1
Policy Issues in US Policy Issues in US Corrections: The Corrections: The
California California TemplateTemplate
Llad PhillipsLlad PhillipsUniversity of California Santa BarbaraUniversity of California Santa Barbara
To be presented at Oxford Round TableTo be presented at Oxford Round TableMarch 27, 2006March 27, 2006
2
The IssueThe Issue
• The high rate of imprisonment in the The high rate of imprisonment in the United StatesUnited States– Why did it not fall when the crime rate Why did it not fall when the crime rate
came down?came down?
3
The AnalysisThe Analysis
• California exhibits the same pattern: California exhibits the same pattern: crime rates falling but imprisonment crime rates falling but imprisonment rates staying highrates staying high– California accounts for about one eighth California accounts for about one eighth
of all prisoners under state jurisdiction of all prisoners under state jurisdiction in the USin the US
– California has extensive historical data California has extensive historical data that describes the operation of the that describes the operation of the correctional system over timecorrectional system over time
4
The StoryThe Story• Prison system staffing responded to Prison system staffing responded to
a higher inflow of new felons a higher inflow of new felons committed to prison from court.committed to prison from court.
• Parole staffing lagged behind.Parole staffing lagged behind.– The higher caseload for parole officers The higher caseload for parole officers
motivated them to return a higher motivated them to return a higher fraction of parolees to prisonfraction of parolees to prison
5
Figure 1: Per Capita Crime Rates and Imprisonment Rates, California and US
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Rat
e
CA Crime Index Per Capita
CA Prisoners Per Capita
FBI Crime Index Per Capita, US
US Prisoners Per Capita
The Phenomenon, P. 2The Phenomenon, P. 2
6
Another ViewAnother ViewCalifornia Prisoners Per Hundred Californai Index Offenses, 1952-2004
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Nu
mb
er
7
National Crime Victimization National Crime Victimization Survey, 2004Survey, 2004
8
Conceptual Framework, Conceptual Framework, p. 4p. 4
Prisoners163,939
Discharged & Died42,483Felons Newly
Admitted fromCourt46,798
Felon FirstReleases toParole58,994
FelonsRe-paroled55,866
Felon Parole ViolatorsReturned to Custody: 58,712
Parolees113,768
Discharges & Deaths4,324
Escapes122
Parolees At Large19,056
Absconded40,758
Felon Parole Violators with a New Term 17,842
Reinstated32,090
Figure 2: Schematic of Prison & Parole Stocks and Flows: 2004
9
Model of CJS, Perfect Model of CJS, Perfect EfficiencyEfficiency
No Revolving DoorNo Revolving Door
California Population
Felon New Admissions from Court Per Capita
Prison Population;Time in Prison Before
First Release
Parole Population;Time on Parole Before
DischargeDischarges;
1/Total Time
10
Stocks and Flows, p. 5Stocks and Flows, p. 5Prisoners Plus ParoleesPrisoners Plus Parolees
• Outflow from CJS(t) = kOutflow from CJS(t) = kCJSCJS*[Prisoners+ *[Prisoners+ Parolees](t-1)Parolees](t-1)– Total Time in CJS = (1/kTotal Time in CJS = (1/kCJSCJS)* = [Pris. + )* = [Pris. +
Par.]/DischargesPar.]/Discharges
• Equilibrium: Equilibrium: – Outflow of Discharges = Inflow of New Outflow of Discharges = Inflow of New
AdmissionsAdmissions
– Total Time in CJS = (1/kTotal Time in CJS = (1/kCJSCJS)* =[Pris. + )* =[Pris. + Par.]/New AdmitsPar.]/New Admits
11
Stocks and Flows, p. 5Stocks and Flows, p. 5Prisoners Prisoners
• Outflow from Prison(t) = kOutflow from Prison(t) = kPRISPRIS *Prisoners(t-1)*Prisoners(t-1)– Time in Prison = 1/kTime in Prison = 1/kPRISPRIS = =
Outflow/PrisonersOutflow/Prisoners
• Equilibrium: outflow = inflowEquilibrium: outflow = inflow– Time in Prison = 1/kTime in Prison = 1/kPRISPRIS = =
Inflow/PrisonersInflow/Prisoners
12
Model of CJS, Model of CJS, InefficiencyInefficiency
California Population
Felon New Admissions from Court Per Capita
Prison Population;Time in Prison Before
First Release
Parole Population;Time on Parole Before
DischargeDischarges;
1/Total Time
Probability of Moving from CA Pop. To CJS = Felon New Admissions Per Capita
Probability of Moving from CJS to CA Pop. = 1/Total Time
13
Time in Prison, p. 9Time in Prison, p. 9Figure 3: Years Served in Prison, Observed Compared to Estimated
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year
Ye
ars
Prisoners/Inflow
Reported Mean
Prisoners/Outflow
Reported Median, Men
14
Creation of the Revolving Creation of the Revolving Door, p. 11Door, p. 11
Figure 4: Number of Felons Flowing Into California Prisons By Source
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Nu
mb
er
Felons Newly Admitted FromCourt
Parole Violators With A newTerm
Parole Violators Returned ToCustody
15
Deteriorating Performance Deteriorating Performance of the California Parole of the California Parole
System, p.12System, p.12• Parole Violators Returned to Parole Violators Returned to
Custody, PVRTCCustody, PVRTC• Parolees Absconding from Parolees Absconding from
SupervisionSupervision• Parolees At Large, PALParolees At Large, PAL• Shorter Time on ParoleShorter Time on Parole
16
Time On ParoleTime On ParoleYears Served On Parole
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Yea
rs
Reported Mean
Parolees/Outflow
Reported Median, Men
17
Absconding from Parole as Percent of Total Outflow from Parole, 1987-2004
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year
Per
cen
t
18
What Caused the What Caused the Deteriorating Performance Deteriorating Performance
of the Parole System?of the Parole System?
