michigan department of corrections · nearly 9 decades of year end prisoner populations and...

Michigan

Department of Corrections

Trends in Key Indicators

Through December 2018

(Data as of 3/19/2019)

Nearly 9 decades of Year End Prisoner Populations and Commitments

2

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 2021

Total Prisoner Population* Prison Commitments**

*Includes Community Residential Programs (CRP - Halfway Houses) prisoners when appropriate.**Prison Commitments includes Additional Sentence Imposed Commitments for existing prisoners.

Michigan Department of Corrections

Historical Prisoner Population and Commitments

31,000

32,000

33,000

34,000

35,000

36,000

37,000

38,000

39,000

40,000

41,000

42,000

43,000

44,000

45,000

46,000

47,000

48,000

49,000

50,000

51,000

52,000

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Mo

nth

ly P

op

ula

tio

n

Start of Year


ACTUAL PRISON POPULATION SINCE 1991

More recently, after growth of 20,000+ inmates in 16 years, a decline of 8,650

in 5 years, and 3 years of stability, the prison population decline continues.

51,554March 2007

----------------Peak Population

3

38,761December 2018

----------------Down to

1995 prison levels*

*And 1993-1994 total prisoner population levels whenMichigan had halfway houses (CRP)

54,48255,545 56,155

59,35760,177

58,113

55,592

53,422

50,862 50,641 50,81749,201

47,480 47,347 46,68445,626

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

60,000

65,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Total Felony Court Dispositions (Offenders)

Front End Impact: After peaking in 2007, annual felony court dispositions

continue a slow downward trend for an eleventh year.

4

21.9%

20.3%20.9%

21.7%

20.7%

19.4% 19.3%

20.3% 20.2%20.7%

21.6% 21.7% 21.5%21.0%

19.7%20.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Prison Commitment Rate*

* The prison commitment rate is the percentage of all felony court dispositions that are sentenced to prison.* The prison commitment rate is the percentage of all felony court dispositions that are sentenced to prison.

5

Front End Impact: The prison commitment rate continues to remain in a fairly

narrow, 19-22%, range since 2003.

48,19047,620

50,599

52,597

50,570 50,717

53,992

55,605 55,17154,581

53,375 53,87254,854

57,23057,899

58,497

52,893

49,176

47,52846,812

45,219 44,99144,089

43,098

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Year-End Probation Population

6

Front End Impact: The felony probation population increased from 2005

through 2010 to a record high, but has since declined by more than 25%.

3,333

3,479

4,228

3,706

3,494 3,481

3,643

3,359

2,850

2,632

2,481 2,507

2,6342,705

2,556

2,405

2,2492,169

2,073

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Probation Violator Intake*

*Includes probation technical violators and probationers with a new sentence.

7

Front End Impact: Probation violator intake has decreased from 2002 and data

through 2018 showed a continued decline to 50% since 2002.

9,169

9,5849,424

8,809 8,922

9,610

11,050

10,311

9,811

10,241

11,094

10,705

9,715

9,2959,158

8,7568,882

9,2378,983

8,664

8,085

7,695 7,593

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Prison Intake*

*Includes new court commitments, probation violators (technical or new sentence), parole violators new sentence, and escapee new sentence.

8

Front End Impact: Annual prison intake decreased by 21% from 2007 to 2011 and then

increased for 2 years. Through the end of 2018, the decline since 2013 continues, to levels

not seen since before 1988.

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Prison Intake by Cumulative Minimum Term in Months

0-12 13-24 25-60 61+ (incl. life)

9

Impact on Length of Stay: Since 2013, the intake decline has been in the 0-12 and 13-24

month min term groups while the 25 month and up min terms have remained fairly stable.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Percent of Prison Intake by Cumulative Minimum Term in Months

0-12 13-24 25-60 61+ (incl. life)

10

Impact on Length of Stay: As a proportion of intake, the shift has been from the 0-12

month min terms to the 25 month and up groups with 13-24 months remaining stable.

47.046.1

48.949.9 49.2 48.7

50.148.7 48.7

50.148.7

44.042.6

44.0

41.943.2

42.2

44.1 43.7

45.4

49.648.6

47.5

49.9

51.7 52.251.4

53.354.7

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Prison Intake by Average Cumulative Minimum Term in Months*

11

Impact on Length of Stay: The decline of shorter minimum terms and proportional shift to

longer terms shows in the growth of the average minimum term.

