Corrections Growth:A Long-Term Analysis of Growth in

Michigan’s Department of Corrections

Balancing Our Priorities:Can We Safely Spend Less on

Corrections?May 2, 2008

2

Citizens Research Council of Michigan

• Founded in 1916

• Statewide

• Non-partisan

• Private not-for-profit

• Promotes sound policy for state and local governments through factual research – accurate, independent and objective

• Relies on charitable contributions of Michigan foundations, businesses, and individuals

• www.crcmich.org

3

One Theme in Michigan Corrections Since 1973: Growth

• Michigan’s prison population has grown by 538 percent in the last 34 years

• Department of Corrections expenditure and workforce sizes have reached record levels

• Michigan is an outlier in national and Great Lakes states Corrections comparisons

• Looking forward, prison populations and Corrections expenditures are projected to rise

4Source: Michigan Department of Corrections Statistical Reports, Michigan Department of Corrections 2008 Prison Population Projection Report

Michigan’s Prison Population Growth: 1973-2007

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

Year

Num

ber

of Pri

soner

s

Substantial Growth

Steady Growth

Stability

5

• The number of prisoners entering prison increases

• The length of time prisoners remain incarcerated increases

What Causes Prison Population Growth?

6

In Michigan, Both Have Increased

• The number of prisoners entering prison has increased due to:• Swelling annual felony dispositions• Increasing recidivism rates• More technical rule violators

• The length of time prisoners remain incarcerated has increased due to: • Decreasing parole approval rates• Policy changes aimed at being ‘tough on crime’ (e.g. removing disciplinary credits and stiffer sentencing guidelines)

What Causes Prison Population Growth?

7

Source: Department of Corrections Statistical Reports, FBI Uniform Crime Reports

(Data Compiled by The Disaster Center Website)

Felony Disposition Status of Michigan’s Reported Crimes: 1976-2006

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

197

6

197

8

198

0

198

2

198

4

198

6

198

8

199

0

199

2

199

4

199

6

199

8

200

0

200

2

200

4

200

6

Year

Oth

er

Rep

ort

ed

Cri

mes

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

Felo

ny D

isp

osi

tio

ns

Other Reported Crime

Felony Disposition

8Source: Michigan Department of Corrections Statistical Reports

Prison Commitments: 1976-2006

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

mm

itm

en

ts

Other Commitment

Technical Rule Violators

9Source: Michigan Department of Corrections Statistical Reports, Department of Corrections MPRI Quarterly Status Report July 2007

Recidivism and Parole Approval Rates: 1976-2004

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

Year

Rate Parole Approval Rate

Recidivism Rate

10Source: Michigan Department of Corrections MPRI Quarterly Status Report July 2007, Department of Corrections Research Section May 1995, Department of Corrections Five Years After Report September 1997

Prisoners Serving Past Parole Eligibility*: 1988, 1997, and

2006

*Prisoners with parolable life sentences are not included in the ‘Serving Past Eligibility’ category

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

55000

1988 1997 2006

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

Pri

son

ers

Not Eligible

Serving Past Eligibility

17%

28%

31%

11Source: CRC Calculations, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics Annual Releases

Spreadsheet

Michigan’s Estimated Average Length of Stay: 1981-2005

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005

Year

Len

gth

of

Sta

y (

in M

on

ths)

Average Length of Stay

12

How Does Prison Population Growth Affect Michigan’s Budget?

13

The Fiscal Effects of Sustained Prison Population Growth

• Corrections expenditures increased by nearly 5,000 percent in the last 34 years from $38 million to roughly $2 billion

• Michigan Corrections spending grew from 1.6 percent of total GF/GP expenditures in FY1973 to 21.5 percent by FY2007

• Since FY2000, Corrections spending has “crowded out” spending on other major GF/GP programs

14Source: Michigan Department of Civil Service, CRC calculations, U.S. Bureau of

Labor Statistics

Corrections and GF/GP Expenditures Compared to CPI: FY73-FY07

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

197

3

197

5

197

7

197

9

198

1

198

3

198

5

198

7

198

9

199

1

199

3

199

5

199

7

199

9

200

1

200

3

200

5

200

7

Fiscal Year

Ind

ex Corrections Expenditures

Inflation (Detroit CPI)

GF/GP Expenditures Less Corrections

15

The Effects of Sustained Prison Population Growth on the State

Workforce

• There were roughly 7 times more Corrections employees in 2006 than in 1973

• The percentage of the state classified workforce employed in Corrections rose from 5 percent in 1973 to 32 percent in 2006

