1. Crime Trends in Washington & Evidence-Based Policy Options that Reduce Crime and Save Money Smart Justice Spokane Symposium November 9, 2012 1 of 12 Steve Aos Director Washington State Institute for Public Policy Phone: (360) 586-2740 E-mail: saos@wsipp.wa.gov Institute Publications: www.wsipp.wa.gov

2. 2 of 12 Washington State Institute for Public Policy Created by the 1983 Legislature Mission: carry out non–partisan research on projects assigned by the legislature or the Institute’s Board of Directors Senator Mike Carrell Senator Karen Fraser Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles Representative Glenn Anderson Representative Cary Condotta Representative Phyllis Kenney Ken Conte, House Staff Richard Rodger, Senate Staff Stan Marshburn, OFM Director Kari Burrell, Gov. Policy Office Sandra Archibald, Univ. of WA James Gaudino, Central WA Univ. Les Purce, The Evergreen State Col. Robert Rosenman, WA State Univ. Board of Directors Senator Mark Schoesler, Co-Chair Representative Mary Lou Dickerson, Co-Chair

3. Two Goals Application in WA Principles Good News 3 of 12 Change in Crime Rates United States and Washington: 1980 to 2011 Crime Rates : -45% -46% United StatesWashington Homicide Rates: -48% -49%

4. Two Goals Application in WA Principles Good News 4 of 12 Adult Prison Incarceration Rates: 1930 to 2011 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 *Incarceration Rate *The incarceration rate is defined as the number of inmates in state prisons per 1,000 resident population in Washington or the United States. 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 United States Washington CFC Forecast State GF Fiscal Impact If Washington had the same incarceration rate as the average state, then DOC’s GF budget (including debt service) would be about $660 million more per biennium. State GF Fiscal Impact If Washington had the same incarceration rate as the average state, then DOC’s GF budget (including debt service) would be about $660 million more per biennium. WA Jails

5. Two Goals Application in WA Principles Good News 5 of 12 Keeping Track of Results: the Incarceration-Crime Relationship Washington’s Crime Rate (non-drug crimes per 1,000 pop) 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Washington’s Incarceration Rate (ADP per 1,000 pop) 1234 If Prison Doesn’t Work If Prison Really Works Each data point is that year's incarceration rate and crime rate. Elasticity: Elasticity: how a percentage change in a state’s incarceration rate leads to a percentage change in its crime rate. Key Development: The long-term link between incarceration and crime in WA appears to have changed, favorably, around 2006. Crime is now falling without expensive increases in incarceration rates. Better public policies have had a role in the improved results. 2011 2007 2008 2009 2010 ‘89 ‘90 ‘91 ‘92 ‘93 ‘94 ‘95 ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘00 ‘99 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 2006 ‘85 ‘86 ‘87 ‘88 ‘81 ‘82 ‘83 ‘84 1980

6. Two Goals Application in WA Good News Principles 6 of 12 onfinement Rates in Washington Per 1000 Residents 10 to 17 Years Old 1.Risk More crime can be avoided when policies focus on higher-risk (rather than lower-risk) offender populations. 2.Treatment (delivered with fidelity) Benefit-cost evidence indicates that some policies work and others do not. Careful selection and implementation needed. 3.Swift and Certain Response/Punishment Clear evidence (for crime deterrence) for certainty, but not for severity of punishment. 4.Budget Drivers (aka: incentives) Deliver savings to taxpayers by tying policies to budget drivers (e.g. fiscal notes & caseloads); incentive funding formulas. Evidence-Based Policies that Reduce Crime and Save Money: —four principles that improve the odds of success—

7. Two Goals Principles Good News Application in WA 7 of 12 Prison is Increasingly Used for Violent Offenders Change in Average Violent Felony Risk Scores Since 1990 Year -5% +0% +5% +10% +15% +20% +25% +30% +35% 19901995200020052010 Since 1990, the average violent felony risk score of offenders released from Washington prisons has increased more than 30%.

8. Two Goals Principles Good News Application in WA 8 of 12 Evidence-Based Lists Can Now be Produced: What Works (and what pays off) in Criminal Justice? Our “Consumer Reports” Lists: What Works? What Doesn’t? What Can Give Washington Taxpayers a Good Return on Their Money? Given the Current Level of Rigorous Research, What Don’t We Know?

