Skip navigation

By the Numbers - Parole Release and Revocation Across 50 States, Robina Institute, 2016

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
1

Parole Release and Revocation Across 50 States

INTRODUCTION

BY THE NUMBERS:

A publication by the Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

ROBINA INSTITUTE
OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE
UNIVERSITY

OF

MINNESOTA LAW SCHOOL
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

INTRODUCTION

2

BY THE NUMBERS:
Parole Release and Revocation
Across 50 States
A publication by the Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

By Mariel E. Alper

Contributors: Kevin R. Reitz, Edward R. Rhine, Alexis L. Watts, and Jason P. Robey

© 2016. Regents of the University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.

3

Introduction to the State Data Parole Profiles............................................................................................i
Methodological Notes....................................................................................................................................iii
1..	Alabama.................................................................................................................................................. 1
2..	Alaska...................................................................................................................................................... 5
3..	Arizona.................................................................................................................................................... 9
4..	Arkansas...............................................................................................................................................13
5..	California..............................................................................................................................................17
6..	Colorado...............................................................................................................................................21

INTRODUCTION

CONTENTS

7..	Connecticut.........................................................................................................................................25
8..	Delaware..............................................................................................................................................29
9..	Florida...................................................................................................................................................33
10.	Georgia.................................................................................................................................................37
11.	Hawaii....................................................................................................................................................41
12.	Idaho......................................................................................................................................................45
13.	Illinois....................................................................................................................................................49
14.	Indiana..................................................................................................................................................53
15.	Iowa.......................................................................................................................................................57
16.	Kansas...................................................................................................................................................61
17.	Kentucky..............................................................................................................................................65
18.	Louisiana..............................................................................................................................................69
19.	Maine.....................................................................................................................................................73
20.	Maryland..............................................................................................................................................77
21.	Massachusetts....................................................................................................................................81
22.	Michigan...............................................................................................................................................85
23.	Minnesota............................................................................................................................................89
24.	Mississippi...........................................................................................................................................93
25.	Missouri................................................................................................................................................97
26.	Montana............................................................................................................................................. 101
27.	Nebraska........................................................................................................................................... 105
28.	Nevada............................................................................................................................................... 109
29.	

New Hampshire............................................................................................................................... 113

30.	

New Jersey....................................................................................................................................... 117

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

INTRODUCTION

4

CONTENTS
31.	

New Mexico...................................................................................................................................... 121

32.	

New York............................................................................................................................................ 125

33.	

North Carolina.................................................................................................................................. 129

34.	

North Dakota.................................................................................................................................... 133

35.	Ohio..................................................................................................................................................... 137
36.	Oklahoma.......................................................................................................................................... 141
37.	Oregon............................................................................................................................................... 145
38.	Pennsylvania.................................................................................................................................... 149
39.	

Rhode Island..................................................................................................................................... 153

40.	

South Carolina................................................................................................................................. 157

41.	

South Dakota.................................................................................................................................... 161

42.	Tennessee......................................................................................................................................... 165
43.	Texas................................................................................................................................................... 169
44.	Utah..................................................................................................................................................... 173
45.	Vermont............................................................................................................................................. 177
46.	Virginia............................................................................................................................................... 181
47.	Washington...................................................................................................................................... 185
48.	

West Virginia.................................................................................................................................... 189

49.	Wisconsin.......................................................................................................................................... 193
50.	Wyoming........................................................................................................................................... 197
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................... 201
Appendix....................................................................................................................................................... 203
About the Parole Release and Revocation Project & About the Robina Institute...................... 204

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

5i

The Data Profiles in this report are designed to provide a
statistical snapshot of the relationships and movements
between prison and parole supervision populations in
each state. The report examines the “in-out” decision
point of parole release, and the “out-in” decisions at stake
in the parole revocation process. Its relevance extends as
much to prison policy across the U.S. as to parole policy.
There are 50 separate Data Profiles, several pages for
each state, all presented in a common format. It is possible
to read the report from front to back, but we doubt this will
be the normal approach. Instead, the report is structured
so that readers may “flip through” and “jump around,”
with attention to each reader’s specific interests. Most
readers will start with their home jurisdictions, and will be
selective about which other states to look at next. While
the report does not editorialize on the policy significance
of these data, or the rich comparisons the data make
possible, we have no doubt that readers will draw their
own conclusions.
The Data Profiles include overall population rates,
admissions to prison, parole releases granted, and
conditional release violations, in addition to those
individuals at risk of incarceration, and exits from parole
back to prison. They demonstrate how parole decisionmaking functions as a crucial mechanism channeling
offenders into and out of prison. The sentencing structure
within which parole boards operate shapes the exercise
of their discretionary authority, creating wide variation in
releasing practices throughout the nation. At the same
time, paroling authorities continue to exert significant
leverage over those subject to revocation and return to
prison. The charts clearly display the differentiation and
complexity that exists by state.

Context for This Report
The statistics gathered in this report reflect measurable
outcomes in each state’s sentencing and corrections
system, but it is important to keep in mind that these
outcomes arise in very different contexts. States vary
in innumerable ways that cannot be captured in broad
statistics.

The volume of movement from prison to parole supervision
is affected by many jurisdiction-specific factors. First, the
extent to which discretionary parole release is authorized
varies a great deal across states. In some systems, all or
nearly all inmates are released through a discretionary
hearing by a parole board. In other jurisdictions that
have adopted determinate sentencing “reforms,” only
inmates sentenced before the effective date of the state’s
determinate sentencing law are eligible for discretionary
release (and the number of “grandfathered-in” prisoners
drops over time). In other determinate jurisdictions, a
subset of prisoners, such as inmates with life sentences,
remain subject to a parole hearing—even though the
great majority of prisoners receive determinate sentences.
When only “old code” or the most serious offenders are
eligible for discretionary parole release, parole release
will be granted far less often compared to states in which
every inmate is eligible for release consideration.

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION TO THE
STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

Second, formal eligibility requirements for granting parole
release, which vary widely across the states, exert an
impact on actual release rates, alongside the attitudes,
cultures, and norms of individual parole boards and
individual board members. In some states, an inmate
may become legally eligible for parole at an early point in
their indeterminate sentence. Indeed, in a small number
of jurisdictions, there is no minimum term that must be
served in most cases. If first release eligibility occurs
extremely early in relationship to maximum terms, boards
may be unlikely to release inmates at first eligibility. In this
context, the statutory structure of minimum and maximum
terms can have an impact on statistical parole “grant”
rates. In contrast, in some other states, initial parole
eligibility may be tied to a legal presumption of release,
absent disqualifying factors. In these states, the legal
backdrop of paroling decisions can push toward higher
grant rates.
The “range of discretion” enjoyed by individual parole
boards varies from state to state, and can change over
time and within a single state. In a majority of states,
parole boards consider a sizeable number of factors
when deciding to grant or defer the release of an inmate.
Procedurally, states vary in whether such decisions can
be made by one board member, or whether many board

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

INTRODUCTION

ii
members, a quorum of board members, or all the members
must vote. At various points in time, paroling authorities
may be less likely to grant parole release, even when it is
within their discretion to do so, depressing grant rates in
comparison with other jurisdictions. For example, parole
boards are often put in, and more often fear being put
in, a position of vulnerability when a parolee they have
released subsequently commits a violent crime.
Parole revocation rates in individual states are likewise
shaped by a host of legal and contextual factors, and are
just as difficult to unpack as grant rates. This is not surprising. The Robina Institute views parole boards’ powers
to revoke as a form of “reincarceration discretion,” which
is the mirror image of their “release discretion.” In both
instances, we are dealing with a grey-area correctional population on the borderline between incarceration
and the community. The “out-in” function of paroling
authorities invokes many concerns that are parallel to
their “in-out” responsibilities. And every decision by a
parole board, in either direction, is an important element
of a jurisdiction’s prison policy.
The prospect of revocation may vary by who is placed
on parole supervision in the first place. If supervision
is reserved for only the most serious offenders with the
highest likelihood of recidivism, then a state’s rate of
reincarceration may be higher than in other states with
lower-risk parole cohorts. Revocation numbers are also
influenced by the sheer volume of offenders placed
on supervision, and the lengths of their terms. Larger
populations exposed to the risk of revocation, all else
being equal, will lead to larger absolute numbers of
revocations. Revocation rates are also affected by the
policies and practices of the supervising agency and the
idiosyncrasies of individual parole officers. If revocations
are triggered by less serious forms of misconduct, for
example, or if the standard of proof at revocation hearings
is low, parolees are on average more likely to be returned
to prison.

Contents of the Data Briefs
A series of five charts are displayed for each state in this
volume. Chart 1 shows figures for the past decade of
prison and parole population rates, per 100,000 adult
residents in a particular state—and compares this with
the prison and parole supervision rates for states as a
whole. Chart 3 shows parole release grant rates, when
available from the state.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

The three additional charts show reincarceration rates
using different measures. All three are meaningful measures, but they all are affected by different considerations. Chart 2 measures reincarceration due to revocations as a percent of total admissions to prison in a given
year (as opposed to admissions due to a new conviction). Chart 2 highlights the significant contribution of
conditional releases in some states to the prison population. This measure is affected by the relative sizes of the
prison and parole population. If a state has a very large
parole population, that might contribute to a larger proportion of prison admissions due to parole revocations.
It is important to note that Chart 2 cannot disaggregate
revocations based on new criminal activity from those
based on “technical” violations (that is, violations of
conditions of supervision that would not be illegal for
persons not under supervision). Statistics broken down
in this way may sometimes be gathered from particular
states.
Chart 4 displays the number of parolees who were reincarcerated per one hundred parolees at risk of incarceration (that is, they were under parole supervision at
some point during that year). This Chart spans a number
of years for each state; its coverage varies depending on
the availability of data.
Chart 5 focuses on the percentage of offenders who
exited post-release supervision in 2014 due to reincarceration (as opposed to those completing their supervision
successfully). People who remain on parole supervision,
but are not revoked, would not be part of the percentage
that exits successfully or to incarceration.
Many of the measures presented in the Data Briefs
feature comparisons of the state that is the subject of the
Data Brief with the aggregate rate for all fifty states. This
offers one benchmark for comparison, although readers
can easily flip through the book and compare any state
with any other state of their choosing. Inclusion of the
aggregate 50-state statistic is not meant to imply that
it is the best reference point for evaluation of practices
in individual states. What counts as a “good” point of
comparison is up to the reader. The U.S. imprisons and
supervises its residents at rates far greater than other
countries. So, while some states’ prison and parole
populations may be lower than the average state, they
may often still be far above the world average.

iii

Readers of this report will also be interested in a separate
series of publications by the Robina Institute on American
parole practices. These are comprehensive “Legal
Profiles,” focused on one state at a time, detailing the
legal, institutional, regulatory, and policy framework of
parole release and revocation. The series is titled, Profiles
in Parole Release and Revocation: Examining the Legal
Framework in the U.S. The first report in the series, on
the State of Colorado, was published in February 2016.
One area of concentration in the Legal Profiles series
is the parole release guidelines and risk assessment
instruments, if any, used in each state. The content of
each jurisdiction’s decisional tools is described in detail,
providing a resource never before available.
For more information, go to www.robinainstitute.org/
parole-release-revocation-project.

Methodological Notes
ical Notes 

Chart 1 in each Data Brief:
Data Brief: 
The formula used to construct this chart is:

d to construct this chart is: 

Prison and parole counts in Chart 1 come from annual
reports issued by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS),
including the Prisoners series and the Probation and
Parole in the United States series, as well as the online
Statistical Analysis Tools associated with these reports,
accessible through the BJS website (bjs.gov). When
states submit changes after the publication of the annual
report, the data are updated in the online tool. Consequently, the online tools are the most up-to-date source,
and this report relies on them whenever possible. This
may cause some discrepancies for readers consulting
the published reports. More detailed information on the
sources is available at the end of the report.
Adult population counts for each state were gathered
from the U.S. Census Bureau. As not all figures are
available from BJS in rates per adult population (as
opposed to rates per general population), the rates in
this report were reconstructed using the denominator of
adult census counts for each calendar year. This may also
cause some discrepancies for readers consulting BJS’s
published reports, or the Statistical Analysis Tools. These
adjustments standardize the calculation of prison and
parole supervision rates throughout the report.

INTRODUCTION

In some of the “longitudinal” Data Briefs, we occasionally
observed precipitous changes in particular states from
one year to the next. In every such instance, we made
an effort to discover whether there was a straightforward
explanation for the one-year leap, such as reporting
changes or new legislation.

In the appendix, tables 1 and 2 display the prison and
parole rates reflected in Chart 1, ranked in descending
order from states with the highest correctional
populations. This allows readers to see the relative
position of individual states, which is not easy to do in the
body of the report.

‫݌‬௜
 
ܽ௜ ൈ ͳͲͲǡͲͲͲ

Although the data have been carefully combed, we do
not want to overstate their accuracy. Throughout the
report, for example, readers should interpret year-to-year
changes with caution. While the data are displayed over
where p is the count of individuals at yearend in
ount of individuals at yearend in prison and in parole, respectively for year i and a is the 
a series of eleven years, it is important to recognize that, in
prison and in parole, respectively for year i and a is the
of adult residents in the state for year i. Correctional populations relative to a jurisdiction’s 
individual jurisdictions, (seemingly) continuous statistics
yearly estimate of adult residents in the state for year i.
n  is the  standard yardstick used throughout this report.  We  prefer this to estimates of 
do not necessarily remain comparable from year-to-year.
Correctional populations relative to a jurisdiction’s adult
pulations per general population because, with few exceptions statistically speaking, the 
Reporting changes, alterations in data management,
population is the standard yardstick used throughout
and new legislation may cause statistical bumps that
n is the group at risk of entering the adult criminal justice system. Questions of juveniles 
this report. We prefer this to estimates of correctional
are not indicative of genuine shifts in prison or parole
upervision would require separate data collection and analysis. 
populations per general population because, with few
populations. When the reported data indicate surprisingly
exceptions statistically speaking, the adult population
large changes in a particular jurisdiction over a single
is the group at risk of entering the adult criminal justice
le counts in Chart 1 come from annual reports issued by the Bureau of Justice Statistics 
year, this report makes every effort to note the apparent
system. Questions of juveniles on community supervision
he Prisoners series and the Probation and Parole in the United States series, as well as the 
reason in the chart, e.g., whether a methodological
would require separate data collection and analysis.
al  Analysis  Tools  associated  with  these  reports,  accessible  through 
the  BJS 
change
waswebsite 
reported to BJS, or new legislation in the
states submit changes after the publication of the annual report, the data are updated in 
state was reported in other sources. However, in some
instances, we could find no explanation for such singleConsequently, the online tools are the most up‐to‐date source, and this report relies on 
year lurches in the data.
possible. This may cause some discrepancies for readers consulting the published reports. 

nformation on the sources is available at the end of the report. 

n counts for each state were gathered from the U.S. Census Bureau. As not all figures are 
JS in rates per adult population (as opposed to rates per general population), the rates in 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 reconstructed using the denominator of adult census counts for each calendar year. This 

INTRODUCTION

iv

In the narrative accompanying Chart 1 for every state, the
Chart 3 in each Data Brief:
percentage of releases from prison that were conditional
ve accompanying Chart 1 for every state, the percentage of releases from prison that were 
releases is given. The formula used to calculate this
These data come from states’ annual reports, where
percentage is:
available. For some jurisdictions, minimal or no data
eleases is given. The formula used to calculate this percentage is:  
exist, and the number of years we can look back to
݀
 
retrospective practice varies quite a bit. The relevant
݀൅‫ݑ‬
ve accompanying Chart 1 for every state, the percentage of releases from prison that were 
sources used to build Chart 3 are noted beneath the
chart for each state. Readers can consult those sources
eleases is given. The formula used to calculate this percentage is:  
he  number  of 
conditional 
releases offrom 
prison releases
reported 
in  2014 
Where
d is the number
conditional
from
pris- and  u  is  the  number  of 
for more detail about how the figures were calculated. An
݀the number of unconditional
on reported
2014 and u is
  releases  from 
prison. inConditional 
releases 
include  releases  to  post‐release 
probation, 
 
important caveat is that Chart 3 relies on what each state
݀
൅
‫ݑ‬
releases
from
prison.
Conditional
releases
include
mandatory  releases,  and  other  unspecified  conditional  releases.  Unconditional 
reports, withreleases 
no independent inquiry into the quality of
releases to post-release probation, supervised mandatoations of sentence (prisoners who have “maxed out”), commutations, among others. Lastly, 
the data. Consequently, any errors or missing data in the
ry conditional 
releases, andreleases 
other unspecified
conditional
he  number  of 
from  prison 
reported releases.
in  2014  and  u  is  the  number  of 
states’ reports are mirrored in Chart 3. The terminology
ge of admissions to parole in 2014 that were due to discretionary decisions (such as by a 
Unconditional
releases
include
expirations
of
sentence
l  releases  from  prison.  Conditional  releases  include  releases  to  post‐release 
probation, 
used in Chart
3 is not uniform throughout this report, but
 is presented in the narrative accompanying Chart 1. This figure comes from the Probation 
(prisoners
who
have
“maxed
out”),
commutations,
among
mandatory  releases,  and  other  unspecified  conditional  releases.  Unconditional 
releases 
is based on how
outcomes are reported by each state. For
the United States, 2014 report by BJS.  
others. Lastly, the percentage of admissions to parole in
ations of sentence (prisoners who have “maxed out”), commutations, among others. Lastly, 
example, some states report whether parole is “granted”
2014 that were due to discretionary decisions (such as
and others report whether parole is “approved.” Most
ge of admissions to parole in 2014 that were due to discretionary decisions (such as by a 
by a parole board) is presented in the narrative accomch Data Brief: 
states report only the board’s decision, not whether the
 is presented in the narrative accompanying Chart 1. This figure comes from the Probation 
panying Chart 1. This figure comes from the Probation
release actually occurred, unless noted in the chart.
the United States, 2014 report by BJS.  
and Parole in the United States, 2014 report by BJS.

