Report

COVID Incarceration Trends Interagency Collaboration Jail Populations December 17, 2024

Evaluation of Emergency COVID-19 Jail Reduction Strategies in Multnomah County, Oregon

Sarah Jensen & Shannon Magnuson, Justice System Partners

In response to the rapid spread of COVID‐19 in early 2020, jails across the country implemented emergency strategies to reduce jail populations in an effort to mitigate the spread of the virus. These strategies varied across counties in type and scope, ranging from identifying specific populations for release—e.g., those deemed “low‐risk,” those with underlying medical conditions, those close to their original release dates, etc.—eliminating bail/bond, and increasing access to community‐based alternatives to jail, such as supervised release, among others. In addition to these more intentional mechanisms, the rate of jail bookings was reduced as a result of substantial declines in arrests early in the pandemic due, in part, to the adoption of social distancing measures.

To learn more about the impact of emergency COVID-19 measures on jail reduction efforts, and think about emergency measures that could continue in the post-pandemic era, CUNY ISLG funded Justice System Partners (JSP) through the Safety and Justice Challenge (SJC) to conduct a mixed-methods case study on the emergency jail population reduction strategies implemented in Multnomah County, Oregon and the impact of these strategies on the jail population broadly, and continued bookings for violent crime, specifically. Multnomah County provided an interesting context in terms of jail bookings and community perceptions, as they had reduced jail bookings by 50 percent from the start of the pandemic while at the same time experienced over 100 days of social unrest in response to the murder of George Floyd at the same time as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Using administrative data from the Multnomah County Jail and interviews with people across the Multnomah County criminal legal system, including judges, attorneys, and law enforcement, and interviews with Multnomah County community members, including individuals incarcerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study aimed to identify the emergency strategies selected and implemented to reduce the jail population, the impact of those strategies on jail trends and jail bookings for violence-related charges, and perceptions of safety during this time for criminal legal system stakeholders and community members.

Key Findings include:

  • Participation in the SJC, and the collaboration it facilitates, allowed local stakeholders in Multnomah to act swiftly to implement emergency jail reduction strategies;
  • Though the County implemented a few new strategies, they mainly relied on making small changes to existing SJC strategies, including expanding eligibility criteria for existing pretrial reforms, allowing for a substantial decrease in the number of jail bookings during the COVID-19 pandemic;
  • Contrary to the narrative that reforms lead to increases in crime, the significant jail reductions achieved during the pandemic in Multnomah did not lead to increases in crime.
    • Three out of every 4 of the individuals with a history of jail bookings in the pre-pandemic period did not experience a new jail booking for any reason after March 2020.
    • Bookings for violence-related charges did not increase, including for individuals who had a history of violence prior to the pandemic.
  • Though Multnomah County staff and community members reported feeling unsafe during the pandemic, it was attributed to a combination of COVID-19, limited local police presence, the militarized federal police presence during the protests, and social disorder, visible drug use, and property damage from the protests rather than person crimes or crimes with weapons.

Download the Executive Summary.
Download the Impacts to Jail Populations and Community Safety report.
Download the Implementation & Impact Evaluation Report.

In addition to the key findings in the technical report, JSP has also developed a set of strategic policy and practice recommendations based on the lessons learned in Multnomah County designed to assist criminal legal system stakeholders in Multnomah and other counties around the country to reduce the over-reliance on jails following the pandemic. These key recommendations include:

  • De-emphasizing arrest for non-person, misdemeanor offenses, implementing deflection programs when possible, and increasing reliance on release on recognizance for non-violent misdemeanor and felony offense types;
  • Easing the burdens on individuals to attend court by allowing people to appear virtually for court hearings and minimizing the number of hearings that require attendance;
  • Reducing the number of people returning to the jail for non-crime related events, including failures to appear and violations of community supervision conditions;
  • Working with the community to define safety and violence when evaluating success; and
  • Investing in inter-agency collaboration to build and maintain momentum in implementing jail reduction efforts.

Download the Strategic Policy & Practice Recommendations report.