9. Two Goals Principles Good News Application in WA 9 of 12 Change In Crime (# of EB Studies) Benefits Minus Costs, per-person, life cycle (Probability: you lose $) Adult Drug Courts-17% (67)$11,255 (<1%) Education Programs-16% (11)$20,298 (<1%) Cog-Behavioral Treatment-7% (38) $9,283 (<1%) ISP: surveillance only0% (14)-$4,718 (89%) ISP: treatment focus-14% (17)$7,295 (4%) Multisystemic Therapy -13% (11)$24,751 (2%) Aggression Repl. Training -20% (4)$29,740 (4%) Adult Offenders Juvenile Offenders* Pre-School* (low income) -21% (11) $14,934 (<1%) Nurse Family Partnership*-17% (3) $13,182 (20%) Prevention* Functional Family Therapy -22% (8)$30,706 (<1%) Drug Tx in Prison (TC or out-patient) -12% (21) $10,974 (<1%) We located and meta-analyzed 38 rigorous outcome evaluations conducted in the United States, Canada, and UK. We find, on average, they reduced recidivism rates 7 percent. Without CBT, an moderate-to-high risk offender has a 69% chance of being reconvicted for a new felony or misdemeanor; With CBT, the odds drop to about 64%. The reduced recidivism = a NET gain of $9,283 per participant. We estimate CBT, which is done in groups, costs $412 per participant; benefits of reduced recidivism total $2,308 to taxpayers (lower criminal justice costs) and $7,387 to crime victims and others (reduced victimization). A total benefit-to-cost ratio of $21 to $1 Risk: Less than 1% of the time you lose money (costs exceed benefits). We ran the model 1,000 times testing the expected bottom line for the known or estimated risk and uncertainty in our findings. Scared Straight+8% (10)-$9,887 (100%) MDT Foster Care -9% (3)$31,276 (15%) What Works to Reduce Crime? * Programs have a number of other non-crime benefits; all benefits reported here. (April 2012 Results)

10. Two Goals Principles Good News Application in WA 10 of 12 Evidence-Based Community Supervision of Adult Offenders: Three Findings from WSIPP Research Reviews +1% Intensive Supervision: Surveillance- Oriented (14)* Intensive Supervision: Treatment- Oriented (17)* Supervision: Focused on Risk, Treatment, & Response (6)* Change in Criminal Recidivism -10% ($1.93 b/c) -16% ($6.83 b/c) *The number of high-quality research studies on which this finding is based.

11. Two Goals Principles Good News Application in WA 11 of 12 Keeping Track of Results: Prison Beds Avoided Cumulative Effect of Washington’s History of Evidence-based Programming Average Daily Prison Population Year 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 22,000 24,000 1980198519901995200020052010201520202025 As of 2011, there are 1,100 fewer people in prison as a result of Washington’s evidence-based adult, juvenile, & prevention programs. These effects are in the CFC prison forecast. Blue Area = Actual Prison PopulationYears beyond 2011 are current CFC forecast. Orange Area = What ADP would have been without the programs.

12. Application in WA Principles Good News Two Goals 12 of 12 Two “Big Picture” Goals of Criminal Justice Crime Reduction (to achieve less crime in the future) Justice (to address criminal wrongs done in the past) Benefit-cost and recidivism risk findings can help policymakers with the crime reduction goal, but they are pretty much silent on the justice goal.

13. ANNUAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUE EXCLUSIVE RATINGS Over 200 Crime–Related Programs and Policies Programs programs taxpayer dollars that reduce crime and save taxpayers money. programs BEST 2012 Crime Policies to Adopt S Institute Publications: www.wsipp.wa.gov Reports Are Available on: Criminal Justice Juvenile Justice Child Welfare Education Mental Health Substance Abuse Prevention …More on the way

14. Thank You

15. Appendix

16. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1980198519901995200020052010 * Crime rates are the number of reported crimes to police per 1,000 resident population. Source: WASPC and FBI. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1980198519901995200020052010 United States Washington Crime Rates: Violent & Property Washington and United States: 1980 to 2010 Violent Crime Rate* Property Crime Rate* United States Washington Violent crime has dropped since the mid-1990s, and Washington’s rate remains lower than the US. Property crime rates have declined, and the gap between Washington and the US has narrowed.

17. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1985198719891991199319951997199920012003200520072009 Juvenile Arrest Rates: Closing the Gap Long-Term Trends in Juvenile Arrest Rates (1985 to 2010) Juvenile Arrest Rate (arrests per 1,000 10-17 year olds) Year United States Washington Prior to the mid-1990s, Washington’s juvenile arrest rate was consistently higher than the US rate. The gap started to close in the mid-1990s. Today, the two juvenile arrest rates are virtually identical. In 1995, the Legislature First Tells WSIPP to Study Juvenile Justice!

18. DOC Risk-Level Classifications of Adult Offenders: The Timing of Recidivism in Washington State for… Months After Being At-Risk in the Community …a New Felony Conviction…a Violent Felony Conviction Months After Being At-Risk in the Community Source: WSIPP analysis of data from the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Department of Corrections 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 161218243036 Classified by DOC as: High, Violent Lower Moderate High,Non-Violent Classified by DOC as: High, Violent 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 161218243036

19. 6 of 11 Trends in Adult Recidivism in Washington: 1990-2007 Annual prison release cohorts by DOC risk classification level 31% 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Among moderate risk offenders released from prison in 1990, 31% were reconvicted for a new felony within three years. Among moderate risk offenders released from prison in 2007, 20% were reconvicted for a new felony within three years. Any Felony Re-conviction (within 3 years after release) '90'92'94'96'98'00'02'04'06'90'92'94'96'98'00'02'04'06'90'92'94'96'98'00'02'04'06'90'92'94'96'98'00'02'04'06 Lower Risk (20% of total prison pop ) Moderate Risk (17%) High, Non-violent (19%) High, Violent (44%) Risk Classification Level of Offenders In Prison 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Violent Felony Re-conviction by year of release from prison Lower Risk 20% Moderate Risk 17% High, Non Violent 19% High, Violent 44%