Expert: 1-percent cut in recidivism could save state millions

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The state could save millions of dollars simply by reducing recidivism rates by 1 percent, a public policy expert told lawmakers Thursday.

That’s money that could be used for mental health, addiction and education programs that could help inmates when they are released from prison into communities, said Roger Jarjoura, a researcher at the Indiana University Public Policy Institute.

Jarjoura was talking to the Sentencing Policy Study Committee, which heard a day of testimony about recidivism and community-based justice programs.

He told the committee about a 2012 study he conducted to learn more about the costs of recidivism in Marion County. It found that 51.6 percent of inmates released by the Department of Correction to Marion County returned to prison within three years.

If that rate could be cut by just 1 percent – a reduction of just 46 people returning to prison – the state would have saved $1.55 million in incarceration costs.

“What could we do to keep 46 people from going back to prison?” Jarjoura asked lawmakers. “What could we do with $1.5 million to keep 46 people from going back to prison?”

The questions are important for lawmakers as they study the impact of a sentencing reform law the General Assembly approved earlier this year. The new system will move Indiana’s system of four felony classes to one that has six felony levels. It also requires offenders to serve 75 percent of their sentences instead of the 50 percent currently required.

Some drug and theft crimes will carry lighter sentences than under the current system and many of those offenders are expected to be pushed out of prison and into community-based programs.

The study committee is tasked with looking into those impacts and making suggestions for changes to the legislature before its 2014 session begins in January.

Jarjoura told lawmakers that the IU Public Policy Institute will complete a statewide study of the existing programs in place in communities, the anticipated need for additional programs, and what other states are doing well. That study is to be finished by early December so it can be incorporated into the study group’s recommendations.

He said several states – most notably Texas and Michigan – have been successful implementing “justice reinvestment” programs. Those involve estimating the costs of additional incarceration, including new prisons, and using the money instead for programs meant to keep people out of prison or from returning to prison after release.

Paula Smith, an assistant professor at the Center for Criminal Justice Research at the University of Cincinnati, told the committee that it’s more important that they do local programming well than it is that they do it at all.

She said research has shown that punishments or penalties alone are not useful in convincing people released from prison not to reoffend. In fact, researchers have found that sanctions alone can actually increase recidivism by 3 percent, while human services program can reduce recidivism by 12 percent. She said quality programs will help even more.

The key, Smith said, is focusing intensive programs on those who need more intervention “gets you a payoff.” But she said putting lower risk offenders into intensive programs will have the opposite effect, in part because they come into contact with more hardened criminals.

Niles Hall is one of those offenders who needed more intervention – and he got it from the Project Care program at Centerstone, a not-for-profit group in Bloomington. Hall told lawmakers he was a heroin addict who had been in and out of prison. But he said Project Care gave him the attention and services he needed to get back on track.

Now he works at the center as a peer recovery specialist.

“I came here so you guys could put a face to this demographic you’ve been talking about all morning,” he told the committee.

The sentencing study committee is scheduled to meet again on Oct. 8.


  • Message for RPC
    Did you ever think that creating jobs might keep many people out of prison, or at least provide access to a job for those released from prison. Reducing the return to a life of crime for 1% might be possible if the governor and state house were truly committed to creating more jobs in Indiana. Maybe the Governor of Indiana should talk with the CEO at General Electric. As for the marijuana, I suggest a ballot initiative that let's the voters decide.
  • Other ways to save
    We must get rid of mandatory sentences. We have 5% of the world population and almost 25% of those who are incarcerated. We also need to repeal laws criminalizing that which should not be deemed criminal behavior. One a person is declared a felon he can't get a job. Start by legalizing marijuana a plant that was grown by George Washington on his farm for 20 years until 1775. Washington speculated in his diary about the medical benefits of the plant. Thomas Jefferson also grew it on his farm and said he enjoyed smoking it. The plant was banned by the federal government because it was allegedly inciting blacks and other minorities. The plant has amazing medical benefits. It is not toxic, less addictive than alcohol, and you can't die from smoking too much of it because of the anti-cancer substances contained in it.

    Post a comment to this story

    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. The deductible is entirely paid by the POWER account. No one ever has to contribute more than $25/month into the POWER account and it is often less. The only cost not paid out of the POWER account is the ER copay ($8-25) for non-emergent use of the ER. And under HIP 2.0, if a member calls the toll-free, 24 hour nurse line, and the nurse tells them to go to the ER, the copay is waived. It's also waived if the member is admitted to the hospital. Honestly, although it is certainly not "free" - I think Indiana has created a decent plan for the currently uninsured. Also consider that if a member obtains preventive care, she can lower her monthly contribution for the next year. Non-profits may pay up to 75% of the contribution on behalf of the member, and the member's employer may pay up to 50% of the contribution.

    2. I wonder if the governor could multi-task and talk to CMS about helping Indiana get our state based exchange going so Hoosiers don't lose subsidy if the court decision holds. One option I've seen is for states to contract with healthcare.gov. Or maybe Indiana isn't really interested in healthcare insurance coverage for Hoosiers.

    3. So, how much did either of YOU contribute? HGH Thank you Mr. Ozdemir for your investments in this city and your contribution to the arts.

    4. So heres brilliant planning for you...build a $30 M sports complex with tax dollars, yet send all the hotel tax revenue to Carmel and Fishers. Westfield will unlikely never see a payback but the hotel "centers" of Carmel and Fishers will get rich. Lousy strategy Andy Cook!

    5. AlanB, this is how it works...A corporate welfare queen makes a tiny contribution to the arts and gets tons of positive media from outlets like the IBJ. In turn, they are more easily to get their 10s of millions of dollars of corporate welfare (ironically from the same people who are against welfare for humans).