Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010

April 22, 2014 NCJ 244205
with updated
December 2016, NCJ 244205:

Examines the 5-year post-release offending patterns of persons released from state prisons in 2005 by offender characteristics, prior criminal history, and commitment offense. It provides estimates on the number and types of crimes former inmates commit both prior to their imprisonment and after release. The report includes different measures of recidivism, including a new arrest, court adjudication, conviction, and incarceration for either a new sentence or a technical violation.

It also documents the extent to which the released prisoners committed crimes in states other than the one that released them. Data are from the Bureau of Justice Statistics' Recidivism Study of State Prisoners Released in 2005, which tracked a sample of former inmates from 30 states for five years following release in 2005. The findings are based on prisoner records obtained from the state departments of corrections through the National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) and criminal history records obtained through requests to the FBI's Interstate Identification Index (III) and state repositories via the International Justice and Public Safety Network (Nlets).

Supplemental Tables (Most serious commitment offense and types of post-release arrest charges of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005) (PDF) (CSV) has been added.

Highlights:

..Continued.. by Matthew R. Durose, Alexia D. Cooper, Ph.D., Howard N. Snyder, Ph.D., Bureau of Justice Statistics

---

As to folks we advocate for the key re-arrest rate is expressed here: "Among prisoners released for rape or sexual assault in 30 states in 2005, an estimated 5.6% were re-arrested for rape or sexual assault within 5 years of release" See PDF (20,422 X .056 = 1,145 were re-arrested for new sex offense over that 5-year period)

---

Wyoming Sex Offender Recidivism Rates

Average 4.4% Over 5yr Followup

Assessing Risk Among Sex Offenders in Virginia

January 2001:

In 1999, the Virginia General Assembly requested the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission to develop a sex offender risk assessment instrument, based on the risk of re-offense, for integration into the state’s sentencing guidelines system. In accordance with Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 333 of the 1999 General Assembly, the Commission embarked on an empirical study of recidivism among sex offenders convicted in the Commonwealth. The Commission’s goal was to develop a reliable and valid predictive instrument, specific to the population of sex offenders in Virginia, that could be a valuable tool for the judiciary when sentencing sex offenders. If put in place, Virginia would be the first state in the nation to integrate sex offender risk assessment into sentencing guidelines.

Research Methodology
The Commission tracked 579 felony sex offenders who were released from incarceration (or sentenced to probation without an active term of incarceration) during fiscal years (FY) 1990 through 1993. Selecting offenders returning to the community from FY1990 to FY1993 allowed for a minimum five-year follow-up for all offenders in the sample, with some offenders followed for as long as ten years. On average, offenders in the Commission’s study were tracked for eight years. The offenders were selected in such a way that the overall sample reflects the characteristics of a random sample of sex offenders sentenced in Virginia’s circuit courts in calendar years (CY) 1996 and 1997. This design enables the Commission to generalize the results of the study to the population of sex offenders sentenced in circuit courts in the Commonwealth.

Automated data was supplemented through manual data collection. Through examination of narrative accounts found in pre/post-sentence investigation (PSI) reports, rich contextual detail of the sex offenses committed by offenders in the sample was gathered. Criminal history “rap sheets” from the Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN) system maintained by the Virginia State Police and from the FBI’s Central Criminal Records Exchange (CCRE) system provided recidivism data and supplemented prior record information.

Measuring Recidivism
There are many barriers to accurate measurement of recidivism among sex offenders, including reluctance to report sexual victimization and evidentiary problems resulting in offenders not being charged or convicted of their crimes. Victims and witnesses may refuse to come forward to testify, particularly when the victim is young. These and other obstacles hinder the prosecution of sex offense cases and often mean that charges must be dropped or reduced in a plea agreement. In order to avoid the underestimation of recidivism that is inherent with measurement based solely on reconviction, the Commission elected to define recidivism using official records of arrests. The Commission believes that measuring recidivism by a new arrest more closely approximates the true rate of re-offense behavior among sex offenders. To the extent that sex offenders go on to commit other types of violent crimes, re-arrests for new sex offenses will underestimate the predatory nature of these offenders. The Commission, therefore, chose as its operational definition of recidivism a new arrest for a sex offense or any other crime against the person.

