Released From Prison but if You Break the Law Again You Go Back

Arrest, Release, Repeat:

How police force and jails are misused to respond to social problems

By Alexi Jones and Wendy Sawyer Tweet this
August 2019
Printing release

Police and jails are supposed to promote public condom. Increasingly, nonetheless, law enforcement is called upon to respond punitively to medical and economic problems unrelated to public safety issues. As a result, local jails are filled with people who need medical intendance and social services, many of whom cycle in and out of jail without e'er receiving the assist they demand. Conversations nigh this problem are becoming more frequent, but until now, these conversations have been missing 3 fundamental data points: how many people go to jail each year, how many render, and which underlying issues fuel this cycle.

In this study, nosotros fill this troubling data gap with a new analysis of a federal survey, finding that at least iv.9 million people are arrested and jailed each year,¹ and at least one in 4 of those individuals are booked into jail more than once during the same year.^two Our analysis shows that repeated arrests are related to race and poverty, as well as loftier rates of mental illness and substance use disorders. Ultimately, nosotros find that people who are jailed take much higher rates of social, economical, and health problems that cannot and should not exist addressed through incarceration.

Fortunately, as nosotros discuss in our recommendations, there are policy solutions that can break this cycle of incarceration past addressing people's needs in their communities rather than through the criminal justice arrangement.

By the numbers: At least 4.nine million individuals are arrested and booked per year

Using nationally representative information from the National Survey on Drug Use and Wellness (NSDUH), we find that at least four.nine meg individuals were arrested and booked in 2017³. Of those 4.9 million individuals, 3.5 one thousand thousand were arrested just once in 2017; 930,000 were arrested twice; and 430,000 were arrested iii or more times.

People with multiple arrests unduly come up from marginalized populations

Most broadly, we notice important demographic differences between people with multiple arrests in the past year and those with no arrests or only one arrest. Our analysis shows that people with multiple arrests are disproportionately: Black, low-income, less educated, and unemployed. Moreover, the vast majority are arrested for not-vehement offenses. This suggests that instead of incarceration, which diminishes economic prospects, public investments in employment assistance, education and vocational training, and financial assistance would assist mediate the weather condition that lead marginalized individuals to police contact in the first place.

Slideshow 1. Swipe for more demographic comparisons of people jailed once in a twelvemonth, multiple times, or not at all. For the raw data used to construct these graphs, see Appendix Tabular array 1.

Specifically, we find that:

• Black Americans are overrepresented among people who were arrested in 2017. Despite making upwards only 13% of the general population, Black men and women business relationship for 21% of people who were arrested just once and 28% of people arrested multiple times in 2017. This is partly reflective of persistent residential segregation and racial profiling, which subject Blackness individuals and communities to greater surveillance and increased likelihood of law stops and searches.
• Poverty is strongly correlated with multiple arrests. Nearly one-half (49%) of people with multiple arrests in the past year had private incomes beneath $x,000 per yr. In contrast, about a 3rd (36%) of people arrested just once, and just one in 5 (21%) people who had no arrests, had incomes below $x,000.
• Low educational attainment increases the likelihood of arrest, specially multiple arrests. Two-thirds (66%) of people with multiple arrests had no more than a high school pedagogy, compared to half (51%) of those who were arrested in one case and a third (33%) of people who had no arrests in the past twelvemonth.⁵
• People with multiple arrests are 4 times more likely to be unemployed (xv%) than those with no arrests in the past twelvemonth (four%).
• Virtually people arrested multiple times don't pose a serious public rubber risk. The vast majority (88%) of people who were arrested and jailed multiple times had not been arrested for a serious violent offense in the past twelvemonth.⁶

People with multiple arrests accept greater health needs

In addition to social and economic factors, our analysis also shows that people who are arrested and booked more once per year often have underlying health issues, many of which tin pb to law contact. Our finding that people with multiple arrests have low rates of violence but serious medical and mental health needs gives new urgency to the growing concerns that jails have get "the de facto mental health care system in many communities," and that police are often used to reply to medical and mental health bug, non to matters of public prophylactic.

