AN EXAMINATION OF OFFENDERS
RELEASED FROM STATE PRISON IN THE
FIRST YEAR OF PUBLIC SAFETY
REALIGNMENT
Kevin Grassel
March 20, 2014
PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT
ACT 2011
• Realignment redirected: non-serious, non-violent, non-sex
registrant (non-non-non) offenders from State to local
jurisdictions
• Intended to reserve State prison for those with serious or violent
charges (current or prior), sex registrants, and a few other offense
types (e.g., battery against a juror, sale of a person for
immoral purposes)
THIS PRESENTATION
• CDCR now has two full years of data to evaluate how offenders
released from prison after October 1, 2011, fared on parole and
local post-release community supervision
• This report evaluates the impact of Realignment by comparing
the rates of arrest, conviction, and returns to prison of those
released after completing their State prison term in the first year
of Realignment with those released one year earlier
METHODOLOGY
To evaluate the impact of Realignment, two groups were created:
1) a pre-Realignment release cohort that includes all offenders
paroled from a CDCR State prison between
October 1, 2010, and September 30, 2011
2) a post-Realignment release cohort that includes all offenders
paroled or discharged to PRCS from a CDCR State prison between
October 1, 2011, and September 30, 2012
METHODOLOGY CONTINUED…
•
•
•
An arrest is defined as the first felony, misdemeanor, or
supervision violation offense occurring within State of CA
A conviction is defined as the first felony or misdemeanor
conviction within State of CA, regardless of whether the
conviction resulted in incarceration
A return-to-custody is defined as a return to a CDCR facility
or CDCR contracted facility
METHODOLOGY CONTINUED…
=
Number Returned
÷
Recidivism Cohort
X
100
Pre- and Post-Realignment
One-Year Arrest Rates
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
64.3%
62.5%
63.2%
60.7%
63.2%
61.7%
59.8%
58.8%
59.4%
56.3%
59.4%
56.9%
54.7%
54.0%
52.7%
51.8%
54.9%
52.1%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Pre-Realignment
Post-Realignment
53.6%
51.7%
52.0%
51.1%
51.5%
50.5%
ARREST TYPES
100%
90%
80%
35.0%
39.8%
70%
60%
22.2%
50%
23.3%
40%
30%
20%
42.9%
36.9%
10%
0%
Pre-Realignment
Felony
Post-Realignment
Misdemeanor
Supervision Violation
Number of Arrests
Per Person Released
1.80
1.64
1.65
1.61
1.60
1.40
1.40
1.20
1.34
1.28
1.25
1.25
1.29
1.24
1.22
1.21
1.21
1.10
1.12
1.13
May
June
July
1.18
1.21
1.23
1.17
1.16
1.14
1.00
1.09
1.08
August
September
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
October
November
December
January
February
March
Pre-Realignment
April
Post-Realignment
Number of Times Offenders
Were Arrested
Pre-Realignment
Count of Arrest Cycles
N
%
Post-Realignment
N
%
Total
90,514
100.0%
58,746
100.0%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6+
37,614
25,213
13,942
7,300
3,467
1,594
1,384
41.6%
27.9%
15.4%
8.1%
3.8%
1.8%
1.5%
25,738
12,591
8,309
5,013
3,002
1,691
2,402
43.8%
21.4%
14.1%
8.5%
5.1%
2.9%
4.1%
Pre- and Post-Realignment
One-Year Conviction Rates
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
24.0%
21.1%
22.7%
20.8%
22.9%
22.4%
22.2%
21.4%
21.0%
21.8%
21.5%
20.5%
20.3%
20.4%
19.2%
19.2%
20.3%
20.4%
19.8%
18.9%
18.6%
18.1%
17.4%
16.7%
10%
0%
Pre-Realignment
Post-Realignment
Conviction Types
100%
90%
80%
43.4%
41.9%
56.6%
58.1%
Pre-Realignment
Post-Realignment
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Felony
Misdemeanor
Number of Convictions
Per 1,000 Released
350
300
292
278
281
255
250
242
271
248
249
254
249
234
236
232
243
238
220
212
232
231
201
206
241
225
200
150
100
50
0
Pre-Realignment
239
Post-Realignment
Number of Times Offenders
Were Convicted
Pre-Realignment
Count of Conviction Cycles
N
%
Post-Realignment
N
%
Total
90,514
100.0%
58,746
100.0%
0
1
2
3+
71,633
16,319
2,208
354
79.1%
18.0%
2.4%
0.4%
46,425
10,179
1,804
338
79.0%
17.3%
3.1%
0.6%
Pre- and Post-Realignment
One-Year Return to Prison Rates
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
47.0%
45.7%
44.3%
41.2%
40%
37.8%
33.8%
30.3%
30%
24.3%
20.5%
20%
16.6%
12.7%
8.5%
10%
0%
7.1%
7.6%
7.5%
7.8%
7.3%
7.4%
Pre-Realignment
8.3%
7.6%
7.7%
Post-Realignment
6.9%
7.1%
6.3%
Pre- and Post-Realignment
Types of Returns to Prison
100%
0.1%
90%
80%
70%
60%
75.2%
50%
99.9%
40%
30%
20%
10%
24.8%
0%
Pre-Realignment
Post-Realignment
New Conviction
Parole Violations
CONCLUSION
• Arrest rates have been on a decline since Realignment and the
initial gap observed between pre- and post-Realignment
has diminished
• Conviction rates also gradually declined after October 2011 and
remained lower than pre-Realignment rates through the end
of the time frame studied
• Return to prison rates have held steady post-Realignment, much
lower than the pre-Realignment rate, with RTCs being virtually
non-existent
OFFICE OF RESEARCH CDCR
Denise Allen, Chief
Research and Evaluation Branch
Denise.Allen@cdcr.ca.gov