Treatment of Sex Offenders
SJR 333 requests the Commission to consider the impact of treatment interventions on the reduction of recidivism among this particular population of offenders. The Commission, however, determined that assessing the effectiveness of post-conviction treatment services among offenders in the study sample would be extremely difficult. In 1992, the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) determined that, during the time in which the offenders under study were incarcerated, “the Department of Corrections had not promulgated any standards to govern the development of treatment programs in the prisons and field units” (p. iii). JLARC found no agency specific requirements for the service providers, no minimum qualifications for counselors conducting group therapy and no guidelines outlining the basic elements of therapeutic counseling (p. iv-v). Moreover, only half (53%) of imprisoned sex offenders received any treatment services prior to reaching their first parole eligibility date (JLARC 1992, p. iv).

Of those receiving treatment services when they become eligible for parole, a large share (40%) were provided only sex offender education programming, and not sex offender therapy. Furthermore, little consistent documentation about participation in prison-based sex offender treatment programs was available in files at the headquarters of the Department of Corrections. Given these serious limitations, the Commission concluded that the impact of post-conviction treatment and its effect on rates of recidivism among sex offenders returned to the community from FY1990 through FY1993 could not be accurately assessed as part of the current study. Although the impact of specialized sex offender treatment provided after conviction was not examined, the Commission analyzed available automated data indicating whether or not the offender had received some type of mental health treatment or participated in an alcohol or drug treatment program prior to committing the offense under study. A review of literature on the effectiveness of sex offender treatment is provided in this document. ..more..

A Multi-state Recidivism Study Using Static-99R and Static-2002 Risk Scores and Tier Guidelines from the Adam Walsh Act

November 2012:

Abstract:
This study seeks to examine important components of our nation’s sex offender tracking and monitoring systems, with a focus on risk assessment and sexual recidivism (measured by re-arrest). The principal aims of this study were fourfold: (1) to compare the nationally recommended Adam Walsh Act (AWA) classification tiers with actuarial risk assessment instruments in their respective abilities to identify high risk individuals and recidivists; (2) to evaluate the predictive accuracy of existing state risk assessment classification schemes; (3) to examine the distribution of risk assessment scores within and across tier categories as defined by the AWA; and (4) to examine the role of offender age in recidivism risk across the adult lifespan.

Data were collected from 1,789 adult sex offenders in four states (Minnesota, New Jersey, Florida and South Carolina) to inform these analyses. Variables including offender demographics and criminal history information, coded from state criminal justice records, were used to score actuarial risk assessment instruments and sex offender registry information. On average, we found that the recidivism rate was approximately 5% at five years and 10% at 10 years. AWA tier was unrelated to sexual recidivism, except in Florida, where it was inversely associated with recidivism. Actuarial measures and existing state tiering systems both showed better predictive validity than AWA tiers. Finally, offender age was found to have a significant protective effect for sexual reoffending, with older offenders showing a decreased risk for sexual recidivism.

The findings indicate that the current AWA classification scheme is likely to result in a system that is less effective in protecting the public than the classification systems currently implemented in the states studied. Policy makers should strongly consider substantial revisions of the AWA classification system to better incorporate evidence-based models of sex offender risk assessment and management. ..Source.. by Kristen M. Zgoba, PI, New Jersey Department of Corrections -and- Michael Miner, Co-PI, University of Minnesota Medical School -and- Raymond Knight, Co-Investigator Brandeis University -and- Elizabeth Letourneau, Co-Investigator, Johns Hopkins University -and- Jill Levenson, Co-Investigator, Lynn University -and- David Thornton, Co-Investigator, Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Center

Recidivism among sex offenders in Connecticut

February 2012:

Executive Summary

Although the term “sex offender” is commonly used to describe anyone who has been convicted of sex-crimes, it is important to recognize that individuals who have committed sex offenses do not constitute a single, homogenous population. Together they exhibit a wide range of criminal behaviors that may or may not include violence or contact with other persons. As a consequence, the risk, or likelihood, of committing new sex crimes is not consistent across all sex offender types.