Additional Downloads

Report

COVID Data Analysis Incarceration Trends Jail Populations July 11, 2024

Updated Findings on Jail Reform, Violent Crime and the COVID-19 Pandemic

Sana Khan, Emily West, Stephanie Rosoff, CUNY Institute for State & Local Governance

Jail population reduction reforms are often cited as causing crime increases. Last year, CUNY ISLG evaluated this claim using data from cities and counties that have implemented jail re- forms as part of the Safety and Justice Challenge. The analysis found that jail populations were lowered safely, without driving an increase in crime or an increase in returns to jail custody. A year later, the findings still hold true.

This brief presents the most up-to-date data— through April 2023—on the outcomes of individuals released from jails after SJC reforms were passed. Additionally, this brief expands on previous work by distinguishing returns to jail that involve a new alleged criminal offense and those that involve administrative reasons only, such as failing to appear in court or violating a condition of release.

Additional Downloads

Report

Data Analysis Incarceration Trends Jail Populations January 17, 2024

Turning Local Data into Meaningful Reforms

Rebecca Tublitz

Effective criminal legal reform requires a strong understanding of the key challenges jurisdictions face in building safe and equitable legal systems, as well as an equally strong understanding of the carefully designed solutions—and how to thoughtfully implement them. Data and information must play critical roles in supporting each stage of legal system reform. With this in mind, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation launched the Safety and Justice Challenge (SJC), a major initiative to support local criminal legal systems in reducing over-reliance on jails as a response to social problems. Today, the SJC supports a national network of 57 cities, counties, and states in implementing a range of policy and programmatic interventions to re- shape local justice systems, with the aim of safely reducing the number of people who go to jail and how long they stay. Data, measurement, and evaluation has played a pivotal role in guiding this initiative—for identifying drivers of the jail popu- lation, designing innovative decarceration strate- gies, monitoring progress, and evaluating and understanding performance. The Institute of State & Local Governance at the City University of New York (CUNY ISLG) plays a leading role in these data collection and analysis activities across the SJC, serving as a central liaison between local jurisdictions, external researchers, technical assis- tance providers, and the MacArthur Foundation. Safety and Justice Challenge cities and counties lowered jail populations by 18.6 percent—or 11,010 individuals on average—since the start of the initiative. This data is made possible by the data collection efforts detailed in the Main Report.

Additional Downloads

We Must Stop Sacrificing Public Safety for Profit

By: Lauren-Brooke Eisen, Ram Subramanian

Incarceration Trends Interagency Collaboration Jail Costs January 27, 2023

Perverse incentives drive government officials across the United States to stop, arrest, put through the court system, and even jail more people to generate revenue rather than to advance public safety. That is the focus of our recent report from the Brennan Center for Justice produced with support from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Safety and Justice Challenge (SJC).

The report attempts to explain why decades-long efforts at decarceration, and broader criminal justice reform have run into such immense challenges focusing on a range of programs and practices often said to be aimed at public safety, but which are better understood through the lens of revenue production. The publication details how ending mass incarceration cannot happen until policymakers and the broader public understand and change the deeply entrenched economic and financial incentives that encourage punitive enforcement and imprisonment. Better understanding the extent of these interlocking incentives should make policymakers clearer eyed in making transformative policy changes.

Complex factors beyond simply increases to police forces and more punitive criminal penalties played a significant role in creating today’s bloated jail and prison populations. The report highlights some of the most corrosive and entrenched revenue generating practices—such as civil asset forfeiture, fines and fees, and privatized community supervision—where people subjected to criminal enforcement activities are routinely made to contribute to the very cost of their being arrested, detained, charged, prosecuted, supervised, or incarcerated. These economic and financial incentives established by local, state, and federal agencies are hiding in plain sight. The report details how police, prosecutors, and corrections agencies competed for these benefits by escalating their enforcement practices. Law enforcement came to depend on these funding sources, particularly as declining tax receipts and intergovernmental transfers left them grasping to fill budget holes. These incentives are a persistent structural driver of punitive enforcement and mass incarceration.

User-Funded Justice

Often so much time and effort go into generating revenue that the goals of pursuing justice and improving public safety get pushed to the side. The killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, drew national attention to this phenomenon because the city had pushed the police department and the courts to maximize funding potential of fines and fees. In fiscal years 2010 and 2011, about 12 percent of Ferguson’s general fund revenue came from fines and fees. By fiscal year 2015, the city was budgeting for 23 percent of its revenues to come from fines and fees.