used to construct this chart is: 

ܿ௜
Chart 2 in each Data Brief:
 
ch Data Brief: 
‫ݐ‬

Chart 4 in each Data Brief:
Chart 4 in each Data Brief: 
௜
 
The formula used to construct this chart is:
The formula used to construct this chart
is:
The formula used to construct this chart is: 
used to construct this chart is: 
e total number of admission to prison for year i that are conditional release violators and t is 
݉௜
ܿ
 
mber  of  admissions  to  prison  for  year ௜  i.  This  fraction  is  displayed  as  a  percentage.  The 
ሺܾ௜ ൅ ݁௜ ሻ ൈ ͳͲͲ
‫ݐ‬௜
t can include admissions due to violations of conditional release, admissions due to a new 
 
ment, or admissions for other reasons as reported by the state including transfers from other 
Where m is the number of parolees who are incarcerated in year i, b is the number of indivi
Where m is the number of parolees who are incarcerated
Where c is the total number of admission
to prison for
e total number of admission to prison for year i that are conditional release violators and t is 
returns from appeal or bonds, AWOLs/escapes, and other types of admissions. These data 
in year i, b is the number of individuals on parole at the
year i that are conditional release violators
and
t
is
the
mber  of  admissions  to  prison  for  year  i.  This at the beginning of year i, and e is the number of individuals who entered parole in year
fraction  is  displayed  as  a  percentage.  The 
beginning
of year
i, and e is the number of individuals
total
number
of
admissions
to
prison
for
year
i.
This
he  Prisoners  series  published  by  BJS  and  the 
related  online  Statistical 
Analysis 
Tool. 
this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United States series and the related o
t can include admissions due to violations of conditional release, admissions due to a new 
who
entered
parole
in year i. The data for this chart come
fraction is displayed as a percentage. The denominator
the percentages for the fifty states are rank ordered, and each state’s rank is presented in 
 
ment, or admissions for other reasons as reported by the state including transfers from other 
from the Probation and Parole in the United States series
t can include admissions due to violations of conditional
on of the chart. The full rank ordering and percentages for all 50 states are displayed in the 
Chart 5 in each Data Brief: 
returns from appeal or bonds, AWOLs/escapes, and other types of admissions. These data 
and the related online data tool.
release, admissions due to a new court commitment, or
le 3. 
 
admissions
for
other
reasons
as
reported
by
the
state
he  Prisoners  series  published  by  BJS  and  the  related  online  Statistical  Analysis  Tool. 
Two figures are used to construct this chart. Incarcerations include parolees who exited par
including transfers from other jurisdictions,
returns from
Chart 5 in each Data Brief:
the percentages for the fifty states are rank ordered, and each state’s rank is presented in 
ch Data Brief: 
appeal or bonds, AWOLs/escapes,because they were incarcerated in calendar year 2014 with a new sentence, through par
and other types of
on of the chart. The full rank ordering and percentages for all 50 states are displayed in the 
admissions. These data come fromor to receive treatment, but do not include incarcerations for “other/unknown” reasons
the Prisoners series
Two figures are used to construct this chart. Incarcerations
le 3. 
published by BJS and the related
online
Statistical
include
parolees
who exited
parole supervision
because
me from states’ annual reports, where available. For some jurisdictions, minimal or no data 
include  parolees  who  exited 
parole 
because 
they  successfully 
completed 
their  superv
Analysis
Tool.
Additionally,
the
percentages
for
the
they
were
incarcerated
in
calendar
year
2014
with a
 number of years we can look back to retrospective practice varies quite a bit. The relevant 
discharged. The data come from the Probation and Parole in the United States 2014 repo
ch Data Brief: 
fifty states are rank ordered, and each state’s rank is
new sentence, through parole revocation, or to receive
  to  build  Chart  3  are  noted  beneath  the  chart 
for  each  state.  Readers  can  consult  those 
related online Statistical Analysis Tool. 
presented in the description of the chart. The full rank
treatment, but do not include incarcerations for “other/
ore detail about how the figures were calculated. An important caveat is that Chart 3 relies 
ordering and percentages for all 50  states are displayed
unknown” reasons. Completions include parolees who
me from states’ annual reports, where available. For some jurisdictions, minimal or no data 
 state reports, with no independent inquiry into the quality of the data. Consequently, any 
in
the
appendix,
table
3.
exited parole because they successfully completed their
 number of years we can look back to retrospective practice varies quite a bit. The relevant 
ing data in the states’ reports are mirrored in Chart 3. The terminology used in Chart 3 is not 
supervision and were
discharged. The data come from
References 
to  build  Chart  3  are  noted  beneath  the  chart  for  each  state.  Readers  can  consult  those 
the Probation and Parole in the United States 2014 report
ughout this report, but is based on how outcomes are reported by each state. For example, 
 
ore detail about how the figures were calculated. An important caveat is that Chart 3 relies 
and the BJS’s related online Statistical Analysis Tool.
eport whether parole is “granted” and others report whether parole is “approved.” Most 
The following sources from the Bureau of Justice Statistics were consulted in the preparat
 state reports, with no independent inquiry into the quality of the data. Consequently, any 
only the board’s decision, not whether the release actually occurred, unless noted in the 
report. The state‐specific sources used to calculate parole grant rates are listed in the resp
ing data in the states’ reports are mirrored in Chart 3. The terminology used in Chart 3 is not 
brief. 
ughout this report, but is based on how outcomes are reported by each state. For example, 
 
eport whether parole is “granted” and others report whether parole is “approved.” Most 
Reports in the Prisoners Series 
only the board’s decision, not whether the release actually occurred, unless noted in the 
 
2 
Carson, E. A. (2015). Prisoners in 2014. (NCJ 248955). Washington, DC: United States De
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5387 

v

The following sources from the Bureau of Justice Statistics were consulted in the preparation of this report. The statespecific sources used to calculate parole grant rates are listed in the respective state’s brief.
Carson, E. A. (2015). Prisoners in 2014. (NCJ 248955). Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5387
Carson, E. A. (2014). Prisoners in 2013. (NCJ 247282). Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5109
Carson, E. A. & Golinelli, D. (2013). Prisoners in 2012: Trends in admissions and releases, 1991-2012 (Revised). (NCJ
243920). Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice
Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4842
Carson, E. A. & Sabol, W. J. (2012). Prisoners in 2011. (NCJ 239808). Washington, DC: United States Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4559
Guerino, P., Harrison, P. M., & Sabol, W. J. (2011). Prisoners in 2010 (Revised). (NCJ 236096). Washington, DC: United
States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.
bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2230
Sabol, W. J. & West, H. C. (2011). Prisoners in 2009 (Revised). (NCJ 231675). Washington, DC: United States
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.
gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2232
Cooper, M., Sabol, W. J. & West, H. C. (2009). Prisoners in 2008. (NCJ 228417). Washington, DC: United States
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.
gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1763
Sabol, W. J. & West, H. C. (2008). Prisoners in 2007. (NCJ 224280). Washington, DC: United States Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=903
Couture, H., Sabol, W. J. & West, H. C. (2007). Prisoners in 2006. (NCJ 219416). Washington, DC: United States
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.
gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=908
Beck, A. J. & Harrison, P. M. (2006). Prisoners in 2005. (NCJ 215092). Washington, DC: United States Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=912
Beck, A. J. & Harrison, P. M. (2005). Prisoners in 2004. (NCJ 210677). Washington, DC: United States Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=915
Beck, A. J. & Harrison, P. M. (2004). Prisoners in 2003. (NCJ 205335). Washington, DC: United States Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.
cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=918

INTRODUCTION

REFERENCES

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

INTRODUCTION

vi
Reports in the Probation and Parole in the United States Series
Bonczar, T. P., Kaeble, D., & Maruschak, L. M. (2015). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2014. (NCJ 249057).
Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5415
Bonczar, T. P. & Herberman, E. (2014). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2013. (NCJ 248029). Washington,
DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5135
Bonczar, T. P. & Maruschak, L. M. (2013). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2012. (NCJ 243826).
Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4844
Maruschak, L. M. & Parks, E. (2012). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2011. (NCJ 239686). Washington,
DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4538
Bonczar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2011). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2010. (NCJ 236019). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2239
Bonczar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2010). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2009. (NCJ 231674). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2233
Bonczar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2009). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2008. (NCJ 228230). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1764
Bonczar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2008). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2007 – Statistical Tables. (NCJ
224707). Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of
Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1099
Bonczar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2007). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2006. (NCJ 220218). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1106
Bonczar, T. P. & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2005. (NCJ 215091). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1107
Glaze, L. E. & Palla, S. (2005). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2004. (NCJ 210676). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1108
Glaze, L. E. & Palla, S. (2004). Probation And Parole In The United States, 2003. (NCJ 205336). Washington, DC:
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1109

Online Data Tools
Carson, E. A. & Mulako-Wangota, J. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Corrections Statistical Analysis Tool (CSAT) –
Prisoners: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=nps
Bonczar, T. P., Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Corrections Statistical Analysis Tool (CSAT) – Parole: http://www.bjs.gov/parole

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN ALABAMA

*NOTE	ALL	STATES	SHOULD	BEGIN	ON	THE	RIGHT	SIDE/ODD	PAGE	NUMBER	
	
Alabama	(we	could	use	state	images	like	Profiles	in	Probation	for	header)	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	are	higher	in	Alabama	compared	to	states	as	a	whole	while	parole	
population	rates	are	lower.		However,	parolees	are	slightly	less	likely	to	be	re-incarcerated	compared	to	
the	states	as	a	whole.	About	a	third	of	parole	hearings	lead	to	a	discretionary	release,	compared	to	forty	
percent	five	years	ago.	Alabama	currently	practices	discretionary	release	for	the	majority	of	offenders,	
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Alabama compared to states as a whole while parole population
including	most	violent	offenders,	sex	offenders,	property	offenders,	and	drug	offenders.	
rates are	 lower. However, parolees are slightly less likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole.
th
About a Alabama	had	the	5
third of parole hearings
lead to a discretionary release, compared to forty percent five years ago. Alabama
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014	(CALL	OUT	IN	HEADER)	
currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including most violent offenders, sex
	
offenders, property offenders, and drug offenders.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014		

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1,000
900
800
700

823

808

806

603

612

316

597

758
600

317

308

312

227

210

2004

2005

831

851

615

612

880

869

878

877

870

849

605

597

582

563

561

551

305

600
500
400

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

220

224

233

246

234

233

241

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

300
200
100

205

247

216

0
2003

2006

Alabama Prison Population

State Prison Population

Alabama Parole Population

State Parole Population

2014

	

This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
*Alabama parole
populations are not comparable from 2005-2007 or 2013-2014 due to changes in recordkeeping procedures.
each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
Chart 1 shows
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The	prison	population	rate	in	Alabama	is	higher	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	The	peak	rate	was	in	
2009;	thereafter,	the	rate	declined	slightly.	In	2014,	the	prison	population	rate	was	849	in	Alabama	

ALABAMA

2
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per
100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to
2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by
the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual
state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

Alabama had the 5th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Alabama had the 25th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The prison population rate in Alabama is higher than the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; thereafter, the rate declined
slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was 849 in Alabama
versus 551 for all 50 states. Alabama had the 5th highest prison
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 65% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Over the series, the parole population rate has remained fairly
steady and is lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the
parole population rate in Alabama is 216 which is lower than
Over the series, the parole population rate has remained fairly steady and is lower than the aggregate 
the aggregate rate of 305. Alabama had the 25th highest parole
state rate. In 2014, the parole population rate in Alabama is 216 which is lower than the aggregate rate 
population rate of the states in 2014. th

of 305. Alabama had the 25  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014.  
 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

26%

9%

9%

10%

2012

2013

2014

25%
20%
14%

15%

14%

13%

12%

11%

12%

10%

10%
5%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Alabama

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Over the series,
the percentage of prison admissions that were due to conditional release violators has been lower in
series for all 50 states is shown. 
Alabama compared
to the states in aggregate. In 2014, just ten percent of prison admissions in Alabama were due to
 
violationsOver the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were due to conditional release violators has 
of conditional release compared to just over one-quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Alabama
had one of the lowest percentages of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states
been lower in Alabama compared to the states in aggregate. In 2014, just ten percent of prison 
in 2014.
admissions in Alabama were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter 
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Alabama had one of the lowest percentages of prison 
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. 
 

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE:  PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES

Com
text, 
sepa
okay

Com
foreg
popu

28%

27%

Com
langu
don’t

3
Chart 3. Alabama Grant Rate, 2014 

ALABAMA

Chart 3a. Alabama Grant Rate, 2014
Chart 3. Alabama Grant Rate, 2014 
34%

Granted

Denied

66%
34%

Granted

Denied

 
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or denied. Slightly over one-third of the hearings resulted in
Chart 3b. Alabama Grants by Year, 2009‐2014 
parole being granted
while the remaining two-thirds resulted in parole being denied.
 
 
66%

  9000
Chart 3b. Alabama Grants by Year, 2009-2014
Chart 3b. Alabama Grants by Year, 2009‐2014 
8000
 
9000
7000
8000
6000
7000

5000

3,280
2,690

2,097

3,280

6000

4000

2,690

5000

2,097

3000
4000

2000

4,644

4,098

4,774

3000

1000
2000

4,644

0
FY 2009

1000

0
FY 2009

4,098

FY 2010
FY 2010

4,774

FY 2011
Denied

FY 2011

2,178

2,178

5,228
5,228

FY 2012
Granted

FY 2012

2,312
2,237
2,312
2,237

5,315
5,315

4,410

FY 2013
FY 2013

4,410

FY 2014
FY 2014

 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
Denied
Granted
granted or denied. Slightly over one‐third of the hearings resulted in parole being granted while the 
 
Chart 3b showsThe first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
the outcome of parole hearings from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2014. In FY2009 and FY2010, about 40 percent of hearings resulted in parole being
remaining two‐thirds resulted in parole being denied. 
granted. In FY2011-FY2013, the rate was around 30 percent. In 2014 it was 34%.
 granted or denied. Slightly over one‐third of the hearings resulted in parole being granted while the 
Source: State ofremaining two‐thirds resulted in parole being denied. 
Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles Annual Report FY 2014, http://www.pardons.state.al.us/Annual_Reports/2013-2014_Annual_Report.pdf.
The second chart shows the outcome of parole hearings from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2014. In 
 
FY2009 and FY2010, about 40 percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted. In FY2011‐FY2013, 
The second chart shows the outcome of parole hearings from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2014. In 
the rate was around 30 percent. In 2014 it was 34%. 
FY2009 and FY2010, about 40 percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted. In FY2011‐FY2013, 
 the rate was around 30 percent. In 2014 it was 34%. 
Source: State of Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles Annual Report FY 2014 
 
http://www.pardons.state.al.us/Annual_Reports/2013‐2014_Annual_Report.pdf 
Source: State of Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles Annual Report FY 2014 
 http://www.pardons.state.al.us/Annual_Reports/2013‐2014_Annual_Report.pdf 
 
 
  
 

 

 

8 

8 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

ALABAMA

4
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

9

10
8

7

8

9

2006

2007

2008

2009
Alabama

3

2
5

5

0

2010

2011

8

2012

5
2013

State Total

2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is slightly lower in Alabama compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the incarceration rate stood at 5 per 100 parolees in Alabama compared to 8 per 100 for
the states inparole during the year. 
aggregate.