People who were jailed were more than probable than those who weren't jailed to accept serious mental and concrete health needs, and to lack health insurance. These needs were fifty-fifty more prevalent among those arrested more than once per yr. For the raw information used to construct this graph, see Appendix Table ane.

Our analysis demonstrates that a significant portion of people with multiple arrests accept serious mental health and medical needs that cannot and should not exist addressed by jails:

• Over half (52%) of people arrested multiple times reported a substance use disorder in the past yr. ^seven In contrast, 36% of people arrested once and just 7% of people who were not arrested had a substance utilise disorder in the past yr.
• People with multiple arrests were iii times more likely to accept a serious mental illness (25% vs. 9%) and 3 times more than probable to report serious psychological distress, including symptoms of depression and anxiety, than people with no arrests in the past year (30% vs eleven%).
• People with multiple arrests were less likely to have admission to health care. Individuals who were arrested and booked more than one time were over iii times more likely to have no wellness insurance (27%) compared to those with no arrests in the past yr (8%), and slightly more probable to lack insurance than people arrested just once (23%).
• HIV prevalence was 11 times higher among people with multiple arrests (1.68%) compared to people with no arrests in the past yr (0.15%). In that location is a significant overlap between social determinants of HIV and run a risk factors for incarceration; for example, intravenous drug use, homelessness, and poverty all increase the risk of both HIV and incarceration. Moreover, incarceration can be peculiarly unsafe for people living with HIV, as many jails fail to provide advisable HIV care.

Even a few days in jail can exist especially devastating for people with serious mental health and medical needs, equally they are cut off from their medications, support systems, and regular healthcare providers. Fifty-fifty worse, many people are in jail in the midst of a wellness crisis, such as mental distress or substance use withdrawal. Notwithstanding history has shown that jails are unable to provide effective mental health and medical care to incarcerated people. Jailing people with serious mental illness and substance use disorders has lethal consequences. Instead, jurisdictions must invest in public health and community-based wellness services, such as substance use treatment, mental health services, and community health centers, to preclude and treat the underlying bug that can lead to arrest and incarceration.

A closer look at the subset of "frequent utilizers" amid those with multiple arrests

The nearly 428,000 people who cycle in and out of jail most frequently (i.due east. three or more times over the course of a year) demand special attention in this report and from policymakers. These individuals, sometimes called "frequent utilizers," repeatedly collaborate with the criminal justice arrangement and with public services similar emergency rooms and emergency shelters.

Although no national data has been published on this phenomenon, several cities have studied how their jails are used and reported that a small portion of people account for a big number of arrests. Unnecessary arrests toll cities and counties millions of dollars simply do nothing to ready the underlying medical, economic, and social issues. For example, in New York City, a written report of frequent utilizers plant that the 800 people with the about arrests accounted for xviii,713 jail admissions and $129 million in custody and health costs over v years. In Camden, New Bailiwick of jersey, researchers found that 5% of adults accounted for 25% of all arrests over the five-twelvemonth study period.

Slideshow two. Swipe for more detail on the economic, racial, and health disparities between "frequent utilizers" and people who had no past-year arrests. For the raw information used to construct these graphs, see Appendix Tabular array ii

To better provide national information on "frequent utilizers", we as well looked specifically at people who were arrested and booked iii or more than times in the past year. We plant like, but frequently more extreme, results compared to the findings discussed above:

• 42% of people arrested and booked iii or more than times were Black.
• About half (50%) of those well-nigh frequently arrested had annual incomes below $10,000 and 85% had incomes beneath $20,000.
• Educational attainment was lowest amidst people with 3 or more arrests in a twelvemonth. Three-quarters (74%) had a high school education or less — with 38% without a high school diploma.
• The bulk of people (61%) arrested 3 or more times reported having a substance use disorder. Over a quarter (27%) had a serious or moderate mental illness.
• People with iii or more arrests were more than likely to have been diagnosed with chronic wellness atmospheric condition compared to those with no arrests, including heart conditions (15% vs. 10%), HIV (four.12% vs. 0.xv%), cirrhosis (iii.47% vs. 0.21%), and hepatitis B or C (2.43% vs. one.04%).
• Frequent utilizers were more probable to utilise emergency rooms multiple times in the past year. 36% of frequent utilizers had used the emergency 2 or more times in the past year, compared to xi% of people with no arrests.

