Justice Reinvestment Initiative: Sources and Notes

Updated October 2019

 

Alabama

Alabama’s introduction, key accomplishments, and “lasting impact” narrative are drawn from the Council of State Government’s Justice Reinvestment in Alabama: Analysis and Policy Framework (March 2015) and internal initiative memoranda. Savings/averted costs were documented in an April 2018 report from the Council of State Governments Justice Center (not available online). The reinvestment total is from the Council of State Governments’ Alabama Allocates $26.5 Million for Justice Reinvestment in FY2019 (April 2018). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–17). Recidivism data for people released from prison and prison population counts are from the Alabama Department of Corrections’ Annual Report Series (2010–2018). The baseline prison projection was calculated by the Council of State Governments Justice Center (not available online). Prison composition percentages are from the Alabama Sentencing Commissions’ Annual Reports Series (2013–2019; the FY 2017 rate was provided by the Alabama DOC).

Alaska

Alaska’s introduction, key accomplishments, and “lasting impact” narrative are drawn from six sources: The Pew Charitable Trusts’ presentation to the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission (July 2015) and Alaska’s Criminal Justice Reforms (December 2016); Crime and Justice Initiative’s Justice Reinvestment Phase II: Implementation (June 2016) and Justice Reinvestment: Alaska (June 2018); Alaska Criminal Justice Commission’s 2018 Annual Report (November 2018); and the Urban Institute’s Justice Reinvestment Data Snapshot (May 2018). Savings/averted costs and reinvestment total were documented in the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission’s 2018 Annual Report (November 2018). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–2017). Recidivism data for people released from prison are from the Alaska Department of Corrections’ presentation to the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission (March 2019). The prison population and the baseline prison projection were provided by the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission (not available online). Prison composition percentages are from Alaska Criminal Justice Commission’s 2018 Annual Report (November 2018).

Georgia

Georgia’s introduction, key accomplishments, and lasting impact narrative are drawn from the following six reports: The Pew Charitable Trusts’ 2012 Georgia Public Safety Reform: Legislation to Reduce Recidivism and Cut Corrections Costs (2012); The Council of State Governments Justice Center’s Georgia’s Justice Reinvestment Approach: Strengthening Probation and Increasing Public Safety (2017) and Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver Results (2017); Georgia’s 2018 Report of the Georgia Council on Criminal Justice Reform (February 2018); the Carl Vinson Institute of Government at the University of Georgia’s Council of Accountability Court Judges: Processes and Outcomes (2018); and the Urban Institute’s Assessing the Impact of Georgia’s Sentencing Reforms: Justice Reinvestment Initiative (2017). The Georgia Office of Planning and Budget reported total savings to the Urban Institute on September 9, 2016, and stakeholders in Georgia reported an updated reinvestment total on March 15, 2019. Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–17) and recidivism data are from Georgia Department of Corrections 3-Year Felony Reconviction Rates for Calendar Years CY 2005 to CY 2015 (January 2019). Prison population counts and prison composition percentages are from the Georgia Department of Corrections’ “Profiles of All Inmates” and prison population numbers reflect the count on July 1 of each year. Applied Research Services calculated the baseline prison population projection (not available online).

Kentucky

Kentucky’s introduction, key accomplishments, and “lasting impact” narrative are drawn from the following five sources: the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Kentucky: A Data-Driven Effort to Protect Public Safety and Control Corrections Costs (October 2010) and 2011 Kentucky Reforms Cut Recidivism, Costs: Broad Bill Enacts Evidence-Based Strategies (July 2011); the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy’s Corrections Data Shows Positive Impact of HB 463 That Additional Criminal Justice Reforms Can Build On (September 2016); the University of Kentucky Center on Drug and Alcohol Research’s Criminal Justice Kentucky Treatment Outcome Study (February 2018); and the Kentucky Department of Corrections’ (DOC) HB43 Annual Reports 2012–18. Savings and reinvestment totals were provided by the Kentucky DOC in July 2019 and include figures through FY 2019. Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–17) and recidivism data for releases from 2007to 2016 are from the Kentucky DOC’s HB43 Annual Reports 2012–18. Kentucky’s prison population counts for 2012 to 2018 and prison composition data are from the Kentucky DOC’s monthly inmate profiles. Prison population counts for 2009 to 2011 were provided to the Urban Institute by the Kentucky DOC. The JFA Institute calculated the baseline prison population projection (not available online).