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is slightly lower in Alabama compared to the states in aggregate 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
and has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the incarceration rate stood at 5 per 100 parolees in 
Alabama compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Alabama

24%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Alabama, about a quarter of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is comparable to the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

9 

PAROLE IN ALASKA

Alaska 
Summary: Prison population rates are much higher in Alaska compared to the states as a whole while 
parole population rates are comparable. Parole is much more likely to end in incarceration rather than a 
successful completion in Alaska compared to states in aggregate. Forty percent of parole hearings lead 
Summary:
Prison population rates are much higher in Alaska compared to the states as a whole while parole
to a discretionary release in 2014 compared to a high of sixty‐one percent in 2009. Alaska currently 
population
rates are comparable. Parole is much more likely to end in incarceration rather than a successful
practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including the majority of violent offenders, 
completion in Alaska compared to states in aggregate. Forty percent of parole hearings lead to a discretionary
sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
release in 2014 compared to a high of sixty-one percent in 2009. Alaska currently practices discretionary release
 
for the majority of offenders,
including the majority of violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug
Alaska had the 3rd highest prison population rate of the states in 2014 
offenders, and public order offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1,200
1,000

981

963

597

600

999

1,035 1,042

994

1,031 1,025 1,046 1,039
929

948

561

551

421

402

306

305

2013

2014

800
603

612

615

612

605

597

378

397

308

313

600
400

317

308

312

316

201

201

202

213

2003

2004

200

311
323

343
317

582

563

332

347

313

308

0
2005 2006 2007 2008
Alaska Prison Population
Alaska Parole Population

2009 2010 2011 2012
State Prison Population
State Parole Population

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
Comm
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
out of t
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The prison population rate in Alaska is higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2011; 

ALASKA

6
The prison population rate in Alaska is higher than the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate was in 2011; thereafter, the rate has
declined. In 2014, the prison population rate was 948 in Alaska
versus 551 for all 50 states. Alaska had the 3rd highest prison
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 47% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Alaska had the 3rd highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Alaska had the 10th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

Over the series, the parole rate appears to have doubled. In 2003,
the rate was lower in Alaska than states as a whole while it was
higher than the aggregate rate in 2014. In 2014, the parole population rate in Alaska is 402 which is higher than the aggregate state
rate of 305. Alaska had the 10th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014. In 2014, 9% of admissions to parole were due
to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	(LEAVE	IN	TEXT	AND	CALL	OUT)	In	2014,	9%	of	admissions	
to	parole	were	due	to	a	discretionary	decision	such	as	the	decision	of	a	parole	board.	
	 Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2.
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
50%

47%

45%
40%
35%

31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%

33%

30%

27%

26%

28%

25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Alaska

2011 2012 2013 2014

State Institutions

	
This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
Chart 2 shows
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
Alaska has
	 not provided data on the type of prison admission since 2003. In 2003, the percentage of prison admissions
that were conditional release violators was higher (47%) than states in aggregate (31%).
Alaska	has	not	provided	data	on	the	type	of	prison	admission	since	2003.	In	2003,	the	percentage	of	
prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	violators	was	higher	(47%)	than	states	in	aggregate	
(31%).		
	
	
*Alaska did not provide data on type of prison admission after 2003.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

7
Chart 3. Alaska Grant Rate, 2014 

ALASKA

Chart 3a. Alaska Grant Rate, 2014
Grant

Chart 3. Alaska Grant Rate, 2014 
21%

Deny

40%

Continued

Grant

39%
21%

Warning
Deny

 
 
Continued
Chart 3a showsChart 3b. Alaska Grants by Year, 1996‐2011 
the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted, denied,
or continued. Forty percent of hearings resulted in parole being
39%
granted while about equal numbers resulted in parole
being denied. The remaining fifth resulted in a continuation.
40%

250

Warning

Chart 3b. Alaska Grants by Year, 1996-2011
 
200
Chart 3b. Alaska Grants by Year, 1996‐2011 

 

250

150
200

100
150

50

100

51%
35%

51%

40%
0

50

61%
41% 40% 39% 36%
34% 36%

51%

96 35%
97
40%

98 51%
99

00

01

02

03

04

41% 40% 39% 36%
34% 36%

Grant

Deny

05

53%
30%

41%

59%
56%

61%
59%
53%
07
08
09
10
56%
41%

06

11

30%
Continued

 
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted, 
denied, or continued. Forty percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted while about equal 
Grant
Deny
Continued
numbers resulted in parole being denied. The remaining fifth resulted in a continuation.   
Chart 3b shows The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted, 
the outcome of parole hearings from 1996 to fiscal year 2014. In 1996, the rate was 40%. It increased to a high of 51% in 1998 and 1999, before decreasing
to a low of 30%denied, or continued. Forty percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted while about equal 
in 2006. Thereafter, the rate increased to a high of 61% in 2009 and was 56% in 2011. The number of hearings during this time has ranged from a low of
104 in 2006 to The second chart shows the outcome of parole hearings from 1996 to fiscal year 2014. In 1996, the rate 
a high of 236 in 1998. Information from 2012 and 2013 was not available.
numbers resulted in parole being denied. The remaining fifth resulted in a continuation. 
was 40%. It increased to a high of 51% in 1998 and 1999, before decreasing to a low of 30% in 2006. 
Source: Discretionary Parole Hearings Facts 2014, http://www.correct.state.ak.us/Parole/documents/Discretionary%20Hearings%202014.pdf.
 
Thereafter, the rate increased to a high of 61% in 2009 and was 56% in 2011. The number of hearings 
The second chart shows the outcome of parole hearings from 1996 to fiscal year 2014. In 1996, the rate 
during this time has ranged from a low of 104 in 2006 to a high of 236 in 1998. Information from 2012 
was 40%. It increased to a high of 51% in 1998 and 1999, before decreasing to a low of 30% in 2006. 
and 2013 was not available. 
Thereafter, the rate increased to a high of 61% in 2009 and was 56% in 2011. The number of hearings 
 during this time has ranged from a low of 104 in 2006 to a high of 236 in 1998. Information from 2012 
(Source: Discretionary Parole Hearings Facts 2014 
and 2013 was not available. 
http://www.correct.state.ak.us/Parole/documents/Discretionary%20Hearings%202014.pdf) 
 
 (Source: Discretionary Parole Hearings Facts 2014 
 http://www.correct.state.ak.us/Parole/documents/Discretionary%20Hearings%202014.pdf) 
  
 
0

 
 

 

 

13 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

13 

ALASKA

8
Chart 4. Rates of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rates of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

10

14

14

21

12

13

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

11

9
0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Alaska

2010

2011

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees in Alaska is only available from 2009 to 2011. During this time, the rate was slightly
lower in Alaska
compared to the states as a whole.
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 

parole during the year. 
 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
The rate of incarceration for parolees in Alaska is only available from 2009 to 2011. During this time, the 
rate was slightly lower in Alaska compared to the states as a whole. 

Alaska

States Total
24%

61%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Alaska, 61% of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state proportion
of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

14 

PAROLE IN ARIZONA

Arizona 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Arizona compared to states as a whole while parole 
population rates are lower. Parole violators make up a smaller percentage of the prison population than 
states as a whole. However, parolees at risk of reincarceration are slightly more likely to be re‐
incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. About one‐tenth of parole hearings result in parole 
being granted, while almost three‐quarters result in parole being denied. Arizona does not practice 
discretionary release for the majority of offenders.    
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Arizona compared to states as a whole while parole population
 
rates are lower. Parole violators
make up a smaller percentage of the prison population than states as a whole.
th
However,Arizona had the 8
parolees at risk of  highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
reincarceration are slightly more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as
a whole.  About one-tenth of parole hearings result in parole being granted, while almost three-quarters result in
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 
parole being
denied. Arizona does not practice discretionary release for the majority of offenders.

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1,000
900
800

804

828

849

860

841

825

812

822

827

612

605

597

582

563

561

551

768

780

777

597

600

603

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

132

136

142

145

149

162

174

167

159

151

152

147

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

700

612

615

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Arizona Prison Population

State Prison Population

Arizona Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
The prison population rate in Arizona is higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; 

ARIZONA

10
The prison population rate in Arizona is higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; thereafter, the rate declined slightly. In the past two years, the rate has shown a modest
increase. In 2014, the prison population rate was 827 in Arizona
versus 551 for all 50 states. Arizona had the 8th highest prison
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 82% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Arizona had the 8th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Arizona had the 35th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Arizona is lower than the aggregate
state rate. From 2003 to 2009, the parole population rate in Arizona
increased;  since 2009, the rate has decreased (to 147 in 2014) and
is lower than
the aggregate state rate of 305. Arizona had the 35th
The parole population rate in Arizona is lower than the aggregate state rate. From 2003 to 2009, the 
highest parole
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, less
parole population rate in Arizona increased; since 2009, the rate has decreased (to 147 in 2014) and is 
th
than one percent
of admissions to parole were due to a discretion highest parole population rate of the 
lower than the aggregate state rate of 305. Arizona had the 35
ary decision
such
as
the
decision
of
a
parole
board.
states in 2014. (CALL OUT and LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, less than one percent of admissions to parole 

were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

27%

26%

28%

25%
20%
20%
15%

18%

19%

19%
17%
15%

16%

18%

15%

17%

17%

2013

2014

13%

10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Arizona

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from theviolations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 

Throughout
this series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional
release violators in Arizona has been lower than
 
the aggregate
state rate. However, while the states aggregately
Throughout this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
Arizona had the 36th highest
remained Arizona has been lower than the aggregate state rate. However, while the states aggregately remained 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning
percentage of prison admisin 2011, the
percentage in Arizona has been increasing since
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Arizona has been 
sions that were due to viola2009, withincreasing since 2009, with a slight decrease since 2011. In 2014, 17% of prison admissions in Arizona 
a slight decrease since 2011. In 2014, 17% of prison
tions of conditional releases
admissions
in Arizona were due to violations of conditional
were due to violations of conditional release compared to about a quarter of the admissions for states in 
of the states in 2014.
release compared
to about a quarter of the
admissions for states
th
 highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of 
aggregate. Arizona had the 36
in aggregate.
Arizona had the 36th highest percentage of prison
conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT) 
admissions
that
were due to violations of conditional releases of
 
the states  in 2014.
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

11
Chart 3. Arizona Grant Rate, 2015 
4% 6%
1%

4%

ARIZONA

Chart 3. Arizona Grant Rate, 2015
Granted

11%

Denied
Appeared and Waived
Continued
Refused to Appear
SED/Released/Ineligible/
OTC/MLT

74%

 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole being granted, parole being denied, an appearance where parole was waived, a
continuation, aThis chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole being 
refusal to appear, or other outcomes. Nearly three-quarters of the hearings resulted in a denial, while slightly over one-tenth resulted in parole being granted.
Source: Arizonagranted, parole being denied, an appearance where parole was waived, a continuation, a refusal to 
Board of Executive Clemency Annual Report 2015, https://boec.az.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/Annual%20Report%20PDF%202015.pdf.
appear, or other outcomes. Nearly three‐quarters of the hearings resulted in a denial, while slightly over 
one‐tenth resulted in parole being granted. 
  Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2013
Source: Arizona Board of Executive Clemency Annual Report 2015 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
https://boec.az.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/Annual%20Report%20PDF%202015.pdf 
50
 
 
40

30

20

10

15
15

14

14

15

16

16

15

15

16
12

14

14

11

12
9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Arizona

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2013. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is slightly higher in Arizona compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
since 2009.the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
In 2014, the rate stood at 12 per 100 parolees in Arizona compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is slightly higher in Arizona compared to the states in aggregate 
and has been so since 2009. In 2014, the rate stood at 12 per 100 parolees in Arizona compared to 8 per 
100 for the states in aggregate. 

 

18 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

ARIZONA

12
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Arizona
19%

States Total

24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Arizona, just under one-fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN ARKANSAS

Arkansas 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Arkansas compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Nearly nine 
out of ten parole hearings result in parole being approved—either with or without a stipulated pre‐
release program. Arkansas currently practices discretionary release for inmates convicted prior to the 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Arkansas compared to the states as a whole. However,
effective date of its determinate sentencing statute and for inmates serving life sentences.  
parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Nearly nine out of ten parole
 
hearings result in parole being approved—either with or without a stipulated pre-release program. Arkansas
th
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
currentlyArkansas had the 9
practices discretionary
release for inmates convicted prior to the effective date of its determinate
  statute and for inmates serving life sentences.
sentencing
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 
*Changes to Arkansas’ parole system in 2013 contributed to higher counts of 

Chart 1. Prison
and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
inmates under the jurisdiction of prisons.  
1,200

1,000
867

918

967

1,044
965

955

790

800
670
600

903

1,019

718

733

766

723

962
791

646

646

667

679

695

615

612

605

597

582

563

561

551

654

651

668

597

600

603

612

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

400

200

0
Arkansas Prison Population

State Prison Population

Arkansas Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

ARKANSAS

14
The prison population rate in Arkansas is higher than the aggregate state rate. After changes to the state’s parole system in 2013,
the prison population increased. In 2014, the prison population
rate was 791 in Arkansas versus 551 for all 50 states. Arkansas
had the 9th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In
2014, 93% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Arkansas had the 9th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Arkansas had the 2nd highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate is higher in Arkansas than the prison
population rate and is much higher than the parole rate for states as
a whole. The parole population rate increased every year from 2003
to 2012 (other
than in 2010). Since 2012, the rate has decreased (to
The parole population rate is higher in Arkansas than the prison population rate and is much higher than 
962 in 2014),
yet
it remains far higher than the aggregate state rate
the parole rate for states as a whole. The parole population rate increased every year from 2003 to 2012 
of 305. Arkansas had the 2nd highest parole population rate of the
(other than in 2010). Since 2012, the rate has decreased (to 962 in 2014), yet it remains far higher than 
states in 2014. In 2014, 86% of admissions to parole were due nd
to a
the aggregate state rate of 305. Arkansas had the 2  highest parole population rate of the states in 
discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

2014. (LEAVE IN TEXT AND CALL OUT) In 2014, 86% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 
decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
60%

55%

50%
42%
40%
31%

44%

42%
33%

30%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

26%

35%

33%
27%

33%
22%

22%

27%
24%

20%

26%

26%

28%

2013

2014

20%

10%

0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Arkansas

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Arkansas was higher to
 
that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Arkansas had the 4th highest
remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
violators in Arkansas was higher to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
percentage of prison admis2011, the percentage in Arizona decreased dramatically in 2005
remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Arizona 
sions that were due to violaand increased even more dramatically in 2013, surpassing the
tions of conditional releases
aggregatedecreased dramatically in 2005 and increased even more dramatically in 2013, surpassing the aggregate 
state rate. In 2014, over half of prison admissions in
of the states in 2014.
state rate. In 2014, over half of prison admissions in Arkansas were due to violations of conditional 
Arkansas were due to violations of conditional release compared to
th
 
release compared to about a quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Arkansas had the 4
about a quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Arkansas
highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states 
had the 4th highest percentage of prison admissions that were
in 2014. (CALL OUT) 
due to violations
of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

15
Chart 3. Arkansas Grant Rate, 2014 

12%

ARKANSAS

Chart 3. Arkansas Grant Rate, 2014
Approved, no stipulated prerelease program

1%

Approved, contingent upon
stipulated pre-release program

20%

Denied for 1 year
67%

Denied for 2 years

 
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
Chart
3 shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being approved with no stipulated pre-release program, parole being approved
approved with no stipulated pre‐release program, parole being approved conditional on completion of a 
conditional on completion of a stipulated pre-release program, parole being denied for one year, and parole being denied for two years. Just over two-thirds of the hearings
resulted
in parole being approved without stipulation, while a fifth were approved with the noted stipulation. Twelve percent were denied for one year while just one percent
stipulated pre‐release program, parole being denied for one year, and parole being denied for two 
were denied for two years.
years. Just over two‐thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being approved without stipulation, while a 
Source: Arkansas Parole Board, The Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2013-2014, www.paroleboard.arkansas.gov/Resources/Documents/Publications/2014ParoleBoardAnnual
fifth were approved with the noted stipulation. Twelve percent were denied for one year while just one 
Report.pdf.
percent were denied for two years. 
 
