vccja baseline recidivism study

National Center for State Courts

VCCJA Baseline Recidivism Study

Fred Cheesman, Ph.D.Tara Kunkel, MSW

The National Center for State Courts

August 16, 2013


Purpose of the Study

To complete a baseline outcome evaluation of all Community Corrections probationers who completed

supervision in FY04.


Key Questions for the Baseline Study

• What was the demographic profile of probationers who completed Community Corrections supervision in FY04?

• Did the probationers being supervised in FY04 by the 20 sites that would become the EBP sites differ demographically from the probationers supervised in the non-EBP sites in a statistically meaningful way?

• What was the average length of supervision in FY04?

• By offense category and offense level, what were the placement charges for the FY04 completers?

• What was the average number of office contacts per probationer for the FY04 completers?



• What services were local probationers ordered to complete in FY04?

• What were the case closure types for local probationers whose cases were closed in FY04? If unsuccessful, why?

• What percentage of FY04 local probation completers were re-arrested or received a new conviction while under supervision?

• What percentage of FY04 local probation completers were re-arrested or received a new conviction post-program three years from exit date?



• What types of new offenses were committed by local probationers after exiting in FY04?

• What, if anything, predicted whether a probationer would complete local probation supervision successfully in FY04?

• What, if anything, predicted whether a probationer would be convicted of a new crime post-program in FY04?


Sample Size

Approximately 33,655 probationers in the total sample (# of defendants whose cases were closed in FY04)

For the recidivism analysis a smaller group was studied4,705 probationers


Baseline Question 1

What was the demographic profile of probationers who completed Community Corrections supervision in FY04?


Age of FY04 Case Closures

< 21 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 >600.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

22.9%

37.5%

21.0%

13.5%

4.0%

1.1%

Average age = 30 years old

N = 29,072


Race of FY04 Case Closures

Asian Black Hispanic Native American White Other/Unknown0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

0.8%

41.1%

3.6%

0.1%

53.3%

1.1%

N = 33,655


Marital Status of FY04 Case Closures

Married Separated Divorced Widowed Never Married0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

20.1%

7.1% 7.9%

1.0%

64.0%

N = 33,555


Last Grade Completed – FY04 Case Closures

Less

Than H

igh S

choo

l

9th G

rade

10th

Grade

11th

Grade

12th

Grade

GED

Trade S

choo

l

1 Yea

r Coll

ege

2 Yea

rs Coll

ege

3 Yea

rs Coll

ege

Colleg

e Grad

uate

Gradua

te Edu

catio

n0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

6.4%4.9%

9.0%

12.5%

38.0%

7.6%

0.9%

6.7% 6.8%

3.1% 3.5%

0.7%

N = 33,518


Prior Convictions – FY04 Case Closures

Prior Misdemeanor Convictions Prior Felony Convictions Any Prior Convictions0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

37.4%

14.8%

40.4%


Average # of Prior Convictions - FY04 Case Closures

Average # of Prior Misdemeanor Convictions Average # of Prior Felony Convictions0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.41

0.45


Baseline Question 2

Did probationers being supervised in FY04 by what would become the 20 EBP sites differ demographically from probationers being supervised by the non-EBP sites?


Baseline Question #2

QualityEvidence-Based Practice

SitesNon-EBP

SitesDifference

(EBP – Non-EBP)Female (%) 26.17% 26.90% -0.73%

Asian (%) 0.89% 0.56% 0.33%

Black (%) 39.15% 43.99% -4.84%

Hispanic (%) 3.78% 3.41% 0.37%

Native American (%) 0.10% 0.07% 0.02%

White (%) 55.03% 50.71% 4.32%

Race and Ethnicity Unknown/Other (%) 1.06% 1.26% -0.20%

Age(Average) 29.36 30.41 -1.05

There were no statistically significant differences in the demographics between the EBP sites and the non-EBP sites in the FY04 sample.


Baseline Question 3

What was the average length of supervision for probationers who completed supervision in FY04?


Baseline Question 3

Average length of supervision for the entire sample:

8.6 months

Average length of supervision for a successful probationer: 8.2 months

Average length of supervision for an unsuccessful probationer: 9.4 months


Baseline Question 4

By offense category and offense level, what were the placement charges for the FY04 probation completers?


Placement Type by Offense Level

Felony Misdemeanor0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

7%

93%

N = 28,969N = 2,184


Placement Offenses - Misdemeanors

Person Offense Property Offense Drug Offense Public Order Offense Technical Offense Driving Offense Other Offense0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

29%

18%

26%

10%11%

6%

0%

N = 8,327 N = 5,121 N = 7,564 N =1,707N = 2,878

N = 3,263 N =110


Placement Offenses - Felonies

Person

Offe

nse

Propert

y Offe

nse

Drug O

ffens

e

Public

Orde

r Offe

nse

Techn

ical O

ffens

e

Driving

Offe

nse

Other O

ffens

e0.0%

200.0%

400.0%

600.0%

800.0%

1000.0%

1200.0%

Person Offense Property Offense Drug Offense Public Order Offense Technical Offense Driving Offense Other Offense0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

16%

27%

42%

4%

10%

0% 0%

N = 352

N = 580N = 352 N = 919N = 95

N = 225 N = 4 N = 10


Baseline Question 5

What was the average number of office contacts per probationer for the FY04 completers?


Baseline Question 5

Average number of office contacts for successful

completers: 8.9 contacts

Average number of office contacts for unsuccessful completers: 10.6 contacts

NOTE: Data quality was questionable with some sites not documenting this information in FY04.


Baseline Question 6

What services were probationers ordered to complete in FY04?


Court-Ordered Conditions in FY04

Anger

Manag

emen

t

Battere

r's G

roup

Commun

ity S

ervice

Electro

nic M

onito

ring

Financ

ial R

espo

nsibi

lity C

lass

Other

Sex O

ffend

er Txt

Shopli

fters

Group

SA Ass

essm

ent o

r Txt

Drug/A

lcoho

l Tes

ting

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

13.9%11.0%

51.9%

0.1% 1.3%

14.2%

0.5%3.0%

22.3%

29.5%


Baseline Question 7

What were the case closure types for local probationers whose cases were closed in FY04? If unsuccessful, why?


Case Closure by Type

Successful Unsuccessful Other Closure Type Pending Medical Death0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

67.6%

24.8%

5.6%

1.8%0.2% 0.1%


Reason for Unsuccessful Closures

Techn

ical V

iolati

on

Program

Clos

ed—

Capias

Issu

ed

Revok

ed—

New M

isdem

eano

r Offe

nse

Revok

ed—

New Felo

ny O

ffens

eOthe

r0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%63.8%

17.8%

8.0%

2.4%

8.0%


Baseline Question 8

What percentage of FY04 probationer completers were re-arrested and/or had a new conviction while under supervision (by program completion type)?


Re-Arrest and New Convictions In-Program

Successful Unsuccessful Total0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

3.1%

8.3%

4.8%

1.6%

3.9%

2.3%

Re-Arrested While in Program New Conviction While in Program

Differences between the successful and unsuccessful completers on both measures are significant at ..001 level.


Baseline Question 9

What percentage of probationers were re-arrested and/or had a new conviction post-program three years from exit (by program completion type?


Re-Arrests and New Convictions Post-Exit

Re-arrested Within Three Years New Conviction Within Three Years

New Conviction Within Five Years

New Conviction Within Eight Years

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

26.5%

16.2%

25.1%

33.4%

44.2%

31.1%

43.6%

54.9%

Successful Unsuccessful

Arr

est

Differences between the successful and unsuccessful completers all measures are significant at ..001 level.

Arr

est


Baseline Question 10

What types of new offenses were committed by local probationers post-program in FY04?


Statewide Total Estimated Offense Types of New Convictions Within 3 Years

Person Offense Property Offense Drug Offense Public Order Technical Offense Driving Offense Other Offense0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

14.1%

28.5%

23.9%

11.1%

23.3%

2.0%1.2%


Number of New Offenses within 3 Years

Average of 2.18 misdemeanor arrests and 1.81 convictions within three years among all recidivists

Average of 1.76 felony arrests and .73 felony convictions within three years among all recidivists


Recidivism Rates by Placement Charge

Person

Offe

nse

Propert

y Offe

nse

Drug O

ffens

e

Public

Orde

r Offe

nse

Techn

ical O

ffens

e

Driving

Offe

nse

Other O

ffens

e

All Offe

nse T

ypes

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

20.6%22.1%

19.3%

24.3%

28.7%

13.9%

22.8%21.4%


Statewide Estimated Offense Types for New Convictions within Three Years for Person Offenders

Person

Offe

nse

Propert

y Offe

nses

Drug O

ffens

es

Public

Orde

r

Techn

ical O

ffens

es

Driving

Offe

nses

Other O

ffens

es0.0%

200.0%

400.0%

600.0%

800.0%

1000.0%

1200.0%

Person Offense Property Offenses Drug Offenses Public Order Technical Offenses Driving Offenses Other Offenses0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

22.9%

16.2%

17.9%

12.7%

26.3%

1.8% 1.7%

62.5.% misdemeanor37.5% felony


Statewide Estimated Offense Types for New Convictions within Three Years for Property Offenders


5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

9.2%

38.1%

19.0%

8.4%

22.9%

2.3%

0.0%


Statewide Estimated Offense Types for New Convictions within Three Years for Drug Offenders


5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

11.2%

21.7%

31.3%

10.5%

22.2%

0.9%2.2%


Statewide Estimated Offense Types for New Convictions within Three Years for Public Order Offenders


5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

8.7%

30.3%

36.4%

12.3%10.3%

0.7% 0.9%


Statewide Estimated Offense Types for New Convictions within Three Years for Technical Offenders


5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

11.7%

20.2%

15.7%

11.4%

35.4%

4.4%

0.8%



What, if anything, predicted whether a probationer would successfully complete supervision in FY04?


Methodology

Multivariate analyses were conducted to provide valid answers to Baseline Questions 11 and 12.

• Because Type of Completion and Recidivism are complex phenomenon, any number of factors could explain variation in these two variables (e.g., age, race, sex).

• To determine each of these factors’ unique contribution to explaining such variation, it is necessary to simultaneously control for the influence of all the other explanatory factors.

• Multivariate analysis is the vehicle to ascertain each explanatory factor’s unique contribution to explaining variation in each of the two variables, controlling for the influence of all the other explanatory variables.


Predictors of successful completion

• African Americans were 31% less likely to successfully complete than Caucasians.

• Probationers placed on a felony-level charge are 53% less likely to successfully complete than those placed on a misdemeanor charge.

• Probationers with a prior misdemeanor conviction at placement are 42% less likely to successfully complete than those with none.

• Probationers with a prior felony conviction at placement are 38% less likely to successfully complete than those with none.

• Every year of education beyond the average increases the odds of successfully completing by 6%.

Only includes statistically significant predictors



What, if anything, predicted whether a probationer would reoffend (as measured by a new conviction within three years) post-program in FY04?


Predictors of Recidivism

• Women are 35% less likely to have a new conviction in three years then men.

• African Americans are 43% more likely to have a new conviction than Caucasians.

• Probationers with prior misdemeanor convictions at placement are 117% more likely to have a new conviction than those without prior misdemeanor convictions.

• Probations with a prior felony conviction at placement are 39% more likely to have a new conviction than probationers without a prior felony conviction.

• Probationers who successfully complete probation are 47% less likely to have a new conviction.


Other Items of Note – not for the report!

18 programs in FY04 showed a statistical difference in

the recidivism rates of probationers who successfully completed versus unsuccessful completers.


Next Steps

Each program will receive program-specific data in the next two weeks.


Next Steps

Your site specific data will include:

• Age, race, gender, marital status and educational breakdown of your sample

• Length of supervision and # of office visits for your sample

• Breakdown of closure type for your sample• Reason for unsuccessful closures in your sample• Reconviction rates for your sample


Next Steps

A note about your recidivism rates:

Percent of Probationers Re-Convicted within Three Years of Program By Site and Statewide Estimate

SiteRe-Convicted

(%)

XXXXXX 16.0***Statewide Average 21Difference significant at: *** p < .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05NOTE: If there is a *, ** or *** next to your site, your site performed statistically better or worse than the state average. If there is no *, ** or *** next to your site, your site performed no differently (statistically) than the state average.

vccja baseline recidivism study

Documents

probationers national

fy04 completers

local probationers

state courtsaverage

state courts1purpose

state courtsbaseline

state courtskey questions

state courts4key questions