Reducing the Prison Recidivism Rate for Violent Criminals

24 June 2005

Reducing the Prison Recidivism Rate

For Violent Criminals

Recidivism can be viewed as a public safety failure rate; new crime by convicted felony inmates and probationers and is measured by rates of re-arrest for a new misdemeanor or felony offense, reconviction on new charges, and re-incarceration or sentence to another court imposed sanction such as probation, a diversionary program, or a fine. Each measure has strengths and weaknesses, but combined, the three are a more comprehensive and accurate means to measure the rate of recidivism. At least 70% of inmates and 58% of probationers are re-arrested within three years of being released. Males have a high rate of recidivism and young minority offenders are rearrested more often. Most new crime is normally nonviolent, less serious felonies and misdemeanors with violent offenders being the least likely to recommit another violent crime.

The Department of Correctional Education offers academic, vocational and transition programs to those persons who enter the Department of Corrections. Academic programs include instruction in literacy (Literacy Incentive Program), which is mandated by state law for those inmates who score below a predetermined level on standardized testing, Adult Basic Education courses, and GED preparatory instruction. The vocational program includes instruction in 36 trade areas and coordinates an apprenticeship program in various areas. The transition program in the adult system is a relatively new endeavor of the department having been initiated at the Virginia Correctional Center for Women in 1992 and provides instruction in employability skills, career assessment, budgeting and financial management, and life planning.

Most inmates are re-arrested at least once after being released from prison. This does not mean that they committed new crimes, only that they either were suspected of having committed a new crime or violated some rule of their parole. When a crime is committed in the vicinity of a known offender, especially one that fits his or her description, he/she becomes a logical suspect. Once an offender has paid his or her debt to society, police should not automatically assume that an "innocent" person is guilty of a crime. Most people who fail parole fail not because they committed new crimes but because of technical violations. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (1999) reports that of all adults who left parole in 1998, 45% successfully completed their terms, and 42% were returned to incarceration. Only 13% were returned to prison with new sentences. This means most did not actually commit another crime. Irwin and Austin (1997: 116, 123) attribute parole failures to increased supervision capacities of parole officers and to an increased focus on the law enforcement function of parole as opposed to its social service function.

Studies have been conducted in several states and research indicates that prison college programs are among the best tools for reducing recidivism. Individuals who take college courses while in prison improve their chances of attaining and keeping employment after release and are less likely to commit additional crimes that lead to their return to prison. The effectiveness of these programs led to widespread adoption for several years. In 1965, only 12 post-secondary correctional education programs were operating in the United States. By 1982 there were 350 programs with approximately 27,000 inmates, representing almost 9% of the total prison population at the time, receiving some form of post-secondary education (Wolford & Littlefield, 1985). The rapid increase in these programs began in 1965 when Congress passed Title IV of the Higher Education Act. This Act permitted inmates to apply for Pell grants to be used for college courses. Even though higher education through Pell grants reduced an individual's chances of returning to crime, finding better jobs and holding them for longer periods of time (Batiuk, Moke & Rountree), the U.S. Congress, under pressure from the public, added a provision in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 eliminating Pell grants for prisoners.

Benefits of correction education

Corrections education has the potential to greatly reduce the costs associated with the cycle of incarceration and re-incarceration. A 1987 Bureau of Prisons report found that the more education an inmate received, the lower the rate of recidivism. Inmates who earned college degrees were the least likely to reenter prison. Inmates who had some high school, the recidivism rate was 54.6 percent; for college graduates the rate was 5.4 percent and for inmates with an associates degree it was 13.7 percent. The "Three State Recidivism Study" indicated that those who benefited from correctional education recidivated 29% less often than those who did not have educational opportunities while in the correctional institution (Steurer, Smith, and Tracy, 2001).

The Changing Minds study, conducted at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York, examined the impact of college in prison after the elimination of Pell grants. This study demonstrated that college prison programs could save taxpayers millions of dollars and showed that college prison programs transform lives, reduce recidivism, create safer prisons and communities, and significantly reduce the cost of prisons (Fine et al, 2001).

A Maryland study demonstrated the effectiveness of educational intervention with inmate populations as related to post-release employment (Jenkins, Steurer, & Pendry, 1995). Of the sample selected, 77% of those persons who had completed formal educational offerings were employed as reported by a supervising parole officer. Those who completed programs were employed at a level above the established minimum wage. The conclusion of this study is clear: educational intervention for inmates results in more positive post-release functioning, including higher employment rates, the type and wages of employment found, and a person's success on community supervision.

Patterns and trends in recidivism

Many of the same factors that cause a person to initially commit crime are common to repeat offenders. Although the research varies on which specific demographic or crime characteristics are the best predictors of recidivism, there is consensus that some factors have significant correlations to repeat criminal activity. The younger an offender is at first arrest as an adult, the more likely he or she is to become a repeat offender [See figure 1]. Some studies cited 25 to 35 percent of urban males are arrested for a serious crime at some time during