Source: Arkansas Parole Board, The Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2013‐2014 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
www.paroleboard.arkansas.gov/Resources/Documents/Publications/2014ParoleBoardAnnualReport.pdf 
50

40

30
21
20

10

15

12

15

10

14

14

12

13

17
14

9

12
11

13
9

8

2013

2014

9

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Arkansas

2010

2011
State Total

2012

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Arizona compared to the states in aggregate, though it was lower
from 2006 the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
to 2011. In 2014, the rate stood at 17 per 100 parolees in Arkansas compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Arizona compared to the states in aggregate, though it 
was lower from 2006 to 2011. In 2014, the rate stood at 17 per 100 parolees in Arkansas compared to 8 
per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

 

23 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

ARKANSAS

16
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Arkansas

States Total
24%

59%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Arkansas, over half of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN CALIFORNIA

California	
Summary:	Since	California’s	realignment	laws	were	introduced	in	2011,	prison	and	parole	population	
rates	have	been	lower	than	the	states	as	a	whole.	Conditional	release	violators	make	up	a	smaller	
proportion	of	the	prison	population	in	California	than	for	states	as	a	whole.	Just	under	one-fifth	of	
parole	hearings	lead	to	a	parole	being	granted,	while	the	remaining	hearings	lead	to	a	deferral	of	some	
type.	Since	realignment,	the	number	of	incarcerated	offenders	subject	to	discretionary	release	has	
Summary:
Since California’s realignment laws were introduced in 2011, prison and parole population rates have
been lower
than the states as a whole. Conditional release violators make up a smaller proportion of the prison
expanded	dramatically,	although	much	of	this	discretion	is	now	being	exercised	by	officials	at	the	local	
population
in California than for states as a whole. Just under one-fifth of parole hearings lead to a parole being
level.	An	accounting	for	these	changes,	which	vary	across	the	state’s	58	counties,	has	yet	to	be	made.	
granted, while
the remaining hearings lead to a deferral of some type. Since realignment, the number of incarcerated
	
st
offendersCalifornia	had	the	15
subject to discretionary
release has expanded dramatically, although much of this discretion is now
	highest	parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
being exercised by officials at the local level. An accounting for these changes, which vary across the state’s 58
	
counties, has yet to be made.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700

636

637

646

600
597
500

427

600
422

603
423

659

612
445

648

615
460

637

612

605

597

582

563

561

588
551

526

443
383

400
300

619

375

391

467

466

459

310

300

294

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
California Prison Population

State Prison Population

California Parole Population

State Parole Population

	
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate seriesUnited	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
	
*Realignment laws enacted October, 2011

CALIFORNIA

18
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in California was much
California had the 34th highest
higher than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states
prison population rate of the
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing
states in 2014.
beginning in 2011, the percentage in California has decreased
dramatically
since 2011 with the introduction of realignment laws.
faster	than	the	aggregate	rate.	In	2014,	the	prison	population	rate	was	459	in	California	versus	551	for	
California had the 15th highest
th
In 2014, just
fourteen percent of prison admissions
in California
all	50	states.	California	had	the	34
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
parole population rate of the
were due to
	 violations of conditional release compared to about
states in 2014.
a quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. California had
Until	2011,	with	the	introduction	of	realignment	laws,	the	parole	population	rate	in	California	was	
one of the lowest percentages of prison admissions due to violahigher	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	Since	2011,	the	rate	has	decreased	(to	294	in	2014)	and	is	slightly	
tions of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
st

lower	than	the	aggregate	rate	of	305.	California	had	the	15 	highest	parole	population	rate	of	the	states	
in	2014.	
Chart 2.	Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
80%
70%

65%

62%

62%

33%

34%

65%

66%

67%

34%

35%

36%

65%

65%

35%

35%

62%

60%
50%
40%

31%

33%
27%

30%
20%

26%

28%

14%

23%
17%

10%
0%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
California

2011 2012 2013 2014

State Institutions

	
This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
In the earlyseries	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in California
	
was much higher
than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained steady for several
In	the	early	years	of	this	series,	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	
years before
decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in California has decreased dramatically since 2011 with the
violators	in	California	was	much	higher	than	that	of	the	aggregate	states.	However,	while	the	states	
introduction
of realignment laws. In 2014, just fourteen percent of prison admissions in California were due to violations
aggregately	remained	steady	for	several	years	before	decreasing	beginning	in	2011,	the	percentage	in	
of conditional
release compared to about a quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. California had one of the
California	has	decreased	dramatically	since	2011	with	the	introduction	of	realignment	laws.	In	2014,	just	
lowest percentages of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
fourteen	percent	of	prison	admissions	in	California	were	due	to	violations	of	conditional	release	
compared	to	about	a	quarter	of	the	admissions	for	states	in	aggregate.	California	had	one	of	the	lowest	
percentages	of	prison	admissions	due	to	violations	of	conditional	releases	of	the	states	in	2014.	
*Realignment laws enacted October, 2011

	

	

	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

19
Chart 3. California Grant Rate, 2015
Grants 18%
Split Decisions <1%
Denials 40%
Stipulations 7%
Voluntary Waivers 9%
Postponments 21%
Cencellations 5%
Cancellations
Continuances 1%

18%
21%

9%
7%

40%

 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings from January to September 2015 that resulted in a parole being granted, denied, the hearing being postponed, or other
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings from January to September 2015 that resulted in a 
outcomes. Nearly a fifth of the hearings resulted in parole being granted while forty percent resulted in a denial. About a fifth of hearings were postponed and about a tenth
were voluntarily
waived.
parole being granted, denied, the hearing being postponed, or other outcomes. Nearly a fifth of the 
Source: Board
of
Parole Hearings, Board of Parole Hearings Workload Summary, January 2015-September 2015, http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/BOPH/docs/LSTS_Workload_
hearings resulted in parole being granted while forty percent resulted in a denial. About a fifth of 
CY2015.pdf.
hearings were postponed and about a tenth were voluntarily waived. 
 
Source: Board of Parole Hearings, Board of Parole Hearings Workload Summary, January 2015‐
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2013
September 2015 http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/BOPH/docs/LSTS_Workload_CY2015.pdf 
Chart	4.	Rate	of	Incarceration	Per	100	Parolees	at	Risk,	2006-2013	
 
50
 
 
40
 
 
28
27
 
27
30
26
 
22
 
20
15
 
14
14
14
12
 
 
9
9

CALIFORNIA

Chart 3. California Grant Rate, 2015 

8

10

4

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
State Total

2010

2011

2012

2013

California

	
This	chart	shows	the	rate	of	incarceration	per	100	parolees	who	are	at	risk	of	reincarceration	each	
Chart 4 shows
the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2013. The data for this chart come from the Probation
year	from	2006	to	2013.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	United	
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
States	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	The	incarcerated	population	includes	the	reported	number	
of	parolees	who	exited	parole	to	incarceration	for	any	reason.	The	at-risk	population	is	calculated	as	
The rate the	number	reported	on	parole	at	the	beginning	of	the	year,	plus	the	reported	number	of	entries	to	
of incarceration for parolees decreased dramatically in 2011 with the enactment of legislation engineering a
realignment of the state’s adult correctional population. Data are not available after 2011.
parole	during	the	year.	
	
The	rate	of	incarceration	for	parolees	decreased	dramatically	in	2011	with	the	enactment	of	legislation	
engineering	a	realignment	of	the	state’s	adult	correctional	population.	Data	are	not	available	after	2011.	
*Realignment laws enacted October, 2011

 

28 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

CALIFORNIA

20
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

California

States Total
24%

*Data not
available

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

Data are not available for California.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN COLORADO

Colorado 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are similar in Colorado compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Just over 
one‐quarter of parole hearings lead to a discretionary release, while the remaining hearings lead to a 
deferral of some type. Colorado currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, 
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are similar in Colorado compared to the states as a whole. However,
offenders. 
parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Just over one-quarter of parole
 
hearings lead to a discretionary
release, while the remaining hearings lead to a deferral of some type. Colorado
th
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014.  
currentlyColorado had the 28
practices discretionary
release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders,
property  offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

617

600
581

592

603

634
612

632
615

631
612

607

597

605

597

500

582

563

561

551

517

505

502

306

305

565

400
317

308

312

316

300
200
194

215

236

323

317

310

307

316

308

269

313

313

308

288

277

290

2011

2012

269

245

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Colorado Prison Population

State Prison Population

Colorado Parole Population

State Parole Population

2013

2014

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

COLORADO

22
The prison population rate in Colorado is similar to the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate was in 2006-2008; thereafter, the rate declined. In recent years, the Colorado rate has decreased faster than
the aggregate rate. In 2014, the prison population rate was 502 in
Colorado versus 551 for all 50 states. Colorado had the 28th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 84% of
releases from prison were conditional releases.

Colorado had the 28th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
Colorado had the 20th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

From 2003 to 2008, the parole population rate in Colorado increased steadily becoming equivalent to the aggregate rate by 2008.
Since 2008,
  the rate has decreased (to 245 in 2014) and is lower than the
aggregate rate of 305. Colorado had the 20th highest
From 2003 to 2008, the parole population rate in Colorado increased steadily becoming equivalent to 
parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 33% of admisthe aggregate rate by 2008. Since 2008, the rate has decreased (to 245 in 2014) and is lower than the 
sions to parole were due to a discretionary decision thsuch as the
aggregate rate of 305. Colorado had the 20  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL 
decision of a parole board.

OUT) In 2014, 33% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a 
parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.6

0.5

45%

0.4
32%
0.3

31%

34%
33%

36%

37%

34%

34%

39%

35%

48%

45%

46%

47%

48%

27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

41%

36%

35%

35%

33%

0.2

0.1

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Colorado

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were  conditional release violators in Colorado was similar to
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Colorado had the 5th highest
remained violators in Colorado was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
percentage of prison admis2011, the remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Colorado has 
percentage in Colorado has been increasing. In 2014,
sions that were due to violanearly halfbeen increasing. In 2014, nearly half of prison admissions in Colorado were due to violations of 
of prison admissions in Colorado were due to violations
tions of conditional releases
of conditional release compared to just over a quarter of the
conditional release compared to just over a quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Colorado 
of the states in 2014.
admissions for states
in aggregate. Colorado had the 5th highest
had the 5th highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases 
percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of
of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
conditional
  releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

23
Chart 3. Colorado Grant Rate, 2014 

COLORADO

Chart 3. Colorado Grant Rate, 2014
Discretionary
releases
26%

Defer to
mandatory
release date
Defer

46%
28%

 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in a discretionary release, a deferral to the mandatory release date, and a deferral. Nearly
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in a discretionary 
half of the hearings resulted in a deferral, while just over one-quarter resulted in a deferral to the mandatory release date. Slightly more than one-quarter led to a discretionary
release.
release, a deferral to the mandatory release date, and a deferral. Nearly half of the hearings resulted in 
Source: Annual
Report to the Joint Judiciary Committee, 2014, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/PB%20Annual%20Report%20to%20the%20Joint%20Judia deferral, while just over one‐quarter resulted in a deferral to the mandatory release date. Slightly 
ciary%20Committees%202014%20_f%E2%80%A6%20%281%29.pdf, pg. 9.
more than one‐quarter led to a discretionary release. 
 
Source: Annual Report to the Joint Judiciary Committee, 2014 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/PB%20Annual%20Report%20to%20the%20Joint%2
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
0Judiciary%20Committees%202014%20_f%E2%80%A6%20%281%29.pdf, pg. 9 
50
 
 
40

30

20

24

15

23
15

23

23

14

14

24
20
14

21

23

25

12

10

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Colorado

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Colorado compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 25 per 100 parolees in Colorado compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Colorado compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 25 per 100 parolees in Colorado compared to 8 
per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

 

33 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

COLORADO

24
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Colorado

States Total
24%

53%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Colorado, just over half of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN CONNECTICUT

Connecticut 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Connecticut compared to states as a whole while parole 
population rates are lower. Compared to states as a whole, parole is more likely to end in incarceration 
in Connecticut, though (with a smaller parole population) conditional release violators make up a 
smaller proportion of the prison population. About two‐thirds of parole hearings lead to parole being 
granted, while the remaining one‐third lead to parole being denied. Connecticut currently practices 
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Connecticut compared to states as a whole while parole population
discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property 
rates areoffenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
lower. Compared to states as a whole, parole is more likely to end in incarceration in Connecticut,
though (with
a smaller parole population) conditional release violators make up a smaller proportion of the prison
 
population. About two-thirds of parole
hearings lead to parole being granted, while the remaining one-third lead to
Connecticut had the 15th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
parole being denied. Connecticut currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including
 
violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
900
800

754

737

730

768

777

760

719

699

700
600
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

500

658

582

627

625

563

561

551

590

400
300

317

308

312

316

323

317

99

96

97

96

81

86

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

308

313

313

308

306

305

105

105

92

100

94

91

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
Connecticut Prison Population

State Prison Population

Connecticut Parole Population

State Parole Population

  

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

CONNECTICUT

26
The prison population rate in Connecticut is higher than the aggregate state rate. The rate peaked in 2007; thereafter, the rate declined. In 2014, the prison population rate was 590 in Connecticut
versus 551 for all 50 states. Connecticut had the 15th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 51% of releases
from prison were conditional releases.

Connecticut had the 15th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
Connecticut had the 43rd
highest parole population rate
of the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Connecticut is lower than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate occurred in 2009-2010. In September,
2007, changes to parole hearing policies led to an immediate de  parole population. The increase in 2009 resulted from
crease in the
additionalThe parole population rate in Connecticut is lower than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate occurred 
staff that have addressed hearing backlogs and expeditin 2009‐2010. In September, 2007, changes to parole hearing policies led to an immediate decrease in 
ed the hearing
process. During the last few years, the rate has dethe parole population. The increase in 2009 resulted from additional staff that have addressed hearing 
creased slightly
(to 91 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate rate
of 305. Connecticut
had one of the lowest parole population rates
backlogs and expedited the hearing process. During the last few years, the rate has decreased slightly 
of the states
in 2014. In 2014, 51% of admissions to parole were due
(to 91 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Connecticut had one of the lowest parole 
to a discretionary
decision such as the decision of a parole board.
population rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 51% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 

decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
 
Chart 2.Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

27%

26%

14%

15%

2012

2013

28%

25%
20%

19%
17%

16%

16%

16%

16%

17%

16%

15%

15%

15%

10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Connecticut

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 

published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout
the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Connecticut was lower than
that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Connecticut had the 40th
remained Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
highest percentage of prison
2011, theConnecticut was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
percentage in Connecticut has remained fairly steady.
admissions that were due
In 2014, fifteen
percent of prison admissions in Connecticut were
remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Connecticut 
to violations of conditional
due to violations
of conditional release compared to just over onehas remained fairly steady. In 2014, fifteen percent of prison admissions in Connecticut were due to 
releases of the states in 2014.
quarter ofviolations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for states in 
the admissions for states in aggregate. Connecticut had
th
the 40th highest
percentage of prison admissions
that were due to
aggregate. Connecticut had the 40
 highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to 
violationsviolations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. 
of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

27
Chart 3. Connecticut Grant Rate, 2014

33%

Granted

Denied

67%

 
 
Chart 3 shows
the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or denied. Two-thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being granted while
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or 
one-third led to parole being denied.
denied. Two‐thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being granted while one‐third led to parole being 
Source: Connecticut Board of Pardons & Paroles 2014 Calendar Year Statistics, http://www.ct.gov/bopp/cwp/view.asp?a=4330&q=560754.
denied. 
 
Source: Connecticut Board of Pardons & Paroles 2014 Calendar Year Statistics 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
http://www.ct.gov/bopp/cwp/view.asp?a=4330&q=560754 
  50
 
 

CONNECTICUT

 Chart 3. Connecticut Grant Rate, 2014 

40
30
30
22
20

15

15

14

20

20

14

14

18

18

19

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

12

10

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Connecticut

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Connecticut compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series, where data are available. In 2013 (the most recent year available), the rate was 19 per 100 parolees
in Connecticut
compared to 9 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Connecticut compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series, where data are available. In 2013 (the most recent year available), 
the rate was 19 per 100 parolees in Connecticut compared to 9 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

 

38 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

CONNECTICUT

28
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2013

Connecticut

States Total

25%
40%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Connecticut, forty percent of the exits from parole in 2013 are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN DELAWARE

Delaware 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Delaware compared to states as a whole while parole 
population rates are lower. Parolees are also less likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a 
whole. Information on outcomes of parole release hearings is not available. The vast majority of 
prisoners in Delaware serve determinate sentences, and do not appear before the parole board.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Delaware compared to states as a whole while parole population
rates are  lower. Parolees are also less likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Information on
nd
Delaware had the 2
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
outcomes
of parole release hearings
is not available. The vast majority of prisoners in Delaware serve determinate
  and do not appear before the parole board.
sentences,
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1,200

1,000

1,096 1,097 1,080 1,096 1,089

1,041

988

953

958

970

970

951

605

597

582

563

561

551

800
615

597

600

603

612

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

85

85

93

83

80

81

76

81

79

84

91

92

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

612

600

400

200

0
Delaware Prison Population

State Prison Population

Delaware Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

DELAWARE

30
The prison population rate in Delaware is higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2006; thereafter, the rate declined until 2010. In recent years, the Delaware rate has increased
slightly (until 2014), while the aggregate rate steadily decreased
slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was 951 in Delaware
versus 551 for all 50 states. Delaware had the 2nd highest prison
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 93% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Delaware had the 2nd highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Delaware had the 42nd highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Delaware is much lower than the
aggregate state rate. It has remained steady over time, from a low
of 76 in 2009. Since 2009, the rate has increased slightly (to 92
in 2014), but remains well under the aggregate state rate of 305.
The parole population rate in Delaware is much lower than the aggregate state rate. It has remained 
Delaware had the 9th lowest parole population rate of the states
steady over time, from a low of 76 in 2009. Since 2009, the rate has increased slightly (to 92 in 2014), 
in 2014.
th

but remains well under the aggregate state rate of 305. Delaware had the 9  lowest parole population 
rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT) 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%
25%

27%
29%

29%

28%

26%

20%

26%

28%

24%
19%

15%

16%

18%

17%
13%

10%

10%

10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Delaware

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Delaware was lower than
 
that of the aggregate percentage of the states. The difference
Delaware had the 34th highincreasedIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
over time, though there was a sizeable closing of the gap
est percentage of prison adfrom 2013violators in Delaware was lower than that of the aggregate percentage of the states. The difference 
to 2014. In 2014, nearly one-fifth of prison admissions in
missions due to violations of
Delaware increased over time, though there was a sizeable closing of the gap from 2013 to 2014. In 2014, nearly 
were due to violations of conditional release compared
conditional releases when
one‐fifth of prison admissions in Delaware were due to violations of conditional release compared to 
to just over
a quarter of the admissions for states in the aggregate.
compared thto
other states in
 highest 
Delaware just over a quarter of the admissions for states in the aggregate. Delaware had the 34
had the 34th highest percentage of prison admissions
2014.
percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases when compared to other 
due to violations
of conditional releases when compared to other
states in 2014. (CALL OUT) 
states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

31

DELAWARE

Chart 3. Delaware Grant Rate

*Data not
available

The outcomes of parole release hearings are not available from Delaware.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart	4.	Rate	of	Incarceration	Per	100	Parolees	at	Risk,	2006-2014	
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10

9

9

8

2012

2013

4
2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

State Total

2011
Delaware

	

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This	chart	shows	the	rate	of	incarceration	per	100	parolees	who	are	at	risk	of	reincarceration	each	
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year	from	2006	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	United	
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	

aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	The	incarcerated	population	includes	the	reported	number	

The rate of incarceration for parolees is only available for Delaware for 2014. In 2014, the rate stood at 4 per 100
of	parolees	who	exited	parole	to	incarceration	for	any	reason.	The	at-risk	population	is	calculated	as	
parolees in Delaware compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.

the	number	reported	on	parole	at	the	beginning	of	the	year,	plus	the	reported	number	of	entries	to	
parole	during	the	year.	
	