19
Caseloads: Prison Vs. Caseloads: Prison Vs. Parole, p.13Parole, p.13
Figure 5: Caseloads In California Corrections: Parole Vs. Prison
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Year
Rat
e
Parolees per Parole Officer
Prisoners Per CorrectionalOfficer
20
What Caused Such High What Caused Such High Prison and Parole Prison and Parole
Populations?, p. 15Populations?, p. 15• The Minimal (Prison + Parole) PopulationThe Minimal (Prison + Parole) Population
– Perfect efficiency: no revolving doorPerfect efficiency: no revolving door
• (Prison + Parole) Pop. = (t(Prison + Parole) Pop. = (tPRIS + tPAR ) * New Admits
• ? (2004) = (1.67 + 1.39) * 46,812• Prisoners and Parolees (est. 2004) = 143, 245• Prisoners & Parolees (obs. ‘04) = 162,352 +
110,130• = 272,482• Ratio of Actual/Minimal = 1.90
21
Another View: Estimated Another View: Estimated Time Spent in California Time Spent in California
CorrectionsCorrections• Turning the stock/flow relation aroundTurning the stock/flow relation around• Estimated total time = (Prisoners + Estimated total time = (Prisoners +
Parolees)/New AdmitsParolees)/New Admits– Total time includes spins inside the revolving Total time includes spins inside the revolving
doordoor
• Estimated total time = (Prisoners + Estimated total time = (Prisoners + Parolees)/(Discharges From Parole + Parolees)/(Discharges From Parole + Deaths)Deaths)
22
Total Years Spent In Corrections, 1960-2004
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Ye
ars
Est. Total Time: Stocks/Admits
Est. Total Time: Stocks/Discharges &Deaths
Efficient Total Time, Median, Men
Indeterminate Sentence Law
Determinate Sentencing Law
23
Where Does the Increase in the StocksWhere Does the Increase in the StocksCome From? Inflow or System Come From? Inflow or System
Inefficiency? Inefficiency? [Prisoners + Parolees = New [Prisoners + Parolees = New
Admits*Total Time]Admits*Total Time]YearYear Prisoners Prisoners
+ + Parolees Parolees p.c.p.c.
New New Admits Admits p.c.p.c.
Total Total Time Time (years)(years)
20042004 0.007540.00754 0.0012710.001271 5.95.9
19801980 0.001810.00181 0.0004770.000477 3.43.4
ratioratio 4.17 4.17 ~~ 2.662.66 1.71.7
24
Policy?Policy?
Source: California Department of Corrections, Historical Trends ….1978-1998, www.corr.ca.gov
25
Prisoners + Parolees = New Prisoners + Parolees = New Admits*Total TimeAdmits*Total Time
YearYear Prisoners Prisoners + + Parolees Parolees p.c.p.c.
New New Admits Admits p.c.p.c.
Total Total Time Time (years)(years)
20042004 0.007540.00754 0.0012710.001271 5.95.9
19801980 0.001810.00181 0.0004770.000477 3.43.4
ratioratio 4.17 4.17 ~~ 2.662.66 1.71.7
2004 @ 2004 @ 1980 1980 Drug Drug AdmitsAdmits
% of total% of total
0.00340.0034 0.00100 0.00100 p. c.p. c.
3.43.4
26
SummarySummary• The increase in prison populations is only The increase in prison populations is only
partly due to increases in new admissions partly due to increases in new admissions from court, and hence the crime rate.from court, and hence the crime rate.
• The total time spent cycling back and The total time spent cycling back and forth between prison and parole before forth between prison and parole before discharge has increased by 70% between discharge has increased by 70% between 1980 and 2004.1980 and 2004.
• The “war on drugs” has inflated new The “war on drugs” has inflated new admissions to prison in 2004 by 25% admissions to prison in 2004 by 25% compared to the policy on imprisoning compared to the policy on imprisoning drug offenders in 1980drug offenders in 1980
27
28
What Caused Such High What Caused Such High Populations of Prisoners Populations of Prisoners
and Parolees?and Parolees?• New Admissions per capita = new New Admissions per capita = new
admissions per offense * offenses admissions per offense * offenses per capitaper capita– The per capita California Crime Index The per capita California Crime Index
fell from ~0.04 in 1980 to ~0.02 in fell from ~0.04 in 1980 to ~0.02 in 20042004
29
It Was Not the Inflow from It Was Not the Inflow from CourtCourt
California Felon New Admissions Per Index Offense
0.0000
0.1000
0.2000
0.3000
0.4000
0.5000
0.6000
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Rat
io