Civil asset forfeiture has also turned into a major revenue source, going well beyond its onetime purpose of targeting drug kingpins. Law enforcement agencies seize and retain peoples’ cash, vehicleshomes, and other items on a suspicion of their connection to an offense without having to prove the connection. Minnesota’s Metro Gang Strike Force is a good example of this. An investigation revealed that its members were stopping and searching people who were clearly not involved in gang activity, and then taking or buying seized items for personal use — like televisions, tools, appliances and jet skis.

Correctional and Detention Bed Markets

Perverse incentives have also created a market in incarcerated people. Financially distressed counties have seen the market as a solution to their budget woes—often expanding their jails, or building jails that are bigger than they need, with the expectation of selling the extra bed space. As a result, a thriving market exists for beds in local jails and other detention facilities. In Louisiana, for example, Immigration and Customs Enforcement pays $74 a day to local sheriffs for its jail beds. That is nearly three times what the state prison system pays the same sheriffs to use its jail beds. In Midland County, Michigan, the local budget depends on renting jail beds at $45 a day to other counties. Bladen County, North Carolina, earned nearly $2 million in the first 18 months after it started holding people for the federal government in its local jails.

Enforcement-Oriented Performance Metrics.

Police departments and prosecutors’ offices reward staff for meeting productivity-based job metrics, such as arrest quotas and high conviction rates; they penalize people who fall short. With their job security and career advancement at stake, law enforcement officials are incentivized to pursue punitive measures even when leniency might be more appropriate.

Rebalancing the Scales of Justice

To unravel mass incarceration, and end it, reforms must account for and change the full array of these perverse financial incentives. Moreover, the justice system should be funded fairly and equitably by taxpayers, all of whom are served by it. It should not be funded primarily by the community’s poorest, most marginalized members. Based on that understanding, to end the crisis of punitive enforcement driven by pecuniary motives, policymakers need to identify and undo this self-reinforcing bundle of financial incentives that agencies have become all too reliant on to sustain or top of their budgets. Working together, they must change what is measured and rewarded to shift incentives. That is what will provide true public safety and restore community trust in the criminal justice system.

Report

Diversion Incarceration Trends Probation Sanctions January 12, 2023

Probation Violations as Drivers of Jail Incarceration in St. Louis County, Missouri

Beth M. Huebner, Lee Ann Slocum, Andrea Giuffre, Kimberly Kras, and Bobby Boxerman

Many have argued that we are in the era of mass probation, as more people are under probation supervision than under any other correctional sanction. Although there have been declines in the national probation population over the past decade, one in 84 adult US residents is currently on probation. Nationwide, local jail populations have also grown—from 184,000 in 1980 to 741,900 in 2019. The increased use of probation inflates the population at risk of subsequent confinement in jail or prison. Individuals who violate their probation, in some states, are detained in jail and await a hearing. Despite the growth in probation revocations and the increased use of jail stays as a response to technical violations, however, there is little evidence to suggest that short-term stays of incarceration reduce recidivism.

Adding to the growing rate of probation is the problem of racial disparity in incarceration. People of color are disproportionately represented among the probation population. In 2018, Black people represented 30% of the US probation population, twice their proportion in the national population. Further, almost half of all young Black men (24 to 32 years old) with no high school degree reported having been on probation at some point. Black individuals, particularly young men, are also more likely than White individuals to struggle on probation and to be given multiple conditions of supervision. Although there is evidence that Black individuals are more likely to have their probation revoked, less is known about how revocation to jail influences trajectories and outcomes for this group.

Jail stays also have deleterious effects in the short and long term. For example, Harding and colleagues found that short terms of jail incarceration resulting from technical violations suppressed the earnings of individuals by about 13% in the nine months after release from custody. The churn of multiple jail stays, even if short in length, also causes strain and instability among families, leaving them feeling hopeless under the constant eye of supervision. Yet, the unique needs of jail populations overall, and those of individuals who violate probation terms, are rarely considered in correctional reforms.

Additional Downloads