This study tracked 14,398 men for a five-year period following their 2005 release or discharge from a CT prison in 2005. Every subsequent arrest, criminal conviction or reincarceration event was captured and analyzed to produce the 5-year recidivism rates for the group.

In addition to analyzing recidivism among all offenders released or discharged during 2005, the study identified five subgroups from the total cohort who were either convicted for sex offenses or thought to have been involved in criminal sexual crimes but not convicted. The five subgroups were:

-- 1,395 men who had had a prior arrest for a sex-related offense
-- 896 men who had a prior conviction for a sex-related offense
-- 746 men who had served a prison sentence for a sex-related offense before being released in 2005
-- 423 men, a subset of the 746, whose last prison sentence before release was for a sex-related offense, and
-- 1,229 men who were assigned Sex Treatment Scores of 2 or higher by the Department of Correction prior to their 2005 release or discharge.

In 2005, 746 offenders who had served a prison sentence for a least one sex-related offense were released or discharged from prison. Over the next five years:

-- 27 (3.6%) of these men were arrested and charged with a new sex crime.
-- 20 (2.7%) were convicted for new sex offense, and
-- 13 (1.7%) were returned to prison to serve a sentence for a new sex crime.

The sexual recidivism rates for the 746 sex offenders released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The real challenge for public agencies is to determine the level of risk which specific offenders pose the public. ...continued... by State of Connecticut, Office of Policy and Management, Criminal Justice Policy & Planning Division (Source Conn State)

Sexual Assault Trends and Sex Offender Recidivism in Maine

October 2010:

Forward:

Concern about sex offenders and their behavior is understandably a topic of great public interest. Numerous public policy proposals target the management of sex offenders in prisons and in communities post‐release. Recent examples of such proposals include, but are not limited to, enhanced sanctions for convicted and repeat sex offenders, civil commitment for predatory sex offenders, the development of sex offender registries, and the use of advanced technology to monitor sex offenders and residency restrictions.1 Unfortunately, the quality and extent of the body of knowledge concerning sex offender behavior has not kept pace with either the sophistication or potential cost of some of these proposed policies.

The purpose of this report is to shed light on trends in sex offending and the recidivism of sex offenders in Maine, by replicating the methods of Bureau of Justice Statistics special report, Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994. That study followed prisoners released from prison in 15 states during 1994 over a three year period, examining their patterns of incarceration. This report seeks to replicate, to the degree possible, the analysis and resulting data tables for sex offenders released from Maine’s state prisons over a five year period, from 2004‐2008.

This report also examines sex offenders admitted to probation from 2004‐2007. The rationale for this inclusion is that offenders under community correctional supervision are a population of special interest, and that determining the progress of a group which had been subjected to supervision in the community might also have important policy implications. Each group was followed for a period of three years to identify re‐incarcerations.

Funding for this report is provided by BJS to the Maine Statistical Analysis Center, located at the University of Southern Maine’s Muskie School of Public Service. Any points of view or opinions stated are those of the report author and do not necessarily represent the opinion or official position of BJS.

..For the remainder of this report.. by USM Muskie School of Public Service, Maine Statistical Analysis Center

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) Recidivism Studies

June 2008:

Following release of these recidivism numbers the California Sex Offender Management Board has released this explanation of these recidivism numbers: A STATEMENT FROM THE CALIFORNIA SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT BOARD (CASOMB) REGARDING THE TWO PAPERS

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) has conducted two sex offender recidivism studies that are very interesting. They were published on June of 2008:

Study 1) A 5-year study of 4,204 sex offender parolees, who were released in 2002 and followed until the end of 2007. Of the 4,204 parolees released 135 were returned to prison with a new sex offense conviction, a 3.21% recidivism rate. As to non sex offenses, 197 were returned to prison for a 4.69% non sex offense recidivism rate.

Study 2) A 10-year study of 3,577 sex offender parolees, who were released in 1997 and followed until the end of 2007. Of the 3,577 parolees released 121 were returned to prison with a new sex offense conviction, a 3.38% recidivism rate. As to non sex offenses, 137 were returned to prison for a 3.83% non sex offense recidivism rate.