Frequent utilizers are characterized by serious public health needs, mental health or substance use disorders, and unstable housing weather. While interventions specifically targeting frequent utilizers of the criminal justice organisation are nevertheless relatively rare, programs in New York City and Denver accept demonstrated that it is possible to stop people from cycling in and out of jail by providing advisable medical care and social services in the community, including supportive housing, mental wellness and substance use treatment, and case management. These services, which address the underlying issues that can pb to justice involvement, are more cost-efficient, effective, just, and humane than incarcerating people.

Conclusion

Ultimately, our analysis confirms that people who are repeatedly arrested and jailed are arrested for lower-level offenses, have unmet medical and mental health needs, and are economically marginalized. Arrest and incarceration of these individuals neither enhances public safety nor addresses their underlying needs. Our findings underscore the demand to redirect dollars wasted on repeatedly jailing people toward public services that prevent justice interest in the first identify: education, employment assistance, public health, medical and mental wellness services.

Recommendations

Frequently absorbing, jailing and rejailing people who pose little public safety take chances has immediate moral and fiscal costs. These costs are compounded as underlying medical, fiscal, educational, and mental health needs are exacerbated past arrest and detention. To interruption this wheel, policymakers at the country and local level should:

Redirect taxpayer dollars from jails to expand access to health services:

• Counties should resist jail expansion, close jails when possible, and instead invest in increasing health care capacity. Because of the limited number of psychiatric beds, which are often much further away than jails, police force enforcement officers ofttimes detect it easier to send people with serious mental illness to jail. The Treatment Advancement Center estimates information technology is two.v times quicker for law enforcement to send someone to a jail compared to a medical facility. For case, there are 25 detention sites across Dallas County, Texas, but there are only 3 psychiatric diversion sites for police force enforcement. For more on how counties reduce jail populations and invest in community health, see our written report Does our county really need a bigger jail? A guide for avoiding unnecessary jail expansion.
• Invest in customs-based mental health care and treatment for substance use disorders, which can prevent criminal justice involvement in the first place. Enquiry has demonstrated that admission to handling can reduce both fierce and financially motivated crimes in a community. Moreover, investing in such handling is estimated to yield a $12 return for every $1 spent, as it reduces futurity crime, costly incarceration, and lowers health intendance expenses.
• Counties should too provide evidence-based mental health and substance use disorder treatment in jails, including medication-assisted treatment, and connect people with medical care and health insurance upon release to ensure their treatment is not disrupted.

Connect people with social services:

• Expand job training and placement services, educational opportunities, and fiscal assist for low-income individuals.
• Expand social services for people with unstable housing, focusing on "Housing First." This approach acknowledges that stable homes are oft necessary earlier people can address unemployment, illness, substance use disorder, and other bug. "Housing First" reforms, along with expanded social services, would help to disrupt the revolving door of release and reincarceration. Inquiry has found that supportive housing may even pay for itself by reducing people's employ of other public services, such every bit emergency medical care.

Reduce the number of arrests and jailable offenses:

• Constabulary should issue citations in lieu of arrests, which allow defendants to look for their court date at home without having to go to jail or postal service money bond. And local governments should to be certain to link defendants to pretrial services to ensure they make their courtroom date.⁸
• States should reclassify criminal offenses and plough misdemeanor charges that don't threaten public safety into non-jailable infractions.