Mississippi

Mississippi’s introduction, key accomplishments, and “lasting impact” narrative are drawn from six sources: The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Mississippi’s 2014 Corrections and Criminal Justice Reform (May 2014), Mississippi Enacts Round 2 of Criminal Justice Reform (May 2018), and Public Safety in Mississippi (June 2017); Vera Institute of Justice’s Aging Out: Using Compassionate Release to Address the Growth of Aging and Infirm Prison Populations (December 2017); the Mississippi Legislature’s House Bill 387 (March 2018); and the Urban Institute’s Assessing the Impact of Mississippi’s Technical Violation Centers (forthcoming). Savings/averted costs were provided by the Mississippi’s Department of Corrections (MDOC) on October 2, 2019 (not available online). MDOC reduced its expenditures by approximately $40 million three years after passage, due in part to initiatives implemented under House Bill 585. Justice reform measures have been instrumental in curtailing population growth. The reinvestment total is from the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Mississippi’s 2014 Corrections and Criminal Justice Reform (May 2014). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–2017). Recidivism data for people released from prison are from the Mississippi Department of Corrections’ Recidivism Report (FY 2012)The actual prison population is from Mississippi Department of Corrections’ Daily Inmate Population (2013-2019) and the baseline prison projection is from the Mississippi Department of Corrections July 2013 10-year adult prison population projection (not available online). Prison composition percentages are from the Mississippi Department of Corrections’ Monthly Fact Sheets (2007-2018).

Nebraska

Nebraska’s introduction, key accomplishments, and “lasting impact” narrative are drawn from four sources: the Council of State Government’s Nebraska’s Justice Reinvestment Approach: Reducing Prison Overcrowding and Expanding Probation and Parole Supervision (May 2015) and internal project memoranda; Nebraska Legislature’s Legislative Bill 605 (May 2015); and the State of Nebraska Judicial Branch’s Quick Look: Nebraska Probation – Transitional Living Initiative (July 2019). Savings/averted costs and reinvestment totals were documented in an April 2018 report from the Council of State Governments Justice Center (not available online). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–2017). Recidivism data are from the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services’ Quarterly Population Summary, (January-March 2019)The prison population is from Nebraska Department of Correctional Services’ Average Daily Population (FY1982-2020). The baseline prison projection is from the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services Daily Director’s Report (not available online). Prison composition percentages are from the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services’ Annual Reports (2011-2018) with rates for 2015 and 2016 provided by email (not available online).

North Carolina

North Carolina’s introduction, key accomplishments, and lasting impact narrative are drawn from the following five reports: The Council of State Governments Justice Center’s Justice Reinvestment in North Carolina: Analysis and Policy Framework to Reduce Spending on Corrections and Reinvest in Strategies to Increase Public Safety (April 2011) and Justice Reinvestment in North Carolina: Three Years Later (November 2014); the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission’s Justice Reinvestment Act Implementation Evaluation Report (April 2018); the North Carolina Department of Public Safety’s Justice Reinvestment Performance Measures: North Carolina Fiscal Year 2015-2016 (March 2017; not available online); and the North Carolina Sheriffs’ Association’s Statewide Misdemeanant Confinement Program Annual Report Fiscal Year 2017–18 (October 2018; not available online). Savings and reinvestment totals are from the Justice Reinvestment Act Implementation Evaluation Report (April 2018). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–17). Recidivism data are from the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission’s Adult Recidivism/Correctional Program Evaluation Reports (2009; 2010–11; 2012–13; 2014–15). Prison population counts and prison composition percentages are from the North Carolina Department of Public Safety’s Annual Statistical Reports and prison population numbers reflect the count on June 30 of each year. The baseline prison population projection is from the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission’s Current Population Projections Fiscal Year 2010/11 to Fiscal Year 2019/20.

