230 likes | 240 Views
Explore the impact of community corrections on incarceration rates, racial disparities, and policy recommendations for improving the system. Learn how shorter supervision terms and incentives for progress can lead to better outcomes.
E N D
The Wisconsin Community Corrections Story Kendra Bradner, Columbia Justice Lab January 23, 2019
Why reduce community corrections • Deprivation of liberty and trip wire to incarceration • More is not better – supervising low-risk people increases their likelihood of re-arrest • Lengthy supervision terms: • strain department resources • are unnecessary trip wires to technical violations • Diminishing returns: Most re-offenses occur in first 1-2 years • Stark racial disparities
Long and Increasing Average parole Length of stay December 31, 1999: TIS implemented
Mass supervision Drives Mass Incarceration - Exits to incarceration (2013)
Mass supervision drives mass incarceration – Admissions (1996-2017)
Mass supervision drives mass incarceration – Admissions including holds (1996-2017)
Sharp increase in probation/parole holds October 8, 2001: MSDF opened
Excerpt from statement on the future of community corrections As America’s leading probation and parole officials and other concerned individuals and organizations recommend that the number of people on probation and parole supervision in America be significantly reduced by: • Reserving community corrections for those who truly require it • Reducing lengths of stay • Exercising parsimony in imposing conditions • Incentivizing progress by granting early discharge • Eliminating supervision fees • Preserving most of the savings to improve services
A Majority of States Have Limited Felony Probation Terms to 5 Years or Less 31 states with a cap on maximum felony probation terms of five years or less* * Many states exempt some crimes from the cap
New York City – Model of Reform Without Legislation • 45% decline in violations 2010 - 2012 • Six fold increase in early discharges to 17% • 2/3 of supervisees on kiosks • 5,4,3 for felonies; 3 or 2 for misdemeanors (16% > max)
NYC Probation caseload (1996 - 2017) 81.2% decline in number of people on probation, 1996-2017
New York City Outcomes • Use savings to focus on higher-risk and improve services: • Almost tripled per-person expenditure from 2002 to 2016 • Initiated new programs: NeON, Arches, ACE, etc. • 57% decrease in violent crime in NYC during that time • 55% decrease in jail usage during that time
Policy Recommendations • Close the Milwaukee Secure Detention Facility • Locate Alternative to Revocation programs in the community • Shorten probation and parole terms • Incentivize good behavior • Eliminate incarceration for technical violations • Realign savings to community programs
resources • The Pennsylvania Community Corrections Story. April 2018 • Too Big to Succeed: The impact of the growth of community corrections and what should be done about it. January 2018 • Less is More in New York: An Examination of the Impact of State Parole Violations on Prison and Jail Populations. January 2018 • Statement on the Future of Community Corrections. August 2017 • Toward an Approach to Community Corrections for the 21st Century. July 2017
For more information The Wisconsin Community Corrections Story: https://bit.ly/2AXec6b @CUJusticeLab