*Excludes Intake for Life terms

Prison Intake Comparison by Crime Groups

12

Involving

Death

5%

Sexual

Offense

12%

Other

Assaultive

29%

Other

Non-Assaultive

36%

Drug

18%

2018

Involving

Death

4%

Sexual

Offense

10%

Other

Assaultive

28%

Other

Non-Assaultive

44%

Drug

14%

2007

Average Cumulative Minimum Term:3.7 years


Involving

Death

5%

Sexual

Offense

12%

Other

Assaultive

29%

Other

Non-Assaultive

36%

Drug

18%

Intake(2018)

Prison Intake & Population by Crime Groups

Involving

Death

22%

Sexual

Offenses

20%Other

Assaultive

34%

Other

Non-Assaultive

16%

Drug

8%

Population

(12/31/2018)

13



Other

Non-Assaultive

23%

Drug

9%

Assaultive

68%(includes

Involving Death and Sexual Offenses)

2007 Peak Prison Population

Prison Population Comparison by Crime Groups

Involving

Death

22%

Sexual

Offenses

20%Other

Assaultive

34%

Other

Non-Assaultive

16%

Drug

8%

Current

Population (12/31/2018)

14



68.2%

64.6%

61.1%

63.3%

57.4%

55.0%

57.9%

55.3%

51.3% 51.5%

47.3% 47.7%48.4%

51.8% 51.5%

54.7%

51.7%52.5%

58.1%

62.4%

55.9%

65.5% 65.0%

67.6%

65.1%

68.0%

71.2%72.2%

71.5%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Parole Approval Rate

15

Impact on Length of Stay: The parole rate hovers at record highs, as first hearing

prisoners become prepared to successfully reenter society before parole board review.

17,597 17,67317,225

20,03720,460

21,568

22,255

23,74724,109

23,583

20,915

21,902

23,770

22,164

26,752

21,800

17,110

15,847 16,02015,593 15,604

14,848 14,586

12,664

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Parole Board Decisions

16

Impact on Releases: As prisoners are better prepared for society and approvals at their first

parole hearing increase, the need for subsequent and overall hearings declines.

Pre-ERD

60%

Life

9%

Post-ERD

23%

PVT 8%

2007 Peak Prison Population

Status of Earliest Release Date (ERD)

17

Pre-ERD

74%

Life

12%

Post-ERD

10%

PVT

4%

Current

Population(12/31/2018)

9,078

9,465

8,758

10,506

9,682

9,133

10,001

10,697

11,752

11,344

10,284 10,240

12,429

11,557

13,542

12,138

11,162

9,361

10,554

10,110 10,019

10,601

9,886

9,193

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

13,000

14,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Moves to Parole

18

Impact on Releases: Years of declining prison intake will eventually be reflected in

declining moves to parole.

12,753 12,713 12,57313,047

13,653 13,706

14,545

15,592

17,449

18,104

17,168

16,029

18,362

20,379

22,237 22,183

20,129

18,21817,964

16,767

15,609 15,658

14,589

13,607

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Year-End Parole Population Under Active Supervision*

* Includes Interstate Compact parolees here and Residential Reentry

19

Impact on Releases: The parole population peaked in 2009, and has since declined by

39% due to successful parole completions & relatively stable moves to parole.

851

969

1,051

1,174

1,299

1,449

1,629

1,699 1,714

1,925 1,929

1,781

1,713

1,655

1,502

1,188

1,126

961

898

849 833

647

555507

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Discharges on the Maximum Sentence

20

Impact on Releases: Since peaking in 2005, discharges on the maximum continue over

a decade of decline due to the higher parole approval rate.

45.744.9

43.5

41.9

39.3 39.1

40.8 40.6

36.5

33.2

31.530.6

29.0

30.331.0

29.8

28.129.1

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015


3-Year Return to Prison Rate*

* Includes cases that were returned to prison on Parole Technical Violations or for a New Sentence within three years of parole release.

21

Impact on Returns: Since establishing the baseline for recidivism in 1998, the 3-Year Return

to Prison Rate has been consistently maintained in a range of 28-32% for eight years now.

890

1,033

1,2881,345

1,259

1,1661,195

1,441

1,644

1,802

1,879

2,0201,985

2,0251,970

1,794

1,525

1,406 1,393

1,267

1,1591,105

1,029989

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Parole Violator New Sentence Intake

22

Impact on Returns: The parole violator new sentence (PVNS) intake resulting from new

felony prosecutions while on parole continues its decline for the tenth year.