Divert people to other service providers before abort, and abroad from jails afterwards arrest:

• States and counties should create pre-arrest diversion programs so people with mental illness and substance use disorders can avoid arrest altogether and exist diverted directly to appropriate treatment and services. For example, Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) is a pre-arrest diversion program designed for people for people that engage criminal activity due to unmet behavioral wellness needs or poverty. Under Atomic number 82, law enforcement diverts peoples who would otherwise exist arrested to case managers who answer to the immediate crisis and provide long term intensive case management, including substance use disorder handling and housing.
• When people with substance utilize disorders and/or mental illnesses are arrested, states should brand handling-based diversion programs and other damage reduction strategies the default instead of jail. States should ensure their diversion and harm reduction programs are fully funded.⁹

Evaluate and accost the needs frequent utilizers:

• Collect and analyze data in order to identify frequent utilizers and to pattern interventions. Since frequent utilizers interact with not simply the criminal justice system, but also healthcare and homeless services, it is of import to integrate data across agencies. This data is crucial to understanding local frequent utilizer populations and designing constructive, testify-based interventions. Interventions should too address racial and indigenous disparities in the frequent utilizer population.

A notation about using public health information for a criminal justice system analysis

As with nigh national criminal justice information, which tends to be outdated, incomplete, and inconsistent,¹⁰ data on jail admissions is extremely limited. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) publishes bones descriptive statistics near the 740,000 individuals in jail on a given 24-hour interval in its annual Jail Inmates reports, and it published a more in-depth Profile of Jail Inmates in 2004, based on a 2002 survey. However even bones descriptions of the millions of other individuals who are arrested and jailed over the course of the year are conspicuously absent from the data. Until now, there has not even been an answer to the basic question: how many individuals are arrested and booked into jails in a given year? This lack of information restricts policymakers' ability to empathize and accost the high number of yearly arrests and jail admissions.

In club to answer this question, we had to turn to public health data: the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). But because information technology was not intended to be used to assess justice-involved populations specifically, its sample excludes two groups that are probable to be arrested but are hard targets for a survey: incarcerated people (in jails and prisons) and unsheltered homeless people.¹¹ The exclusion of people who were incarcerated or unsheltered homeless when they otherwise would have been surveyed creates a limitation to our analysis, since many were likely arrested and jailed during 2017.

Because of the limitations in both national criminal justice and homelessness data, there is no obvious manner to supplement the NSDUH to gauge the number of people who were arrested and booked in 2017 simply excluded from the survey. Neither the BJS nor FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Programme program keeps track of the number of unique individuals arrested or jailed over the course of a year. However, given the high charge per unit of weekly jail turnover (54%) and the fact that the average length of stay in jails in 2017 was simply 26 days, nosotros concluded that near of the people who fabricated up the x.six 1000000 total jail admissions in 2017 were likely still included in NSDUH.

Despite the limitations of the NSDUH sample, the survey offers the most comprehensive nationally representative data available to depict people who are arrested and jailed, whether one time or many times in a year. Our analysis shows there are important differences between those jailed just once and those jailed multiple times — differences that accept articulate policy implications — but the full scope of these differences will remain unknown until nosotros better arrest and jail information collection efforts.

Information Analysis

For our analysis, we used the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration'southward (SAMHSA'due south) public online information assay system (PDAS) to run cantankerous tabulations on the National Survey on Drug Employ and Health, 2017. Our analysis included the variables NOBOOKY2 for the number of times arrested and booked, EDUHIGHCAT for education, NEWRACE2 for race, IRPINC3 for income, HIVAIDSEV for HIV status, BKSRVIOL for whether someone had committed a violent criminal offence, UDPYILAL for substance use disorder, SMMIYR_U for serious or moderate mental affliction, SPDYR for serious psychological distress, IRWRKSTAT18 for employment, CIRROSEVR for cirrhosis, HRTCONDEV for center condition, and HEPBCEVER. In social club to look at what offenses people committed, we used the following variables: BKMVTHFT (theft), BKDRUNK (drunkenness), BKDRUG (drug offenses), and BKOTHOF2 (for "other offenses," including additional drug violations, theft violations, probation and parole violations, and traffic violations).

