Offender Recidivism Figures

2012 Alaska:

A recent report by the Alaska Judicial Council (AJC) examined for the first time recidivism among both felony and misdemeanor offenders in the state. An earlier report in 2007 was the first general study of recidivism and focused on felons. In this 2011 study, the AJC analyzed records for felons and misdemeanants who returned to the community in 2008 and 2009. Because there were two years of data for the offenders released in 2008, the report highlights the analysis of that 2008 sample—2,675 felons and 8,815 misdemeanants. (The report does include data for the 2009 sample.) This article focuses on the data for offenders released in 2008.

In Criminal Recidivism in Alaska, 2008–2009, the researchers looked at three measures of recidivism:

--Rearrests—Department of Public Safety ASPIN data
--Reconvictions—Department of Public Safety ASPIN data
--Remands to incarceration, including remands for new arrests, and for probation and parole violations—Department of Corrections OTIS and AVOMS data.

There is some overlap in the measures, but each reflects an offender’s contact with the justice system which impacts justice resources. In the report and in this article, “recidivism” is used as an umbrella term referring to all measures of recidivism. When a specific percentage for recidivism is given, the measure—remand, rearrest, or reconviction—is identified.

The report also looked at offender characteristics and the location of the court where the case was originally filed; this may or may not have been the same as the offense location. The court locations were designated as Anchorage, Fairbanks, Southeast, Mat-Su, Kenai, and Rural.

... ... ...

Felons

Within two years of return to their community:

-- 30% of felons were convicted of new offenses.
--2% of Class B felons and 3% of Class C felons were convicted of a more serious crime than their original underlying offense.
--No Class A felons were convicted of a more serious crime. (An unclassified felony is the most serious category and an unclassified felon could, therefore, not commit a more serious offense.)
--29% of individuals convicted of a violent offense, 34% convicted of a property offense, and 34% convicted of “other” offenses were reconvicted of the same category of offense.
--15% of drug offenders were reconvicted of a drug offense. (These offenders were more likely to be convicted of a driving or property offense than another drug offense.)
--2% of sex offenders were reconvicted of another sex offense.

..Source.. by Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage

Sexual crime studys shows repeats are low

Alaska Feb 2007:

STUDY: Supporters of tough new laws say convicts just get smarter.

A study of nearly 2,000 Alaska ex-cons challenges the widely held conviction that sex criminals are more likely to strike again than other lawbreakers when they get out of prison.

The study, by the Alaska Judicial Council, found that sex offenders are among the criminals least likely to get in trouble once they've done their time and been released.

The study says only 3 percent of sex offenders were convicted of another sex crime within three years of release from jail.



The most despised of criminals, sex offenders are widely held to be incurable and more likely to repeat their acts than those who commit other violent crimes. Backers of new laws that drastically increased jail time for sex criminals say they are skeptical of the report and stand by the tougher penalties.

Recidivism: Multi States

2001 Released:

..Source.. by Justice Research and Statistics Association

Criminal Recidivism in Alaska: Alaska Judicial Council

January 2007:

Executive Summary:
How well does Alaska’s criminal justice system work to protect the public? What works best? What needs improvement? Can less costly alternatives more effectively promote public safety? Knowing what happens after offenders serve their sentences can help answer these questions.

This report by the Judicial Council is the first general study of recidivism in Alaska. It describes the percentages of offenders who were re-arrested, had new court cases filed, were re-convicted, or remanded to custody for new offenses or for probation or parole violations. The report shows how soon after release these events occurred, and what factors were most closely related to an increased chance that offenders would be involved again in the criminal justice system. The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services funded the report.

The Council followed 1,934 offenders, all of whom were charged with at least one felony in 1999 and convicted. Of those, 59% were convicted of a felony, and 41% of a misdemeanor. This report focuses on the 1,798 offenders who had been out of custody for at least three years after they had served their sentence. The Council found that within three years after release from their sentence on the 1999 offense:

• 66% of all offenders in the sample had been re-incarcerated at least once, for a new offense or a probation or parole violation.

• 59% were arrested at least once for a new offense.

For the remainder of this paper: by the Alaska Judicial Council

A few selected highlights about sex offenders:

Sexual offenders were the group least likely to be convicted of the same type of offense that they were convicted of in the 1999 sample.

No Sexual offenders were convicted of any offense more serious than their 1999 offense.

3% of the persons who were convicted of a Sexual offense in a 1999 case had at least one new Sexual conviction.

Offenders whose 1999 felony charges resulted in conviction of a Sexual offense were among the least likely to be re-arrested, have new cases filed, be re-convicted, or return to custody.

AK- Alaska Sex Offender Recidivism Study

1996 Alaska

Sex offenders benefit if they participate in treatment during their incarceration, "surviving" much longer than untreated offenders before committing new crimes after returning to society, according to a long term study recently completed by the University of Alaska Anchorage and the Alaska Department of Corrections.