In both studies the majority of the recidivism occurred in the first year ( 86 of 135 for 64% -v- 79 of 121 for 65% respectively). Again in both studies the majority of non sex offense convictions occurred in the first year ( 114 of 197 for 58% -v- 89 of 137 for 65% respectively). Technical violations of parole, although 47.05% and 49.06% respectively, were far less than other parolees who showed 60-70%.

The two studies virtually validated each other on a few points, remembering, each study had different parolees.

Click on chart to print

WA- Sex Offender Sentencing in Washington State: Recidivism Rates

August 2005:

SUMMARY
This report describes the recidivism rates of Washington State sex offenders.

Findings

• Compared with the full population of felony offenders, sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rates for felony offenses (13 percent) and violent felony offenses (6.7 percent) but the highest recidivism rates for felony sex offenses (2.7 percent).

• Sex offenders who victimize children have the lowest felony recidivism rates as well as the lowest sex (2.3 percent) and violent felony (5.7 percent) recidivism rates. Rapists have the highest sex (3.9 percent) and violent felony (9.5 percent) recidivism rates. Some select populations of sex offenders in the state have been found to have much higher recidivism rates.3

• Sex offenders who complete SSOSA,4 an outpatient treatment sentence, have the lowest recidivism rates in all categories. In contrast, sex offenders sentenced to prison have the highest rates. Those sentenced to jail or community supervision have rates similar to, but slightly below, the recidivism rates of those sentenced to prison.

The relatively low “base rate” of recidivism makes it challenging to predict reoffending. Subsequent reports will cover this topic in detail.



Introduction:
The 2004 Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to analyze the impact and effectiveness of current sex offender sentencing policies.1 Because the topic is extensive, we are publishing a series of reports.

This report describes the recidivism rates of Washington State sex offenders. It examines the 4,091 sex offenders placed in the community from 1994 to 1998 after release from prison or jail or a community supervision sentence. Typically, news articles report sex offender recidivism with one number. This study examines recidivism from multiple perspectives, looking at the type of sex offender (child victim, rapist, sex offender with priors) and the categories of crimes after release (sex, violent, non-violent, misdemeanor).

This study defines recidivism as a conviction occurring during the first five years after release to the community. In addition, the time between the date of a recidivism offense and the conviction for that offense—the adjudication period—is taken into account. Our previous work indicates that a one-year adjudication period captures nearly all convictions.2

For the remainder of this study: by Washington State Institute for Public Policy

Sex offender recidivism rates below expectations: more than 80% of sex offenders who underwent treatment did not reoffend

December 2002:

More than 80% of sex offenders who have undergone treatment do not reoffend within 15 years, according to preliminary results of a 15-year prospective study of 626 individuals reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

The study did not examine the efficacy of various forms of treatment, but it did find that sexual offenders who were compliant with their treatment were less likely to reoffend than those who were noncompliant.

The results of the study were reported by Dr. Fred Berlin, who is director of the National Institute for the Study, Prevention, and Treatment of Sexual Trauma, Baltimore, and by Gerard J. McGlone. Ph.D., a clinical fellow at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.

The results are "a far cry from what people often think is occurring, particularly with a group of patients who are this serious, people with multiple prior offenses, people with pedophilia," Dr. Berlin said. "The notion that most of these people would quickly be back into trouble was simply not true."

The preliminary 15-year data update the group's 5-year study of the same individuals (Am. J. Forensic Psychiatry 12[3]:5-28, 1991). That study found an overall 9.7% recidivism rate.

The estimated rate of additional recidivism for the following 10 years was 9.3%, for a total of 19% over 15 years.

Both studies followed 626 individuals treated at the Johns Hopkins sexual disorders clinic between 1978 and 1990. Of those, 406 were pedophiles, 111 were exhibitionists, and 109 were characterized as "sexually aggressive," with most diagnosed as "paraphilic disorder not otherwise specified" or antisocial personality disorder.

The patients underwent a variety of treatments at the clinic, including individual, group, and family therapy. Approximately 40% of the patients received an-tiandrogenic drugs in an effort to lessen their sex drive.

Investigators examined three local and national databases for evidence of recidivism in the 5-year study.

Anyone who was charged with a sexual crime was included; conviction was not necessary.

For the 15-year follow-up, investigators have so far examined only Maryland state databases and have not yet examined national databases.