For researchers who want to replicate our piece of work, we establish information technology helpful to take the steps discussed below. When possible, nosotros used variables that were recoded and imputed by SAMHSA so that "Bad information" "blank" "refused" or "don't know" responses were already accounted for and excluded in our assay and weighting. For variables where SAMHSA did non provide a recoded version, we recoded all missing data, such as "Bad information," "Refused," "Bare," and "Don't Know," into "NA."

We took additional steps for some of the of the variables:

• For arrests, we recoded "Legitimate Skip" and "No" responses into "No." ("Legitimate Skip" indicates that the respondent was not asked how many times they were arrested and booked in the past 12 months, because they had previously responded that they had never been arrested).
• We excluded individuals between 12 and 17 years one-time from our analyses of the relationships between arrest and teaching, employment, and income, since youths are typically still in school at those ages rather than the labor forcefulness.

Read almost the data

Appendix

To benefit other researchers who wish to build upon our assay or need the precise data behind our graphs, this appendix shares our complete data. The first appendix corresponds with the first office of the written report focusing on those with multiple arrests (that is, two or more arrests within 12 months). The second table corresponds with the frequent utilizer section, focusing on the subset of people with multiple arrests that are arrested three or more times inside a yr.

Note that, due to rounding, percentages may not total 100%.

Table 1. This table summarizes demographic, economic, and health data for people with no arrests, one arrest, and multiple arrests in the past year.

	Everyone surveyed	No arrests in the by year	1 arrest in the past yr	Multiple arrests in the past yr
Employment status
Employed full fourth dimension	45.26%	45.44%	44.28%	32.74%
Employed role fourth dimension	xi.78%	11.81%	10.58%	9.43%
Unemployed	iii.94%	3.72%	12.39%	fifteen.07%
Other	29.85%	29.86%	25.74%	33.53%
12-17 Year olds	9.17%	nine.xvi%	7.01%	ix.23%
Race/Ethnicity
Non-Hispanic White	62.76%	63.15%	53.49%	45.79%
Non-Hispanic Blackness/African American	12.08%	eleven.lxxx%	20.70%	28.08%
Not-Hispanic Native American or Alaskan Native	0.54%	0.51%	2.66%	two.46%
Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander	0.39%	0.38%	1.02%	1.twenty%
Not-Hispanic Asian	5.62%	5.72%	1.64%	1.29%
Not-Hispanic more one race	1.80%	1.78%	ii.93%	3.23%
Hispanic	16.80%	16.67%	17.56%	17.96%
Sex activity
Male	48.51%	47.98%	66.88%	77.71%
Female	51.49%	52.02%	33.12%	22.29%
Teaching
Less than high school	11.13%	ten.72%	20.21%	35.91%
High school graduate	22.15%	21.93%	30.62%	29.61%
Some college or assembly degree	28.23%	28.30%	32.nineteen%	21.29%
College graduate	29.32%	29.88%	9.97%	3.96%
12-17 Twelvemonth olds	9.17%	9.16%	vii.01%	9.23%
Income
Less than $ten,000	21.63%	21.xviii%	35.85%	48.threescore%
$10,000 — $19,999	17.89%	17.66%	27.x%	29.35%
$20,000 — $29,999	13.11%	thirteen.07%	xiv.57%	12.86%
$thirty,000 — $39,999	10.88%	11.01%	vi.76%	4.18%
$40,000 — $49,999	viii.65%	eight.76%	4.82%	1.24%
$50,000 — $74,999	12.62%	12.77%	8.09%	3.02%
$75,000 or more	15.22%	15.55%	two.81%	0.76%
Covered past whatsoever health insurance
Yeah	90.58%	xc.99%	75.69%	71.84%
No	8.87%	8.49%	23.35%	27.17%
N/A	0.56%	0.52%	0.96%	0.99%
By year serious or moderate mental illness
Aye	9.50%	nine.23%	22.45%	24.78%
No	90.50%	90.77%	77.55%	75.22%
Past year psychological distress
Yes	11.22%	x.88%	26.72%	30.15%
No	88.78%	89.12%	73.28%	69.85%
Past twelvemonth illicit drug or alcohol dependence or abuse
Yes	vii.27%	6.63%	36.27%	51.54%
No	92.73%	93.37%	63.73%	48.46%
HIV
Yes	0.16%	0.fifteen%	0.35%	1.68%
No	98.eighty%	98.95%	98.72%	96.31%
North/A	1.04%	0.90%	0.93%	iii.01%