The study also showed that the longer they stayed in treatment, the longer they lasted in the community without reoffense, and that those who reached the advanced stages of treatment committed no new offenses during the period studies.

"These are positive results. They show our treatment program is working," said Margaret Pugh, Commissioner of Corrections. "No matter how you measure, the treatment group did better after release than untreated. And the further they go in treatment, the better their chances are of not reoffending."

The four-year study was done in conjunction with the university's Anchorage Justice Center. It reviewed the records of 685 prisoners who served time in Alaska correctional facilities between January 1987 and August 1995, including 411 who participated in the state's primary sex offender treatment program at Hiland Mountain Correctional Center in Eagle River.

Significant findings of the study are:

None of the 41 offenders in the study who reached the advanced stage of treatment has been reported committing a new offense.

All treated offenders, even those whose participation in treatment was minimal, went longer in the community without committing a new offense than offenders in any other comparison group.

Sexual assault offenders (rapists) and sexual abuse of a minor offenders do equally well, both in terms of how long they stay in treatment and how far they advance.

Alaska Native offenders do not progress in treatment as well as non-Natives, and both older, more educated Natives and those with a history of combined alcohol and drug abuse tend to leave treatment in the earlier phases.

"It's important to realize that this study does not claim we are curing sex offenders through treatment. The fact is, sex offenders are never considered cured," Pugh said. "But treatment can help offenders learn to control their behavior when they return to society. The vast majority of offenders do return to their communities, and treatment clearly is helping to reduce the number of victims of reoffenders."

Pugh said the reasons behind the findings concerning higher dropout rates for Alaska Natives aren't clear, but the department already is working on a plan to address the issue, she said. Part of the effort will involve a working group to focus on cultural issues. The working group will include representatives of several Alaska Native organizations, Pugh said.

"The value of this study is that now we have some baseline data on providing sex offender treatment to Native American inmates. We believe this research is at the forefront nationally, and even internationally, in that regard," Pugh said.

Pugh said the study took much longer than anticipated to complete because of difficulties involved in building and maintaining data bases with the department's inadequate management information system. The department is working with the state's other criminal justice agencies to create an integrated information system that will benefit public safety statewide, she said. ..more.. by the Alaska Department of Corrections. Full Study

AK- Criminal Recidivism in Alaska

Study the highlighting below, does it make sense?

January 2007

Executive Summary

How well does Alaska’s criminal justice system work to protect the public? What works best? What needs improvement? Can less costly alternatives more effectively promote public safety? Knowing what happens after offenders serve their sentences can help answer these questions.

This report by the Judicial Council is the first general study of recidivism in Alaska. It describes the percentages of offenders who were re-arrested, had new court cases filed, were re-convicted, or remanded to custody for new offenses or for probation or parole violations. The report shows how soon after release these events occurred, and what factors were most closely related to an increased chance that offenders would be involved again in the criminal justice system. The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services funded the report.

The Council followed 1,934 offenders, all of whom were charged with at least one felony in 1999 and convicted. Of those, 59% were convicted of a felony, and 41% of a misdemeanor.

-How can both statements be true? This is a study done by professionals employed by the state of Alaska.

This report focuses on the 1,798 offenders who had been out of custody for at least three years after they had served their sentence. The Council found that within three years after release from their sentence on the 1999 offense:

• 66% of all offenders in the sample had been re-incarcerated at least once, for a new offense or a probation or parole violation.

• 59% were arrested at least once for a new offense.

Recidivism rates during the three-year period by demographic factors and type of offense (see Parts 3 and 6)

• The likelihood that an offender would be re-arrested was affected by the type of offense for which the offender was convicted in 1999: 67% of Property offenders were re-arrested, as compared to 61% of Driving offenders, 60% of Violent offenders, 52% of Drug offenders, and 39% of Sexual offenders.

• The factors most closely related to increased recidivism were the offender’s age, and indigent status (indigent offenders were those who qualified for public attorney representation in 1999).

• An offender’s ethnicity (if Native), prior criminal history, alcohol, drug and mental health problems were other factors that increased the chance of re-arrest.

Types and seriousness of new convictions (see Part 4)

• Youthful offenders, males and those previously convicted of a Violent offense were more likely to commit a new offense at a more serious level than their 1999 offense.

• Most offenders who were convicted of a new offense were convicted of an offense of the same or lesser seriousness level than their 1999 conviction. Offenders with alcohol or drug problems in 1999 were less likely than others to be convicted of a more serious offense. An offender’s indigency or mental health problems were not related to conviction on a more serious offense.

• Sexual offenders were the least likely to commit the same offense again; those previously convicted of Driving offenses were the most likely to commit the same offense again.

Timing of recidivism (see Part 5)

• Offenders were arrested for most of their new offenses within the first year after release, particularly during the first six months after release.