The	rate	of	incarceration	for	parolees	is	only	available	for	Delaware	for	2014.	In	2014,	the	rate	stood	at	4	
per	100	parolees	in	Delaware	compared	to	8	per	100	for	the	states	in	aggregate.	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

DELAWARE

32
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Delaware

States Total

9%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Delaware, just under one tenth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN FLORIDA

Florida 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Florida compared to the states as a whole while parole 
population rates are significantly lower. While the small parole populations mean that few prison 
admissions are due to parole violations, parolees in Florida are about as likely to be incarcerated as 
compared to the states as a whole. Just two percent of parole hearings lead to parole being granted. 
Florida currently practices discretionary release only for offenders who were sentenced prior to the 
effective date of the determinate sentencing statute.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Florida compared to the states as a whole while parole population
rates are significantly lower. While the small parole populations mean that few prison admissions are due to parole
th are about as likely to be incarcerated as compared to the states as a whole. Just two
violations,
parolees in Florida
Florida had the 13
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
percent  of parole hearings lead to parole being granted. Florida currently practices discretionary release only for
offenders
who were sentenced prior to the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800
700

622

632

647

597

600

603

600

657

612

685

615

706

612

709

605

703

597

500

683

582

666

664

649

563

561

551

400
300

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

38

36

34

34

32

31

29

28

28

30

30

29

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
Florida Prison Population

State Prison Population

Florida Parole Population

State Parole Population

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
The prison population rate in Florida is higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; 

FLORIDA

34
The prison population rate in Florida is higher than the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; thereafter, the rate declined
slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was 649 in Florida versus 551 for all 50 states. Florida had the 13th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 36% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Florida had the 13th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Florida had the 48th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Florida is much lower than the aggregate state rate. The rate decreased slightly from 2003 to 2009
and has remained steady since. In 2014, the parole population rate
was 29 in Florida, significantly lower than the aggregate state rate
of 305. Florida had one of the lowest parole population rates of
the states The parole population rate in Florida is much lower than the aggregate state rate. The rate decreased 
in 2014. In 2014, less than one percent of admissions to
slightly from 2003 to 2009 and has remained steady since. In 2014, the parole population rate was 29 in 
parole were
due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of
Florida, significantly lower than the aggregate state rate of 305. Florida had one of the lowest parole 
a parole board.

population rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, less than one percent of admissions to parole were due 
to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.4
0.35
0.3

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.25

27%

26%

28%

0.2
0.15
0.1
5%

6%

0.05

1%

0%

1%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2003

2004

Florida

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Due to Florida’s small parole population, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators
series for all 50 states is shown. 
is very small and is much lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, only 114 prisoners were admitted to prison in
 
Florida due to a parole violation, representing less than one percent of all prison admissions in the state. Florida had
Due to Florida’s small parole population, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional 
one of the lowest percentages of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
release violators is very small and is much lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, only 114 
prisoners were admitted to prison in Florida due to a parole violation, representing less than one 
percent of all prison admissions in the state. Florida had one of the lowest percentages of prison 
admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. 
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

35
Chart 3. Florida Grant Rate, 2014 

FLORIDA

Chart 3. Florida Grant Rate, 2014
Granted
Not Granted

2%

98%

 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted. Just two percent of parole hearings resulted in parole being granted.
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
Source: Florida Commission on Offender Review 2014 Annual Report, www.fcor.state.fl.us/docs/reports/FCORannualreport201314.pdf.
granted. Just two percent of parole hearings resulted in parole being granted. 
 
Source: Florida Commission on Offender Review 2014 Annual Report 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
www.fcor.state.fl.us/docs/reports/FCORannualreport201314.pdf. 
 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

13

10

11

2009

2010

10

11

9

9

9

8

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

Florida

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
Though Florida
has a very small parole population and parole is not granted often, the rate of incarceration for parolees
is similar inthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
Florida compared to the states in aggregate and has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at
11 per 100 parole during the year. 
parolees in Florida compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
 
Though Florida has a very small parole population and parole is not granted often, the rate of 
incarceration for parolees is similar in Florida compared to the states in aggregate and has been so 
throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 11 per 100 parolees in Florida compared to 8 per 100 
for the states in aggregate. 

 

48 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

FLORIDA

36
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Florida
19%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Florida, nearly a fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is just under the aggregate state proportion
of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN GEORGIA

Georgia 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Georgia compared to the states as a whole while parole 
population rates are similar. However, parolees are less likely to be reincarcerated compared to the 
states as a whole. Fifty‐six percent of discretionary release hearing lead to parole being granted while 
just nineteen percent of life sentence hearings result in parole being granted. Georgia currently 
practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, 
property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Georgia compared to the states as a whole while parole population
rates are  similar. However, parolees are less likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Fifty-six
th
percent of
discretionary release
hearing lead to parole being granted while just nineteen percent of life sentence
Georgia had the 10
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
hearings  result in parole being granted. Georgia currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders,
including
violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
900
800

791
744

742

700
597

600

603

782

612

787

615

799
750

612

605

781

597

600

764

582

747

563

720

561

696

551

500
400
300

349

361

348

340

335

334

337

347

348

333

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

355

336

200
100
0
Georgia Prison Population

State Prison Population

Georgia Parole Population

State Parole Population

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
The prison population rate in Georgia is higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; 

GEORGIA

38
The prison population rate in Georgia is higher than the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; thereafter, the rate declined.
In 2014, the prison population rate was 696 in Georgia versus 551
for all 50 states. Georgia had the 10th highest prison population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 58% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

Georgia had the 10th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Georgia had the 13th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Georgia has
been above the aggregate rate. The rate for Georgia has remained
fairly steady over time and in 2014 stood at 336, modestly higher
than the aggregate state rate of 305. Georgia had the 13th highest
Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Georgia has been above the aggregate rate. The 
parole population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, all admissions
rate for Georgia has remained fairly steady over time and in 2014 stood at 336, modestly higher than 
to parole were
due to a discretionary decision such as the decision
th
of a parolethe aggregate state rate of 305. Georgia had the 13
board.
 highest parole population rate of the states in 

2014. (CALL OUT AND LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, all admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 
decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
50%
45%

43%

43%

33%

34%

42%

42%

43%

43%

35%

36%

35%

35%

40%
35%
30%

31%

34%

33%

25%
20%

27%

18%

26%

28%

10%

10%

2013

2014

15%

15%

11%

11%

2011

2012

10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Georgia

2009

2010

State Institutions

 

*Counts for 2014
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
admissions are not comparable to earlier years due to a change in reporting methodology.

Chart 2 showsviolations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from thepublished by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

series for all 50 states is shown. 
In the early
  years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in Georgia
was oftenIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
higher than that of the aggregate states. However, after a large decrease in 2011, the rate in Georgia has
been much
lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, ten percent of prison admissions in Georgia were due to
violators in Georgia was often higher than that of the aggregate states. However, after a large decrease 
violationsin 2011, the rate in Georgia has been much lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, ten percent of 
of conditional release compared to just over one-quarter of admissions for states in aggregate. Georgia had
one of theprison admissions in Georgia were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐
lowest percentages of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in
2014. Duequarter of admissions for states in aggregate. Georgia had one of the lowest percentages of prison 
to the large changes in the data over this series, the numbers for Georgia should be interpreted with caution.
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. Due to the large 
changes in the data over this series, the numbers for Georgia should be interpreted with caution. 
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

39

GEORGIA

Chart 3. Georgia Grant Rate, 2014 
Chart 3a. Georgia Grant Rate, 2014
Chart 3. Georgia Grant Rate, 2014 
Released
Released
Denied
Denied
44%
44%

56%
56%

 
 

 
 
Chart 3b. Georgia Grant Rate for Life Sentences, 2014 
Chart 3b. Georgia Grant Rate for Life Sentences, 2014 

Com
Com
state
state
may n
may 

Chart 3b. Georgia Grant Rate for Life Sentences, 2014
Deny
Deny
Grant
Grant

19%
19%

81%
81%

 
 
 
 This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
Chart shows
the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or denied for non-life sentences (discretionary release) and life senThis chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
granted or denied for non‐life sentences (discretionary release) and life sentences. Over half of the 
tences. Over half of the hearings for discretionary release resulted in release being granted, while the percentage was much lower for life sentences (just under one-fifth).
granted or denied for non‐life sentences (discretionary release) and life sentences. Over half of the 
hearings for discretionary release resulted in release being granted, while the percentage was much 
Source: Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Annual Report FY2014, www.pap.georgia.gov/sites/pap.georgia.gov/files/Annual_Reports/FY14%20AR.pdf.
hearings for discretionary release resulted in release being granted, while the percentage was much 
lower for life sentences (just under one‐fifth). 
 lower for life sentences (just under one‐fifth). 
 
Source: Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Annual Report FY2014 
Source: Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles Annual Report FY2014 
www.pap.georgia.gov/sites/pap.georgia.gov/files/Annual_Reports/FY14%20AR.pdf. 
 www.pap.georgia.gov/sites/pap.georgia.gov/files/Annual_Reports/FY14%20AR.pdf. 
  
  
  
 
 
 

 
 

53 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE
PROFILES
53 

GEORGIA

40
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

13

13

14

11

14

11

14

9

12
9

9

7

7

5

2011

2012

2013

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Georgia

2010

State Total

8

3
2014

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
The rate of incarceration
for parolees is lower in Georgia compared to the states in aggregate and has been so throughout
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In
2014, the rate stood at 3 per 100 parolees in Georgia compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in Georgia compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 3 per 100 parolees in Georgia compared to 8 
per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Georgia

States Total

9%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Georgia, just under a tenth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

54 

PAROLE IN HAWAII

Hawaii 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Hawaii compared to the states as a whole while parole 
population rates are lower. However, parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the 
states as a whole. A quarter to a third of hearings for discretionary release and reductions of minimum 
sentences are granted. Hawaii currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, 
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order 
offenders.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Hawaii compared to the states as a whole while parole population
rates are lower. However, parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. A quarter
th
to a thirdHawaii had the 25
of hearings for discretionary
release and reductions of minimum sentences are granted. Hawaii currently
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
practices  discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property
offenders,
drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597
600

609

600

603

611

618

612
591

615

589

612

578

500

605

564

597

558

582
563

563
538

561

513

551
528

400
300

317

308

234

235

312
213

316
229

323

208

200

317

308

313

313

185

175

175

167

308

306

151

158

2012

2013

305

139

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Hawaii Prison Population

State Prison Population

Hawaii Parole Population

State Parole Population

2014

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

HAWAII

42
The prison population rate in Hawaii is similar to the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; thereafter, the rate declined
each year except for 2011 and 2014. In 2014, the prison population rate stood at 528 in Hawaii versus 551 for all 50 states. Hawaii
had the 25th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In
2014, 67% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Hawaii had the 25th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Hawaii had the 38th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Hawaii has been consistently lower
than the aggregate state rate across the series. Since 2006, the rate
has decreased (to 139 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate
The parole population rate in Hawaii has been consistently lower than the aggregate state rate across 
rate of 305.
Hawaii had the 38th highest parole population rate of
the statesthe series. Since 2006, the rate has decreased (to 139 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate rate of 
in 2014. In 2014, 90% of admissions to parole were due
th
305. Hawaii had the 38
to a discretionary
decision such as  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
the decision of a parole board.

In 2014, 90% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a 
parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
60%

57%

54%

55%
51%

52%

53%

47%

50%

40%
31%

33%

34%

34%

46%

35%

36%

49%
44%

44%
39%

35%

35%

33%

30%

27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

20%

10%

0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Hawaii

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout
the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional
release violators in Hawaii is higher than that of
 
the aggregate
percentage
for the states. However, the percentage
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
Hawaii had the 12th highest
in Hawaii has
shown
a
larger
decrease over time than the aggregate
Hawaii is higher than that of the aggregate percentage for the states. However, the percentage in 
percentage of prison admisstate rate.Hawaii has shown a larger decrease over time than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, thirty‐nine percent 
In 2014, thirty-nine percent of prison admissions in
sions due to violations of
Hawaii were
due to violations of conditional release compared
of prison admissions in Hawaii were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐
conditional releases of the
to just over
one-quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate.
th
 highest percentage of prison 
quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Hawaii had the 13
states in 2014.
Hawaii had the 12th highest percentage of prison admissions due
admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
to violations
  of conditional releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

43

Chart 3. Hawaii Grant Rate, 2014 

Co
tha

HAWAII

Chart 3a. Hawaii Grant Rate, 2014
Paroles Granted

0%

Chart 3. Hawaii Grant Rate, 2014 
9%

Commented
than one cha

Paroles Denied

32%

Paroles
Paroles
Granted

0%

Deferred/Continued

59%
9%

Paroles
Denied
Escape

32%

Paroles
 
Deferred/Continued
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal
59%year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted, denied, or deferred. The second chart shows the information
over five fiscal years.  The last two charts show the same information for hearings for the reductionEscape
of minimum sentences. About a third of parole hearings and just over a
fifth of hearings for the reduction of minimum sentences resulted in parole being granted. The rate for parole hearings has remained steady over time, though the overall
Chart 3b. Hawaii Grants by Year, 2009‐2014 
number of hearings has
slightly increased. The granting of reductions of minimum sentences as well as the overall number of hearings of this type has increased over time.
 
 
  Authority 2014 Annual Statistical Report, www.dps.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2014-Annual-Report.pdf.
Source: Hawaii Paroling

  3000
Chart 3b. Hawaii Grants by Year, 2009‐2014 
Chart 3b. Hawaii Grants by Year, 2009-2014
 
2500
3000

2000
2500

1500
2000

1000
1500

500
1000

33%

0
500

33%
FY 09-10

32%

33%

34%

30%

34%
FY
10-11

30%
FY 11-12

32%

33%

FY 12-13

0
Paroles Granted
Paroles Denied
Paroles Deferred/Continued
FY 09-10
FY 10-11
FY 11-12
FY 12-13

 
Paroles Granted
Paroles Denied
Paroles Deferred/Continued
 
Chart 3c. Hawaii Reduction of Minimum Sentences, 2014 

FY13-14
Escape

FY13-14

Escape

  Chart 3d. Hawaii Reduction of Minimum Sentences, 2009‐2014 
ChartHawaii
3c. Hawaii
Reductionof
ofMinimum
Minimum Sentences,
2009-2014
Chart 3c. Hawaii Reduction of Minimum Sentences, 2014 
Reduction
Sentences

 
 

Hawaii Reduction of Minimum Sentences by Year

300

Hawaii Reduction of Minimum Sentences

250

27%

Granted

27%

200

Granted

73%
150

Denied

Denied

73%

 

100

 
50

 

 

2%

0
FY 09-10

38%

2%

25%

FY 10-11

FY 11-12
Granted

Denied

FY 12-13

27%

58 

58 

FY13-14

 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
granted, denied, or deferred. The second chart shows the information over five fiscal years. The last two 

HAWAII

44
 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

21

14

17
10
10
7

12

9

10

9

2008

2009

2010

13
9

9

9

2012

2013

8

0
2006

2007

Hawaii

2011

State Total

2014

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
parole during the year. 
 
Hawaii
States Total
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Hawaii compared to the states in aggregate, though it 
remained at lower levels from 2006 through 2010. In 2014, the rate stood at 13 per 100 parolees in 
Hawaii compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

24%

34%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Hawaii, just over a third of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

60 

PROFILE IN IDAHO

Idaho 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Idaho compared to the states as a whole and parole 
population rates have increased and surpassed the aggregate state rate. Parolees are more likely to be 
reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. About a third of the regular parole hearings resulted 
in parole being granted while parole was granted for forty‐four percent of administrative reviews. 
Idaho currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Idaho compared to the states as a whole and parole population
sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
rates have
increased and surpassed the aggregate state rate. Parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared
 
to the states
as a whole. About a third of the regular parole hearings resulted in parole being granted while parole
th
Idaho had the 12
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
was granted
for forty-four percent
of administrative reviews. Idaho currently practices discretionary release for the
 
majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public
order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800
700
600

633

660

670

671

603

612

615

656

656

651

612

605

597

683

696

563

561

329

325

675

583
597

600

500

582

551

391

400
317

308

312

316

323

347

237

235

240

2003

2004

2005

257

286

350

317

308

302

305

313

313

308

306

305

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

300
200

670

100
0
2006

2007

Idaho Prison Population

State Prison Population

Idaho Parole Population

State Parole Population

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
The prison population rate in Idaho is higher than the aggregate state rate. The rate peaked in 2007, 

IDAHO

46
The prison population rate in Idaho is higher than the aggregate
state rate. The rate peaked in 2007, declined until 2010, then peaked again in 2013. In 2014, the prison population rate was 675 in
Idaho versus 551 for all 50 states. Idaho had the 12th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 89% of releases
from prison were conditional releases.

Idaho had the 12th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Idaho had the 12th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

From 2003 to 20011, the parole population rate in Idaho increased
surpassing the aggregate rate by 2010. Since 2010, the rate has remained above the aggregate rate. The rate in 2014 was 350 which
is higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Idaho had the 12th highFrom	2003	to	20011,	the	parole	population	rate	in	Idaho	increased	surpassing	the	aggregate	rate	by	
est parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 77% of
2010.	Since	2010,	the	rate	has	remained	above	the	aggregate	rate.	The	rate	in	2014	was	350	which	is	
admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as th
higher	than	the	aggregate	rate	of	305.	Idaho	had	the	12
	highest	parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	
the decision
of a parole board.

2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	In	2014,	77%	of	admissions	to	parole	were	due	to	a	discretionary	
decision	such	as	the	decision	of	a	parole	board.	
	 Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2.
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
0.7

65%

0.6
0.5
0.4
31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%

33%

0.3
0.2

27%

26%

6%

5%

2012

2013

28%

27%
13%
8%

0.1

6%

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

6%

7%

2007

2008

Idaho

9%
2009

6%
2010

0%
2011

2014

State Institutions

	
This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
Throughseries	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
2013, the percentage of prison admissions that were
	 release violators in Idaho was lower than that of the
conditional
Through	2013,	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	violators	in	Idaho	was	
aggregate
states. In 2014, the reporting methodology changed,
Idaho had the highest perlower	than	that	of	the	aggregate	states.	In	2014,	the	reporting	methodology	changed,	so	comparisons	
so comparisons
cannot be made between 2014 and earlier
centage, tied with Vermont, of
cannot	be	made	between	2014	and	earlier	years.	Idaho	had	one	of	the	highest	percentages	(65%)	of	
years. Idaho
had one of the highest percentages (65%) of prison
prison admissions that were
prison	admissions	that	were	due	to	violations	of	conditional	releases	in	comparison	with	other	states	in	
admissions
that were due to violations of conditional releases in
due to violations of conditioncomparison
with other states in 2014.
2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	
al releases in comparison with
*Counts for 2014 admissions are not comparable to earlier years due to a change in reporting methodology.

	

	

	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

other states in 2014.

47

IDAHO

Chart 3. Idaho Grant Rate, 2014 
Chart 3a. Idaho Grant Rate, 2014
Chart 3. Idaho Grant Rate, 2014 
Granted
Granted
Denied
Denied

32%
32%
68%
68%

 
 
Chart 3b. Idaho Grant Rate, Administrative Reviews, 2014 
Chart 3b. Idaho Grant Rate, Administrative Reviews, 2014 

  
  

Com
Com

Chart 3b. Idaho Grant Rate, Administrative Reviews, 2014
Granted
Granted
Denied
Denied
44%
44%

56%
56%

 
 
 
 This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or 
Chart shows
the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or denied. The first chart shows the percentages for regular parole hearings and
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or 
denied. The first chart shows the percentages for regular parole hearings and the second chart shows 
the second chart shows the percentages for administrative reviews. Approximately twice as many regular parole hearings were conducted as administrative reviews. About
denied. The first chart shows the percentages for regular parole hearings and the second chart shows 
two-thirds
of the regular parole hearings resulted in parole being granted while parole was approved for fifty-six percent of administrative reviews.
the percentages for administrative reviews. Approximately twice as many regular parole hearings were 
the percentages for administrative reviews. Approximately twice as many regular parole hearings were 
Source:conducted as administrative reviews. About two‐thirds of the regular parole hearings resulted in parole 
Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole Statistical Information 2014, www.parole.idaho.gov/documents/statistics/website%20stats%202014.pdf.
conducted as administrative reviews. About two‐thirds of the regular parole hearings resulted in parole 
being granted while parole was approved for fifty‐six percent of administrative reviews. 
 being granted while parole was approved for fifty‐six percent of administrative reviews. 
 
Source: Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole Statistical Information 2014 
Source: Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole Statistical Information 2014 
www.parole.idaho.gov/documents/statistics/website%20stats%202014.pdf. 
 www.parole.idaho.gov/documents/statistics/website%20stats%202014.pdf. 
 
 
 

 
 

64 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE64 
PROFILES

IDAHO

48
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart	4.	Rate	of	Incarceration	Per	100	Parolees	at	Risk,	2006-2014	
50

40

30
29
20

15

15

10

14

11

12

2007

2008

14
14

14

12

12

14

9
14

9

8
12

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
0
2006

2009
Idaho

2010

State Total

	
This	chart	shows	the	rate	of	incarceration	per	100	parolees	who	are	at	risk	of	reincarceration	each	
Chart 4 shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
year	from	2006	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	United	
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarcerated population
includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
States	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	The	incarcerated	population	includes	the	reported	number	
of	parolees	who	exited	parole	to	incarceration	for	any	reason.	The	at-risk	population	is	calculated	as	
In 2014, the rate of incarceration for parolees stood at 12 per 100 parolees in Idaho compared to 8 per 100 for the states
the	number	reported	on	parole	at	the	beginning	of	the	year,	plus	the	reported	number	of	entries	to	
in aggregate.
parole	during	the	year.	
	
In	2014,	the	rate	of	incarceration	for	parolees	stood	at	12	per	100	parolees	in	Idaho	compared	to	8	per	
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
100	for	the	states	in	aggregate.	
*Data for Idaho are estimated in 2013 and 2014.

Idaho

States Total

24%
37%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Idaho, thirty-seven percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is well over the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

66	

PAROLE IN ILLINOIS

Illinois 
Summary: Prison population rates are lower in Illinois compared to the states as a whole while parole 
population rates have decreased and are slightly lower than the aggregate state rate. However, parolees 
are more likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Very few discretionary parole 
hearings were held and none resulted in parole being granted. Illinois currently practices discretionary 
release only for offenders who were sentenced prior to the effective date of the determinate sentencing 
statute.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are lower in Illinois compared to the states as a whole while parole population
  decreased and are slightly lower than the aggregate state rate. However, parolees are more likely to
rates have
th to the states as a whole. Very few discretionary parole hearings were held and none
be re-incarcerated
compared
Illinois had the 29
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
resulted   in parole being granted. Illinois currently practices discretionary release only for offenders who were
sentenced
prior to the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600
500

465

470

477

400

375

365

367

300

317

308

312

477

475

368

316

323

474

468

351

343

317

582

561

551

498

496

503

493

488

313

313

308

306

305

300

300

2013

2014

308

200

563

268

261

2010

2011

280

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2012

Illinois Prison Population

State Prison Population

Illinois Parole Population

State Parole Population

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

ILLINOIS

50
The prison population rate in Illinois is lower than the aggregate
state rate. The rate increased until 2012; thereafter, the rate declined, but it always remained under the aggregate rate for the
states. In 2014, the prison population rate was 488 in Illinois versus
551 for all 50 states. Illinois had the 29th highest prison population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 85% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

Illinois had the 29th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Illinois had the 14th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate decreased significantly in 2010 and
thereafter was lower than or similar to the aggregate state rate. In
2014, the parole population rate was 300 in Illinois versus 305 for
  Illinois had the 14th highest parole population rate of
all 50 states.
the states The parole population rate decreased significantly in 2010 and thereafter was lower than or similar to 
in 2014. In 2014, less than one percent of admissions to
the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the parole population rate was 300 in Illinois versus 305 for all 50 
parole were
due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of
states. Illinois had the 14th highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
a parole board.

TEXT) In 2014, less than one percent of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such 
as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.45

41%

0.4

37%
35%

36%

35%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%

35%

0.35
0.3

33%
31%

34%

33%

35%

29%

0.25

29%

33%
27%

26%

2012

2013

30%

28%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Illinois

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Illinois was lower than the
 
aggregate percentage associated with states overall. However,
Illinois had the 21st highest
while the In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
states aggregately remained steady for several years
percentage of prison admisviolators in Illinois was lower than the aggregate percentage associated with states overall. However, 
before decreasing
beginning in 2011, the percentage in Illinois
sions that were due to violawhile the states aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the 
increased through 2010 before it began to decrease. In 2014,
tions of conditional releases
percentage in Illinois increased through 2010 before it began to decrease. In 2014, thirty percent of 
thirty percent
of prison admissions in Illinois were due to violations
of the states in 2014.
prison admissions in Illinois were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐
of conditional
release compared to just over one-quarter of the
st
 highest percentage of prison 
quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Illinois had the 21
admissions
for states in aggregate. Illinois had the 21st highest
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of
TEXT) 
conditional
releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

51

ILLINOIS

Chart 3. Illinois Grant Rate, 2014 

Chart 3. Illinois Grant Rate, 2014
Granted
0%

Denied

100%

 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted. While the state conducted nearly 24,000 mandatory supervised
release This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
reviews, only eighty-three parole release hearings were held and none were granted.
granted. While the state conducted nearly 24,000 mandatory supervised release reviews, only eighty‐
Source: Illinois Prisoner Review Board 38th Annual Report January 1 to December 31, 2014, www.illinois.gov/prb/Documents/FY14%20Annual%20Report.pdf.
three parole release hearings were held and none were granted. 
 
  Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Source: Illinois Prisoner Review Board 38th Annual Report January 1 to December 31, 2014 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
www.illinois.gov/prb/Documents/FY14%20Annual%20Report.pdf. 
50
 
 
 
40
 
 
30
 
23
 
19
17
17
20
 
16
16
15
 
15
15
 
14
14
14
10
12
 
9
9
8
 
0
 
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
 
Illinois
State Total
 
 
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
 
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number  reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Illinois compared to the states in aggregate and has been so for
 
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
every year in
the series where data for the state are available. In 2014, the rate stood at 16 per 100 parolees in Illinois
 
compared to
8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
 
 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Illinois compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so for every year in the series where data for the state are available. In 2014, the rate stood at 16 
 
per 100 parolees in Illinois compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 
 
 
 
 

69 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE
PROFILES

ILLINOIS

52
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Illinois

States Total
24%

33%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Illinois, a third of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is higher than the aggregate state proportion of
24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN INDIANA

Indiana 
Summary: Prison rates in Indiana are slightly higher compared to the states as a whole while parole 
population rates are lower. However, parolees at risk of incarceration are more likely to be 
reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Indiana does not currently practice discretionary 
release for the majority of offenders; the board only has discretionary release authority over “old code” 
cases from before October, 1977.  
Summary:
Prison rates in Indiana are slightly higher compared to the states as a whole while parole population
rates are  lower. However, parolees at risk of incarceration are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the
th
states asIndiana had the 16
a whole. Indiana does
not currently practice discretionary release for the majority of offenders; the board
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
only has discretionary release authority over “old code” cases from before October, 1977.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

588

594

600
500
500

517

522

308

312

552

569

597
574

582
588

583

600

584

563

561

551

313

308

306

305

206

205

207

2011

2012

2013

400
300

317

316

200
100

152

161

156

168

2003

2004

2005

2006

323

317

308

313

217

221

217

223

2007

2008

2009

2010

189

0
Indiana Prison Population

State Prison Population

Indiana Parole Population

State Parole Population

2014

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
From 2003 to 2009, the prison population rate in Indiana increased and by 2011 had surpassed the 

INDIANA

54
From 2003 to 2009, the prison population rate in Indiana increased
and by 2011 had surpassed the aggregate state rate. The peak
rate was in 2013; in 2014 the prison population rate decreased to
584 for Indiana versus 551 for all 50 states. Indiana had the 16th
highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 87%
of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Indiana had the 16th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Indiana had the 28th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Indiana
has been lower than the aggregate state rate. Since it peaked in
2010, the rate has decreased (to 189 in 2014) and is lower than
the aggregate rate of 305. Indiana had the 28th highest parole
Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Indiana has been lower than the aggregate state 
population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, there were no
rate. Since it peaked in 2010, the rate has decreased (to 189 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate 
reported admissions to parole that were due to a discretionary
st
 highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (leave in text, and 
rate of 305. Indiana had the 29
decision such
as the decision of a parole board.

also put in call out) In 2014, there were no reported admissions to parole that were due to a 
discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
50%
44%

45%
40%

35%

35%
30%

36%

35%

35%

38%
31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

32%

33%

33%

27%

25%

26%

28%

20%
15%
10%
5%

15%

14%

14%

2005

2006

16%

15%

13%

11%

0%
2003

2004

2007

2008

Indiana

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from theviolations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 

In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were  conditional release violators in Indiana was much lower
to that of the
aggregate states. However, the percentage reported
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Indiana had one of the lowest
in Indianaviolators in Indiana was much lower to that of the aggregate states. However, the percentage reported 
from 2007 to 2011 was much higher than the years
percentages of prison admisbefore or after.
In 2014, just thirteen percent of prison admissions
in Indiana from 2007 to 2011 was much higher than the years before or after. In 2014, just thirteen 
sions that were due to violain Indianapercent of prison admissions in Indiana were due to violations of conditional release compared to just 
were due to violations of conditional release compared
tions of conditional releases
to just over
one quarter of admissions for states in aggregate.
over one quarter of admissions for states in aggregate. Indiana had one of the lowest percentages of 
of the states in 2014.
Indiana had
one of the lowest percentages of prison admissions
prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT 
that were BOX) 
due to violations of conditional releases of the states in
2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

55

INDIANA

Chart 3. Indiana Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of discretionary parole release hearings was not available for Indiana. “The Board has jurisdiction over all offenders who committed their crimes
before October 1977 (referred to as “old code” offenders), and exercises discretionary parole release authority over them. The Board also has jurisdiction over all offenders
who committed their crimes after October 1977 (referred to as “new code” offenders) whose release on parole is mandatory.”
Source: http://www.in.gov/idoc/2324.htm.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart	4.	Rate	of	Incarceration	Per	100	Parolees	at	Risk,	2006-2014	
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

14

14

12
6

0
2006

14

2007

4
2008

2009
Indiana

14

12

13

14

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

12

12
9
2010

2011
State Total

	
This	chart	shows	the	rate	of	incarceration	per	100	parolees	who	are	at	risk	of	reincarceration	each	
Chart 4 shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
year	from	2006	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	United	
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarcerated States	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	The	incarcerated	population	includes	the	reported	number	
of	parolees	who	exited	parole	to	incarceration	for	any	reason.	The	at-risk	population	is	calculated	as	
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Indiana compared to the states in aggregate, though the rate was
the	number	reported	on	parole	at	the	beginning	of	the	year,	plus	the	reported	number	of	entries	to	
noticeably lower from 2007 until 2012. In 2014, the rate stood at 12 per 100 parolees in Indiana compared to 8 per
parole	during	the	year.	
100 for the states in aggregate.
	
The	rate	of	incarceration	for	parolees	is	higher	in	Indiana	compared	to	the	states	in	aggregate,	though	
the	rate	was	noticeably	lower	from	2007	until	2012.	In	2014,	the	rate	stood	at	12	per	100	parolees	in	
Indiana	compared	to	8	per	100	for	the	states	in	aggregate.	
*Data for Idaho are estimated in 2013 and 2014.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

INDIANA

56
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Indiana
24%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Indiana, a quarter of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is equal to the aggregate state proportion of
24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN IOWA

Iowa	
Summary:	Prison	and	parole	population	rates	are	lower	in	Iowa	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	
However,	parolees	are	more	likely	to	be	re-incarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	Just	under	
one-half	of	parole	hearings	result	in	parole	being	denied,	while	just	over	one-third	lead	to	parole	being	
granted.	Iowa	currently	practices	discretionary	release	for	the	majority	of	offenders,	including	violent	
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are lower in Iowa compared to the states as a whole. However, parolees
offenders,	sex	offenders,	property	offenders,	drug	offenders,	and	public	order	offenders.		
are more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Just under one-half of parole hearings result
	
in parole being denied, while just over one-third lead to parole being granted. Iowa currently practices discretionary
Iowa	had	one	of	the	lowest	prison	population	rates	of	the	states	in	2014.	
release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders,
	 order offenders.
and public
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

563

561

551

371

368

371

308

306

305

236

242

2013

2014

500
400
300

385

381

389

391

384

383

382

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

407

313

390

313

200
100

139

148

159

2003

2004

2005

190

158

156

2006

2007

138

142

138

2008

2009

2010

219

0
2011

2012

Iowa Prison Population

State Prison Population

Iowa Parole Population

State Parole Population

	
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
Chart 1 showseach	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
	
The	prison	population	rate	in	Iowa	is	noticeably	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	Throughout	the	
*In 2011, Iowa changed its method of reporting the parole population count to include absconders, resulting in a higher parole population in 2011.

IOWA

58
The prison population rate in Iowa is noticeably lower than the aggregate state rate. Throughout the series, that rate has remained
fairly stable. In 2014, the prison population rate was 371 in Iowa
versus 551 for all 50 states. Iowa had one of the lowest prison population rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 77% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Iowa had the 41st highest
prison population rates of the
states in 2014.
Iowa had the 21st highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Iowa is also lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2011, Iowa changed its method of reporting
the parole population count to include absconders, resulting in a
higher parole
population in 2011. Even after this change, the rate
The parole population rate in Iowa is also lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2011, Iowa changed its 
in Iowa remained
lower than the aggregate rate, rising in 2014 to
method of reporting the parole population count to include absconders, resulting in a higher parole 
242, which is lower than the aggregate state rate of 305. Iowa had
population in 2011. Even after this change, the rate in Iowa remained lower than the aggregate rate, 
the 21st highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In
rising in 2014 to 242, which is lower than the aggregate state rate of 305. Iowa had the 22nd highest 
2014, all reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary
parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALLOUT, KEEP IN TEXT TOO) In 2014, all reported 
decision such as the decision of a parole board.

admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
 
Chart 2.Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.3

27%

26%

0.25
0.2

23%

21%

25%

24%

28%
26%

22%

22%
18%

0.15
0.1

12%

13%

14%

2004

2005

2006

15%

0.05
0
2003

2007

2008

Iowa

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Iowa was much lower
compared  to that of the aggregate states. However, while the
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Iowa had the 24th highest
states aggregately
remained steady for several years before
percentage of prison admisviolators in Iowa was much lower compared to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
decreasing beginning in 2010, the percentage in Iowa has been
sions that were due to violaaggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2010, the percentage in 
increasing since and now approaches the aggregate percentage.
tions of conditional releases
Iowa has been increasing since and now approaches the aggregate percentage. In 2014, twenty‐six 
In 2014, twenty-six
percent of prison admissions in Iowa were
of the states in 2014.
percent of prison admissions in Iowa were due to violations of conditional release compared to twenty‐
due to violations
of conditional release compared to twenty-eight
th
 highest percentage of prison 
eight percent of the admissions for states in aggregate. Iowa had the 24
percent of the admissions for states in aggregate. Iowa had the
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT) 
24th highest
percentage of prison admissions that were due to
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

59

IOWA

Chart 3. Iowa Grant Rate, 2014 
 

Chart 3. Iowa Grant Rate, 2014
Parole Granted

4%
12%

Denied
35%

Work Release
Granted
Special Sentence
Granted

49%

 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted, parole being denied, work release being granted, or a special senThis chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
tence being
granted. Nearly half of the hearings resulted in a denial, while just over one-third resulted in parole being granted.
granted, parole being denied, work release being granted, or a special sentence being granted. Nearly 
Source: Iowa Board of Parole Annual Report Fiscal Year 2014, www.bop.state.ia.us/Document/1001.
half of the hearings resulted in a denial, while just over one‐third resulted in parole being granted. 
 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Source: Iowa Board of Parole Annual Report Fiscal Year 2014, www.bop.state.ia.us/Document/1001. 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
 
 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

12

13

14
13

14

14

15

12
9

11

12

12

5

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Iowa

9

2010

2011

State Total

2012

8

6
2013

2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Iowa compared to the states in aggregate, though it was lower
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
than or equal
to the state aggregate rate from 2006 through 2013. In 2014, the rate was 15 per 100 parolees in Iowa
compared to
8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Iowa compared to the states in aggregate, though it 
was lower than or equal to the state aggregate rate from 2006 through 2013. In 2014, the rate was 15 
per 100 parolees in Iowa compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

 

79 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

IOWA

60
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Iowa

States Total
24%

40%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Iowa, forty percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN KANSAS

Kansas 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Kansas compared to the states as a whole. 
Parolees are also less likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Less than one‐third 
of parole hearings in Kansas result in parole being approved, while the remaining hearings result in 
parole being denied or other outcomes. Kansas does not currently practice discretionary release for the 
majority of offenders. The prison review board has discretionary release authority over offenders 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Kansas compared to the states as a whole. Parolees
convicted prior to the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute and for inmates serving life 
are also less likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Less than one-third of parole hearings
sentences.  
in Kansas result in parole being approved, while the remaining hearings result in parole being denied or other
 
outcomes. Kansas does not currently practice discretionary release for the majority of offenders. The prison review
th
Kansas had the 37
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
board has
discretionary release
authority over offenders convicted prior to the effective date of the determinate
 
sentencing statute and for inmates serving life sentences.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

551

500
400
300

453

317

200
206

442

444

428

420

408

409

425

435

449

450

443

306

305

187

186

2013

2014

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

223

229

237

234

237

237

238

236

237

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Kansas Prison Population

State Prison Population

Kansas Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

KANSAS

62
The prison population rate in Kansas is lower than the aggregate
state rate. The rate declined between 2005 and 2008 to a low of
408 before increasing again to 450 in 2013. In 2014, the prison population rate was 443 in Kansas versus 551 for all 50 states. Kansas
had the 37th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In
2014, 69% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Kansas had the 37th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Kansas had the 30th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Kansas was
lower than the aggregate state rate. From 2003 to 2006, the rate
increased before leveling out. In 2013, the rate decreased sharply,
 
likely due to the impact of Justice Reinvestment Initiatives within
Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Kansas was lower than the aggregate state rate. 
the state. In 2014, the parole population rate was 186 in Kansas
From 2003 to 2006, the rate increased before leveling out. In 2013, the rate decreased sharply, likely 
which is noticeably lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Kansas
due to the impact of Justice Reinvestment Initiatives within the state. In 2014, the parole population 
had the 30th highest parole population rate of the states in 2014.
st
 
rate was 186 in Kansas which is noticeably lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Kansas had the 31
In 2014, none
of the reported admissions to parole were due to a
highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT,KEEP IN TEXT TOO) In 2014, none of the 
discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole 
board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.3
0.25

35%

29%

27%

29%

31%

27%

30%

26%

26%

25%

25%

0.2

26%

28%

27%
23%

22%

0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Kansas

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Until 2012,
the percentage of prison admissions that were
series for all 50 states is shown. 
conditional
  release violators in Kansas was lower than the rate
of the states
in aggregate. However, the rate increased in 2012
Until 2012, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in Kansas was 
Kansas had the 28th highest
and 2013lower than the rate of the states in aggregate. However, the rate increased in 2012 and 2013 and was 
and was similar to the aggregate rate. In 2014, the rate
percentage of prison admisdecreasedsimilar to the aggregate rate. In 2014, the rate decreased to twenty‐three percent, compared to just 
to twenty-three percent, compared to just over one
sions that were due to violaquarter ofover one quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Kansas had the 28
the admissions for states in aggregate. Kansas had the
th
 highest percentage of 
tions
of conditional releases of
28th highest
percentage
of
prison
admissions
that
were
due
to
prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (call out, 
the states in 2014.
violationsleave in text) 
of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

63
Chart 3. Kansas Grant Rate, 2015 

KANSAS

Chart 3a. Kansas Grant Rate, 2015
Granted

Chart 3. Kansas Grant Rate, 2015 
9%

2%

Denied

29%

Granted

Serve to Mandatory
Release
Denied
Continued

9%
2%
60%

29%

Serve to Mandatory
Release
Continued

 
60%
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole being approved or denied. Less than a third of the hearings resulted in a parole
being granted, while sixty percent were denied and about a tenth were continued.
 
Chart 3b. Kansas Grants by Year, 2011‐2015 
 
  600
Chart 3b. Kansas Grants by Year, 2009-2014
Chart 3b. Kansas Grants by Year, 2011‐2015 
500
600
400
500
400
300
300
200
200

100
100

24%

0
24%
FY2011

0
FY2011

29%
29%

FY2012

GrantedFY2012
Denied

27%
27%
FY2013

31%
31%

29%

FY2014

Serve
to Mandatory Release
FY2013
FY2014

29%

FY2015

Continued
FY2015

 
Granted
Denied
Serve to Mandatory Release
Continued
 
 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole being 
 
Chart 3b shows the outcomes for hearings from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2015. While the percentage of hearings that are continued have decreased over time, the
approved or denied. Less than a third of the hearings resulted in a parole being granted, while sixty 
percentage that
result in parole being granted have remained fairly stable over time.
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole being 
percent were denied and about a tenth were continued. 
Source: Kansasapproved or denied. Less than a third of the hearings resulted in a parole being granted, while sixty 
Department of Correction Annual Report FY 2015, www.doc.ks.gov/publications/Reports/2015.
 percent were denied and about a tenth were continued. 
The second chart shows the outcomes for hearings from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2015. While the 
 
The second chart shows the outcomes for hearings from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2015. While the 
percentage of hearings that are continued have decreased over time, the percentage that result in 
percentage of hearings that are continued have decreased over time, the percentage that result in 
parole being granted have remained fairly stable over time. 
 parole being granted have remained fairly stable over time. 
 
Source: Kansas Department of Correction Annual Report FY 2015 
Source: Kansas Department of Correction Annual Report FY 2015 
www.doc.ks.gov/publications/Reports/2015. 
www.doc.ks.gov/publications/Reports/2015. 
 
 
 

  

 

84 

84 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

KANSAS

64
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

14

15

14

14

14

14

13

13

12

2007

2008

2009
Kansas

2010

9

3

5

2012

2013

8

11

0
2006

9

2011
State Total

2
2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

Until 2011, of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
the rate of incarceration for parolees was similar in Kansas to that of the states in aggregate. In 2012, the rate
decreased the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
significantly. In 2014, the rate stood at 2 per 100 parolees in Kansas compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 

 
Until 2011, the rate of incarceration for parolees was similar in Kansas to that of the states in aggregate. 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
In 2012, the rate decreased significantly. In 2014, the rate stood at 2 per 100 parolees in Kansas 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Kansas

States Total

4%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Kansas, just four percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much lower than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

85 

PAROLE IN KENTUCKY

Kentucky 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Kentucky compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are about as likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states when they are 
considered in aggregate. Slightly over one‐half of parole hearings lead to parole being recommended, 
while the other half result in a deferral or the entire sentence being served. Kentucky currently practices 
discretionary release for the majority of offenders.  
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are higher in Kentucky compared to the states as a whole. However,
parolees  are about as likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states when they are considered in aggregate.
th
Slightly over
one-half of parole
hearings lead to parole being recommended, while the other half result in a deferral
Kentucky had the 14
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
or the entire
  sentence being served. Kentucky currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800
664

700
597

600

619

623

603

612

600
500

533

566

370

400
317

308

300
200

243

254

2003

2004

657
618

693
615

393

612

605

376

380

644

658

622

637

551

597

582

440

425

429

561
441

563

492

301
312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

100
0
Kentucky Prison Population

State Prison Population

Kentucky Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

KENTUCKY

66
The prison population rate in Kentucky is higher than the aggregate state rate. While the rate was lower through 2004, it surpassed
the aggregate rate in 2005 and has remained higher each year
thereafter. The peak rate was in 2007. Since then the rate has decreased to 637 in 2014 versus 551 for all 50 states. Kentucky had
the 14th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In
2014, 81% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Kentucky had the 14th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Kentucky had the 6th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Kentucky has
increased, surpassing the aggregate state rate in 2006. In 2014,
the parole population rate in Kentucky was 492 which is noticeably higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Kentucky had the 6th
Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Kentucky has increased, surpassing the aggregate 
highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 66%
state rate in 2006. In 2014, the parole population rate in Kentucky was 492 which is noticeably higher 
of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such
than the aggregate rate of 305. Kentucky had the 7th highest parole population rate of the states in 
as the decision of a parole board.

2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 66% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 
decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.45

41%

0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%

31%

37%
33%

0.3

27%
28%

0.25
0.2

23%

22%

2003

2004

23%

28%
25%

25%

26%

26%

28%

27%

23%

0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2005

2006

2007

2008

Kentucky

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were  conditional release violators in Kentucky was lower than
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Kentucky had the 10th highremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
violators in Kentucky was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
est percentage of prison ad2011, the reported percentage in Kansas remained fairly steady
remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the reported percentage in 
missions that were due to
until 2012 before increasing sharply. In 2014, forty-one percent of
Kansas remained fairly steady until 2012 before increasing sharply. In 2014, forty‐one percent of prison 
violations of conditional reprison admissions in Kentucky were due to violations of conditional
admissions in Kentucky were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter 
leases of the states in 2014.
release compared to just over one-quarter of the admissions for
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Kentucky had the 10th highest percentage of prison admissions 
states in aggregate. Kentucky had the 10th highest percentage
that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT BOX, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional
 
releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

67
Chart 3. Kentucky Grant Rate, 2014 

KENTUCKY

Chart 3. Kentucky Grant Rate, 2014
Parole
Recommended

12%

Defer
52%

36%

Serve Out
Sentence

 
 
Chart 3 shows
the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being recommended, parole being deferred, or the inmate serving his or her entire
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
sentence. Just over one-half of the hearings resulted in parole being recommended, while just over one-third resulted in a deferral. The remaining twelve percent were directrecommended, parole being deferred, or the inmate serving his or her entire sentence. Just over one‐
ed to serve out
their sentence.
Source: Kentucky
Parole Board FY2013-14, www.justice.ky.gov/Documents/Parole%20Board/Reports/FY13-14.pdf.
half of the hearings resulted in parole being recommended, while just over one‐third resulted in a 
deferral. The remaining twelve percent were directed to serve out their sentence. 
 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Source: Kentucky Parole Board FY2013‐14, 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
www.justice.ky.gov/Documents/Parole%20Board/Reports/FY13‐14.pdf. 
50
 
 
40

30
21

10

18

18

20
15

15

13

13

14

14

14

14

18

13
8

12
9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Kentucky

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees remained comparable in Kentucky compared to the states in aggregate from 2008
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
through 2011. Kentucky’s rate was higher in 2012 and 2013. In 2014, the rate was 8 per 100 parolees in Kentucky which
parole during the year. 
is equivalent
to the rate for the states in aggregate.

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees remained comparable in Kentucky compared to the states in 
aggregate from 2008 through 2011. Kentucky’s rate was higher in 2012 and 2013. In 2014, the rate was 
8 per 100 parolees in Kentucky which is equivalent to the rate for the states in aggregate. 

 

89 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

KENTUCKY

68
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Kentucky

States Total
24%

29%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Kentucky, twenty-nine percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly higher than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN LOUISIANA

Louisiana 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Louisiana compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are less likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. More than 
forty percent of parole hearings lead to parole being granted, while the remaining hearings lead to a 
denial. Louisiana currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders; however, the 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Louisiana compared to the states as a whole. However,
paroleesmajority of offenders are released via mandatory mechanisms.  
are less likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. More than forty percent of parole
hearings  lead to parole being granted, while the remaining hearings lead to a denial. Louisiana currently practices
Louisiana had the highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
discretionary
release for the majority of offenders; however, the majority of offenders are released via mandatory
 
mechanisms.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1400
1200

1,082 1,096 1,062

1,178 1,151
1,148 1,145 1,154
1,148 1,152
1,119

1,075

1000
800

752

765

735

741

760

765

799

830

818

838

724

708

597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

582

563

561

551

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

600
400
200
0

Louisiana Prison Population

State Prison Population

Louisiana Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

LOUISIANA

70
The prison population rate in Louisiana is much higher than the
aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2009; thereafter, the rate
declined slightly. Throughout the series, the rate in Louisiana was
about twice as high as the rate for the states in aggregate. In 2014,
the prison population rate was 1,075 in Louisiana versus 551 for all
50 states. Louisiana had the highest prison population rate of the
states in 2014. In 2014, 93% of releases from prison were conditional
releases.