16Source: Michigan Department of Civil Service

State Classified Workforce: FY73-FY06

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

Fiscal Year

Em

plo

yees

State Workforce Less Corrections

Corrections Workforce

17

The Effects of Sustained Prison Population Growth on Correctional

Facilities

• There were 31 more correctional facilities, prisons and camps, in Michigan in 2006 than in 1976

• Michigan has exceeded its year-end net operating capacity in 16 of the last 30 years

18Source: Michigan Department of Corrections Statistical Reports

Prison Facilities, Population*, Net Operating Capacity: 1976-2006

*Annual prison population numbers do not include participants in the MDOC community residential program.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

Faci

liti

es

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

Nu

mb

er

of

Pri

son

ers

Prisons

Camps

Prison Population

Net Operating Capacity

19

National and Great Lakes States Comparisons

When compared to the U.S. and Great Lakes states averages, Michigan:

• has higher incarceration rates

• has lower prison admissions rates

• has a substantially longer average prisoner length of stay

• spends the largest percentage of its total state expenditures on Corrections

20Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics

Michigan, U.S., and Great Lakes States Incarceration Rates: 1977-

2006

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005

Year

Inca

rcera

tio

n R

ate

(P

riso

ners

per

10

0,0

00

Resi

den

ts)

Great Lakes Average

Michigan

U.S. Less Michigan

21

Source: CRC Calculations, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics Annual Admissions

Spreadsheet

Michigan, U.S., and Great Lakes States Admissions Rates: 1977-2005

0

50

100

150

200

250

1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005

Year

Pri

son

Ad

mis

sio

ns

(per

10

0,0

00

Resi

den

ts)

Great Lakes Average

Michigan

U.S. Less Michigan

22Source: CRC Calculations, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics Annual Releases

Spreadsheet

Michigan, U.S., and Great Lakes States Estimated Average Length of

Stay: 1981-2005

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year

Len

gth

of

Sta

y (

in M

on

ths)

Great Lakes Average

Michigan

U.S. Less Michigan

23

What if Michigan’s Average Prisoner Length of Stay was one year less each year from 1990 to 2005?

• There would have been roughly 14,000 fewer Michigan prisoners in 2005

• Michigan’s 2005 incarceration rate would drop from 489 prisoners per 100,000 residents to 351

• At a cost of $28,743 per prisoner, Michigan’s 2005 Corrections expenditures would decrease by $403 million

• There would have been approximately 4,700 fewer Corrections employees in 2005 (assuming the prisoners to employee ratio remained the same)

24

U.S. 501 $41,354 $23,876 $143 3.30%

Illinois 351 51,507 21,622 94 2.90%Indiana 388 33,521 21,531 117 3.40%Minnesota 180 44,252 29,260 80 1.70%New York 326 60,713 42,202 151 2.90%Ohio 400 34,091 23,011 166 3.80%Pennsylvania 340 45,845 31,029 140 3.40%Wisconsin 380 41,845 28,932 187 3.30% Average 338 44,487 28,227 133 3.06%

Michigan 489 53,268 28,740 205 5.10%

Total Corrections Expenditures as a Percent of Total

State Expenditures

Total Corrections

Spending per Capita

Incarceration Rate (per 100,000 residents)

Average Corrections

Salary

Average Annual Costs Per Prisoner

Source: Pew Charitable Trusts Public Safety, Public Spending, Forecasting America’s Prison Population 2007-2011; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, 2005; National Association of State Budget Officers, 2006 State Expenditure Report

*Numbers displayed in red are smaller than Michigan’s corresponding number.

Michigan, U.S., and Great Lakes States Incarceration and Spending Comparisons

2005

25

What Does the Future Hold for Michigan Corrections?

26

Five Years From Now

• Michigan’s prison population is projected to grow by 5,800 prisoners in the next five years

• By 2012 Michigan’s incarceration rate is projected to be 559

• CRC projects annual spending pressures to reach $2.6 billion by 2012

27Source: CRC Calculations, Michigan Department of Corrections Statistical Reports, Michigan Department of Corrections 2008 Prison Population Projection Report

Historical and Projected Prison Populations and Expenditures

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

Pri

son

ers

0

500,000,000

1,000,000,000

1,500,000,000

2,000,000,000

2,500,000,000

3,000,000,000

U.S

. D

ollars

Prison Population

Corrections Expenditures

28

Citizens Research Council of Michigan

CRC Publications available atwww.crcmich.org

Providing Independent, Nonpartisan Public Policy Research Since 1916