Table two. This table summarizes demographic, economic, and wellness information for people with no arrests, ane abort, two arrests, and three or more than arrests in the past year. This corresponds with the department of the report nearly frequent utilizers, which we defined as individuals with three or more arrests within 12 months.

	Everyone surveyed	No arrests in the past year	1 arrest in the by year	two arrests in the past twelvemonth	3 or more arrests in the by year
Employment status
Employed total fourth dimension	45.26%	45.44%	44.28%	34.18%	29.62%
Employed part fourth dimension	11.78%	11.81%	10.58%	10.78%	six.48%
Unemployed	3.94%	iii.72%	12.39%	14.24%	xvi.88%
Other	29.85%	29.86%	25.74%	33.76%	33.03%
12-17 Year olds	9.17%	9.sixteen%	7.01%	7.03%	13.99%
Race/Ethnicity
Non-Hispanic White	62.76%	63.15%	53.49%	47.32%	42.46%
Non-Hispanic Black/African American	12.08%	11.80%	20.70%	21.63%	42.08%
Non-Hispanic Native American or Alaskan Native	0.54%	0.51%	ii.66%	2.05%	three.36%
Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander	0.39%	0.38%	1.02%	i.63%	0.27%
Non-Hispanic Asian	5.62%	v.72%	i.64%	1.71%	0.38%
Non-Hispanic more one race	1.80%	i.78%	2.93%	3.81%	1.96%
Hispanic	16.80%	16.67%	17.56%	21.86%	9.fifty%
Sex
Male	48.51%	47.98%	66.88%	77.00%	79.25%
Female person	51.49%	52.02%	33.12%	23.00%	20.75%
Education
Less than high school	xi.13%	10.72%	20.21%	34.76%	38.42%
High school graduate	22.15%	21.93%	30.62%	26.92%	35.43%
Some higher or associates caste	28.23%	28.30%	32.19%	26.26%	10.51%
Higher graduate	29.32%	29.88%	ix.97%	5.03%	1.64%
12-17 Year olds	9.17%	ix.16%	7.01%	7.03%	thirteen.99%
Income
Less than $ten,000	21.63%	21.eighteen%	35.85%	48.02%	49.96%
$10,000 – $19,999	17.89%	17.66%	27.10%	26.68%	35.lx%
$20,000 – $29,999	thirteen.11%	13.07%	14.57%	xv.12%	vii.56%
$30,000 – $39,999	x.88%	11.01%	6.76%	4.73%	ii.89%
$40,000 – $49,999	viii.65%	8.76%	four.82%	0.94%	1.95%
$50,000 – $74,999	12.62%	12.77%	8.09%	3.72%	1.36%
$75,000 or more	15.22%	xv.55%	2.81%	0.78%	0.69%
Covered past any wellness insurance
Yes	xc.58%	90.99%	75.69%	72.13%	71.19%
No	8.87%	8.49%	23.35%	27.38%	26.72%
N/A	0.56%	0.52%	0.96%	0.48%	2.09%
By yr serious or moderate mental illness
Yes	ix.50%	nine.23%	22.45%	23.91%	26.82%
No	90.50%	90.77%	77.55%	76.09%	73.18%
Past year psychological distress
Yes	eleven.22%	x.88%	26.72%	27.25%	36.94%
No	88.78%	89.12%	73.28%	72.75%	63.06%
Past year illicit drug or booze dependence or abuse
Yep	seven.27%	6.63%	36.27%	47.33%	60.66%
No	92.73%	93.37%	63.73%	52.67%	39.34%
HIV
Yes	0.16%	0.15%	0.35%	0.56%	iv.12%
No	98.lxxx%	98.95%	98.72%	96.13%	93.52%
N/A	i.04%	0.ninety%	0.93%	3.31%	2.37%
Hepatitis B or C
Yes	1.09%	1.04%	two.fifty%	ix.47%	ii.43%
No	97.87%	98.06%	96.57%	87.22%	95.21%
N/A	i.04%	0.90%	0.93%	three.31%	2.37%
Cirrhosis
Yeah	0.22%	0.21%	0.86%	0.55%	3.47%
No	98.74%	98.89%	98.21%	96.14%	94.16%
N/A	1.04%	0.90%	0.93%	iii.31%	2.37%
Heart Condition
Yes	9.66%	9.73%	5.36%	half-dozen.21%	14.56%
No	89.31%	89.37%	93.71%	90.48%	83.07%
N/A	one.04%	0.90%	0.93%	three.31%	2.37%
Number of emergency room visits in the past year
None	72.33%	72.93%	51.55%	53.48%	42.66%
One	14.eighteen%	14.05%	22.49%	21.04%	18.26%
Two	7.08%	6.94%	12.32%	sixteen.thirty%	23.52%
3 plus	iv.31%	iv.16%	9.82%	9.13%	12.33%
N/A	2.11%	one.92%	3.81%	0.05%	3.23%

