1. 1 Who’s in Prison? The Changing Demographics of Incarceration Amanda Bailey Public Policy Institute of California

2. 2 Why Study Prisoners?  Prison population growing 3 times faster than the state population  Corrections expenditures increasing –Per capita: $109 in 1990; $194 in 2006 –$8.7 billion in 2006-07 budget  Recent attention to the system –Federal interventions –Ballot measures

3. 3 Our Contribution  Combines administrative and survey data to describe the adult prison population  Provides a demographic profile of who’s in California prisons  Examines effects of legislation on prison population

4. 4Outline  Demographic profile  Effects of policy interventions  Summary and policy considerations

5. 5 Prison Population Has Grown Three Times as Rapidly as General Population California Population Prison Population 167,698 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 1990199520002005

6. 6 The Prison Population Undergoes Tremendous Turnover -150,000 -100,000 -50,000 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 19951996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20012002 Admissions Releases Net Change

7. 7 Men Constitute 93% of the State’s Adult Prison Population Men 93% Women 7%

8. 8 Imprisonment Affects Many Families Female Prisoners Male Prisoners Have minor child 64%58% Lived with child before incarceration 33%23% Immediate family member has been incarcerated 58%42%

9. 9 Young and Middle-Aged Adults are Overrepresented among Prisoners Age Distribution of Prisoners & Adults, 2005 %

10. 10 Latinos Constitute the Largest Race/Ethnic Group among Male Prisoners… %

11. 11 …But Incarceration Rates are Far Higher for African-American Men Age-standardized incarceration rates per 100,000 men, 2005

12. 12 One in Six Prisoners Was Born Outside the U.S.  Foreign-born make up 17% of prison population; 35% of California adult population  Most foreign-born prisoners are from Mexico (60%), El Salvador (4%), or Vietnam (3%)  Lower incarceration rates among foreign-born –Foreign-born: 297 per 100,000 –Native-born: 813 per 100,000

13. 13 Most Prisoners Have Little Formal Education 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Latina/oAfrican American WhiteOther BA+ Some college GED in prison High school grad < HS

14. 14 Inland and Poorer Counties Have Higher Incarceration Rates Inyo Kern San Bernardino Fresno Siskiyou Tulare Riverside Lassen Modoc Shasta Mono Trinity Imperial Humboldt San Diego Tehama Plumas Monterey Butte Mendocino Los Angeles Lake Merced Yolo Kings Placer Tuolumne Ventura Glenn El Dorado Santa Barbara Sierra Madera San Luis Obispo Sonoma Colusa Mariposa Stanislaus Napa Nevada Yuba San Benito Alpine Del Norte San Joaquin Solano Santa Clara Sutter Calaveras Orange Marin Alameda Sacramento Amador Contra Costa San Mateo Santa Cruz San Francisco Incarceration Rates (per 100,000 adults) < 400 400 - 699 700 - 999 1,000+

15. 15 Inland Areas’ Contribution Rising Adult Population Growth Rate 1990-2005 Adult Population Growth Rate 1990-2005 Prison Population Growth Rate 1990-2005 Inland Empire 48%221% South Coast 26%116% San Joaquin Valley 39%87% Los Angeles County 14%45% Bay Area 19%24%

16. 16Outline  Demographic profile  Effects of policy interventions  Summary and policy considerations

17. 17 Legislation that Affects Prison Population  Three Strikes and You’re Out (1994) –25 years to life for third strike –Double sentence for second strike –Enhancement for any felony or serious offense  Truth in Sentencing (1994) –Violent offenders serve 85% of sentence  Prop. 36, a.k.a. Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 –Drug treatment instead of incarceration

18. 18 A Fifth of Prisoners are “Permanent” Residents of the System Determinate Sentence: 59% 2nd Striker: 21% 3rd Striker: 5% Life: 12% Life w/o Parole: 2% Death Row: 0.4%

19. 19 Prisoners Serving Time for Violent Crimes Increasing in Share, Absolute Numbers 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19961997 1998 1999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 Violent Crimes Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes

20. 20 Women 29% 36% 30% 5% Men 52% 20% 8% Violent Crimes Property Crimes Drug Crimes Other Crimes Prop. 36 Provisions Could Affect Women More

21. 21 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 1990199520002005 Death Row Life w/o Parole Lifer 3rd Striker 2nd Striker Determinate Sentence Emergence of “Strikers” Shifts Prison Population Into Longer Sentences

22. 22 Prison Population is Aging 1990199520002005 Prison Population <2520%17%15%14% 50+4%5%8%11% Incarceration Rates per 100,000 <25550722708646 50+5989147185

23. 23 Admission Rates Increasing Among Older Age Groups 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 19951996 1997 19981999 2000 20012002 per 100,000 in population <25 25-39 40-49 50+

24. 24Outline  Demographic profile  Effects of policy interventions  Summary and policy considerations

25. 25 Finding: High Turnover Rates  More than 120,000 prisoners leave prisons each year  Policy considerations –Higher turnover means high administrative costs –Many low-skilled people returning to communities –Communicable and infectious diseases are brought back to communities

26. 26 Finding: Many Families are Affected  Most prisoners are parents of a minor child  Policy considerations –Who is caring for all these inmates’ children while they are imprisoned for longer terms? –Healthy, successful re-entry improves ability to care for family

27. 27 Finding: Prison Population Is Aging  Longer sentences are being imposed and more time is being served  Incarceration and admissions are increasing among older population  Policy considerations: –Cost of incarcerating older prisoners is 2 to 3 times higher than for other inmates –Prison healthcare system under federal receivership –Cutbacks to other rehabilitation programs

28. 28 Thank you Please continue exploring PPIC’s website at www.ppic.org www.ppic.orgwww.ppic.org