The 5-year study showed that 7.4% of pedophiles, 4.6% of sexual aggressives, and 23.4% of exhibitionists reoffended sexually The 15-year study added an additional 8.6% of pedophiles (total 16%), 10% of sexual aggressives (total 14.6%), and 10.8% of exhibitionists, (total 34.2%), the investigators said.

For the 15-year study, investigators have not yet reported recidivism rates for compliant vs. noncompliant patients. These data were reported at the 5-year follow-up.

For pedophiles, 2.9% of the treatment compliant and 11.1% of the noncompliant reoffended sexually For sexual aggressives, 2.8% of the compliant and 8.1% of the noncompliant reoffended sexually

And for exhibitionists, 12.5% of the compliant and 32.6% of the noncompliant reoffended sexually

On the issue of exhibitionists, Dr. Berlin observed, "Even with treatment, this is a very driven, compulsive disorder. The good news, though, is that in almost every instance where there was recidivism, it was a non-hands-on offense.

"These people were not recidivating by doing other things. With very few exceptions they were exposing. ... The more dangerous patients, the ones who had been sexually aggressive or who were pedophiles, had the lowest recidivism rates.

Nonsexual recidivism rates were considerably higher in all groups. At the 5-year follow-up, 9.2% of compliant pe dophiles and 26.2% of noncompliant pedophiles were charged with a nonsexual offense such as burglary. Among sexual aggressives, the rates were 14% of compliant patients and 29.7% of non-compliant patients. And among exhibitionists the rates were 10.4% of compliant patients and 4 1.9% of non compliant patients.

The study's results have important public policy implications, Dr. Berlin said.

Over the years, for example, legislatures in all 50 states and the District of Columbia have passed numerous laws involving the civil commitment, registration, and community notification of sexual offenders.

In addition, a federal law that took effect recently requires the states to notify the public about sexual offenders who are enrolled or working at college campuses.

The idea behind these registries and public notifications is the notion that sexual offenders are difficult to rehabilitate and have a particularly high rate of recidivism. (See related story page 5.)

But the data show that sexual offenders actually have a lower rate of recidivism that those who commit other kinds of crimes.

And some experts speculate that these new laws just might have the unintended consequence of actually increasing the risk of recidivism.

"We think that many of the people who seem to be doing well in our treatment program have done well because they could get jobs," Dr. Berlin said. "They could fit into their community.

"We now have these registries. Are [sexual offenders who have been punished and released going to be able to get housing? Are they going to be able to get work? Are we inadvertently actually going to make it more difficult for some of these people?"

..Source.. Clinical Psychiatry News, By Robert Finn

COPYRIGHT 2002 International Medical News Group
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning

== Awaiting Confirmation of Study Type & Subjects ==
"According to a 1991 study of 626 patients conducted by Berlin's institute, five years after they had been treated through chemical castration fewer than ten percent had committed sexual offenses again. Of the most compliant patients, fewer than 5 percent committed new sexual acts. (Id.)"

OH- Five Year Recidivism Follow-Up Of Sex Offender Releases

August 1996

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to determine baseline recidivism rates for sex offenders releasedfrom Ohio’s prisons. This information is important in understanding the proportion of sex offenderswho return to Ohio’s prisons, as well as the nature of their recidivism crimes.

METHODOLOGY
The 1989 Ohio prison release population was identified in order to establish a five yearfollow up period. This included three different release type populations. The first group, expirationof definite sentence, or flat time offenders, were those who received a definite (flat) sentence for athird or fourth degree felony and were released without any further supervision once they had servedtheir sentence. The second group of offenders released were parolees. These offenders had beengiven an indeterminate sentence, (i.e., 5 to 25 years) and were subsequently approved by the ParoleBoard to be released into the community with supervision before completing their maximumsentence. The last group of offenders was given a suspended sentence. These offenders had beenplaced in prison for a short time, and then granted shock probation by a judge. They also were placedunder community supervision.

Of those released from Ohio’s prisons in 1989, 848 were identified as sex offenders. For the purposes of this study, sex offenders were defined as those inmates whose commitment offense wasany of the following offenses: ..more.. by Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction