 and Table 19). Examination of prior CDCR stays for inmates released in FY 2006-07 supports this assertion. While there are progressively fewer inmates who return to prison over time, the recidivism rates for those who do return increases incrementally with each additional stay, from 47.3 percent for inmates who had one (first ever) stay to 86.5 percent for inmates who had 15-plus stays. Almost half (47.7 percent) of the inmates returned to prison have between one and three CDCR stays, and the greatest increase in the recidivism rates occurs between one and two stays (16.8 percentage point increase). 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 From FY 2005-06 to 2006-07, there were overall declines in the recidivism rates for most categories of stays, ranging from six stays (-0.5 percentage points) to fourteen stays (-4.6 percentage points). The only increases were for offenders who had two stays (+2.2 percentage points) and fifteen or more stays (+0.2 percentage points). Table 19. Recidivism Rates by Total Number of Stays Ever First Releases Stays 1 Number Released 32,983 Number Returned 15,589 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 47.3% Number Released 0 Number Returned 0 Total Recidivism Rate N/A Number Released 32,983 Number Returned 15,589 Recidivism Rate 47.3% 2 7,926 4,442 56.0% 10,012 7,062 70.5% 17,938 11,504 64.1% 3 5,137 3,177 61.8% 7,485 5,536 74.0% 12,622 8,713 69.0% 4 3,964 2,492 62.9% 5,544 4,176 75.3% 9,508 6,668 70.1% 5 3,285 2,143 65.2% 4,245 3,189 75.1% 7,530 5,332 70.8% 6 2,719 1,877 69.0% 3,467 2,672 77.1% 6,186 4,549 73.5% 7 2,190 1,589 72.6% 2,892 2,205 76.2% 5,082 3,794 74.7% 8 1,846 1,340 72.6% 2,519 1,983 78.7% 4,365 3,323 76.1% 9 1,440 1,091 75.8% 2,089 1,677 80.3% 3,529 2,768 78.4% 10 1,163 887 76.3% 1,782 1,450 81.4% 2,945 2,337 79.4% 11 944 730 77.3% 1,478 1,198 81.1% 2,422 1,928 79.6% 12 777 606 78.0% 1,315 1,092 83.0% 2,092 1,698 81.2% 13 595 463 77.8% 1,086 907 83.5% 1,681 1,370 81.5% 14 15+ Total 479 381 79.5% 878 729 83.0% 1,357 1,110 81.8% 1,581 67,029 1,351 38,158 85.5% 56.9% 3,433 48,225 2,985 36,861 87.0% 76.4% 5,014 115,254 4,336 75,019 86.5% 65.1% 41 42 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 10 Recidivism by Institutional Missions 10.1 Institution Missions Figure 19. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Institutional Missions 19 100% 90% Inmates housed in reception centers at least 30 days prior to release are more likely to recidivate than inmates housed at any other CDCR mission. 80% 73.5% 70% 64.4% 64.7% 66.6% 60% 56.3% 57.2% Level IV Female Institutions 58.4% 52.3% 56.3% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Level I Level II Level III Camps Reception Centers Other Facilities Under 30 days Institutional Mission Figure 19 and Table 20 show the three-year recidivism rates for the FY 2006-07 inmates categorized by the last mission 20 in which they were housed for at least 30 days prior to being released. The three-year recidivism rate is highest for inmates who were released to parole from reception centers (73.5 percent), likely influenced by re-releases as they are oftentimes housed in reception centers when their parole has been revoked. Recidivism rates were fairly comparable for inmates who were 19 20 Since inmates are often transferred to institutions closer to their county just prior to release, it was decided that the last institution where an inmate spent at least 30 days prior to being released to parole in FY 2006-07 would be the inmate’s institution of release. The “Under 30 Days” category reflects those inmates who were not incarcerated in any one institution for at least 30 days prior to being paroled. Since females are not housed according to levels, all female institutions are collapsed and displayed as “Female Institutions.” Levels I through IV are male only. Camps, reception centers, other facilities and under 30 days categories are comprised of both males and females. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 assigned to the first three housing levels (approximately 64 to 67 percent) with inmates who were assigned to camps having the lowest overall recidivism rate of all CDCR missions (52.3 percent). While women housed in CDCR female institutions recidivated at a slightly higher rate than males in Level IV housing (approximately 1.0 percentage point) and CDCR camps (4.9 percentage points), females still had a lower rate than males housed in Level I through III institutions, as well as inmates housed in reception centers and “other facilities.” First releases recidivate at a lower rate (ranging from 48.8 to 62.1 percent) than re-releases (ranging from 72.0 to 80.0 percent). After ranking the recidivism rates from highest to lowest for each mission for both first and re-releases (Table 21), comparisons of the results show that inmates who are housed in reception centers have the highest recidivism rate when they are first releases and the third lowest recidivism rate when they are re-releases. In addition, inmates housed in both Level III and Level IV institutions have a higher likelihood to recidivate when they are re-releases. Women housed in female institutions have the lowest recidivism rates irrespective of release type. From FY 2005-06 to 2006-07, the total recidivism rates decreased, ranging from a 1.2 percentage point decrease for inmates released from Level III housing to a 6.5 percentage point decrease for those released from a camp. The exception was a slight increase for those released from Level IV housing (+0.8 percentage points). A similar pattern was found for first releases and re-releases. Table 20 presents the percentage of inmates who were released with a high CSRA score (i.e., were identified as having a high risk to recidivate) by mission. Although it may seem logical that inmate risk to recidivate would increase as housing level increased, there is actually almost an inverse relationship between these two factors, with risk to recidivate decreasing as security housing increases. The exception to this finding is for Level III inmates who have both a high CDCR security housing level and also represent the greatest proportion of inmates (within the four housing levels) that have high CSRA risk scores. Appendix D shows these mission recidivism rates further broken out by gender and institutions. Although inmates housed in reception centers have the highest recidivism rate for all missions overall and for first releases, inmates re-released from reception centers have the third lowest rate for all missions. 43 44 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 20. Recidivism Rates by Institutional Missions 21 Percent of Total Released with a High Risk Institutional Mission CSRA Score Level I 53.8% Level II 51.1% Level III 58.1% Level IV 50.9% Female Institutions 32.8% Camps 49.5% Reception Centers 58.6% Other Facilities 54.0% Under 30 days 36.9% Total 52.9% First Releases Number Released 12,663 16,951 7,654 6,229 5,337 2,837 5,745 8,876 737 67,029 Number Recidivism Returned Rate 7,415 58.6% 9,980 58.9% 4,720 61.7% 3,111 49.9% 2,604 48.8% 1,484 52.3% 3,568 62.1% 4,862 54.8% 414 56.2% 38,158 56.9% Re-Releases Number Released 5,534 8,416 2,790 1,684 3,053 1 24,903 1,839 5 48,225 Number Recidivism Number Returned Rate Released 4,295 77.6% 18,197 6,439 76.5% 25,367 2,231 80.0% 10,444 1,345 79.9% 7,913 2,199 72.0% 8,390 0 N/A 2,838 18,950 76.1% 30,648 1,398 76.0% 10,715 4 N/A 742 36,861 76.4% 115,254 Table 21. Recidivism Rates by Institutional Missions Sorted from Highest to Lowest First Releases Institutional Mission Reception Centers Level III Level II Level I Under 30 days Other Facilities Camps Level IV Female Institutions Recidivism Rate 62.1% 61.7% 58.9% 58.6% 56.2% 54.8% 52.3% 49.9% 48.8% Re-Releases Institutional Mission Level III Level IV Level I Level II Reception Centers Other Facilities Female Institutions Camps Under 30 days Recidivism Rate 80.0% 79.9% 77.6% 76.5% 76.1% 76.0% 72.0% N/A N/A 10.2 Security Housing Unit (SHU) Approximately 5 percent of the felons released from CDCR in FY 2006-07 were housed in a SHU at some point on the term for which they were released. Inmates whose conduct endangers the safety of others or the security of the institution are housed in a SHU. In most cases, these inmates have committed serious rules violations (e.g., assault on an inmate or staff) while housed in a general population setting or have been validated as a member or associate of a prison gang. 21 Recidivism rates were not calculated where less than 30 inmates were released. Total Number Recidivism Returned Rate 11,710 64.4% 16,419 64.7% 6,951 66.6% 4,456 56.3% 4,803 57.2% 1,484 52.3% 22,518 73.5% 6,260 58.4% 418 56.3% 75,019 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 45 November 2011 Figure 20. Recidivism Rates by Security Housing Unit Status 100% 90% 80% 69.8% 70% 64.8% 64.9% Overall, inmates who were assigned to a Security Housing Unit recidivated at a higher rate than those who were not. 60.2% 60% 52.2% 50% 47.6% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years SHU Three Years No SHU Figure 20 and Table 22 show that across all three years inmates who were assigned to a SHU recidivated at higher rate than those who have were not assigned to a SHU. First-release inmates who were assigned to a SHU recidivated at a rate which was five percentage points higher than first-release inmates who were not assigned to a SHU (61.7 percent and 56.7 percent, respectively). Re-release inmates who were assigned to a SHU recidivated at a rate that was nearly one percentage point higher than re-release inmates who were not assigned to a SHU (77.2 percent and 76.4 percent, respectively). See Appendix E for detailed rates of recidivism for inmates housed in a SHU by CDCR institution. Table 22. Recidivism Rates by Security Housing Unit Status First Releases SHU Status SHU No SHU Total Number Paroled 2,863 64,166 67,029 Number Recidivism Returned Rate 1,766 61.7% 36,392 56.7% 38,158 56.9% Re-Releases Number Paroled 3,139 45,086 48,225 Number Returned 2,423 34,438 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 77.2% 76.4% 76.4% Number Paroled 6,002 109,252 115,254 Number Returned 4,189 70,830 75,019 Recidivism Rate 69.8% 64.8% 65.1% 46 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 11 Recidivism by CDCR Program There are a number of programs at CDCR. Below are recidivism rates by program participation where the data are available for analysis. Future reports will provide results for other programs as well. 11.1 Developmental Disability Program (DDP) Criteria for inclusion in the DDP are low cognitive functioning (usually IQ of 75 or below) and concurrent deficits or impairments in adaptive functioning. Both criteria must be met. All inmates included in the DDP are assigned to housing that addresses their safety and security needs and are provided with appropriate, specific adaptive support services. Adaptive support services include self-care, daily living skills, social skills and self-advocacy. Figure 21. Recidivism Rates by DDP Participation 100% 90% 80% 77.7% 73.6% 70% Overall, inmates with a designated developmental disability recidivate at a higher rate than those without a developmental disability designation. 