South Carolina

South Carolina’s introduction, key accomplishments, and “lasting impact” narrative are drawn from the following five sources: the Pew Charitable Trusts’ South Carolina’s Public Safety Reform: Legislation Enacts Research-based Strategies to Cut Prison Growth and Costs (June 2010) and Data Trends: South Carolina Criminal Justice Reform (September 2017); South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services’ Report to the Sentencing Reform Oversight Committee (November 2018); Council of State Governments Justice Center’s South Carolina Workbook: Analyses to Inform Public Safety Strategies (March 2018); and the Urban Institute’s Assessing the Impact of South Carolina’s Parole Probation Reforms (April 2017). Savings totals were documented in the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Data Trends: South Carolina Criminal Justice Reform (September 2017) and include savings and averted costs between 2010 and 2016. The lack of reinvestment was documented in the South Carolina Sentencing Reform Oversight Committee’s State Expenditures Savings Report (December 2015; see discussion on p. 6) and confirmed with relevant agencies in June 2019. Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–17) and recidivism data for people released from prison between 2007 and 2015 are from South Carolina Return to Prison Rates of Inmates Released FY1993–FY2015. Recidivism data for people placed on probation are from the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services Accountability Report Series (2010–2018). South Carolina’s prison population counts for 2007 through 2018 and prison composition data are from South Carolina DOC’s Average Daily Inmate Population Fiscal Years 1970–2018 and SCDC FAQs, Profile of Inmates in Institutional Count with Current Violent Offense. Applied Research Services calculated the baseline prison population projection (not available online).

South Dakota

South Dakota’s introduction, key accomplishments, and lasting impact narrative are drawn from the following four reports: the South Dakota Criminal Justice Initiative Work Group’s Final Report (November 2012); the Public Safety Improvement Act Oversight Council’s Public Safety Improvement Act 2018 Annual Report (December 2018); the Pew Charitable Trusts’ South Dakota’s 2013 Criminal Justice Initiative: Legislation to Improve Public Safety, Hold Offenders More Accountable, and Reduce Corrections Spending (June 2013); and the Vera Institute of Justice’s Bridging the Divide: Improving Parole Outcomes for Native Americans in South Dakota (October 2016). Savings and reinvestment totals are from the  Public Safety Improvement Act 2018 Annual Report (December 2018). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007–17) and recidivism data for releases in 2009–13 are from the Council of State Governments’ 50-State Data on Public Safety South Dakota Workbook (March 2018). The South Dakota Department of Corrections reported the recidivism rate for people released from prison in 2014 to Urban in March 2019. South Dakota’s prison population counts are fiscal year–end counts from the South Dakota Public Safety Improvement Act Annual Reports. The Pew Charitable Trusts calculated the baseline prison population projection (not available online). Prison composition data are from the South Dakota Public Safety Improvement Act Annual Reports.

West Virginia

West Virginia’s introduction, key accomplishments, and innovation through JRI narrative are drawn from the following five sources: the Urban Institute’s Reforming Sentencing and Corrections Policy: The Experience of Justice Reinvestment Initiative States (December 2016), and Justice Reinvestment Initiative Data Snapshot: Unpacking Reinvestment (May 2018); Council of State Government’s West Virginia’s Justice Reinvestment: Strengthening Community Supervision, Increasing Accountability, and Expanding Access to Substance Use Treatment (June 2014) and West Virginia Expands Access to Substance Use Treatment Through Justice Reinvestment (November 2015); and the Vera Institute of Justice’s A Path to Recovery: Treating Opioid Use in West Virginia’s Criminal Justice System (November 2017) as well as internal initiative memoranda . Estimated savings and averted costs were collected from Governor Early Ray Tomblin’s March 1, 2016, column “Leading the Fight Against Substance Abuse Through Justice Reinvestment” (no longer available online). JRI reinvestment data was provided to the Urban Institute in a June 2016 memorandum from the Council of State Governments Justice Center (not available online). Data on crime rates are from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2007-17) and recidivism data for prison releases in 2008-14 are from West Virginia DOC’s Recidivism: Inmates Released in 2014. West Virginia’s prison population counts for 2009-18 are from the Division of Correction’s Annual Report Series and data on violent and nonviolent offenses were provided by the West Virginia Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety, Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation in May 2019 (not available online). The baseline prison population projection is from the Office of Strategic Planning’s West Virginia Correctional Population Forecast, 2012-2022.