Part 1
Measures of Recidivism

The Council looked at four measures of recidivism for offenders charged with a felony filed in calendar 1999, and convicted of a felony or misdemeanor.1 They were:2

• Re-arrests of the offender (using Department of Public Safety data).

• New court cases filed against the offender (using data from Alaska Court System).

• Re-convictions of the offender (using Department of Public Safety data).
• Remands to incarceration of the offender, which included remands for new arrests, and for probation and parole violations (using Department of Corrections data).3

These sources chosen for data are standard sources of information about criminal justice events for specific offenders.4 Similar databases are used by all fifty states to report information and conduct statistical analyses. Therefore, the Council’s data on recidivism can be compared more easily to data from other jurisdictions.

As in other jurisdictions, reports such as this one rely on criminal justice record repositories that probably understate the actual level of re-arrests and re-convictions.5 Although many recidivism reports use only one or two of these measures, the Council has chosen to use all four. Three of the four: re-arrest, new cases filed, and remands to custody do not reflect proven criminal behavior.

Remands may reflect violations of conditions of probation or parole (for example, no drinking) that are not criminal behavior, or they may be a remand because the offender was arrested for a new offense.6 The fourth measure, new convictions, shows only criminal behavior that has been proven in court, whether by a plea from the defendant or conviction after trial. Re-arrests, new cases filed, and remands are useful to understand the frequency with which the criminal justice system had new contacts with offenders. ..more.. by Alaska Judicial Council

AK- RECIDIVISM IN ALASKA

June 2008

ABSTRACT
Recidivism data are a tool that can help policymakers determine how effectively a criminal justice system is working to protect the public. Such data can help answer whether the current system is appropriate, whether alternative methods could provide better results, and whether specialized programs such as therapeutic courts can help reduce recidivism rates. The Alaska Judicial Council published two reports in 2007 that sought to address these questions and more. This Comment has combined much of the data from these two reports in order to present them in a unified fashion, providing direct comparisons and contrasts where appropriate. The Council has also been busy at work responding to requests regarding the data originally published, and some of this new information is printed here. Finally, the Council has proposed that alternatives to incarceration be looked at in certain situations as a result of the findings and also has encouraged agencies sponsoring therapeutic courts to do more work in order to show the costs and benefits of that approach. ..Source.. by TERESA W. CARNS*

AK- Sex Offender Treatment Program: Initial Recidivism Study

July 1996

Executive Summary:
The Alaska Department of Corrections, in conjunction with the University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center, recently completed a study of sex offenders in the treatment program at Hiland Mountain Correctional Center during the period of January 1987 to August 1995. The study included analysis of descriptive characteristics of the participants; treatment variables such as length of time in program, reason for discharge and treatment stage at discharge; and re-offense data. The treatment group was compared with three other groups, including a motivated control group, an unmotivated control group, and a group of non-sex offenders (generics). There were several significant findings from the study:

A treatment effect was clearly demonstrated. Treated sex offenders lasted longer in the community before they re-offended than offenders in any of the comparison groups. Even under varied definitions of re-offense, the treatment group lasted longer without re-offense regardless of the definition applied. (See Figure 1.)

Treatment at any level improved survival in the community without re-offense. Those who were in treatment longer tended to last longer in the community without a re-offense. Those who completed all stages of treatment through the advanced stage had a zero re-offense rate for sexual re-offenses. This included Sexual Assault offenders (rapists), who generally tend to re-offend more quickly and at a higher frequency. (See Figure 2.)

Sexual Assault offenders (rapists) do as well as Sexual Abuse of a Minor (SAM) offenders, both in terms of how long they stay in treatment and how far they advance through the program. This is an unusually positive outcome that has not been typically reported by other programs. For Sexual Abuse of a Minor (SAM) offenders, there was little difference shown in re-offense rate between those who reached intermediate phase and those who reached advanced phase in the program. For Sexual Assault (SA) offenders, achievement of intermediate or advanced stage was related to survival as measured by first arrest. (See Figures 3 and 4.)

Alaska Native offenders do not progress as well in the program as non-Native offenders. This is the first study which directly addressed the demographic characteristics of Alaska Native sex offenders and the findings were somewhat different from what had been expected. It was originally anticipated that Alaska Natives who left the program early would be young, less educated and have a history of both alcohol and drug abuse. In fact, the study demonstrated that older, more educated Alaska Natives left the program early. The effect of a combined alcohol and drug abuse history was as expected. Two-thirds of offenders in the treatment group had a history of substance abuse, with an even higher incidence among Alaska Native offenders. Those who had no history of substance abuse tended to advance further in the program; those with a history of both alcohol and drug abuse tend to leave in the earlier phases of the program. ..Source.. by Alaska Department of Corrections and Alaska Justice Statistical Analysis Unit.