60% 50% 64.9% 61.6% 60.3% 47.7% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% One Year Two Years DDP Three Years No DDP 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Figure 21 and Table 23 show that across all three years individuals who participated in the DDP return to prison at a higher rate than those who did not participate. Within the first year of release, roughly 60 percent of the inmates from the DDP returned to prison, whereas those not from the DDP returned at a rate that was slightly less than 50 percent. By the third year, these recidivism rates climbed to 77.7 and 64.9 percent, respectively. First-releases in both groups recidivate at lower rates (70.7 percent and 56.8 percent, respectively) than re-releases (83.9 percent and 76.3 percent, respectively). Table 23. Recidivism Rates by DDP Participation First Releases Developmental Disability Program (DDP) Status DDP No DDP Total Number Released 813 66,216 67,029 Number Returned 575 37,583 38,158 Re-Releases Recidivism Rate 70.7% 56.8% 56.9% Number Released 919 47,306 48,225 Number Returned 771 36,090 36,861 Total Recidivism Rate 83.9% 76.3% 76.4% 11.2 In-Prison and Community-Based Substance Abuse (SAP) Treatment Programs 22 In-Prison Substance Abuse Programs and Community-Based (SAPs) are designed to create an extended exposure to a continuum of services during incarceration and facilitate a successful re-entry into community living. These services, provided in both female and male institutions, include substance abuse treatment and recovery services; social, cognitive and behavioral counseling; life skills training; health-related education; and relapse prevention. Community-based substance abuse treatment programs (also referred to as “continuing care” or “aftercare”) provide post-release substance abuse treatment services through the Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agencies (SASCA). There are four SASCAs, one in each parole region, that are responsible for referring, placing, and tracking parolees in appropriate substance abuse programs. 22 This analysis only includes data for SAP programs operated by the CDCR Office of Substance Abuse Treatment Services. Data for substance abuse treatment programs administered by the Department of Adult Parole Operations (DAPO) (e.g. STAR, RSMC, PSC) are not included. Number Released 1,732 113,522 115,254 Number Returned 1,346 73,673 75,019 Recidivism Rate 77.7% 64.9% 65.1% 47 48 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Figure 22. Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Substance Abuse Treatment Program Involvement 100% 90% The combination of in-prison SAP and aftercare results in the best outcome: a recidivism rate that is much lower than those who did not participate in in-prison SAP (with or without aftercare). 80% 78.0% 70% 66.5% 64.7% 62.3% 60% 66.6% 50% 65.3% 46.2% 40% 30% 29.3% 29.7% 20% 10% 0% In-Prison SAP Participant Completers In-Prison SAP Participant Non-Completers Aftercare Completed Some Aftercare No In-Prison SAP Participation No Aftercare Figure 22 and Table 24 depict recidivism rates by Substance Abuse Program (SAP) involvement during and after incarceration. Individuals who completed 23 an in-prison SAP recidivated at rates that were almost identical to those who did not complete an in-prison SAP, with those completing community-based aftercare recidivating at the lowest rate (approximately 30 percent). Given this finding, at first blush it would appear there is little value offered by the in-prison SAP; however, further examination revealed higher recidivism rates for those who had no in-prison SAP and either completed or received some aftercare. Specifically, the no in-prison SAP group who completed aftercare still had a recidivism rate that was approximately 16 percentage points higher than those who were involved in in-prison SAP. Furthermore, those who did not receive in-prison SAP and only received aftercare had the highest recidivism rate (79 percent). The implication of this finding suggests that the combination of inprison SAP and aftercare results in the best outcome: a recidivism rate that is much lower than those who did not participate in in-prison SAP (with or without aftercare). These 23 “Completers” are identified based on clinical judgment that the participant has successfully met the SAP treatment goals. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 49 November 2011 results should be interpreted with caution since the number of aftercare completers is small. For further information on SAP participants, see Appendix F. Table 24. Recidivism Rates by Substance Abuse Treatment Program Involvement 24 First Releases Substance Abuse Treatment Program Involvement In-Prison SAP Participant Completers No Aftercare Some Aftercare Completed Aftercare In-Prison SAP Participant Non-Completers No Aftercare Some Aftercare Completed Aftercare No In-Prison SAP Participation Some Aftercare Completed Aftercare Did Not Participate in SAP or Aftercare Total Total Re-Releases Number Released Number Returned Recidivism Rate Number Released Number Returned Recidivism Rate Number Released Number Returned Recidivism Rate 5,540 927 636 3,389 567 182 61.2% 61.2% 28.6% 1,982 80 29 1,611 60 13 81.3% 75.0% NA 7,522 1,007 665 5,000 627 195 66.5% 62.3% 29.3% 3,286 455 297 1,978 293 88 60.2% 64.4% 29.6% 1,261 43 13 1,028 29 4 81.5% 67.4% NA 4,547 498 310 3,006 322 92 66.1% 64.7% 29.7% 126 73 80 24 63.5% 32.9% 189 90 169 53 89.4% 58.9% 315 163 249 77 79.0% 47.2% 55,689 31,557 56.7% 44,538 33,894 76.1% 100,227 65,451 65.3% 67,029 38,158 48,225 36,861 115,254 75,019 56.9% 76.4% 65.1% 12 Type of Return to CDCR As illustrated in Figure 23, almost half of the inmates released in FY 2006-07 returned to prison for a parole violation within the three-year follow-up period. Nineteen percent of the release cohort returned to CDCR after being convicted of a new criminal offense. 24 These results should not be compared to the FY 2005-06 Division of Addiction and Recovery Services (DARS) “In-Prison Substance Abuse Program (SAP) Return to Prison Analysis and Data Tables” report due to major differences in cohort selection and methodology. Almost 50 percent of the inmates released during FY 2006-07 returned for parole violations within the three-year follow-up period. 50 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Figure 23. Three-year outcomes for inmates released from all CDCR adult institutions in FY 2006-07. Other Crimes 2% Parole Violations 45% Drug Crimes 7% Property Crimes 7% Successful Three Years Out 35% Crimes Against Persons 3% Approximately one-third of inmates released in FY 2006-07 were not returned to the CDCR. Furthermore Table 25, which depicts a breakdown of the reasons parole violators returned to prison, shows that returns due to technical violations were slightly higher than for nontechnical violations (54 versus 46 percent, respectively). Almost all returns for technical violations were due to violations of parole process. Finally, almost 20 percent of FY 2006-07 releases returned to prison after being convicted of a new crime. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 25. Parole Violators Returned to Custody Males Number Percent Females Number Percent Total RTCs Number Percent FELON PAROLE VIOLATORS RETURNED TO CUSTORY (PV-RTC)* PV-RTC with Principal Charge Information 40,739 Charges Dismissed 1,016 PV-RTC with Charge Information Unavailable 5,571 Total 47,326 86.1% 2.1% 11.8% 100.0% 3,818 40 622 4,480 85.2% 0.9% 13.9% 100.0% 44,557 1,056 6,193 51,806 86.0% 2.0% 12.0% 100.0% 5,002 2,738 2,274 3,420 6,922 20,383 40,739 12.3% 6.7% 5.6% 8.4% 17.0% 50.0% 100.0% 279 180 315 259 585 2,200 3,818 7.3% 4.7% 8.3% 6.8% 15.3% 57.6% 100.0% 5,281 2,918 2,589 3,679 7,507 22,583 44,557 11.9% 6.5% 5.8% 8.3% 16.8% 50.7% 100.0% 18,988 21,751 40,739 46.6% 53.4% 100.0% 1,504 2,314 3,818 39.4% 60.6% 100.0% 20,492 24,065 44,557 46.0% 54.0% 100.0% PRINCIPAL CHARGE CATEGORY (Includes Technical and Non-Technical) Crimes Against Persons Weapons Offenses Property Offenses Drug Offenses Other Offenses Violations of Parole Process Total TYPE OF RETURN TO CUSTODY Nontechnical Violations Technical Violations Total 51 52 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Table 25. Parole Violators Returned to Custody (continued) Males Number Percent Females Number Percent Total RTCs Number Percent NON-TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS (Returns for Criminal Violations) TYPE I Drug Possession Drug Use Drug Use/Simple Possession Miscellaneous Violations of Law Sub-Total 759 1,784 13 1,547 4,103 1.9% 4.4% 0.0% 3.8% 10.1% 66 122 0 248 436 1.7% 3.2% 0.0% 6.5% 11.4% 825 1,906 13 1,795 4,539 1.9% 4.3% 0.0% 4.0% 10.2% TYPE II Assault and Battery Burglary Driving Violations Drug Possession Drug Sales/Trafficking Firearms and Weapons Miscellaneous Non-Violent Crimes Miscellaneous Violations of Law Sex Offenses Theft and Forgery Sub-Total 650 438 1,264 3 397 285 2,747 140 1,098 1,611 8,633 1.6% 1.1% 3.1% 0.0% 1.0% 0.7% 6.7% 0.3% 2.7% 4.0% 21.2% 66 39 84 0 30 18 179 4 18 257 695 1.7% 1.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.8% 0.5% 4.7% 0.1% 0.5% 6.7% 18.2% 716 477 1,348 3 427 303 2,926 144 1,116 1,868 9,328 1.6% 1.1% 3.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.7% 6.6% 0.3% 2.5% 4.2% 20.9% TYPE III Assault and Battery (Major) Burglary - Major Driving Violations (Major) Drug Violations (Major) Homicide Miscellaneous Crimes (Major) Rape and Sexual Assaults Robbery Weapon Offenses Sub-Total 2,693 225 453 464 83 764 210 268 1,092 6,252 6.6% 0.6% 1.1% 1.1% 0.2% 1.9% 0.5% 0.7% 2.7% 15.3% 163 19 19 41 2 50 1 29 49 373 4.3% 0.5% 0.5% 1.1% 0.1% 1.3% 0.0% 0.8% 1.3% 9.8% 2,856 244 472 505 85 814 211 297 1,141 6,625 6.4% 0.5% 1.1% 1.1% 0.2% 1.8% 0.5% 0.7% 2.6% 14.9% 18,988 46.6% 1,504 39.4% 20,492 46.0% 20,383 1,361 7 21,751 50.0% 3.3% 0.0% 53.4% 2,200 113 1 2,314 57.6% 3.0% 0.0% 60.6% 22,583 1,474 8 24,065 50.7% 3.3% 0.0% 54.0% TOTAL TECHNICAL VIOLATIONS (Returns for Violations that are not Criminal) TYPE I/II - Violations of Parole Process TYPE II - Weapons Access TYPE III - Psychiatric Endangerment TOTAL 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 13 Conclusion Recidivism rates are key indicators of correctional performance that are impacted by all aspects of the correctional system. This report provides a glimpse into many of these factors. It is intended to provide a baseline from which to measure future performance and evaluate the impact of CDCR rehabilitative programs, policies and practices. Although most inmates released from CDCR in FY 2006-07 recidivate and return to prison, it is important to recognize that slightly more than one-third of these releases remain in the community. This finding provides hope that successful reintegration of offenders into the community, which is part of CDCR’s mission, is possible. 53 54 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Appendix A One-, Two- and Three-Year Recidivism Rates for Arrests, Convictions, and Returns to Prison for Felons 1 Released Between FYs 2002-03 and 2008-09 2,3 Presented in the three figures and tables below are recidivism rates for up to seven years for felons released from CDCR by arrests, convictions and returns to prison. Shown first are the one-year recidivism rates for all felon releases from FY 2002-03 through FY 2008-09. This figure provides the longest period of time where data are available. While one year of follow-up is the shortest time frame presented, it is a good indicator of recidivism (as indicated previously in this report) since almost 75 percent of felons who recidivate do so within the first year of release. To provide as complete a picture as possible, these one-year rates are followed by two- and three-year recidivism rates. 4 One-Year Recidivism Rates by FY 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 55.5% 48.0% 57.6% 56.3% 45.9% 46.5% 21.6% 22.6% 58.8% 58.0% 49.1% 47.9% 57.0% 47.5% 57.2% 45.2% 40% 30% 20% 19.7% 22.1% 23.7% 20.7% 20.0% 2007-08 2008-09 10% 0% 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Arrests 1 2 3 4 2005-06 Convictions 2006-07 Returns to Prison Rates for “Arrests” and “Convictions” only include those felons where an automated criminal history record was available from the Department of Justice. These records are necessary to measure recidivism by arrest and conviction. Total numbers released for these measures are therefore smaller than those used to compute “Returns to Prison.” FYs that do not yet have enough follow-up time to capture recidivism behavior are denoted as “N/A.” The data contained in these charts and tables were extracted in June 2011 to minimize the effects of the time lag in data entry into state systems. Recidivism rates are “frozen” at three years, meaning that after three years the follow-up period is considered to be completed and no further analyses are performed. As such, reported rates may fluctuate slightly for the one- and two-year rates as data used in subsequent reporting years will likely increase, particularly for “Arrests” and “Convictions” since these data are routinely updated in accordance with criminal justice system processing. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Two-Year Recidivism Rates by FY 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 69.8% 70.3% 71.3% 71.8% 61.0% 59.8% 61.3% 62.5% 38.0% 38.6% 38.3% 2004-05 2005-06 70.9% 70.1% 60.5% 59.2% 50% 40% 36.3% 40.9% 36.3% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2002-03 2003-04 Arrests Convictions 2006-07 2007-08 Returns to Prison Three-Year Recidivism Rates by FY 100% 90% 80% 70% 76.2% 76.4% 66.2% 65.6% 47.7% 48.5% 2002-03 2003-04 77.0% 77.2% 66.8% 67.5% 49.2% 48.7% 76.6% 65.1% 60% 50% 51.5% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Arrests 2004-05 Convictions 2005-06 2006-07 Returns to Prison Rates for “Arrests” and “Convictions” only include those felons where an automated criminal history record was available from the Department of Justice. These records are necessary to measure recidivism by arrest and conviction. Total numbers released for these measures are therefore smaller than those used to compute “Returns to Prison.” 55 56 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Arrests^ One Year Fiscal Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07* 2007-08 2008-09 Number Released 99,482 99,635 103,647 105,974 112,665 113,765 110,033 Number Arrested 55,204 56,127 59,703 62,331 65,369 64,838 62,886 Two Years Recidivism Rate 55.5% 56.3% 57.6% 58.8% 58.0% 57.0% 57.2% Number Arrested 69,449 70,070 73,881 76,079 79,893 79,756 N/A Recidivism Rate 69.8% 70.3% 71.3% 71.8% 70.9% 70.1% N/A Three Years Number Arrested 75,765 76,135 79,819 81,786 86,330 N/A N/A Recidivism Rate 76.2% 76.4% 77.0% 77.2% 76.6% N/A N/A Convictions^ One Year Fiscal Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07* 2007-08 2008-09 Number Released 99,482 99,635 103,647 105,974 112,665 113,765 110,033 Number Convicted 19,643 21,509 23,464 23,428 26,657 23,593 21,987 Two Years Recidivism Rate 19.7% 21.6% 22.6% 22.1% 23.7% 20.7% 20.0% Number Convicted 36,087 37,881 40,022 40,635 46,106 41,312 N/A Recidivism Rate 36.3% 38.0% 38.6% 38.3% 40.9% 36.3% N/A Three Years Number Convicted 47,443 48,350 51,026 51,650 57,980 N/A N/A Recidivism Rate 47.7% 48.5% 49.2% 48.7% 51.5% N/A N/A Returns to Prison One Year Fiscal Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07* 2007-08 2008-09 Number Released 103,934 103,296 106,920 108,662 115,254 116,063 112,934 Number Returned 49,924 47,423 49,761 53,330 55,167 55,075 51,030 Two Years Recidivism Rate 48.0% 45.9% 46.5% 49.1% 47.9% 47.5% 45.2% Number Returned 63,415 61,788 65,559 67,958 69,691 68,672 N/A Recidivism Rate 61.0% 59.8% 61.3% 62.5% 60.5% 59.2% N/A Three Years Number Returned 68,810 67,734 71,444 73,350 75,018 N/A N/A Recidivism Rate 66.2% 65.6% 66.8% 67.5% 65.1% N/A N/A 5 * ^ Rates for “Arrests” and “Convictions” only include those felons where an automated criminal history record was available from the Department of Justice. These records are necessary to measure recidivism by arrest and conviction. Total numbers released for these measures are * therefore smaller than those used to compute “Returns to Prison”. * The “number released” depicted for Fiscal Year 2006-07 differs slightly from that which was reported in the 2010 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report due to a minor error that was identified related to the extraction of the data used to develop the cohort. Although this correction resulted in a reduction of 828 records, there was a minimal difference in the one-year return to prison rate (+0.1 percent) and no difference in the two-year rate. Because the “Arrest” and “Conviction” data are regularly updated, it is difficult to decipher the impact of this correction to these two measures, if any. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Appendix B Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Characteristics Felons Released During FY 2006-07 Offender Characteristics TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED N One Year Rate TOTAL RECIDIVATED WITHIN Two Years N Rate Three Years N Rate Sex Male Female Total 103,216 12,038 115,254 50,551 4,616 55,167 49.0% 38.3% 47.9% 63,625 6,067 69,692 61.6% 50.4% 60.5% 68,383 6,636 75,019 66.3% 55.1% 65.1% Age at Release 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60 and over Total 736 16,058 22,832 17,870 18,127 16,839 12,582 6,347 2,536 1,327 115,254 400 8,644 11,403 8,193 8,619 7,917 5,809 2,701 1,024 457 55,167 54.3% 53.8% 49.9% 45.8% 47.5% 47.0% 46.2% 42.6% 40.4% 34.4% 47.9% 515 10,754 14,355 10,466 10,951 10,028 7,332 3,441 1,275 575 69,692 70.0% 67.0% 62.9% 58.6% 60.4% 59.6% 58.3% 54.2% 50.3% 43.3% 60.5% 557 11,510 15,469 11,303 11,791 10,785 7,906 3,707 1,376 615 75,019 75.7% 71.7% 67.8% 63.3% 65.0% 64.0% 62.8% 58.4% 54.3% 46.3% 65.1% Race/Ethnicity White Hispanic/Latino Black/African-American Asian Native American/Alaska Native Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Others Total 36,989 43,226 29,995 724 1,094 145 3,081 115,254 18,696 18,640 15,617 318 618 64 1,214 55,167 50.5% 43.1% 52.1% 43.9% 56.5% 44.1% 39.4% 47.9% 23,228 23,787 19,884 396 741 85 1,571 69,692 62.8% 55.0% 66.3% 54.7% 67.7% 58.6% 51.0% 60.5% 24,820 25,737 21,429 425 792 86 1,730 75,019 67.1% 59.5% 71.4% 58.7% 72.4% 59.3% 56.2% 65.1% Commitment Offense Crime Against Persons Property Crime Drug Crime Other Crime Total 26,320 38,827 36,723 13,384 115,254 11,898 20,132 17,088 6,049 55,167 45.2% 51.9% 46.5% 45.2% 47.9% 15,295 25,050 21,598 7,749 69,692 58.1% 64.5% 58.8% 57.9% 60.5% 16,507 26,830 23,253 8,429 75,019 62.7% 69.1% 63.3% 63.0% 65.1% Sentence Type Determinate Sentence Law Indeterminate Sentence Law Total 115,168 86 115,254 55,163 4 55,167 47.9% 4.7% 47.9% 69,683 9 69,692 60.5% 10.5% 60.5% 75,008 11 75,019 65.1% 12.8% 65.1% Sex Offender Yes No Total 7,829 107,425 115,254 4,018 51,149 55,167 51.3% 47.6% 47.9% 4,891 64,801 69,692 62.5% 60.3% 60.5% 5,238 69,781 75,019 66.9% 65.0% 65.1% Serious/Violent Offender Yes No Total 23,483 91,771 115,254 10,052 45,115 55,167 42.8% 49.2% 47.9% 13,144 56,548 69,692 56.0% 61.6% 60.5% 14,310 60,709 75,019 60.9% 66.2% 65.1% 5,433 3,223 59.3% 3,860 71.0% 4,080 75.1% 11,131 16 98,673 1 115,254 5,927 8 46,008 1 55,167 53.2% N/A 46.6% N/A 47.9% 7,378 11 58,442 1 69,692 66.3% N/A 59.2% N/A 60.5% 7,829 11 63,098 1 75,019 70.3% N/A 63.9% N/A 65.1% Mental Health Enhanced Outpatient Program Correctional Clinical Case Management System Crisis Bed No Mental Health Code Department Mental Health Total 57 58 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Characteristics Felons Released During FY 2006-07 (continued) Offender Characteristics Risk Score Level N/A Low Medium High Total TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED 2,640 18,844 32,784 60,986 115,254 N One Year Rate TOTAL RECIDIVATED WITHIN Two Years N Rate Three Years N Rate 1,104 5,343 13,571 35,149 55,167 41.8% 28.4% 41.4% 57.6% 47.9% 1,386 7,282 17,773 43,251 69,692 52.5% 38.6% 54.2% 70.9% 60.5% 1,504 8,060 19,328 46,127 75,019 57.0% 42.8% 59.0% 75.6% 65.1% Length of Stay 0 - 6 months 7 - 12 months 13 - 18 months 19 - 24 months 2 - 3 years 3 - 4 years 4 - 5 years 5 - 10 years 10 - 15 years 15 + years Total 12,427 34,275 20,790 14,233 15,483 6,986 3,684 6,141 1,043 192 115,254 5,004 15,436 10,736 7,498 8,252 3,539 1,623 2,624 406 49 55,167 40.3% 45.0% 51.6% 52.7% 53.3% 50.7% 44.1% 42.7% 38.9% 25.5% 47.9% 6,678 19,848 13,344 9,230 10,133 4,372 2,091 3,395 534 67 69,692 53.7% 57.9% 64.2% 64.8% 65.4% 62.6% 56.8% 55.3% 51.2% 34.9% 60.5% 7,251 21,499 14,279 9,859 10,801 4,679 2,265 3,712 597 77 75,019 58.3% 62.7% 68.7% 69.3% 69.8% 67.0% 61.5% 60.4% 57.2% 40.1% 65.1% Prior Returns to Custody None 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ Total 67,029 22,128 11,313 6,505 3,705 2,077 1,205 640 357 170 125 115,254 25,968 12,741 7,070 4,249 2,382 1,303 716 370 212 86 70 55,167 38.7% 57.6% 62.5% 65.3% 64.3% 62.7% 59.4% 57.8% 59.4% 50.6% 56.0% 47.9% 34,617 15,833 8,414 4,927 2,738 1,500 824 420 242 97 80 69,692 51.6% 71.6% 74.4% 75.7% 73.9% 72.2% 68.4% 65.6% 67.8% 57.1% 64.0% 60.5% 38,158 16,711 8,794 5,119 2,881 1,582 877 448 259 104 86 75,019 56.9% 75.5% 77.7% 78.7% 77.8% 76.2% 72.8% 70.0% 72.5% 61.2% 68.8% 65.1% Number of CDCR Stays Ever One stay Two stays Three stays Four stays Five stays Six stays Seven stays Eight stays Nine stays 10 stays 11 stays 12 stays 13 stays 14 stays 15 + stays Total 32,983 17,938 12,622 9,508 7,530 6,186 5,082 4,365 3,529 2,945 2,422 2,092 1,681 1,357 5,014 115,254 10,370 8,136 6,404 5,057 3,977 3,349 2,856 2,548 2,112 1,791 1,524 1,359 1,117 891 3,676 55,167 31.4% 45.4% 50.7% 53.2% 52.8% 54.1% 56.2% 58.4% 59.8% 60.8% 62.9% 65.0% 66.4% 65.7% 73.3% 47.9% 14,004 10,682 8,074 6,250 4,992 4,248 3,530 3,146 2,603 2,195 1,826 1,594 1,312 1,050 4,186 69,692 42.5% 59.5% 64.0% 65.7% 66.3% 68.7% 69.5% 72.1% 73.8% 74.5% 75.4% 76.2% 78.0% 77.4% 83.5% 60.5% 15,589 11,504 8,713 6,668 5,332 4,549 3,794 3,323 2,768 2,337 1,928 1,698 1,370 1,110 4,336 75,019 47.3% 64.1% 69.0% 70.1% 70.8% 73.5% 74.7% 76.1% 78.4% 79.4% 79.6% 81.2% 81.5% 81.8% 86.5% 65.1% 6,404 108,850 115,254 3,397 51,770 55,167 53.0% 47.6% 47.9% 4,211 65,481 69,692 65.8% 60.2% 60.5% 4,525 70,494 75,019 70.7% 64.8% 65.1% SHU Status SHU No SHU Total DDP Status DDP No DDP Total 1,732 113,522 115,254 1,067 54,100 55,167 61.6% 47.7% 47.9% 1,274 68,418 69,692 73.6% 60.3% 60.5% 1,346 73,673 75,019 77.7% 64.9% 65.1% In-Prison Subastance Abuse Program Completed Program Did Not Complete Program Did Not Participate in Program Total 9,194 5,355 100,705 115,254 4,013 2,363 48,791 55,167 43.6% 44.1% 48.4% 47.9% 5,316 3,115 61,261 69,692 57.8% 58.2% 60.8% 60.5% 5,822 3,420 65,777 75,019 63.3% 63.9% 65.3% 65.1% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Characteristics Felons Released During FY 2006-07 by Type of Release First Releases Offender Characteristics TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N Rate One Year Tw o Years N N Rate Rate Re-Releases Three Years N Rate One Year Tw o Years N N Rate Rate Three Years N Rate Sex Male Female Total 103,216 68,383 66.3% 23,639 40.0% 31,330 53.0% 34,475 58.3% 26,912 61.1% 32,295 73.3% 33,908 77.0% 12,038 6,636 55.1% 2,329 29.6% 3,287 41.7% 3,683 46.8% 2,287 54.9% 2,780 66.8% 2,953 70.9% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Age at Release 18-19 736 557 75.7% 364 52.8% 475 68.9% 516 74.9% 36 76.6% 40 85.1% 41 87.2% 20-24 16,058 11,510 71.7% 5,271 47.7% 6,734 61.0% 7,322 66.3% 3,373 67.2% 4,020 80.1% 4,188 83.4% 25-29 22,832 15,469 67.8% 5,583 41.6% 7,339 54.6% 8,087 60.2% 5,820 61.9% 7,016 74.6% 7,382 78.5% 30-34 17,870 11,303 63.3% 3,839 36.8% 5,155 49.4% 5,700 54.6% 4,354 58.6% 5,311 71.4% 5,603 75.3% 35-39 18,127 11,791 65.0% 3,628 36.0% 4,981 49.5% 5,531 54.9% 4,991 61.9% 5,970 74.1% 6,260 77.7% 40-44 16,839 10,785 64.0% 3,311 36.3% 4,513 49.5% 4,975 54.5% 4,606 59.7% 5,515 71.5% 5,810 75.3% 45-49 12,582 7,906 62.8% 2,355 35.1% 3,195 47.6% 3,537 52.7% 3,454 58.9% 4,137 70.5% 4,369 74.5% 50-54 6,347 3,707 58.4% 1,031 30.6% 1,429 42.4% 1,597 47.4% 1,670 56.1% 2,012 67.6% 2,110 70.9% 55-59 2,536 1,376 54.3% 394 28.5% 533 38.6% 602 43.6% 630 54.5% 742 64.2% 774 67.0% 60 and over 1,327 615 46.3% 192 24.7% 263 33.9% 291 37.5% 265 48.1% 312 56.6% 324 58.8% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% White 36,989 24,820 67.1% 8,338 41.3% 10,894 54.0% 11,935 59.2% 10,358 61.6% 12,334 73.3% 12,885 76.6% Hispanic/Latino 43,226 25,737 59.5% 9,577 34.4% 12,870 46.3% 14,228 51.2% 9,063 58.8% 10,917 70.8% 11,509 74.7% Black/African-American 29,995 21,429 71.4% 6,984 43.7% 9,444 59.1% 10,419 65.2% 8,633 61.6% 10,440 74.5% 11,010 78.6% 724 425 58.7% 146 35.1% 193 46.4% 212 51.0% 172 55.8% 203 65.9% 213 69.2% 1,094 792 72.4% 249 48.1% 307 59.3% 334 64.5% 369 64.1% 434 75.3% 458 79.5% 145 86 59.3% 36 37.5% 50 52.1% 50 52.1% 28 57.1% 35 71.4% 36 73.5% 3,081 1,730 56.2% 638 31.4% 859 42.2% 980 48.2% 576 55.1% 712 68.1% 750 71.7% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Total Race/Ethnicity Asian Native American/Alaska Native Native Haw aiian/Pacific Islander Others Total Com m itm ent Offense Crime Against Persons 26,320 16,507 62.7% 4,959 35.0% 6,874 48.5% 7,633 53.8% 6,939 57.2% 8,421 69.4% 8,874 73.1% Property Crime 38,827 26,830 69.1% 9,845 43.2% 12,857 56.4% 14,081 61.8% 10,287 64.2% 12,193 76.1% 12,749 79.6% Drug Crime 36,723 23,253 63.3% 8,246 37.3% 10,981 49.6% 12,086 54.6% 8,842 60.6% 10,617 72.7% 11,167 76.5% Other Crime 13,384 8,429 63.0% 2,918 36.8% 3,905 49.3% 4,358 55.0% 3,131 57.3% 3,844 70.4% 4,071 74.6% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Total Sentence Type Determinate Sentence Law Indeterminate Sentence Law Total 115168 75008 65.1% 25,967 38.8% 34,614 51.7% 38,153 57.0% 29,196 60.6% 35,069 72.7% 36,855 76.4% 86 11 12.8% 1 1.4% 3 4.2% 5 6.9% 3 21.4% 6 42.9% 6 42.9% 115254 75019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Sex Offender 7,829 5,238 66.9% 1,424 39.5% 1,888 52.4% 2,083 57.8% 2,594 61.4% 3,003 71.1% 3,155 74.7% No Yes 107,425 69,781 65.0% 24,544 38.7% 32,729 51.6% 36,075 56.9% 26,605 60.5% 32,072 72.9% 33,706 76.6% Total 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Serious/Violent Offender Yes 23,483 14,310 60.9% 4,372 32.8% 6,188 46.5% 6,932 52.1% 5,680 55.8% 6,956 68.4% 7,378 72.5% No 91,771 60,709 66.2% 21,596 40.2% 28,429 52.9% 31,226 58.1% 23,519 61.8% 28,119 73.9% 29,483 77.5% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% 5,433 4,080 75.1% 1,183 50.6% 1,520 65.0% 1,633 69.9% 2,040 65.9% 2,340 75.6% 2,447 79.0% 11,131 7,829 70.3% 2,468 43.6% 3,277 57.9% 3,551 62.7% 3,459 63.2% 4,101 75.0% 4,278 78.2% 16 11 68.8% 3 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 5 62.5% 7 87.5% 7 87.5% 98,673 63,098 63.9% 22,314 37.8% 29,816 50.5% 32,970 55.9% 23,694 59.8% 28,626 72.2% 30,128 76.0% 1 1 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A 1 N/A 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Total Mental Health Enhanced Outpatient Program Correctional Clinical Case Management System Crisis Bed No Mental Health Code Department Mental Health Total 59 60 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Characteristics Felons Released During FY 2006-07 by Type of Release (continued) First Releases Offender Characteristics TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N Rate One Year Tw o Years N N Rate Rate Re-Releases Three Years N Rate One Year Tw o Years N N Rate Three Years Rate N Rate Risk Score Level N/A 2,640 1,504 57.0% 424 30.2% 581 41.4% 649 46.2% 680 55.0% 805 65.1% 855 69.2% Low 18,844 8,060 42.8% 2,747 20.8% 4,022 30.4% 4,579 34.6% 2,596 46.2% 3,260 58.0% 3,481 61.9% Medium 32,784 19,328 59.0% 7,109 33.8% 9,772 46.5% 10,882 51.8% 6,462 54.9% 8,001 68.0% 8,446 71.8% High 60,986 46,127 75.6% 15,688 50.0% 20,242 64.5% 22,048 70.3% 19,461 65.7% 23,009 77.7% 24,079 81.3% Total 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Length of Stay 0 - 6 months 12,427 7,251 58.3% 3,768 37.2% 5,111 50.5% 5,606 55.4% 1,236 53.7% 1,567 68.1% 1,645 71.5% 7 - 12 months 34,275 21,499 62.7% 10,727 41.1% 14,006 53.6% 15,340 58.7% 4,709 57.8% 5,842 71.7% 6,159 75.6% 13 - 18 months 20,790 14,279 68.7% 4,694 42.4% 6,096 55.0% 6,680 60.3% 6,042 62.2% 7,248 74.7% 7,599 78.3% 19 - 24 months 14,233 9,859 69.3% 2,446 39.1% 3,248 52.0% 3,607 57.7% 5,052 63.3% 5,982 74.9% 6,252 78.3% 2 - 3 years 15,483 10,801 69.8% 2,133 37.4% 2,917 51.1% 3,245 56.9% 6,119 62.6% 7,216 73.8% 7,556 77.3% 3 - 4 years 6,986 4,679 67.0% 831 32.6% 1,177 46.2% 1,310 51.5% 2,708 61.0% 3,195 72.0% 3,369 75.9% 4 - 5 years 3,684 2,265 61.5% 464 27.8% 686 41.1% 775 46.4% 1,159 57.5% 1,405 69.8% 1,490 74.0% 5 - 10 years 6,141 3,712 60.4% 741 26.2% 1,125 39.8% 1,292 45.7% 1,883 56.8% 2,270 68.5% 2,420 73.0% 10 - 15 years 1,043 597 57.2% 148 25.7% 227 39.5% 270 47.0% 258 55.1% 307 65.6% 327 69.9% 192 77 40.1% 16 13.6% 24 20.3% 33 28.0% 33 44.6% 43 58.1% 44 59.5% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 15 + years Total Prior Returns to Custody None 67,029 38,158 56.9% 25,968 1 22,128 16,711 75.5% 0 2 11,313 8,794 77.7% 0 0 0 7,070 62.5% 8,414 74.4% 8,794 77.7% 3 6,505 5,119 78.7% 0 0 0 4,249 65.3% 4,927 75.7% 5,119 78.7% 4 0 0 0 NA 0 NA 0 NA 12,741 57.6% 15,833 71.6% 16,711 75.5% 3,705 2,881 77.8% 0 0 0 2,382 64.3% 2,738 73.9% 2,881 77.8% 5 2,077 1,582 76.2% 0 0 0 1,303 62.7% 1,500 72.2% 1,582 76.2% 6 1,205 877 72.8% 0 0 0 716 59.4% 824 68.4% 877 72.8% 7 640 448 70.0% 0 0 0 370 57.8% 420 65.6% 448 70.0% 8 357 259 72.5% 0 0 0 212 59.4% 242 67.8% 259 72.5% 9 170 104 61.2% 0 0 0 86 50.6% 97 57.1% 104 61.2% 10+ 125 86 68.8% 0 0 0 70 56.0% 80 64.0% 86 68.8% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% Total Num ber of CDCR Stays Ever One stay 32,983 15,589 47.3% 10,370 31.4% 14,004 42.5% 15,589 47.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Tw o stays 17,938 11,504 64.1% 2,885 36.4% 4,000 50.5% 4,442 56.0% 5,251 52.4% 6,682 66.7% 7,062 70.5% Three stays 12,622 8,713 69.0% 2,117 41.2% 2,852 55.5% 3,177 61.8% 4,287 57.3% 5,222 69.8% 5,536 74.0% Four stays 9,508 6,668 70.1% 1,682 42.4% 2,252 56.8% 2,492 62.9% 3,375 60.9% 3,998 72.1% 4,176 75.3% Five stays 7,530 5,332 70.8% 1,465 44.6% 1,967 59.9% 2,143 65.2% 2,512 59.2% 3,025 71.3% 3,189 75.1% Six stays 6,186 4,549 73.5% 1,273 46.8% 1,711 62.9% 1,877 69.0% 2,076 59.9% 2,537 73.2% 2,672 77.1% Seven stays 5,082 3,794 74.7% 1,104 50.4% 1,459 66.6% 1,589 72.6% 1,752 60.6% 2,071 71.6% 2,205 76.2% Eight stays 4,365 3,323 76.1% 958 51.9% 1,254 67.9% 1,340 72.6% 1,590 63.1% 1,892 75.1% 1,983 78.7% Nine stays 3,529 2,768 78.4% 755 52.4% 1,000 69.4% 1,091 75.8% 1,357 65.0% 1,603 76.7% 1,677 80.3% 10 stays 2,945 2,337 79.4% 632 54.3% 811 69.7% 887 76.3% 1,159 65.0% 1,384 77.7% 1,450 81.4% 11 stays 2,422 1,928 79.6% 536 56.8% 681 72.1% 730 77.3% 988 66.8% 1,145 77.5% 1,198 81.1% 12 stays 2,092 1,698 81.2% 451 58.0% 553 71.2% 606 78.0% 908 69.0% 1,041 79.2% 1,092 83.0% 13 stays 1,681 1,370 81.5% 355 59.7% 438 73.6% 463 77.8% 762 70.2% 874 80.5% 907 83.5% 14 stays 1,357 1,110 81.8% 287 59.9% 349 72.9% 381 79.5% 604 68.8% 701 79.8% 729 83.0% 5,014 4,336 86.5% 1,098 69.4% 1,286 81.3% 1,351 85.5% 2,578 75.1% 2,900 84.5% 2,985 87.0% 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% 15 + stays Total SHU Status 6404 4525 70.7% 1,310 43.3% 1,729 57.2% 1,899 62.8% 2,087 61.7% 2,482 73.4% 2,626 77.7% No SHU SHU 108850 70494 64.8% 24,658 38.5% 32,888 51.4% 36,259 56.7% 27,112 60.5% 32,593 72.7% 34,235 76.3% Total 115254 75019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% DDP Status DDP 1,732 1,346 77.7% 426 52.4% 533 65.6% 575 70.7% 641 69.7% 741 80.6% 771 83.9% NO DDP 113,522 73,673 64.9% 25,542 38.6% 34,084 51.5% 37,583 56.8% 28,558 60.4% 34,334 72.6% 36,090 76.3% Total 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% In-Prison Subastance Abuse Program Completed Program 9,194 Did Not Complete Program 5,822 63.3% 2,678 37.7% 3,695 52.0% 4,138 58.3% 1,335 63.8% 1,621 77.5% 1,684 80.5% 5,355 3,420 63.9% 1,513 37.5% 2,089 51.7% 2,359 58.4% 850 64.5% 1,026 77.9% 1,061 80.6% Did Not Participate in Program 100,705 65,777 65.3% 21,777 39.0% 28,833 51.6% 31,661 56.7% 27,014 60.3% 32,428 72.4% 34,116 76.1% Total 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 61 November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Commitment Offense Felons Released During FY 2006-07 by Type of Release First Releases Com m itm ent Offense TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N Murder First Murder Second Manslaughter Vehicular Manslaughter Robbery Assault/Deadly Weapon Attempted Murder First Attempted Murder Second Other Assault/Battery Rape Lewd Act With Child Oral Copulation Sodomy Sexual Penetration with Object Other Sex Offenses Kidnapping Burglary First Burglary Second Grand Theft Petty Theft With Prior Receiving Stolen Property Vehicle Theft Forgery/Fraud Other Property Offense CS Possession CS Possession for Sale CS Sales CS Manufacturing Other CS Offense Hashish Possession Marijuana Possession for Sale Marijuana Sale Marijuana Other Escape/Abscond Driving Under Influence Arson Possession Weapon Other Offenses Total 6 41 487 239 5,055 5,736 16 332 9,351 360 1,822 196 49 101 2,294 235 3,466 7,469 3,525 6,457 5,206 7,938 3,641 1,125 19,921 10,142 3,239 914 727 53 1,113 465 149 177 2,668 303 6,217 4,019 115,254 1 3 243 80 3,249 3,553 3 156 6,258 184 847 115 19 51 1,641 104 2,323 5,154 2,240 4,608 3,724 5,901 2,137 743 13,833 5,572 1,949 382 491 32 636 283 75 116 1,220 188 4,311 2,594 75,019 Rate One Year Tw o Years N N N/A 0 7.3% 0 49.9% 65 33.5% 22 64.3% 958 61.9% 1,140 N/A 0 47.0% 39 66.9% 1,935 51.1% 52 46.5% 221 58.7% 34 38.8% 7 50.5% 11 71.5% 448 44.3% 27 67.0% 709 69.0% 1,858 63.5% 808 71.4% 1,547 71.5% 1,483 74.3% 2,465 58.7% 687 66.0% 288 69.4% 4,993 54.9% 2,002 60.2% 652 41.8% 92 67.5% 156 60.4% 13 57.1% 229 60.9% 93 50.3% 16 65.5% 24 45.7% 431 62.0% 44 69.3% 1,650 64.5% 769 65.1% 25,968 Rate N/A 0.0% 21.5% N/A 34.0% 35.3% N/A 18.3% 39.7% 27.2% 21.7% 37.8% N/A N/A 45.9% 18.9% 37.7% 42.1% 38.4% 43.2% 47.8% 51.0% 31.2% 42.6% 44.3% 29.6% 31.8% 16.9% 41.8% N/A 32.0% 32.7% 18.6% 30.8% 22.7% 29.5% 44.5% 36.8% 38.7% 0 1 104 44 1,420 1,585 0 67 2,583 64 319 42 9 20 576 40 958 2,485 1,049 2,066 1,864 3,116 951 368 6,505 2,740 918 122 205 16 310 141 24 36 598 60 2,172 1,039 34,617 Rate N/A 2.8% 34.3% 23.2% 50.4% 49.1% N/A 31.5% 53.0% 33.5% 31.3% 46.7% N/A N/A 59.0% 28.0% 50.9% 56.3% 49.8% 57.6% 60.1% 64.5% 43.2% 54.4% 57.7% 40.5% 44.8% 22.4% 55.0% N/A 43.3% 49.6% 27.9% 46.2% 31.5% 40.3% 58.6% 49.8% 51.6% Re-Releases Three Years N 1 1 120 51 1,590 1,758 0 81 2,824 73 368 48 10 22 638 48 1,080 2,733 1,152 2,298 2,036 3,332 1,055 395 7,063 3,094 1,013 141 223 18 356 152 26 39 705 75 2,394 1,145 38,158 Rate N/A 2.8% 39.6% 26.8% 56.4% 54.4% N/A 38.0% 58.0% 38.2% 36.1% 53.3% N/A N/A 65.4% 33.6% 57.4% 61.9% 54.7% 64.1% 65.6% 69.0% 47.9% 58.4% 62.6% 45.8% 49.4% 25.9% 59.8% N/A 49.7% 53.5% 30.2% 50.0% 37.1% 50.3% 64.6% 54.8% 56.9% One Year Tw o Years N N 0 0 83 23 1,252 1,370 2 59 2,736 91 372 47 6 19 839 40 991 1,950 864 1,865 1,378 2,136 819 284 5,427 1,888 754 183 222 12 216 102 38 61 386 96 1,457 1,131 29,199 Rate N/A N/A 45.1% 46.9% 55.9% 54.6% N/A 49.6% 61.1% 53.8% 46.3% 44.3% N/A 42.2% 63.7% 43.5% 62.6% 63.9% 60.9% 64.9% 65.5% 68.7% 57.0% 63.3% 62.8% 55.9% 63.4% 49.6% 62.7% N/A 54.4% 56.4% 60.3% 61.6% 50.3% 62.3% 58.1% 58.6% 60.5% 0 2 117 29 1,561 1,691 3 75 3,280 108 438 63 9 26 968 51 1,182 2,322 1,039 2,204 1,618 2,476 1,019 333 6,461 2,326 898 229 256 12 265 125 45 70 484 106 1,807 1,377 35,075 Rate N/A N/A 63.6% 59.2% 69.7% 67.5% N/A 63.0% 73.2% 63.9% 54.5% 59.4% N/A 57.8% 73.4% 55.4% 74.7% 76.1% 73.2% 76.7% 76.9% 79.6% 70.9% 74.2% 74.8% 68.8% 75.5% 62.1% 72.3% N/A 66.8% 69.1% 71.4% 70.7% 63.1% 68.8% 72.0% 71.3% 72.7% Three Years N 0 2 123 29 1,659 1,795 3 75 3,434 111 479 67 9 29 1,003 56 1,243 2,421 1,088 2,310 1,688 2,569 1,082 348 6,770 2,478 936 241 268 14 280 131 49 77 515 113 1,917 1,449 36,861 Rate N/A N/A 66.8% 59.2% 74.1% 71.6% N/A 63.0% 76.7% 65.7% 59.6% 63.2% N/A 64.4% 76.1% 60.9% 78.5% 79.3% 76.7% 80.4% 80.3% 82.6% 75.2% 77.5% 78.3% 73.3% 78.7% 65.3% 75.7% N/A 70.5% 72.4% 77.8% 77.8% 67.1% 73.4% 76.4% 75.0% 76.4% 62 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Parole County6 Felons Released During FY 2006-07 by Type of Release First Releases TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED County of Parole TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N Alameda Amador Alpine Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern King Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz 5,291 44 9 939 57 45 1,525 78 250 4,531 112 601 371 45 4,047 808 289 93 30,454 624 51 38 291 885 31 27 1,094 156 98 8,728 565 44 7,130 5,684 75 9,746 7,448 1,614 2,682 837 1,105 886 3,646 381 6 3,330 25 5 612 30 33 1,116 54 168 3,456 77 446 280 23 2,845 581 187 56 17,369 460 35 26 190 636 22 14 767 95 56 5,020 384 26 4,944 3,458 49 7,014 5,326 1,224 2,082 459 747 639 2,479 268 Rate 62.9% 56.8% N/A 65.2% 52.6% 73.3% 73.2% 69.2% 67.2% 76.3% 68.8% 74.2% 75.5% 51.1% 70.3% 71.9% 64.7% 60.2% 57.0% 73.7% 68.6% 68.4% 65.3% 71.9% 71.0% N/A 70.1% 60.9% 57.1% 57.5% 68.0% 59.1% 69.3% 60.8% 65.3% 72.0% 71.5% 75.8% 77.6% 54.8% 67.6% 72.1% 68.0% 70.3% One Year N 964 11 1 181 15 9 282 24 55 1,118 31 131 84 12 952 169 68 25 6,403 127 10 7 52 215 11 3 216 33 12 2,009 119 9 1,922 1,147 22 2,739 1,876 291 691 132 259 255 705 81 Rate 35.4% 35.5% N/A 36.6% 40.5% N/A 46.1% 54.5% 44.7% 54.5% 50.8% 48.9% 54.5% 30.8% 41.9% 42.8% 42.5% 46.3% 29.4% 48.5% N/A N/A 40.6% 49.4% N/A N/A 41.1% 36.3% 31.6% 33.7% 41.8% 30.0% 45.8% 34.5% 40.7% 49.0% 46.2% 52.5% 55.8% 28.6% 43.0% 50.1% 38.8% 45.3% Tw o Years N 1,208 13 2 238 17 12 354 26 70 1,357 33 167 107 19 1,343 221 79 29 9,655 152 12 11 62 265 11 3 300 38 15 2,640 144 14 2,429 1,470 34 3,373 2,433 350 835 193 330 318 1,021 103 Rate Re-Releases Three Years N Rate 44.3% 1,298 47.6% 41.9% 14 45.2% N/A 2 N/A 48.2% 273 55.3% 45.9% 20 54.1% N/A 16 N/A 57.8% 382 62.4% 59.1% 26 59.1% 56.9% 77 62.6% 66.1% 1,449 70.6% 54.1% 35 57.4% 62.3% 174 64.9% 69.5% 113 73.4% 48.7% 19 48.7% 59.2% 1,457 64.2% 55.9% 241 61.0% 49.4% 90 56.3% 53.7% 30 55.6% 44.3% 11,119 51.0% 58.0% 161 61.5% N/A 13 N/A N/A 12 N/A 48.4% 71 55.5% 60.9% 281 64.6% N/A 11 N/A N/A 3 N/A 57.1% 324 61.7% 41.8% 42 46.2% 39.5% 16 42.1% 44.3% 2,866 48.1% 50.5% 157 55.1% 46.7% 15 50.0% 57.9% 2,649 63.1% 44.2% 1,591 47.8% 63.0% 36 66.7% 60.4% 3,634 65.1% 59.9% 2,658 65.4% 63.2% 374 67.5% 67.4% 882 71.2% 41.8% 221 47.8% 54.8% 356 59.1% 62.5% 340 66.8% 56.2% 1,138 62.7% 57.5% 110 61.5% One Year N 1,647 10 2 268 8 12 607 22 82 1,701 37 220 135 4 1,090 292 83 23 4,409 249 19 12 101 306 8 8 349 45 35 1,713 182 10 1,833 1,528 11 2,779 2,178 721 1,030 173 314 246 1,026 124 Rate 64.2% N/A N/A 60.2% N/A N/A 66.5% 64.7% 64.6% 68.6% 72.5% 66.1% 62.2% N/A 61.3% 70.7% 64.3% 59.0% 50.8% 68.8% N/A N/A 62.0% 68.0% N/A N/A 61.3% 69.2% 58.3% 61.8% 65.0% N/A 62.5% 64.9% N/A 66.8% 64.3% 68.0% 71.3% 46.1% 62.4% 65.3% 56.1% 61.4% Tw o Years N 1,955 11 2 324 10 16 701 26 90 1,934 42 257 159 4 1,327 330 93 25 5,793 287 21 14 116 342 11 11 413 52 38 2,059 219 11 2,189 1,784 13 3,244 2,567 825 1,161 220 368 292 1,266 153 Direct discharges are not included since these individuals do not have a parole county. Rate 76.2% N/A N/A 72.8% N/A N/A 76.8% 76.5% 70.9% 78.0% 82.4% 77.2% 73.3% N/A 74.7% 79.9% 72.1% 64.1% 66.8% 79.3% N/A N/A 71.2% 76.0% N/A N/A 72.6% 80.0% 63.3% 74.2% 78.2% N/A 74.7% 75.8% N/A 78.0% 75.8% 77.8% 80.4% 58.7% 73.2% 77.5% 69.2% 75.7% Three Years N 2,032 11 3 339 10 17 734 28 91 2,007 42 272 167 4 1,388 340 97 26 6,250 299 22 14 119 355 11 11 443 53 40 2,154 227 11 2,295 1,867 13 3,380 2,668 850 1,200 238 391 299 1,341 158 Rate 79.3% N/A N/A 76.2% N/A N/A 80.4% 82.4% 71.7% 81.0% 82.4% 81.7% 77.0% N/A 78.1% 82.3% 75.2% 66.7% 72.1% 82.6% N/A N/A 73.0% 78.9% N/A N/A 77.9% 81.5% 66.7% 77.6% 81.1% N/A 78.3% 79.3% N/A 81.2% 78.8% 80.2% 83.1% 63.5% 77.7% 79.3% 73.3% 78.2% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 63 November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates by Offender Parole County67 Felons Released During FY 2006-07 by Type of Release (continued) First Releases TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED County of Parole TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba Total 1,096 7 133 1,540 778 1,702 419 360 39 1,491 74 1,608 677 416 113,795 6 751 5 90 1,129 511 1,263 290 230 23 1,088 35 1,172 501 305 74,506 Rate One Year Tw o Years N N 68.5% 232 N/A 4 67.7% 24 73.3% 353 65.7% 158 74.2% 435 69.2% 111 63.9% 83 59.0% 10 73.0% 367 47.3% 18 72.9% 411 74.0% 169 73.3% 110 65.5% 25,963 Rate 42.1% 297 N/A 4 39.3% 31 50.8% 430 40.0% 191 49.9% 537 48.9% 135 39.9% 104 N/A 11 46.7% 474 32.1% 24 49.1% 528 50.6% 209 51.6% 130 38.7% 34,611 Rate Re-Releases Three Years N 53.9% 318 N/A 4 50.8% 33 61.9% 462 48.4% 215 61.6% 578 59.5% 148 50.0% 112 N/A 12 60.3% 523 42.9% 25 63.1% 560 62.6% 222 61.0% 142 51.7% 38,150 Rate One Year Tw o Years N N 57.7% 348 N/A 1 54.1% 43 66.5% 565 54.4% 231 66.3% 576 65.2% 114 53.8% 96 N/A 10 66.5% 476 44.6% 8 66.9% 508 66.5% 239 66.7% 142 56.9% 29,009 Rate 63.9% 421 N/A 1 59.7% 56 66.9% 651 60.3% 281 69.4% 661 59.4% 137 63.2% 117 N/A 11 67.5% 547 N/A 10 65.9% 587 69.7% 271 70.0% 159 62.0% 34,685 Direct discharges are not included since these individuals do not have a parole county. Rate Three Years N 77.2% 433 N/A 1 77.8% 57 77.0% 667 73.4% 296 79.6% 685 71.4% 142 77.0% 118 N/A 11 77.6% 565 N/A 10 76.1% 612 79.0% 279 78.3% 163 74.1% 36,356 Rate 79.4% N/A 79.2% 78.9% 77.3% 82.5% 74.0% 77.6% N/A 80.1% N/A 79.4% 81.3% 80.3% 77.7% 64 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Current Term Commitment Offense by New Term Commitment Offense for Felon Sex Registrants and All Other Felon Offenders Released During FY 2006-07 Commitment Offense Sex Registrants Crime Against Persons Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes Total Commitment Offense All Other Offenders Crime Against Persons Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes Total Returned with a New Conviction Total Total Released Recidivated Crime Against Persons Property Crime Drug Crime N % N % N % 5,151 1,025 1,083 570 7,829 3,088 835 860 455 5,238 251 66 68 34 419 8.1 7.9 7.9 7.5 8.0 61 39 20 6 126 2.0 4.7 2.3 1.3 2.4 68 32 70 19 189 2.2 3.8 8.1 4.2 3.6 Returned with a New Conviction Total Total Released Recidivated Crime Against Persons Property Crime Drug Crime N % N % N % 21,169 37,802 35,640 12,814 107,425 13,419 25,995 22,393 7,974 69,781 946 1,112 824 508 3,390 7.0 4.3 3.7 6.4 4.9 891 5,254 1,784 576 8,505 6.6 20.2 8.0 7.2 12.2 960 2,010 4,166 627 7,763 7.2 7.7 18.6 7.9 11.1 Other Crime N % 53 11 8 13 85 1.7 1.3 0.9 2.9 1.6 Other Crime N % 607 711 657 761 2,736 4.5 2.7 2.9 9.5 3.9 Parole Violation Returned to Custody N % 2,655 687 694 383 4,419 86.0 82.3 80.7 84.2 84.4 Parole Violation Returned to Custody N % 10,015 16,908 14,962 5,502 47,387 74.6 65.0 66.8 69.0 67.9 Current Term Commitment Offense by New Term Commitment Offense for Felon Serious/Violent Offenders and All Other Felon Offenders Released During FY 2006-07 Parole Offense Serious/Violent Offenders Crime Against Persons Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes Total Parole Offense All Other Offenders Crime Against Persons Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes Total Returned with a New Conviction Total Total Paroled Recidivated Crime Against Persons Property Crime Drug Crime N % N % N % 15,436 4,289 1,013 2,745 23,483 9,056 2,892 582 1,780 14,310 631 149 29 121 930 7.0 5.2 5.0 6.8 6.5 551 411 55 114 1,131 6.1 14.2 9.5 6.4 7.9 605 224 95 125 1,049 6.7 7.7 16.3 7.0 7.3 Returned with a New Conviction Total Total Paroled Recidivated Crime Against Persons Property Crime Drug Crime N % N % N % 10,884 34,538 35,710 10,639 91,771 7,451 23,938 22,671 6,649 60,709 566 1,029 863 421 2,879 7.6 4.3 3.8 6.3 4.7 401 4,882 1,749 468 7,500 5.4 20.4 7.7 7.0 12.4 423 1,818 4,141 521 6,903 5.7 7.6 18.3 7.8 11.4 Other Crime N % 405 88 31 103 627 4.5 3.0 5.3 5.8 4.4 Other Crime N % 255 3.4 634 2.6 634 2.8 671 10.1 2,194 3.6 Parole Violation Returned to Custody N % 6,864 2,020 372 1,317 10,573 75.8 69.8 63.9 74.0 73.9 Parole Violation Returned to Custody N % 5,806 15,575 15,284 4,568 41,233 77.9 65.1 67.4 68.7 67.9 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Flagged Sex Registrants Released During FY 2006-07 for Either a Sex Offense or a Nonsex Offense Who Returned to Prison by Type of Release First Release Returns Number Percent Re-Release Returns Number Percent Total Returns Number Percent Released for a sex offense Returned with a new sex conviction Returned with a new nonsex conviction Returned for a parole violation Total 45 48 882 975 4.6% 4.9% 90.5% 100.0% 98 104 1,194 1,396 7.0% 7.4% 85.5% 100.0% 143 152 2,076 2,371 6.0% 6.4% 87.6% 100.0% Released for a nonsex offense Returned with a new sex conviction Returned with a new nonsex conviction Returned for a parole violation Total 50 145 913 1,108 4.5% 13.1% 82.4% 100.0% 118 211 1,430 1,759 6.7% 12.0% 81.3% 100.0% 168 356 2,343 2,867 5.9% 12.4% 81.7% 100.0% 65 66 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Appendix C Post Release Criminal Activity of Convicted Murderers Who Have Paroled Since 1995 Data as of March 31, 2011 Recidivism behavior of murderers who returned to CDCR either as a new admission or with a new term over a 15-year time period. Although this 15-year murderer recidivism report is not directly related, or necessarily comparable, to the data presented in this 2011 Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report, it is included for informational purposes. New Crimes, If Any Number of Paroled Inmates Burglary, 2nd Degree 1 Served 6 Months* (9/10 - Present) Petty Theft with a Prior 1 Served 11 Months (3/09 - 1/10) Percent Served 10 Months (7/05 - 5/06) Served 4 Months (5/09 - 9/09) Served 11 Months* (4/10 - Present) 1 Possession of a Weapon 1 Robbery 1 Sub Total for New Crimes 5 1% No New Crimes 855 99% Total 860 100% *Offenders still serving time for offense. Sentence For New Crime 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Appendix D Mission and Institution Recidivism Rates by Gender Released During FY 2006-07 Demographics Median Age Mission Institution High Risk CSRA Recidivism Rates Median LOS (Months) First Releases Re-Releases Total Number Number Recidivism Number Number Recidivism Number Number Recidivism Released Returned Rate Released Returned Rate Released Returned Rate Male Camps CCC 35 52.9% 18.1 1,226 686 56.0% 0 0 N/A 1,226 686 56.0% CMC 39 45.8% 22.1 48 27 56.3% 0 0 N/A 48 27 56.3% SCC 36 35 50.7% 16.4 685 1,398 1 1 0 0 N/A N/A 1,306 2,580 685 1,398 52.5% 17.3 1,305 2,579 52.5% 51.6% Sub-Total LEVEL I CAL 36 61.4% 3.7 311 193 62.1% 529 412 77.9% 840 605 72.0% 34 54.6% 7.9 1,287 826 64.2% 458 352 76.9% 1,745 1,178 67.5% CEN 33 56.9% 5.5 319 190 59.6% 263 202 76.8% 582 392 67.4% CIM 39 52.3% 4.6 2,625 1,480 56.4% 1,301 985 75.7% 3,926 2,465 62.8% CMC 34 48.7% 12.9 187 101 54.0% 8 6 N/A 195 107 54.9% CMF 37 56.9% 5.7 137 86 62.8% 44 36 81.8% 181 122 67.4% COR 36 55.1% 6.1 689 420 61.0% 229 179 78.2% 918 599 65.3% SAC 35 54.5% 4.8 524 332 63.4% 186 142 76.3% 710 474 66.8% CTF 39 43.1% 4.7 957 457 47.8% 198 161 81.3% 1,155 618 53.5% CVSP 34 55.5% 5.8 319 163 51.1% 214 164 76.6% 533 327 61.4% DVI 45 25.0% 70.9 4 2 FSP 36 52.6% 7.6 329 204 Sub-Total N/A 0 0 N/A 62.0% 70 57 81.4% 78.5% 561 348 62.0% N/A 260 148 56.9% HDSP 36 51.2% 6.2 375 202 53.9% 186 146 MCSP 39 56.5% 11.9 257 146 56.8% 3 2 4 2 399 261 N/A 65.4% ISP 35 57.9% 4.1 259 143 55.2% 394 317 80.5% 653 460 70.4% KVSP 35 57.6% 5.6 418 264 63.2% 167 115 68.9% 585 379 64.8% LAC 35 52.0% 5.1 366 206 56.3% 84 72 85.7% 450 278 61.8% NKSP 38 48.8% 8.2 344 196 57.0% 17 15 N/A 361 211 58.4% PBSP 36 55.1% 7.2 277 178 64.3% 66 50 75.8% 343 228 66.5% PVSP 37 57.1% 5.1 391 236 60.4% 190 150 78.9% 581 386 66.4% 62.3% 159 118 74.2% 477 316 66.2% N/A 65 50 77% 65 50 76.9% RJD 37 53.5% 6.3 318 198 SBURN 37 63.1% 5.6 0 0 SCC 33 54.7% 7.6 1,327 815 61.4% 366 300 82.0% 1,693 1,115 65.9% SVSP 36 54.6% 5.1 334 205 61.4% 155 124 80.0% 489 329 67.3% WSP 36 36 53.6% 3.9 172 7,415 140 4,295 491 18,197 312 11,710 63.5% 58.6% 182 5,534 76.9% 5.5 309 12,663 55.7% 53.8% ASP 35 47.9% 6.2 3,275 1,911 58.4% 1,443 1,094 75.8% 4,718 3,005 63.7% CCI 38 42.5% 5.3 2,092 1,171 56.0% 275 203 73.8% 2,367 1,374 58.0% 77.6% 64.4% CMC 36 47.8% 6.3 2,063 1,152 55.8% 639 471 73.7% 2,702 1,623 60.1% CMF 36 48.4% 6.8 169 85 50.3% 83 64 77.1% 252 149 59.1% CRC 35 49.3% 5.4 1,543 849 55.0% 1,081 802 74.2% 2,624 1,651 62.9% SAC 36 52.0% 6.5 1,438 890 61.9% 597 480 80.4% 2,035 1,370 67.3% CTF 37 48.7% 5.6 413 235 56.9% 129 98 76.0% 542 333 61.4% CVSP 34 52.0% 5.1 1,207 722 59.8% 805 601 74.7% 2,012 1,323 65.8% DVI 36 59.7% 4.7 566 332 58.7% 511 402 78.7% 1,077 734 68.2% FSP 34 61.1% 3.3 709 454 64.0% 631 510 80.8% 1,340 964 71.9% HDSP 31 57.1% 5.1 84 56 66.7% 42 33 78.6% 126 89 70.6% SATF 35 52.3% 7.6 2,507 1,571 62.7% 897 683 76.1% 3,404 2,254 66.2% SQ 37 36 60.3% 3.2 552 9,980 1,283 8,416 998 6,439 77.8% 76.5% 2,168 25,367 1,550 16,419 71.5% 5.6 885 16,951 62.4% 51.1% Sub-Total LEVEL III 54.2% CCC Sub-Total LEVEL II 54.2% 58.9% 64.7% CEN 28 52.7% 3.4 1,852 878 47.4% 448 345 77.0% 2,300 1,223 53.2% CMF 39 56.0% 5.9 624 393 63.0% 329 239 72.6% 953 632 66.3% COR 31 52.3% 7.3 213 123 57.7% 72 59 81.9% 285 182 63.9% CTF 27 63.9% 5.5 823 577 70.1% 281 229 81.5% 1,104 806 73.0% FSP 27 67.7% 6.9 455 342 75.2% 180 155 86.1% 635 497 78.3% MCSP 34 50.3% 7.7 398 279 70.1% 169 134 79.3% 567 413 72.8% ISP 27 65.5% 6.1 920 635 69.0% 452 364 80.5% 1,372 999 72.8% NKSP 31 55.1% 5.3 286 167 58.4% 35 30 85.7% 321 197 61.4% PVSP 29 59.8% 6.2 1,127 757 67.2% 404 335 82.9% 1,531 1,092 71.3% RJD 33 55.5% 3.8 698 417 59.7% 326 266 81.6% 1,024 683 66.7% WSP 29 29 55.7% 3.0 152 4,720 94 2,790 75 2,231 79.8% 352 10,444 227 6,951 64.5% 5.1 258 7,654 58.9% 58.1% 61.7% 80.0% 66.6% 67 68 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Mission and Institution Recidivism Rates by Gender Released During FY 2006-07 (Continued) Demographics Median Age Mission Institution LEVEL IV CAL High Risk CSRA Recidivism Rates Median LOS (Months) First Releases Re-Releases Total Number Number Recidivism Number Number Recidivism Number Number Released Returned Rate Released Returned Rate Released Returned 582 21.8% 339 71.4% 3,012 32 32.7% 1.8 2,673 CEN 26 100.0% 22.7 1 1 COR 30 65.1% 6.8 716 500 N/A 69.8% 242 0 0 216 164 N/A 75.9% 824 1 1 932 664 Recidivism Rate 27.4% N/A 71.2% SAC 34 60.1% 4.0 358 233 65.1% 193 153 79.3% 551 386 70.1% HDSP 30 64.0% 6.5 354 301 85.0% 176 155 88.1% 530 456 86.0% MCSP 36 63.3% 7.4 53 43 81.1% 26 22 N/A 79 65 82.3% KVSP 29 62.7% 6.6 468 338 72.2% 140 119 85.0% 608 457 75.2% LAC 34 54.9% 5.5 591 390 66.0% 196 159 81.1% 787 549 69.8% PBSP 34 61.3% 6.4 210 149 71.0% 116 95 81.9% 326 244 74.8% RJD 38 60.0% 3.7 8 8 N/A 2 1 N/A 10 9 SATF 29 69.1% 7.3 148 114 77.0% 56 47 83.9% 204 161 78.9% SVSP 31 31 63.1% 7.5 452 3,111 224 1,684 188 1,345 83.9% 873 7,913 640 4,456 73.3% 3.5 649 6,229 69.6% 50.9% Sub-Total 49.9% 79.9% N/A 56.3% Reception Center CCI 30 56.1% 2.9 565 363 64.2% 200 161 80.5% 765 524 68.5% CIM 36 62.1% 2.9 452 285 63.1% 5,853 4,449 76.0% 6,305 4,734 75.1% DVI 36 66.5% 2.6 424 287 67.7% 3,075 2,470 80.3% 3,499 2,757 78.8% HDSP 35 52.4% 2.9 20 14 N/A 310 232 74.8% 330 246 74.5% LAC 34 55.6% 2.2 274 140 51.1% 822 569 69.2% 1,096 709 64.7% NKSP 35 53.2% 2.8 932 548 58.8% 778 604 77.6% 1,710 1,152 67.4% PITCH 37 51.7% 3.8 0 0 N/A 2,474 1,833 74.1% 2,474 1,833 74.1% RIOCC 37 56.5% 7.8 0 0 N/A 363 272 74.9% 363 272 74.9% RJD 37 56.5% 2.9 269 180 66.9% 1,920 1,442 75.1% 2,189 1,622 74.1% SQ 36 66.4% 2.5 562 412 73.3% 3,810 2,958 77.6% 4,372 3,370 77.1% SRITA 36 59.4% 5.1 0 0 N/A 1,124 834 74.2% 1,124 834 74.2% WSP 34 36 57.6% 3.0 953 3,182 2,397 18,221 76.4% 4,667 28,894 3,350 21,403 71.8% 63.0% 3,111 23,840 77.0% 2.9 1,556 5,054 61.2% 60.0% CCF 31 58.1% 4.9 6,422 3,789 59.0% 1,787 1,370 76.7% 8,209 5,159 62.8% LPU 39 0.0% 3.0 2 1 50.0% 0 0 N/A 2 1 N/A RENT1 33 51.9% 3.4 293 158 N/A 4 3 N/A 297 161 N/A Sub-Total Other Facilities 74.1% RENT3 35 46.3% 3.6 414 198 47.8% 1 1 N/A 415 199 48.0% RENT4 33 31 56.3% 3.5 1 1,793 0 1,374 N/A 293 9,216 171 5,691 58.4% 4.4 171 4,317 58.6% 57.3% 292 7,423 37 28.7% 13.2 258 86 33.3% 0 0 N/A 258 86 33.3% 37 28.7% 13.2 258 86 33.3% 0 0 N/A 258 86 33.3% 51.8% Sub-Total 58.2% 76.6% 61.8% Female Camp CIW Sub-Total Institutions CCWF 38 28.1% 5.3 2,126 993 46.7% 483 358 74.1% 2,609 1,351 CIW 37 34.0% 3.5 1,183 565 47.8% 1,460 1,058 72.5% 2,643 1,623 61.4% VSPW 36 35.7% 4.1 2,028 1,046 51.6% 1,110 783 70.5% 3,138 1,829 58.3% 37 32.8% 4.3 5,337 2,604 48.8% 3,053 2,199 72.0% 8,390 4,803 57.2% 57.9% 139 87 62.6% 317 190 59.9% N/A 377 266 70.6% 393 275 70.0% 55.2% Sub-Total Reception Center CCWF CIW 1.9 178 103 3.5 16 9 CRCW 33 26.9% 5.8 379 198 52.2% 52 40 76.9% 431 238 38 46.4% 6.8 0 0 N/A 28 18 N/A 28 18 N/A SRITA 34 33.3% 3.6 0 0 N/A 6 5 N/A 6 5 N/A 36 46.1% 2.4 118 76 64.4% 461 313 67.9% 579 389 67.2% 35 34.1% 3.1 691 386 55.9% 1,063 729 68.6% 1,754 1,115 63.6% VSPW CCF 34 34.8% 4.8 320 141 44.1% 22 11 N/A 342 152 44.4% LPUFP 28 41.3% 12.2 63 14 22.2% 0 0 N/A 63 14 22.2% LPUPM 28 51.2% 6.7 83 30 36.1% 1 0 N/A 84 30 35.7% RENT1 37 31.0% 3.0 249 92 36.9% 12 5 N/A 261 97 37.2% RENT2 40 50.0% 1.8 9 2 N/A 1 1 N/A 10 3 RENT3 36 28.5% 3.3 329 106 32.2% 4 2 N/A 333 108 32.4% 35 34.0% 2.9 400 160 40.0% 6 5 N/A 406 165 40.6% 35 33.8% 3.4 1,453 545 37.5% 46 24 52.2% 1,499 569 38.0% RENT4 Sub-Total 23.0% 32.3% RIOCC Sub-Total Other Facilities 36 36 N/A 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Mission and Institution Recidivism Rates by Gender Released During FY 2006-07 (Continued) Recidivism Rates Demographics Median Age Mission Institution High Risk CSRA Median LOS (Months) First Releases Total Re-Releases Number Number Recidivism Number Number Recidivism Number Number Recidivism Released Returned Rate Released Returned Rate Released Returned Rate Under 30 Male LEVEL I CTF 24 100.0% 0.1 1 1 N/A 0 0 N/A 1 1 N/A SBURN 54 0.0% 0.3 0 N/A N/A N/A 0.2 1 N/A 0 N/A 1 2 0 50.0% 1 1 0 39 0 1 1 N/A Sub-Total LEVEL II CCI 27 100% 0.8 1 1 N/A 0 0 N/A 1 1 N/A CRC 43 33.3% 0.6 3 3 N/A 0 0 N/A 3 3 N/A 3 7 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A 3 7 0 N/A 0 0 0 4 4 N/A DVI Sub-Total LEVEL III Sub-Total WSP LEVEL IV Sub-Total HDSP 33 33.3% 0.2 33 42.9% 0.2 30 0.0% 0.5 2 2 N/A 0 0 N/A 2 2 N/A 30 0.0% 0.0 2 2 N/A 0 0 N/A 2 2 N/A 0 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 1 1 0 0 0 N/A 45.5% 31 0.0% 0.4 N/A 43.9% 0.6 1 1 0 34 0 N/A Reception Center CCI 32 35.1% 0.5 77 35 45.5% 0 0 N/A 77 35 CIM 28 40.0% 0.1 4 3 N/A 1 1 N/A 5 4 N/A DVI 34 43.9% 0.6 57 43 75.4% 0 0 N/A 57 43 75.4% HDSP 27 25.0% 0.5 4 2 N/A 0 0 N/A 4 2 N/A LAC 35 28.1% 0.4 32 11 34.4% 0 0 N/A 32 11 34.4% 55.4% NKSP 31 43.9% 0.6 139 77 55.4% 0 0 N/A 139 77 RJD 31 44.0% 0.6 25 18 72.0% 0 0 N/A 25 18 N/A SQ 32 51.8% 0.6 54 40 74.1% 2 2 N/A 56 42 75.0% 198 590 116 58.6% N/A 58.6% 3 N/A 198 593 116 58.5% 0 3 0 345 348 58.7% WSP Sub-Total 30 0 0.6 32 41.8% 0.6 Female Institutions CCWF 27 0.0% 0.9 3 2 N/A 0 0 N/A 3 2 N/A CIW 36 0.0% 0.3 4 1 N/A 0 0 N/A 4 1 N/A 26 20.0% 0.9 N/A N/A N/A 4 N/A 0 N/A 5 12 1 0.8 0 0 0 8.3% 5 12 1 29 4 N/A 44.9% VSPW Sub-Total Reception Center CCWF 36 12.8% 0.5 78 35 44.9% 0 0 N/A 78 35 CIW 32 25.0% 0.3 3 1 N/A 1 1 N/A 4 2 N/A CRCW 31 0.0% 0.4 1 1 N/A 0 0 N/A 1 1 N/A 42 125 21 50.0% 59 47.2% 115,254 75,019 65.1% VSPW 32 23.8% 0.5 50.0% N/A 16.8% 0.5 58 46.8% 0 1 0 33 42 124 21 Sub-Total 1 N/A Grand Total 35 52.9% 4.3 67,029 38,158 56.9% 48,225 36,861 76.4% 69 70 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Appendix E Three-Year Recidivism Rates* By Security Housing Unit (SHU) Institution and Time Between SHU and Parole Felons Released in FY 2006-07 Institution 1 CCI - SHU Parole from SHU Within 14 DAYS 15 - 30 DAYS OVER 30 DAYS CIW - SHU OVER 30 DAYS COR - SHU Parole from SHU Within 14 DAYS 15 - 30 DAYS OVER 30 DAYS FSP - SHU OVER 30 DAYS PBSP - SHU Parole from SHU Within 14 DAYS 15 - 30 DAYS OVER 30 DAYS SQ - SHU OVER 30 DAYS VSPW - SHU Parole from SHU Within 14 DAYS 15 - 30 DAYS OVER 30 DAYS NO SHU TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL RECIDIVATED NUMBER IN THREE YEARS RELEASED N 88 85 12 734 5 263 156 27 4,099 19 4 65 6 201 7 Rate 62 70.5% 69 81.2% 7 NA 516 70.3% 1 NA 168 63.9% 124 79.5% 14 NA 2,848 69.5% 7 NA 4 NA 46 70.8% 4 NA 158 78.6% 2 NA 10 8 2 211 7 NA 5 NA 2 NA 145 68.7% 109,252 115,254 70,830 64.8% 75,019 65.1% Re-Releases First Releases One Year N Rate 37 60.7% 26 47.3% 3 NA 176 46.9% 0 NA 79 42.0% 56 53.3% 7 NA 735 40.6% 1 NA 2 NA 20 32.8% 2 NA 30 50.8% 0 NA 4 NA 2 NA 1 NA 31 40.3% Two Years Three Years N N Rate 40 65.6% 34 61.8% 5 NA 220 58.7% 0 2 42 68.9% 43 78.2% 5 NA 236 62.9% NA 104 55.3% 74 70.5% 9 NA 987 54.5% 0 NA NA 4 NA 5 NA 1 NA 38 49.4% 3 NA 4 NA 43 70.5% 3 NA 43 72.9% 0 NA 4 NA 5 NA 1 NA 42 54.5% N Rate 13 48.1% 22 73.3% 2 NA 230 64.1% 0 NA 43 57.3% 39 76.5% 4 NA 1,385 60.6% 4 NA 0 NA 2 NA 0 NA 91 64.1% 1 NA 2 NA 0 NA 1 NA 80 59.7% Two Years Three Years N N Rate 20 74.1% 25 83.3% 2 NA 267 74.4% 0 NA 48 64.0% 44 86.3% 4 NA 1,666 72.8% 4 NA 0 NA 2 NA 1 NA 109 76.8% 2 NA 3 NA 0 NA 1 NA 94 70.1% Rate 20 74.1% 26 86.7% 2 NA 280 78.0% 1 NA 54 72.0% 45 88.2% 4 NA 1,759 76.9% 4 NA 0 NA 3 NA 1 NA 115 81.0% 2 NA 3 NA 0 NA 1 NA 103 76.9% 24,756 38.6% 33,015 51.5% 36,392 56.7% 27,280 60.5% 32,783 72.7% 34,438 76.4% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% * Recidivism rates were not calculated when fewer than 30 offenders were released. 1. NA 114 60.6% 79 75.2% 10 NA 1,089 60.1% 4 NA 31 50.8% 3 NA 41 69.5% 0 Rate One Year Note: Not necessarily institution from which offenders paroled. 