1,916

2,577

2,668

3,1103,186

3,111

3,2363,289

2,161

3,013

2,859

3,157

2,094

1,878

2,127

2,373

1,893

2,698

2,020

1,686

1,854

1,958

1,691

1,596

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018


Parole Technical Violator Returns to Prison

23

Impact on Returns: Parole technical violator returns (PVT returns) to prison have

declined to twenty year lows and are down over 50% from the 2002 high.

Factors Driving the Prison Population

A. Felony Court Dispositions Down

B. Prison Commitment Rate Stable

C. Probation Population Down

D. Probation Violators to Prison Down

E. Prison Intake Down

F. Intake Average Min Term Up

G. Parole Approval Rate Stable

H. Parole Decisions Down

I. Moves to Parole Down

J. Parole Population Down

K. Max Discharges Down

L. 3-Year Return to Prison Rate (Recidivism) Stable

M. Parole Violator New Offense Returns (PVNS) Down

N. Parole Technical Rule Violator Returns (PVT) Down

Summary Nearly ALL Favorable

24

Projecting the Prison PopulationA. The Model originally purchased from the National Council on Crime and

Delinquency in 1987. The Model has been extensively adapted and customized by MDOC staff over the years.

B. The Model is a Monte Carlo prison population simulator that uses numerous probability distributions to mimic prisoner transitions through MDOC.

C. Probability distributions that drive the Model are build from MDOC enterprise data systems through extensive data extraction, transformation, and analysis before loading into the Model.

D. Data analysis breaks prisoner data down into 50 offense / max term groupings each with up to 6 min term for a total of 300 pairs which allow particular attention to 0-24 month sentences that have the greatest influence on 3 to 5 year population projections.

E. Rebuilt data is then “fine tuned” in the Model by back-projecting against two years of actual historical trace vectors to ensure a valid basis to project the future.

F. Trend analysis forms the basis for the future yearly intake assumptions that must be fed to the Model for disaggregation and projection.

G. Last February’s projection was 99.2% accurate at the end of December 2018 – projecting 321 prisoners higher than actual.

25

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Model Intake1981-2018

26

Projection Assumptions: While Yearly Intake appears declining Monthly Intake

flattened out in 2017. Thin line shows the wild variations that occur in the raw monthly

intake counts. Thick line within the wild variations shows the embedded trend.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Male New Court Commitments2010-2018

27

Projection Assumptions: Male New Court Commitments appear to remain flat.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Male Probation Violators2010-2018

28

Projection Assumptions: Male Probation Violators also appear to remain flat.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Female New Court Commitments2010-2018

29

Projection Assumptions: Female New Court Commitments appear to have rebounded

in late 2017 and may continue upward.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Female Probation Violators2010-2018

30

Projection Assumptions: Female Probation Violators also appear to have rebounded

but in mid-2017 and may still increase.

31

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Intake + PVT + PVNS versus Parole Moves1981-2018

Intake+PVT+PVNS Paroles

Projection Assumptions: Thick line (Parole Moves) is a delayed echo of the Thin line

(Intake+PVT+PVNS) suggesting a couple of more years of Parole Moves decline.

Projection Assumptions

A. Model Intake Slightly Up1. Male New Court and Probation Violation Commits stay flat

2. Female New Court and Probation Violation Commits rise slightly

3. 2019 up 1.0%, 2020 up 0.7%, 2021 up 0.9%, then flat at that level

B. Parole Approval Rate Stable1. Maintains at 2018 level

C. Parole Decisions Down1. Fewer eligible even with the same approval rate yields less

D. Moves to Parole Down1. Follows less Parole Decisions

E. Parole Violator New Offense Returns (PVNS) Down1. Follows less Moves to Parole

F. Parole Technical Rule Violator Returns (PVT) Down1. Also Follows less Moves to Parole

32

37,000

38,000

39,000

40,000

41,000

42,000

43,000

44,000

45,000

46,000

47,000

48,000

49,000

50,000

51,000

52,000

53,000

Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 Jan-19 Jan-20 Jan-21 Jan-22 Jan-23

Nu

mb

er

End of Month


ACTUAL AND PROJECTED PRISON POPULATION

Actual Prison Population 02/2019 Prison Population Projection

33

The new prison population projection anticipates a continued but

slowing decline as a baseline forecast absent any new initiatives.

michigan department of corrections · nearly 9 decades of year end prisoner populations and...

Documents