If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov.

U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics

" -' -y":: '-~ Recidivism of Young Parolees

By Allen J. Beck, Ph.D. BJS Statistician May 1987 Bernard E. Shipley BJS Program Manager Recidivism is one of the most States. It examines the relationship important issues facing those who between rates of recidivism and a Approximately 69% of a group of young formulate and administer our variety of other factors, including parolees were rearrested for a serious sentencing and corrections the age and prior arrest record of crime within 6 years of their release policies-policies intended to the parolees, the length of time each from prison, 53% were convicted for a punish and rehabilitate offenders parolee had spent in prison, and the new offense, and 49% returned to pris­ and to protect the public from nature and location of the rearrest on. These findings are based on a crim e. This special report, with charges. sample of 3,995 parolees, representing its innovative methodology, broad The Bureau of Justice Statistics 11,347 persons between the ages of 17 scope of coverage, and rich data, wishes to express its gratitude to the and 22, who were paroled from prisons should be of particular interest to personnel at the Identification in 22 States in 1978. These States all those concerned abou t these Division of the FBI and all others accounted for 50% of all State prison­ policies. whose cooperation and assistance ers paroled in the Nation during that This report traces the made this report possible. year. criminal activities over a 6-year Stet'en R. Schlesinger period of a sample of young adults Director Other findings include the follow­ paroled in 1978 from prisons in 22 ing: • Excluding violations of parole and those paroled had been rp.arrestedj • The longer the parolee's prior arrest probation, these parolees were re­ within 2 years, 47% had been re­ record, the higher the rate of recidi­ arrested for more than 36,000 new fel­ arrested. vism-over 90% of the parolees with six onies or serious misdemeanors, includ­ or more previous adult arrests were re­ ing approximately 6,700 violent crimes • Recidivism was higher among men, arrested compared to 59% of the first­ . and nearly 19,000 property crimes. blacks, and persons who had not com­ time offenders. pleted high school than among women, • Approximately 10% of the persons whites, and high school graduates. • The earlier the parolee's first adult paroled accounted for 40% of the sub­ arrest, the more likely the chances for -sequent arrest offenses. • Almost three-quarters of those pa­ rearrest-7!J% of those arrested and roled for property offenses were re­ charged as an adult before the age of • About a fifth of the subsequent ar­ arrested for a serious crime compared 17 were rearrested, compared to 51% rests occurred in States other than the to about two-thirds of those paroled for of those first arrested at the age of 20 original paroling State. violent offenses. or older. • An estimated 37% of the parolees • Approximately a third of both prop­ • Time served in prison had no consis­ were rearrested while still on parole. erty offenders and violent offenders tent impact on recidivism rates-those were rearrested for a violent crime who had served 6 months or less in pris­ • Recidivism rates were highest in the upon release from prison. on were about as likely to be rearrested first 2 years after an offender's release as those who had served more than 2 from prison. Within 1 year, 32% of years. Measuring recidivism Cumulative percent of young adults paroled in 1978 Criminal history da ta for the who were rearrested, reconvicted, and reincarcerated, sample of parolees in this study were by6-month intervals obtained from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. These data included Cumulallve percent information on arrests, prosecutions, 100 and incarcera tions for felonies and serious misdemeanors that occurred either before the parolee was released from state prison in 1978 or within 6 years after release. (See Methodology for a further description of the sample 75 and discussion of data contained in the FBI criminal history files.) A rate of recidivism is an estimate of the likelihood that oomeone released from prison commits another crime. 50 Estimates of recidivism vary with the length of the followup period and the measure selected. Three measures of recidivism are employed in this study: rearrest, reconviction, and reincarcer­ ation. 25 Rearrest refers to any felony or se­ rious misdemeanor arrest reported to the FBI after the date of parole. Ar­ rest data were reported on fingerprint o K-______•______cards, which were submitted by an ar­ resting agency, typically a police Months 24 36 48 72 department or a sheriff's office. Re­ 12 60 conviction refers to a conviction on at Figure 1 least one charge after the date of pa­ role entry. Reconviction data were reported to the FBI by prosecutors' cidivism rates because not all offenders Recidivism and time on parole offices, courts, and correctional are prosecuted or go to trial. Parolees agencies. Reincarceration refers to are often not prosecuted for new offen­ Within 6 years after their release any return to a prison or any admission ses but have their parole revoked and from prison in 1978, an estimated 69% to a local jail with a new sentence. are returned to prison to serve the of the 11,347 young parolees had been Confinements in correctional institu­ balance of their original sentence. rearrested; 53% had been reconvicted; tions were reported to the FBI by the and 49% were reincarcerated (figure receiving agencies, typically State or Moreover, new convictions were 1). Recidivism rates were the highest Federal prisons and local jails. the most underreported of the three in the first 2 years for all three meas­ measures. Data on convictions and ures. Nearly a fifth of those paroled Because the three measures reflect other dispositions were not reported for were rearrested in the first 6 months, a successive transactions within the approximately a third of the arrests in third in the first year, and nearly half criminal justice system, the percen t the criminal history files; however, by the end of the second year. Of all rearrested will always be the highest; more than half of the 927 persons who those who were rearrested during the 6- the pe,<1'9nt reincarcera ted, the lowest. lacked a final disposition on their first year followup period, more than two­ rearrest were convicted on a subse­ thirds were arrested by the end of the In previous studies of criminal quent arrest. secQnd year. history records, criminologists have relied on arrests Sf the principal meas­ Because of this underreporting, the Approximately a fifth of all parol­ ure of recidivism. For the sake of true reconviction rate following parole ees were incarcerated within a year of simplicity and comparability with these would be greater than the reported con­ their release from prison; nearly a studies, arrests are also emphasized in viction rate, but still less than the re­ third, within 2 years. Of all those who this report. Violations of parole or pro­ ported arrest rate. If all persons with­ were reincarcerated within 6 years of bation that lead to incarceration arE:: in­ out dispositions on their first rearrest parole, 62% were reincarcerated by the cluded among arrests. or without convictions on subsequent end of the second year. arrests had been convicted, the under­ Although oome rearrested individ­ estimate would be at most 15%. These rates of recidivism are simi­ uals may have been innocent of the lar to those reported in recent single­ crime charged, using only reported con­ State stUdies (see Appendix). vic tions would understa te the true re-

lFor II discussion or problcms with other measures or recidivism, see Maltz, M.D., Recidivism (Orlando, Fla.: Academic Press, 1984).

2 Volume of crime Table 1. The DUmber or DeW arrest charges Cor you~ adults paroled in 1978, by type or offense The 11,347 young inmates entering pal'Ole in 1978 were rearrested an esti­ Number of charges for which parolees were arrested within 6 :lears of release mated 25,383 times and charged with Before -36,726 new offenses. More than 6,700 Rearrest minimum eligible of the new charges were violent offen­ charge Total discharge dateS ses, including an estimated 324 mur­ b ders, 231 rapes, 2,291 robberies, and All charges 36,726 10,832 3,053 assaults (table 1). Violent offenses 6,753 2,259 Murder 324 132 Rape 231 55 More than half of the new charges Robbery 2,291 882 were for property offenses (51 %). Assault 3,053 906 These parolees were arrested for Property offenses 18,904 5,528 approximately 6,600 burglaries, 5,590 Burglary 6,620 1,916 larcenies, and 2,300 forgery and fraud Fraud 2,300 770 offenses. Almost a third of the new Larceny 5,590 1,533 charges were for drug offenses (9%), Drug offenses 3,244 884 public-order offenses (18%), and other Public-order offensesb 6,735 1,757 unspecified felonies (3%). Other offenses 1,090 404

An estimated 10,832 (29%) of the ILrhe date when the offender is first ~ctors affecting this date. f eligible for complete discharge from all xcluding violations of probation, parole, new arrest charges occurred before pa­ corl'ectional supervision, including and warrants. rolees were first eligible for discharge deductions for time credits and other from parole. For each parolee a date was established by the paroling agency indicating when the offender was first Table 2. Recidivism rates of young adults paroled in 1978, eligible for complete discharge from by parolee characteristics supervision, that is, removal from pa­ Number Percent of l2arolees who within 6 :lears of release were: role, assuming successful completion of paroled Rearrested Reconvicted Reincarcerated the terms of parole. Thus about 3 in 10 of the new arrest charges are estimated All parolees 11,347 69% 53% 49% to have occurred while the individuals Sex were still on parole, and about 37% of ~lale 10,761 70% 54% 50% Female 524 52 40 36 the parolees were rearrested while still Race and ethnic origin on parole. (Whether an individual was White non-Hispanic 6,540 64% 49% 45% actually on parole at the time of rear­ Black non-Hispanic 4,206 76 60 56 rest was not systematically reported in Hispanic 374 71 50 44 the criminal history files. It is possible Other 143 75 65 63 that in some cases the parole period Education was extended beyond the original dis­ Less than high school 8,937 71% 55% 51% High school graduate 1,922 61 46 43 charge da te or, less likely, shortened.) Som e college 167 48 44 31 A small fraction of offenders were Note: Subcategories may not add to total because of exclusion of missing data, responsible for a disproportionate num­ ber of new offenses. An estimated 19% Hence, a total of 21 % of those paroled Indians, were as high or higher than of the new offenses were charged to 5% may be classified as multi-State of­ those for blacks. of the rearrested parolees; 49% of the fenders. If data on rearrests had been offenses were charged to 20% of th~ restricted to the paroling States only, The amount of prior education thp rearrested parolees. Expressed as a which is typical of most recidivism parolee had received was relE.ted to the percentage of all those paroled rather studies, the overall rearrest rate would likelihood of rearrest-parolees who had than only those parolees rearrested, ap­ have been estimated at 59% rather than graduated from high school cr had some proximately 10% of th~ parolees were the actual 69%. college 8ducation had lower recidivism arrested for 40% of the subsequent rates than those who had failed to offenses. Demographic characteristics finish high school. An estimated 48% of the parolees who had attended some . MuIti-State offenders Men were more likely than women college were rearrestej, compared to to be rearrested, reconvicted, and rein­ 61 % of the high schOOl graduates and These new offenses occurred not carcerated after their release from 71 % Ijf those who hac' no t completed only in the States in which the prisoners prison (table 2). The recidivism rates high school. 'were paroled but in other States as were 14 to 18 percentage points greater well. One of every fi ve rearrests were among men than among women. made in States other than the paroling State during the 6-year followup Blacks had higher recidivism rates period. An estimated 10% of all per­ than whites-ll to 12 percentage points sons paroled were rearrested only in higher for each measure. Parolees of States other than those in which they Hispanic origin, regardless of their were paroled. An additional 11% of the race, had rates that were 5 to 12 per­ parolees were rearrested both in their centage points lower than those among paroling State and in another State. bla~ks. Recidivism rates for other racial groups, primarily American

3 m

Paroling offense Recidivism was high among persons other parolees to be rearrested for rob­ paroled for "other" offenses-primarily bery (18%). This was also true among Those paroled for property offenses weapons offenses, nonviolent sex offen­ those paroled for larceny (35%), fraud had higher recidivism rates than those ses, and other public-order offenses. (29%), and drug offenses (27%). paroled for violent or drug offenses The percents rearrested, reconvicted, (table 3). Almost three-quarters of the and reincarcerated among these offend­ Despite the tendency of parolees t,:> . property offenders paroled in 1978 were ers were surpassed only by those among be rearrested for the same crime for rearrested within 6 years compared to propel'ty offenders. (See Methodology which they wer.e released from prison, about two-thirds of the violent offend­ for further discussion of offense cate­ parolees were often arrested for other . ers and nearly half of the drug offend­ gories.) crimes as well. Property offenders ers. Property offenders also had a were as likely as violent offenders to be higher rate of reconviction and reincar­ Rearrest offense arrested for a violent crime after their ceration than did other types of of­ release from prison (32% and 33%, re­ fenders. Parolees were often rearrested for spectively). Property offenders were, the same type of crime for which they however, much more likely than ·,·iolent Parolees whose only or most serious had served time in prison; for example, offenders to be arrested for a new offense was a drug offense had the low­ 41 % of the paroled burglars, more than property offense (59% vs. 35%). With est rates of recidivism-49% were re­ any other group of parolees, were ar­ the exception of those paroled for a arrested, J(}% reconvicted, and 25% re­ rested for burglary within the 6-year drug offense, 28% or more of each type incarcerated. Drug offenders were period (table 4). of parolee wer~ subsequently arrested about 15 percentage points less likely at least once for a violation of parole than violent offenders to be rearrested For other types of parolees as well, or probation, a weapons violation, or and returned to prison. They were 24 those pl'l'oled for a particular crime another public-order offense. percentage points less likely than ~"Jere more likely to be rearrested for property offenders to be rearrested and that crime than were those paroled for Prior arrest record 31 percentage points less likely to be other crlmes. Thus, paroled murderers reincarcera ted. were more likely than other parolees to Recidivism rates were highest be rearrested for murder (6%), and pa­ among parolees with the longest crim­ roled robbers were more likely than inal records. Offenders with several adult arrests prior to their parole were more likely to be rearrested and were Table 3. Recidivism rates ot yowl6 adults paroled in 1978, by most serious offense at parole rearrested sooner than parolees with fewer prior adult arrests. (An adult ar­ Most "eriou" offense Number Percent of earolees who within 6 :lears of release were: for which l'uroled paroled Rearrtsted Reconvicted Reincarcerated rest is one that occurred when the indi­

-~--- vidual was of adult age, as defined by All offenses 11,347 69% 53% 49% State law, or when the individual was a Violent offenses 2,433 64 43 39 jUvenile but was charged 01' tried in ~lurder 116 70 25 22 court as an adult.) Among those with 6 Robbery 2,075 64 45 40 or more previous adult arrests, 93% Assault 111 72 51 47 were rearrested within 6 years (table Property offew;es 6,884 73 60 56 5); 72% were reincarcerated (table 6). BurGlary 4,525 73 60 56 Fraud 526 74 59 56 Among these rearrested parolees, the Larceny 1,184 71 61 55 average (mean) time before their first Drub' offenses 736 49 30 25 rearrest was 11 months. Half of these Other offenses 1,294 6il parolees, however, were rearrested 50 44 within 7 months (their median time).

Table 4. Percent of yoong adults paroled in 1978 who were rearrested, by mo!"t serioos otCCD3C at paroltJ and charge at rearrest

Percent of parolees rearrested within 6 years of release whose most serious oFfense at time of earole was: "iolent Pr02ert:i Rearrest charge Total Murder Robbery Assault Total Burglary Fraud Larceny Drugs Other

All charges 64% 70% 64% 72% 73% 73% 74% 71% 49% 68% Violent offenses 33 26 33 38 32 35 29 21 13 31 Murder 4 6 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 Robbery 17 S 18 8 13 13 15 10 3 13 Assault 16 17 16 28 18 20 12 10 10 20 Property offenses 3S 34 36 55 S9 58 63 58 26 43 Hurglary H, 21 19 40 38 41 28 29 9 23 FraUd 5 5 5 10 7 29 12 5 7 La rl! eny 18 11 19 18 30 27 42 3S 15 26 Drug offenses 16 6 18 8 15 14 9 13 27 13 Public-order offenses 36 30 39 28 36 36 31 34 24 31 Parole "r p~ation virolation 10 7 11 6 13 13 12 10 6 8 Weapons 12 9 12 10 1 7 5 8 9 9

Note: The nUllIerator Cor each percent is the paroled Cor eaeh type of offense. Detail may rearrested for more than one type ()f charge. nUlllber of per9ClnS rearrp.sted for a new not add to totals because person', may be - Less than 0.5%. charge, and the denomInator is the number

4 'rable 5. Percent of young adults paroled in 1978 who were rearrested and time before Table 6. Percent oC you~ adults paroled first rearrest, by number of arrests prior to parole in 1978 who were reincllrcerated, by DUmber oC arrests prior to parole Percent of parolees who were rearrested Percent of parolees Within 6 Within i Time before who were reincarcerated Number of adult arrests Number years of year of fi rs t rearrest Number of adult Within Within prior to parolee paroled release release Median Mean arrests prior 6 years 1 year to parolee of release of releaw 1 arrest 3,141 59% 23% 17 months 23 months 2 3,083 64 26 17 23 1 arrest 42% 13% 3 2,248 70 32 15 22 2 45 13 1,366 77 41 4 11 19 3 49 20 5 614 82 49 9 15 4 57 27 6 or more 895 93 67 7 11 5 52 22 All parolees 11,347 69% 32% 14 months 21 months 6 or more 72 39 All parolees 49% 19% Note: The times before first rearrest were half were rearrested after the median. based only on parolees who were rearrested. eAn "adult arrest" is one that occurred when Note: Reincarceration is defined as The median time before first rearrest indi- the individual was of adult aJe, as defined by return to prison after revocation of cat~s that half of the rearrested parolees State law, or when the indi.idual was a juvenile parole or a new sentence to jail or were rearrested before the median value and but was charged or tried in court as an adult. prison after the date of parole. *See note, table 5. In contrast, among parolees with age points. Moreover, for each 6- one previous arrest, 59% were re­ month interval during the followup pe­ Failure rates, defined as the num­ arrested within Ii years, and 42% riod, the cumUlative percent of those ber of parolees rearrested within a 6- returned to prison. In addition, "first­ rearrested was higher for those with month period divided by the number not time offenders" who were rearrested more prior arrests (figure 2). Within 1 yet rearrested (that is, "surviving") at averaged 23 months before their re­ year, for example, parolees with 6 or the beginning of the period, were arrest, more than twice the time of more prior arrests were three times as consistently higher in the first 3 years parolees with the longest criminal likely as those with one arrest and among parolees with 4 or more prior records. Their median time before nearly twice as likely as those with arrests than among those with fewer rearrest was also much longer-half three arrests to have been rearrested prior arrests. Length of pl'ior record were rearrested within 17 months. and remcarcera ted. Al though the rela­ had no impact on the failure rate only tive rates changed somewhat in each among those surviving 4 or more years Recidivism rates were systematic­ period, the higher the number of prior after their release from prison. ally related to the number of prior arrests, the greater the cumulative per­ adult arrests: each additional prior cent of parolees rearrested. arrest increased the likelihood of rearrest by between 5 and 11 percent-

Cumulative percent of young adults paroled in 1978 who were rearrested, by number of arrests prior to parole, at 6-month intervals

Cumulative percent 100 6 or more prior arrests

4-5priora~ 75

50

£5

OE------l':~I------~2------'------Months - 4 36 ..... ---48~------~60~------~72

5 £

Age when paroled Table 7. Percent oC young adults paroled in 1978 who were rearrested, IYJ lIIge when paroled and number of arrests prior to parole Recidivism was higher among of­ fenders who were paroled at a young Percent of parolees rearrested within 6 years age. More than 75% of those age 19 or of release b:i !!Be when Qaroled: younger when paroled were arrested Number of adult 17-18 arrests prior yel.lrs 19 years 20 years 21 years 22 years during the foUowup period (table'/). to parole. old old old old old For each of the other age groups, the percent rearrested was lower: 66% of All parolees 75% 77% 66% 64% 72% those age 20, 64% of those age 21, and 1 arrest 71 73 56 48 49 72% of those age 22 were rearrested. 2-3 77 75 67 60 73 4-5 96 89 73 72 85 The most consistent and largest 6 or more - 96 89 94 93 differences in recidivism among age Number paroled 948 1,(107 3,035 3,797 1,761 groups were among parolees with one - Fewer than 20 cases. .gee note, table S. prior adult arrest. More than 70% of the first-time offenders who were age 19 or younger when paroled were re­ Table 8. Percent oC young adults paroled in 1978 who were rearrested, arrested compared to 49% of those age by age at first adult arrest and number ot arrests prior to parole 22. However, among parolees with 6 or Percent of parolees rearrested within 6 years more prior arrests, the percents re­ of release b;t age at first adult arrest:· arrested among those 19 and 22 years 16 years 20 years Number of adult arrests old or 17 years 18 years 19 years old or old differed by only 3%, which was not prior to parole· younger old old old older statistically significant (see Metho­ dology). All parolees 79% 72% 69% 65% Sl% 1 arrest 73 68 56 57 45 Regardless of the age when parol­ 2-3 73 69 67 68 53 ed, recidivism rose with the number of 4-5 90 74 81 72 - prior adult arrests. Although the per­ 6 or more 89 91 97 - - cent rearrested within each age group Number paroled 1,000 3,434 4,072 1,852 905 increased with the number of prior ar­ Note: Cases with missing data on age at - Fewer than 20 cases. rests, the greatest increases were in first arrest were excluded. "'See note, table 5. the oldest groups. Among parolees who were 22 when released from prison, Table 9. Percent oC young adults paroled in 1978 who were realTested, those with the longest arrest records by time served in prison, the number of arrests prior to parole, were nearly twice as likely to be re­ lIIge when paroled, and age at tirst adult arrest arrested as those with the shortest records. Percent of parolees rearrested within 6 years of release by time served in Qrison8 1-6 7-12 13-18 19-24 25 months Age at first adult arrest months months months months or longer Recidivism was inversely related to All first relesses 64% 66% 73% 67% 69% the age of the parolee when first ar­ Number ot arrests rested and charged as an adult: the prior to parole 1 arrest 56% 60% 61% 57% 62% younger the age at first arrest, the 2-3 60 62 72 66 71 higher the rate of recidivism. (See 4-5 76 84 80 74 70 Methodology for coverage of juvenile 6 or more 99 81 99 96 95 arrest records.) Among parolees 16 Age when paroled years old or younger when they were 17-18 years old 60% 79% 72% 89% 87% first arrested, 79% were rearrested 19 76 70 85 91 65 20 69 63 70 61 64 within 6 years of their release from 21 55 59 68 61 70 prison. Among those age 20 or older at 22 56 71 82 68 73 first arrest, 51 % were rearrested (table Age a t first .dult arrestb 8). 16 years old or younger 74% 81% 87% 76% 72% 17 75 65 79 71 74 In general, both age at first adult 18 68 71 70 66 66 19 64 61 68 69 64 arrest and the number of prior arrests 20 or older 37 58 62 42 - were related to recidivism. With the Number of first releases 1,404 2,841 2,258 1,639 2,039 exception of those with 6 or more prior arrests, for each category of prior ar­ /I All data refer only to "first releases," parolees in this study were first releases. rests the younger the parolees at first tha t is, new court commitments paroled b Fewer than 20 cases. arrest, the greater the percent re­ for the first time on their current See note, table 5. arrested. Further, within each age offense. Approximately 90% of the group the likelihood of rearrest increased as the number of prior arrests Time served in prison among those who served varying increased. amounts of time in prison were incon­ The amount of time served in pris­ sistent and not statistically significant. on by parolees for their previous offen­ ses was not associated with their Despite controls for the effects of chances of being rearrested (table 9). prior record, age when paroled, and age Differences in the likelihood of rearrest when first arrested as an adult, no rela-

6 a tionship between recidivism and length c-' Table 10. Percent oC you~ adults paroled in 1978 who were relUTested, of time served in prison was found by most serious ofCense at parole and record or arrests prior to parole among these parolees. Although the .- average time served and the percent Percent of parolees rearrested rearrested varied for each type of of­ within 6 :tears of release for: .fender (violent, property, drug, and Most serious offense at parole Percent of All Violent other offenders), no consistent relation­ and prior arrest record all parolees offenses offenses ship was found between time served and Violent offense 21% 64% 33% rearrest. In addition, within each prior Prior violent arrest 9 68 38 'arrest group and age group time served Prior nonviolent arrest only 8 67 31 was not related to the likelihood of re­ No prior arrests 5 51 27 arrest among parolees. Property offense 61% 73% 32% Prior violent arrest 10 80 43 Prior nonviolent arrest only 43 72 29 The number of prior adult arrests No prior arrests 8 72 30 remained a strong predictor of recidi­ Other offense 18% 61% 24% vism among the parolees, regardless of Prior violent arrest 6 62 33 the length of time they had served in Prior nonviolent arrest only 11 61 21 prison. The rearrest rates of parolees No prior arrests - * • with six or more prior arrests and those All parolees 11'0% 69% 31% of parolees with only one prior arrest Note: The offenses for which the offender because of rounding, differed by 21 to 43 percentage points, was paroled were excluded from the prior - Less than 0.5%. depending on the category of time arrest record. Detail may not add to totals *F ewer than 20 cases. served. Further, the percent of parol­ ees rearrested within each category of Recidivism and pr'ior violent arrests for nonviolent offenses only, 72% were time served increased with the number rearrested-approximately 30% for a of prior arrests. Recidivism rates and the offenses violent offense. for which parolees were rearrested The age of the parolees when they were related to the prevalence of vio­ Persons paroled for violent offenses were released from prison also lence in their prior records. Regardless were less likely to be rearrested than remained associated with recidivism, of the offense category for which they property offenders, regardless of the though the relationship with age was were paroled, persons with a prior ar­ prevalence of violence in their criminal not as consistent nN as strong as the rest for a violent offense had a greater records. Violent offenders who had no relationship with the number of prior likelihood of arrest for another violent previous arrests were the least likely of arrests. Within each category of time offense than other parolees (table 10). all offender types to be rearrested served, parolees who were age 18 or (51%). younger when released from prison Property offenders with a prior ar­ were more likely than those 22 years rest for a violent offense had higher old to be rearrested, with the exception overall rearrest rates than property of those serving 13 to 18 months in offenders without a prior violent ar­ prison. rest. For violent and other offenders the differences between the rearrest The age of the parolees when they rates for those with a prior violent ar­ were first arrested and charged as an rest and those without one were not adult was also strongly related to recid­ sta tis tic ally significant. ivism, regardless of the amount of time they served in prison. Within each cat­ Property offenders with a prior ar­ egory of time served, the percent of rest for a violent offense (10% of all parolees rearrested among those first parolees) had the highest rates of rear­ arrested at age 16 or younger was rest. An estimated 80% of the released higher than among those first arrested property offenders who had a previous at age 20 or older. The difference in arrest for a violent crime were arrested the likelihood of rearrest between the for a new offense within the 6-year youngest and oldest age groups ranged period-43% for a new violent crime. from 8 to 37 percentage points, depend­ Among property offenders without any ing on the amount of time served. previous arrests and those with arrests

7 Methodology Additional details on the sampling Appendix table. Characteristics of procedures and properties of the sample young adults paroled in 19'18 are available upon request. Unless Data sources and coverage otherwise noted, differences cited in Percent of young the text between groups of parolees adults paroled in 1978 A sample of persons paroled in 1978 were statistically significant at the Sex 100% was obtained from records submitted by 95% confidence level. Male 95 participating States in the Uniform Pa­ Female 5 role Reports (UPR). Individual parole Coverage ofcriminal history files Race and ethnic origin 100% records were linked with Records of White non-Hispanic 58 Arrest and Prosecution (RAP sheets) Black non-Hispanic 37 Criminal history information main­ Hispanic 3 collected by the Federal Bureau of tained by the FBI includes "serious Other 1 Investigation. The sample was restric­ and/or significant offenses." These Education 100% ted to States that reported FBI numbers include all felonies and serious misde­ Less than high school 81 on the parole records. To ensure maxi­ meanors, but exclude arrests and court High school graduate 17 mum coverage of computerized crimi­ actions involving charges such as drunk­ Some college 2 nal history data, the sample was limited enness, vagrancy, disturbing the peace, Age when paroled 100% to offenders born between 1956 and curfew violation, loitering, false fire 17-18 years old 8 1960. 19 16 alarm, unspecified charges of suspicion 20 27 or investigation, and traffic violations 21 33 Twenty-two states were represent­ (except manslaughter, driving under the 22 16 ed in the sample: Alabama, Delaware, influence of drugs or liquor, and hit and Age at first Florida, Georgia, lllinois, Kansas, run, which are included in criminal adult arrest8 100% Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Nebraska, history files). 16 years old or younger 9 Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, 17 30 18 36 North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Information on offenses committed 19 16 Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, by juvenile offenders is also not re­ 20 years old or older 8 Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming. ported in the FBI RAP sheets unless the Most serioUll paroling offender was charged or tried in court offense 100% RAP sheets were found for 3,995 as an adult. Consequently, all figures Violent offenses 21% Murder 1 parolees-approximately 79% of the presented in this report refer to adult Robbery 18 5,028 sampled UPR records. 'fhe per­ arrests only. Assault 1 sons for whom RAP sheets were found Property offenses 61% closely resembled all those in the total Arrests fOl' serious offenses are not Burglary 40 FraUd 5 UPR sample. The percentages for each always reported to the FBI. To correct Larceny 10 sex, racial or ethnic group, and educa­ for this underreporting, incarceration Drug offenses 6% tional category were nearly identical records lacking prior arrest records Other offenses 11% among those with and without RAP Were counted as arrests in the calcula­ Numberora~ta~~ sheet information. The UPR group and tions of rearrest rates, time to first prior to parolea 100% the sample with RAP sheets also had rearrest, and the number of prior ar­ 1 arrest 28 2 27 similar distributions of offenses and rests. 3 20 sentence lengths. There was no 4 12 evidence of any systematic biases Offenses 5 5 resulting from the absence of RAP 6 or more 8 sheets for 21 % of the parolees. The offenses reported in the FBI Time served in !Filion OIl criminal history files were recoded fol­ ctIITent offense 100% 1-6 months 14 To adjust for differences among lowing the definitions outlined in BJS 7-12 28 States in the coverage of RAP sheets Crime Definitions, which is availaEiie 13-18 22 and for differences in the sampling upon request. Attempts and conspira­ 19-24 16 procedures adopted by States participa­ cies were included with completed of­ 25 months or longer 20 ting in the UPR, a series of weight') was fenses; however. attempted murders Note: Percentages are based on cases introduced. The weights were applied and conspiracies to commit murder with reported data, Percentages may not so that individuals in each State were were classified as assaults. sum to 100% because of rounding. ~ee note, table 5. properly represented in the combined bData refer only to "first releases," that sample. By summing the weights the Offense categories in the Uniform is, new court commitments paroled for number of parolees bol'n between 1956 Parole Reports differed somewhat from the first time on the current offense. and 1960 was estimated for each BJS standards. The "other" offense State. The 22-State total in 1978 was category, reported for the paroling 11,347. With the int:roduction of offenses only, was made up of offenses For parolees released after serving weights all findings were representative coded "all other" on the parole reports time in prison for more than one of­ of young adults paroled in the 22 re­ and selected public-order offenses. A fense, the most serious was selected as porting States in 1978. (For a descrip­ separate public-order category could their paroling offense. Yivlent crimes tion of the demographic and criminal not be reported. were considered the most serious and history characteristics of these parol­ were followed in order of seriousness by ees, see the Appendix table.) property offenses, drug offenses, and other offenses.

s Appendix Previous recidivism studies have Comparisons with other studies relied either on official records or on Bureau of Justice Statistics criminal history data obtained from special reports are prepared Similar rates of recidivism have interviews of prisoners. Because of the principally by BJS staff under the been found in recent studies of prison dIfficulties and costs of tracking' of­ direction of Joseph M. Bessette, release cohorts in individuel States, fenders over time, inmate surveys are deputy director for data despite differences in data sources, less frequently used than official analysis. This report was written coverage, and methodology. The records. In general, recidivism rates by Allen J. Beck and Bernard E. Repeat Offender Project, conducted by based on inmate reports of their crimi­ Shipley. It was edited by Frank D. the Illinois Crimin9.l Justice Informa­ nal activities are higher than those Balog. Marianne Zawitz provided tion Authority, found that 60% of a based on official records; however, both assistance in data presentation. sample of 539 inmates released from sources of data yield similar rates of Report production was adminis­ illinois prisons between April and June return to prison, From the interviews tered by Marilyn Marbrook, publi­ of 1983 rere rearrested after 27 to 29 of inmates in State facilities in 1979, cations unit chief, with assistance months. The illinois study included the estimated rate of return among in­ fi'om Betty Sherman, Jeanne inmates of all ages, conditional and un­ mates age 18 to 24 at the time of their Harris, Arlene F. James, and conditional releases, and arrests for most recent release from prison was Joyce A. Hartman. misdemeanors as well as felonies. 49.4% within 6 years. Based on the of­ This study was possible due to ficial recor'ds examined in the current the support and assistance of A similar study of prisoners re­ rer-ort, the rate of return for parolees William H. Garvie, Margaret R. leased ill three States, conducted by the age 17 to 22 was almost identical: 49% Owens, ... nd Dianna L. Olson of the Rand Corporation, found that after 3 within 6 years. FBI's Identification Division. The years the percent rearrested was 76%, Regional Justice Information 60%, and 53% in califosnia, Texas, and Service (REJIS), located in St. Michigan, respectively. A study Louis, Missouri, provided conducted in Delaware found that more technical and data processing than half (51.496) of a sample of persons support in converting the RAP released from confinement between sheets to a machine-readable 1980 and 1982 Vier rearrested by Sep­ format for use in this analysis. tember 30, 1983. The specifications and software for converting the RAP sheets are The reincarcera tion ra tes for young available upon request. adults paroled in 1978 were also similar to the rates \'eported in other stUdies. May 1987, NCJ-I04916 About a third (32.796) of the inmates released from North Carolina prisons in fiscal year 1979-80 were returned to those prisons within 3 years because of The Assistant Attorney General, a new pri~>n sentence or a revocation Office of Justice Programs, of parole. A previous BJS Special coordinates the criminal and Report, Returning to Prison, found that juvenile justice activities of the close to a third of the prisoners in 14 following program Offices and States were returned to prison within 3 Bureaus: the Bureau of Justice years; the median percen~ returned for Statistics, National Institute of the 14 States was 31.596. Despite dif­ Justice, Bureau of Justice ferences among these Sta tes in those Assistance, Office of Juvenile admitted to and released from prison, Justice and Delinquency the percentages of released prisoners Prevention, and the Office of varied little from State to State. Victims of Crime. Finally, based on the 1979 Survey of Inmates in State Facilities, the rate of return to prison was estimated nation­ wide to be 29.4% witlJln 3 years and 39.996 within 6 years.

21llinois Criminal Justice Informlltion Authority, The Pace or Hecidivi.~m in Illinois, Hesearch Bulletin, Number 2, April 1986. 3Klein, S., and M. Caggiano, The Prevalence, Predictability, and Policy Implications of ReCidivism (Santa Monica, Calif.: The Hand CorporatIOn, 1986). 4IJelaware Sta tistical Analysis Center, Recidivism in Delaware-A Study of Hearrest After nelease From Incarceration, December 1984. 5Clarke, S., and L. Crum, Hetums to Prison in North Carolina (Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina, Institute of Government, 1985). 6Wallerstedt, J., Returni!M to Prison, rus Special Report, NGJ-9ri700, November 1984. 7Greenfeld, L., Examining Recidi,rism rus Special Ueport, NCJ-96501, February 1985':::=

9 Crime and Older Americans Information Package

• Are older Americans more likely to be victims of crime than younger aQ8 groups? • Are the elderly being arrested for certain crimes more frequently than in the past? • Are offenders in crimes against the elderly more likely to be strangers or nonstrangers compared to other age groups?

A new information package available Population statistics indicate that older from the Justice Statistics Clearinghouse Americans are fast becoming a large answers these and other questions about segment of the total U.S. population. In crime and the elderly. Drawing from 1985, Americans 60 years and older national sources for crime statistics­ totaled 39.5 million-a 21-percent in­ including the BJS National Crime Survey. crease over the past 10 years. the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, a.nd the ThiS ~)ackage also includes the names BJS National Corrections Reporting and aodresses of associations and Program-the 34-page package discuss­ organizations that are sources of informa­ es the types of cnmes in which older tion about crime and older Americans and Americans are most /if" .,Iy to be victims a list of further readings. and offenders. and the t\loes of crime prevention they use. Crime and Older Americans costs only $10.00. As the elderly pO(1ulation has grown, so has concern about the effects of crime on this age group.

Please send me__ copies of the Informa­ Method of payment tion Package on Crime and Older Americalls Paymentof$~~ ___ enclosed (NCJ 104569) at $10.00 each. o o Check payable to NCJRS Name: ____ _ o Money order payable to NCJRS Organization: Please bill my Address: D NCJRS deposit account City, State. ZIP: # ------Telephone: _ Credit card D Visa D MasterCard Please detach this form and mail it, with payment. to: Justice Statistics Clearinghouse # ______Exp. date: ___~ Dept. F-AGK Box 6000 Signature: __ Rockville. MD 20850 To be added to any BJS mailing list, copy Justice Statistics Clearinghouse/NCJRS or cut out this page, fill it in and mail it to: U.S. Department of Justice o If the mailing label below is· User Services Department 2 correct, check here and do not Box 6000 fill in name and address. Rockville, MD 20850

Name: Title: Organiza tion:

II Street or box:

City, State, Zip: Daytime phone number: Interest in criminal justice (or organization and title if you put home address above):

PLEASE PUT ME ON THE MAILING LIST FOR: BJS bulletins and special reports--ti m ely o Justice expenditur~ and employment o reports-annual spending and staffing by reports of the most current justice data Federal/State/local governments and by o Courts reports-State court caseload sur­ function (police, courts, etc.) veys, model annual State reports, State o Computer crime reports--electronic fund court organization surveys transfer system crimes o Corrections reports-results of sample sur­ o Privacy and securE ty of criminal history veys and censuses of jails, prisons, parole, information and i:1lormation policy-new probation, and other corrections data legislation; maintaining and releasing o National Crime Survey reports-the on,ly intelligence and investigative records; data ~egular national survey of crime victims quality i..sues o Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics o Federal statisticl>'-data describir.g Federal (annual)-broad-based data from 150+ case processing, from investigation through sources (400+ tables, 100+ figures, index) prosecution, adjudication, and corrections o Send me a form to siGn up for NIJ Reports o Juvenile corrections reports-juveniles.n (issued free 6 times a year), which ab­ custody in public and private detention and stra'~ts both private and government crimi­ correctional facilities nal justice publications and lists conf­ erences and training sessions in the field. You will receive an annual renewal card. If you do not return it, we must drop you from the mailing list.

U.S. Department of Justice Official Business Bureau of Justics Statistics Penalty for Private Use $300 PAID I POsrfg~~~DOJ/BJS Permit No. (}-91 -----

U'ashingto~D.C20531

Special Report