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Three-Year Recidivism Rates* By Security Housing Unit (SHU) Institution and Total Time Spent in a SHU1 Felons Released in FY 2006-07 Institution 2 TOTAL TOTAL RECIDIVATED NUMBER IN THREE YEARS RELEASED N CCI - SHU 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years 6+ Years 783 76 27 9 7 17 Rate 549 70.1% 56 73.7% 24 88.9% 7 NA 5 NA 13 NA CIW - SHU 1 Year 5 Years 5 0 1 0 COR - SHU 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years 6+ Years 4,188 209 72 33 17 26 2,891 162 53 23 11 14 FSP - SHU 1 Year 2 Years 16 2 6 0 NA NA PBSP - SHU 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years 6+ Years 108 64 36 23 15 30 81 54 29 18 13 17 75.0% 84.4% 80.6% 78.3% NA NA 4 3 1 1 NA NA SQ - SHU 1 Year 2 Years NA NA 69.0% 77.5% 73.6% 69.7% NA 53.8% First Releases One Year N Rate 209 47.9% 21 52.5% 7 NA 0 NA 2 NA 3 NA 0 0 NA NA 804 41.1% 49 48.0% 10 27.0% 6 NA 1 NA 7 NA 1 0 NA NA 21 53.8% 12 40.0% 6 NA 5 NA 4 NA 6 NA 0 0 NA NA Re-Releases Two Years Three Years N N Rate 257 58.9% 25 62.5% 9 NA 0 NA 2 NA 6 NA 0 0 NA NA 1,070 54.8% 68 66.7% 21 56.8% 7 NA 1 NA 7 NA 2 0 NA NA 26 66.7% 18 60.0% 11 NA 7 NA 9 NA 8 NA 0 0 NA NA Rate 281 64.4% 27 67.5% 9 NA 0 NA 2 NA 7 NA 0 0 1,172 60.0% 77 75.5% 25 67.6% 7 NA 4 NA 7 NA 3 0 Total time in a SHU for parole term case. 2. Last SHU prior to parole. NA NA 29 74.4% 22 73.3% 14 NA 8 NA 11 NA 9 NA 0 0 VSPW - SHU 1 Year 219 152 69.4% 35 40.7% 44 51.2% 48 2 Years 10 6 NA 3 NA 4 NA 4 3 Years 1 0 NA 0 NA 0 NA 0 6+ Years 1 1 NA 0 NA 0 NA 0 Any SHU 6,002 4,189 69.8% 1212 42.3% 1602 56.0% 1766 NO SHU 109,252 70,830 64.8% 24,756 38.6% 33,015 51.5% 36,392 TOTAL 115,254 75,019 65.1% 25,968 38.7% 34,617 51.6% 38,158 * Recidivism rates were not calculated when fewer than 30 offenders were released. 1. NA NA NA NA One Year N Rate 222 64.0% 19 52.8% 12 NA 6 NA 2 NA 6 NA 0 0 NA NA 1,353 60.6% 67 62.6% 25 71.4% 12 NA 7 NA 7 NA 3 0 NA NA 40 58.0% 25 73.5% 11 NA 8 NA 2 NA 7 NA 0 1 NA NA Two Years Three Years N N Rate 258 74.4% 26 72.2% 14 NA 7 NA 3 NA 6 NA 0 0 NA NA 1,627 72.8% 80 74.8% 26 74.3% 15 NA 7 NA 7 NA 3 0 NA NA 49 71.0% 30 88.2% 13 NA 10 NA 2 NA 8 NA 1 1 NA NA Rate 268 77.2% 29 80.6% 15 NA 7 NA 3 NA 6 NA 1 0 NA NA 1,719 76.9% 85 79.4% 28 80.0% 16 NA 7 NA 7 NA 3 0 NA NA 52 75.4% 32 94.1% 15 NA 10 NA 2 NA 8 NA 1 1 NA NA 55.8% 80 60.2% 95 71.4% 104 78.2% NA 2 NA 2 NA 2 NA NA 0 NA 0 NA 0 NA NA 1 NA 1 NA 1 NA 61.7% 1919 61.1% 2292 73.0% 2423 77.2% 56.7% 27,280 60.5% 32,783 72.7% 34,438 76.4% 56.9% 29,199 60.5% 35,075 72.7% 36,861 76.4% 71 72 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 Appendix F Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Male Felons Released in FY 2006-07 Three Year Recidivism Rates by Program Location Institution Facility/Building ASP CCI CIM Avenal State Prison-A CA Correctional Institute-A CA Institute for Men-A CA Institute for Men-B CMC CA Men's Colony-West-A CRC CA Rehabilitation Center-A CA Rehabilitation Center-C CA Rehabilitation Center-E CA Rehabilitation Center-G COR CA State Prison, Corcoran-A CTF Correctional Training Facility - South-A Correctional Training Facility - South-B CVSP Chuckawalla Valley State Prison-A RJD R J Donovan Correctional Facility-A R J Donovan Correctional Facility-B R J Donovan Correctional Facility-C R J Donovan Correctional Facility-D SAC CA State Prison, Sacramento-A ISP Ironwood State Prison-A KVSP Kern Valley State Prison-A LAC CA State Prison, Los Angeles County-A NKSP North Kern State Prison-A PVSP Pleasant Valley State Prison-B SATF Substance Abuse Treatment Facility-Corcoran-A Substance Abuse Treatment Facility-Corcoran-B SCC Sierra Conservation Center-A Sierra Conservation Center-B SOL CA State Prison, Solano-A CA State Prison, Solano-B WSP Wasco State Prison-A DTF Drug Treatment Furlough-Region 4 MRA- Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-1 SASCA Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-2 Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-3 Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-4 SASCA Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-1 Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-2 Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-3 Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-4 Total TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED 312 167 278 259 312 120 134 105 179 336 340 249 312 122 95 81 6 696 224 14 150 1,261 171 952 462 225 127 287 120 1,555 1 38 13 42 35 304 238 594 586 11,502 TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N 231 117 184 166 214 80 87 73 134 216 231 206 222 92 72 63 3 487 162 12 123 781 124 678 287 174 82 208 87 1,062 0 13 6 22 16 171 137 287 339 7,649 Rate 74.0% 70.1% 66.2% 64.1% 68.6% 66.7% 64.9% 69.5% 74.9% 64.3% 67.9% 82.7% 71.2% 75.4% 75.8% 77.8% N/A 70.0% 72.3% N/A 82.0% 61.9% 72.5% 71.2% 62.1% 77.3% 64.6% 72.5% 72.5% 68.3% N/A 34.2% N/A 52.4% 45.7% 56.3% 57.6% 48.3% 57.8% 66.5% First Releases One Year Two Years N Rate N 81 42.0% 108 53 40.8% 78 70 35.7% 100 70 36.5% 96 76 38.2% 110 27 34.2% 42 34 42.0% 43 21 33.3% 35 46 45.1% 63 92 39.3% 127 85 40.1% 111 104 55.0% 133 95 45.0% 126 41 50.6% 50 35 59.3% 39 16 42.1% 26 1 N/A 1 201 40.7% 279 68 43.9% 92 10 N/A 11 49 57.6% 65 447 38.9% 622 65 49.2% 82 251 42.3% 334 182 42.3% 246 83 54.6% 104 24 32.0% 34 88 47.6% 113 34 48.6% 43 596 46.0% 775 0 N/A 0 8 21.1% 12 4 N/A 5 12 29.3% 18 9 26.5% 13 85 31.3% 127 84 37.5% 111 124 21.4% 223 194 35.6% 271 3,565 40.3% 4,868 Re-Releases Three Years Rate N 56.0% 126 60.0% 85 51.0% 118 50.0% 109 55.3% 121 53.2% 48 53.1% 44 55.6% 37 61.8% 69 54.3% 138 52.4% 122 70.4% 153 59.7% 139 61.7% 54 66.1% 43 68.4% 28 N/A 1 56.5% 318 59.4% 105 N/A 12 76.5% 70 54.2% 696 62.1% 91 56.3% 379 57.2% 264 68.4% 112 45.3% 37 61.1% 122 61.4% 45 59.8% 841 N/A 0 31.6% 13 N/A 6 43.9% 22 38.2% 16 46.7% 148 49.6% 126 38.4% 279 49.7% 312 55.1% 5,449 One Year Two Years Rate N Rate N 65.3% 86 72.3% 102 65.4% 31 83.8% 32 60.2% 52 63.4% 62 56.8% 47 70.1% 57 60.8% 82 72.6% 90 60.8% 28 68.3% 30 54.3% 35 66.0% 42 58.7% 28 66.7% 35 67.6% 51 66.2% 64 59.0% 60 58.8% 72 57.5% 81 63.3% 103 81.0% 44 73.3% 52 65.9% 63 62.4% 80 66.7% 29 70.7% 37 72.9% 21 58.3% 29 73.7% 31 72.1% 35 N/A 1 N/A 2 64.4% 133 65.8% 164 67.7% 45 65.2% 54 N/A 0 N/A 0 82.4% 35 53.8% 49 60.6% 66 58.4% 82 68.9% 31 79.5% 33 63.9% 243 67.7% 286 61.4% 18 56.3% 23 73.7% 48 65.8% 62 49.3% 36 69.2% 44 65.9% 67 65.7% 85 64.3% 36 72.0% 41 64.9% 174 66.9% 209 N/A 0 N/A 0 34.2% 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 53.7% 0 N/A 0 47.1% 0 N/A 0 54.4% 18 56.3% 23 56.3% 7 N/A 10 48.1% 6 N/A 8 57.2% 20 48.8% 27 61.7% 1,753 65.8% 2,124 Three Years Rate N 85.7% 105 86.5% 32 75.6% 66 85.1% 57 79.6% 93 73.2% 32 79.2% 43 83.3% 36 83.1% 65 70.6% 78 80.5% 109 86.7% 53 79.2% 83 90.2% 38 80.6% 29 81.4% 35 N/A 2 81.2% 169 78.3% 57 N/A 0 75.4% 53 72.6% 85 84.6% 33 79.7% 299 71.9% 23 84.9% 62 84.6% 45 83.3% 86 82.0% 42 80.4% 221 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 71.9% 23 N/A 11 N/A 8 65.9% 27 79.7% 2,200 Rate 88.2% 86.5% 80.5% 85.1% 82.3% 78.0% 81.1% 85.7% 84.4% 76.5% 85.2% 88.3% 82.2% 92.7% 80.6% 81.4% N/A 83.7% 82.6% N/A 81.5% 75.2% 84.6% 83.3% 71.9% 84.9% 86.5% 84.3% 84.0% 85.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 71.9% N/A N/A 65.9% 82.5% 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report 73 November 2011 Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Female Felons Released in FY 2006-07 Three Year Recidivism Rates by Program Location Institution Facility/Building CCWF Central California Woman's Facility-A Central California Woman's Facility-B CIW CA Institute for Women-A CA Institute for Women-C CRC CA Rehabilitation Center-D FOTEP Female Offender Treatment & Emplymnt Pgm-1 Female Offender Treatment & Emplymnt Pgm-2 Female Offender Treatment & Emplymnt Pgm-3 Female Offender Treatment & Emplymnt Pgm-4 VSPW Valley State Prison for Women-A Valley State Prison for Women-B MCOP-S Mandatory Conditions of Parole (SASCA)-1 MRA- Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-1 SASCA Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-2 Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-3 Mandatory Residential Aftercase-SB1453 (SASCA)-4 SASCA Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-1 Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-2 Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-3 Substance Abuse Services Coordination Agency-4 Total TOTAL NUMBER RELEASED 346 391 563 153 187 35 31 51 56 306 457 3 25 12 32 29 118 55 96 101 3,047 TOTAL RECIDIVATED IN THREE YEARS N 199 187 313 87 95 15 11 30 22 179 280 1 6 6 9 12 46 19 29 47 1,593 Rate 57.5% 47.8% 55.6% 56.9% 50.8% 42.9% 35.5% 58.8% 39.3% 58.5% 61.3% N/A N/A N/A 28.1% N/A 39.0% 34.5% 30.2% 46.5% 52.3% Re-Releases First Releases One Year N Rate 84 30.4% 76 25.2% 114 30.1% 38 33.3% 38 26.6% 4 N/A 5 16.7% 15 32.6% 8 16.0% 67 28.0% 96 35.0% 0 N/A 3 N/A 2 N/A 3 10.0% 8 N/A 21 20.2% 9 19.6% 11 12.6% 24 26.7% 626 27.2% Two Years N 127 109 161 50 54 9 9 22 16 104 129 1 6 4 7 8 31 11 21 37 916 Three Years Rate N 46.0% 145 36.2% 124 42.5% 182 43.9% 57 37.8% 62 N/A 11 30.0% 10 47.8% 27 32.0% 17 43.5% 121 47.1% 144 N/A 1 N/A 6 N/A 6 23.3% 8 N/A 10 29.8% 37 23.9% 14 24.1% 27 41.1% 39 39.7% 1,048 Rate 52.5% 41.2% 48.0% 50.0% 43.4% N/A 33.3% 58.7% 34.0% 50.6% 52.6% N/A N/A N/A 26.7% N/A 35.6% 30.4% 31.0% 43.3% 45.5% One Year N Rate 47 67.1% 53 58.9% 108 58.7% 26 66.7% 25 56.8% 3 N/A 1 N/A 3 N/A 4 N/A 46 68.7% 97 53.0% 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A 1 N/A 2 N/A 6 N/A 4 N/A 1 N/A 5 N/A 432 58.2% Two Years N 51 62 126 30 33 4 1 3 5 53 130 0 0 0 1 2 8 5 2 7 523 Rate 72.9% 68.9% 68.5% 76.9% 75.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A 79.1% 71.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 70.5% Three Years N 54 63 131 30 33 4 1 3 5 58 136 0 0 0 1 2 9 5 2 8 545 Rate 77.1% 70.0% 71.2% 76.9% 75.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A 86.6% 74.3% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 73.5% 74 2011 CDCR Adult Institutions Outcome Evaluation Report November 2011 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Office of Research, Research and Evaluation Branch On the World Wide Web at: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/adult_research_branch