Nigh the Prison Policy Initiative

The non-profit, non-partisan Prison Policy Initiative was founded in 2001 to expose the broader impairment of mass criminalization and spark advocacy campaigns to create a more just society. Through accessible, big-picture reports, the organization helps the public engage more fully in criminal justice reform. Its previous reports Era of Mass Expansion and Detaining the Poor helped put the demand for jail and bail reform into the national conversation. More recently, it published, by the same author, Does our county really demand a bigger jail? A guide for fugitive unnecessary jail expansion. The Prison Policy Initiative also leads the nation'south fight against prison-based gerrymandering and plays a leading part in protecting the families of incarcerated people from the predatory prison and jail phone and video calling industries.

About the authors

Alexi Jones is a Policy Analyst at the Prison Policy Initiative. Since joining the Prison Policy Initiative, Lexi has authored Correctional Control 2018: Incarceration and supervision by state, which shows that prison house is but ane piece of the much larger flick of correctional control, discusses the harms of probation in particular, and provides breakdowns of the criminal justice system in each state. Most recently, she authored Does our county really demand a bigger jail? A guide for avoiding unnecessary jail expansion and co-authored State of Telephone Justice: Local jails, country prisons, and telephone providers with Peter Wagner.

Wendy Sawyer is a Senior Policy Annotator at the Prison Policy Initiative. She is the co-writer, with Peter Wagner, of Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie (2018 and 2019) and States of Incarceration: The Global Context 2018. She is too the author of Youth Confinement: The Whole Pie and The Gender Separate: Tracking women's state prison growth, as well as the 2016 study Punishing Poverty: The high cost of probation fees in Massachusetts.

Acknowledgments

This written report was fabricated possible thanks to the generous back up of the MacArthur Foundation's Condom and Justice Challenge, and the contributions of individuals across the country who support justice reform. Wanda Bertram and Peter Wagner provided invaluable feedback and editorial guidance. Lucius Couloute, Mack Finkel, and Dan Kopf helped respond critical data questions, and Roxanne Daniel provided research assistance.

pottsmaingtoled.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/repeatarrests.html

Share this post