Louisiana had the highest prison population rate of the states
in 2014.
Louisiana had the 3rd highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Louisiana is also far higher than the aggregate state rate. Throughout the series, the rate in Louisiana was
more than twice as high as the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate
The parole population rate in Louisiana is also far higher than the aggregate state rate. Throughout the 
in Louisiana
was 838 which is significantly higher than the aggregate
series, the rate in Louisiana was more than twice as high as the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate in 
rate of 305.
Louisiana had the 3rd highest parole population rate of
rd
 
the states Louisiana was 838 which is significantly higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Louisiana had the 3
in 2014. In 2014, 5% of admissions to parole were due to a
highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 5% of 
discretionary
decision such as the decision of a parole board.

admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
 
Chart 2.Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
0.4
35%
0.35
0.3

36%

35%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

33%
33%

34%

34%

29%
31%

31%

30%

28%

29%

30%

0.25

27%

27%

26%

2011

2012

2013

28%

24%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Louisiana

2009

2010

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
In the earlypublished by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that wereseries for all 50 states is shown. 
conditional release violators in Louisiana was slightly
  that of the aggregate states. However, while the states
higher than
Louisiana had the 22nd highIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregately
remained steady for several years before decreasing
est percentage of prison adbeginningviolators in Louisiana was slightly higher than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
in 2011, the percentage in Louisiana decreased from
missions due to violations of
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
2006 to 2010 before increasing again and surpassing the aggreconditional releases of the
gate stateLouisiana decreased from 2006 to 2010 before increasing again and surpassing the aggregate state rate 
rate in 2014. In 2014, twenty-nine percent of prison adstates in 2014.
in 2014. In 2014, twenty‐nine percent of prison admissions in Louisiana were due to violations of 
missions in
Louisiana were due to violations of conditional release,
nd
 
conditional release, close to the percentage of admissions for states in aggregate. Louisiana had the 22
close to the
percentage of admissions for states in aggregate.
highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. 
Louisiana had the 22nd highest percentage of prison admissions
due to violations
of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
(CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT TOO) 
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

71

Chart 3. Louisiana Grant Rate, 2014 
 

LOUISIANA

Chart 3a. Louisiana Grant Rate, 2014
Granted

Chart 3. Louisiana Grant Rate, 2014 
 

Denied

42%

Granted

58%

Denied
42%

  
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in release being granted or denied. Forty-two percent of hearings resulted in parole being
Chart 3b. Louisiana Grants by Year, 2009‐2014 
granted while the
remaining fifty-eight percent resulted in parole being denied.
58%

Louisiana Grants by Year (Percent)

 
Chart 3b. Louisiana Grants by Year, 2009-2014
100
Chart 3b. Louisiana Grants by Year, 2009‐2014 
90

  

Louisiana Grants by Year (Percent)

80
100

70

90

60

80

50

70

40

60

30

50

20

40

10
30

48%

45%
29%

0
20

29%
FY09

10

0
FY09

28%

45%

FY10
28%

42%

25%
FY11
25%
Granted

FY12

48%

FY13

42%

FY14

Denied

 
FY12
FY13
FY14
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in release being 
Granted
Denied
granted or denied. Forty‐two percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted while the remaining 
 
fifty‐eight percent resulted in parole being denied. 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in release being 
Chart 3b shows percentage of parole hearings from 2009 to 2014 that resulted in release being granted or denied. The percent of hearings that resulted in parole being
 granted or denied. Forty‐two percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted while the remaining 
granted increased
significantly from fiscal year 2011 to 2012, and has remained at a higher level since.
The second chart shows percentage of parole hearings from 2009 to 2014 that resulted in release being 
fifty‐eight percent resulted in parole being denied. 
Source: Louisiana
Board of Pardons and Parole 2014 Annual Report, http://www.doc.la.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/2014-Board-of-Pardons-and-Parole-AnnualReport.pdf.
 
granted or denied. The percent of hearings that resulted in parole being granted increased significantly 
The second chart shows percentage of parole hearings from 2009 to 2014 that resulted in release being 
from fiscal year 2011 to 2012, and has remained at a higher level since. 
 granted or denied. The percent of hearings that resulted in parole being granted increased significantly 
from fiscal year 2011 to 2012, and has remained at a higher level since. 
(Source: Louisiana Board of Pardons and Parole 2014 Annual Report http://www.doc.la.gov/wp‐
 
content/uploads/2014/12/2014‐Board‐of‐Pardons‐and‐Parole‐Annual‐Report.pdf) 
(Source: Louisiana Board of Pardons and Parole 2014 Annual Report http://www.doc.la.gov/wp‐
 
 
FY10

FY11

content/uploads/2014/12/2014‐Board‐of‐Pardons‐and‐Parole‐Annual‐Report.pdf) 
 
 

 
 

94 
94 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

LOUISIANA

72
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10

0

6
2006

7

7

2007

2008

9

9

5

6

6

6

7

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Louisiana

State Total

8

5
2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in theyear from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in Louisiana compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 5 per 100 parolees in Louisiana compared to 8 per 100 for the states
parole during the year. 
in aggregate.
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in Louisiana compared to the states in aggregate and has 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 5 per 100 parolees in Louisiana compared to 8 
per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Louisiana

States Total

14%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Louisiana, just fourteen percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

95 

PAROLE IN MAINE

Maine 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are much lower in Maine compared to the states as a 
whole. Parolees who are at risk of reincarceration are less likely to be ‐incarcerated compared to the 
states as a whole. Very few prisoners are under the jurisdiction of the parole board. Maine currently 
does not practice discretionary release for the majority of offenders; the board only has jurisdiction over 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are much lower in Maine compared
to the states as a whole. Parolees
the relatively few prisoners who were sentenced prior to May 1st, 1976.  
who are at risk of reincarceration are less likely to be -incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Very few
prisoners  are under the jurisdiction of the parole board. Maine currently does not practice discretionary release for
Maine had one of the lowest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
the majority
of offenders; the board only has jurisdiction over the relatively few prisoners who were sentenced prior
  1976.
to May 1st,
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

551

500
400
300

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

199

199

197

205

206

209

210

204

203

198

204

209

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

2

2

2

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0

Maine Prison Population

State Prison Population

Maine Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

MAINE

74
The prison population rate in Maine is much lower compared to
the aggregate state rate and has been so throughout the series. In
2014, the prison population rate was just 209 in Maine versus 551
for all 50 states. Maine had one of the lowest prison population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 40% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

Maine had 49th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Maine had the 50th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Maine is also far lower to the aggregate state rate and has been so throughout the series. The state’s
rate was just 2 per 100,000 in 2014 and is significantly lower than
the aggregate rate of 305. Maine had the lowest parole population
rate of theThe parole population rate in Maine is also far lower to the aggregate state rate and has been so 
states in 2014. In 2014, no reported admissions to pathroughout the series. The state’s rate was just 2 per 100,000 in 2014 and is significantly lower than the 
role were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a
aggregate rate of 305. Maine had the lowest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, 
parole board.

LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, no reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as 
the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.7
60%
0.6

54%
49%

0.5

49%

40%
0.4
0.3

36%

35%

31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

37%
35%

35%

33%

34%
28%

33%

0.2

27%

26% 24%

2012

2013

0.1
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Maine

2009

2010

2011

2014

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were  conditional release violators in Maine was higher than
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, the percentage in Maine
Maine had the 27th highest
has decreased
and, in 2014, the percentage in Maine (24%) was
violators in Maine was higher than that of the aggregate states. However, the percentage in Maine has 
percentage of prison admisslightly below
the
percentage
for
the
states
in
aggregate.
Maine
decreased and, in 2014, the percentage in Maine (24%) was slightly below the percentage for the states 
sions that were due to violahad the 27th
highest
percentage
of
prison
th admissions that were
in aggregate. Maine had the 27  highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of 
tions of conditional releases
due to violations
of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT TOO) 
 

 

of the states in 2014.

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

75

MAINE

Chart 3. Maine Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Information on the outcome of discretionary parole hearings was not available. In 2014, only four inmates were under the jurisdiction of the parole board.
Source: www.bangordailynews.com/2014/06/07/news/state/number-of-maine-prisoners-under-parole-authority-down-to-4/.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

10
3

0

0

0

0

0

0

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

0
2006

Maine

State Total

9

8

5

5

2013

2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in Maine compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 5 per 100 parolees in Maine compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in Maine compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 5 per 100 parolees in Maine compared to 8 per 
100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

MAINE

76
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Maine

States Total
24%

100%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Maine, the one reported exit from parole was due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%. However; very few people are on parole supervision (or being released from parole supervision) in
the state.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN MARYLAND

Maryland	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	are	lower	in	Maryland	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole	while	parole	
population	rates	are	reported	to	be	lower	in	recent	years.	Parolees	have	a	similar	likelihood	of	being	reincarcerated	when	compared	to	the	states	in	aggregate.	More	than	one-third	of	parole	hearings	lead	to	
a	release	being	granted	while	the	remaining	hearings	end-up	in	parole	release	being	denied.	Maryland	
Summary:
Prison population rates are lower in Maryland compared to the states as a whole while parole population
currently	practices	discretionary	release	for	the	majority	of	offenders,	including	violent	offenders,	sex	
rates are reported to be lower in recent years. Parolees have a similar likelihood of being re-incarcerated when
offenders,	property	offenders,	drug	offenders,	and	public	order	offenders.		
compared to the states in aggregate. More than one-third of parole hearings lead to a release being granted while
	
the remaining hearings end-upthin parole release being denied. Maryland currently practices discretionary release
Maryland	had	the	35
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
for the majority
of offenders, including
violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and
	 offenders.
public order
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600
578
500
400
300

334
317

559

345

308

540

339

312

540

338

316

547

323
323

539

508

306

314

317

308

511

582

502

563

561

551

474

465

454

306

305

298

295

300

313

313

308

249

200
100

123

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Maryland Prison Population

State Prison Population

Maryland Parole Population

State Parole Population

2013

2014

	

*Parole rates in Maryland for 2013 and 2014 are not comparable to previous years because of changes in the state’s computing systems and data cleaning. In 2013,
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
Maryland began reporting the number of people rather than cases.

each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	

Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	

	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The	prison	population	rate	in	Maryland	is	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	The	rate	in	Maryland	has	

MARYLAND

78
The prison population rate in Maryland is lower than the aggregate
state rate. The rate in Maryland has been declining since 2003 and
has been doing so faster than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the
prison population rate was 454 in Maryland versus 551 for all 50
states. Maryland had the 35th highest prison population rate of the
states in 2014. In 2014, 86% of releases from prison were conditional
releases.

Maryland had the 35th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Maryland had the 19th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

From 2003  to 2012, the parole population rate in Maryland was similar to the aggregate
state rate. However, in 2013 and 2014, the numFrom 2003 to 2012, the parole population rate in Maryland was similar to the aggregate state rate. 
bers changed
dramatically
as the state made changes in computing
However, in 2013 and 2014, the numbers changed dramatically as the state made changes in computing 
systems and
conducted
data
cleaning. In 2013, the state also began
systems and conducted data cleaning. In 2013, the state also began reporting the number of individuals 
reporting under supervision, rather than the number of cases, as one person could be associated with multiple 
the number of individuals under supervision, rather than
the number of cases, as one person could be associated with multiple cases. In 2014, the rate in Maryland was reported to
cases. In 2014, the rate in Maryland was reported to be 249 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 
be 249 which is lower than the aggregate
rate of 305. Maryland had the 19th highest parole population rate of the states
305. Maryland had the 19th highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
in 2014. In 2014, half of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

TEXT TOO) In 2014, half of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the 
decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
45%
40%
35%
30%

35%

33%
33%

35%

35%

34%

34%

36%
35%

37%
36%

38%

37%

35%

35%

31%

36%

37%

39%

39%

33%

25%

27%

26%

2012

2013

28%

20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Maryland

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 

published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early
years of this series, the percentage of prison admisseries for all 50 states is shown. 
sions that were conditional release violators in Maryland was
similar to  that of the aggregate states. However, while the states
Maryland had the 12th highest
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregately
remained steady for several years before decreasing
percentage of prison admisbeginningviolators in Maryland was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
in 2011, the percentage in Maryland has shown gradusions that were due to violaremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Maryland has 
al, incremental
increases. In 2014, thirty-nine percent of prison adtions of conditional releases of
missions in
Maryland were due to violations of conditional release
shown gradual, incremental increases. In 2014, thirty‐nine percent of prison admissions in Maryland 
the states in 2014.
comparedwere due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for 
to just over one-quarter of the admissions for states in
th
aggregate.
Maryland had the 12th highest percentage
of prison
 highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to 
states in aggregate. Maryland had the 12
admissions
that were due to violations of conditional releases of
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALLOUT, leave in text) 
the states  in 2014.
 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

79
Chart 3. Maryland Grant Rate, 2014 

MARYLAND

Chart 3a. Maryland Grant Rate, 2014
Released

Chart 3. Maryland Grant Rate, 2014 

Not Released

40%

Released

60%

Not Released
40%

 
60%
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in the inmate being released or not released. Forty percent of the hearings resulted in
Chart 3b. Maryland Grants by Year, 2010‐2014 
release while the
remaining sixty percent resulted in the denial of release.

Maryland Grants by Year

 
Chart 3b. Maryland Grants by Year, 2010-2014
16000
Chart 3b. Maryland Grants by Year, 2010‐2014 
14000

 

Maryland Grants by Year

12000
16000
10000
14000
8000
12000
6000
10000
8000
4000
6000
2000

30%

40000

FY2010
2000
30%
0
FY2010

FY2011
19%

30%

24%

19%

FY2012

24%

Released

FY2013

30%

40%

40%

FY2014

Not Released

 
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in the inmate 
Released
Not Released
being released or not released. Forty percent of the hearings resulted in release while the remaining 
 
sixty percent resulted in the denial of release. 
Chart 3b showsThe first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in the inmate 
the outcomes for hearings from fiscal years 2010 to 2014. While the number of parole hearings has decreased over the past several years, the number of
releases being being released or not released. Forty percent of the hearings resulted in release while the remaining 
granted has increased since fiscal year 2011, resulting since then in a higher percentage of releases subsequent to a parole hearing.
The second chart shows the outcomes for hearings from fiscal years 2010 to 2014. While the number of 
Source: The Maryland
Parole Commission Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report, www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/mpc2014AnnualReport.pdf.
sixty percent resulted in the denial of release. 
parole hearings has decreased over the past several years, the number of releases being granted has 
 
The second chart shows the outcomes for hearings from fiscal years 2010 to 2014. While the number of 
increased since fiscal year 2011, resulting since then in a higher percentage of releases subsequent to a 
parole hearings has decreased over the past several years, the number of releases being granted has 
parole hearing. 
 increased since fiscal year 2011, resulting since then in a higher percentage of releases subsequent to a 
parole hearing. 
Source: The Maryland Parole Commission Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report, 
 
www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/mpc2014AnnualReport.pdf 
Source: The Maryland Parole Commission Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report, 
 
 
www.dpscs.state.md.us/publicinfo/publications/pdfs/mpc2014AnnualReport.pdf 
 
 

 
 

104 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE
104  PROFILES

MARYLAND

80
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

9

10
7

7

8

2006

2007

2008

9

9

2010

2011

9
8

8

0
2009
Maryland

2012

2013

State Total

2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is similar in Maryland compared to the states in aggregate, though it was lower in
the early years
of the series. In 2014, the rate was 9 per 100 parolees in Maryland compared to 8 per 100 for the states
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
in aggregate.
parole during the year. 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is similar in Maryland compared to the states in aggregate, though 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
it was lower in the early years of the series. In 2014, the rate was 9 per 100 parolees in Maryland 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Maryland

28%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Maryland, twenty-eight percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly higher than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

105 

PAROLE IN MASSACHUSETTS

Massachusetts 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Massachusetts compared to the states as a 
whole. Parolees at risk of incarceration are somewhat more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the 
states as a whole. A little more than half of scheduled release hearings are not postponed or waived and 
about two‐thirds of the hearings that actually occur lead to parole being granted. Massachusetts 
currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including more than half of 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Massachusetts compared to the states as a whole.
violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, and public order offenders and less than half of 
Parolees at risk of incarceration are somewhat more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole.
drug offenders. 
A little more than half of scheduled release hearings are not postponed or waived and about two-thirds of the
 
hearings that actually occur lead to parole being granted. Massachusetts currently practices discretionary release
Massachusetts had the lowest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
for the majority
of offenders, including more than half of violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, and
 
public order offenders and less than half of drug offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

551

500
400
300
200
100

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

208

206

217

222

229

226

222

220

224

216

207

200

75

78

72

65

64

63

66

63

44

40

41

36

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2003

2004

2005

Massachusetts Prison Population

State Prison Population

Massachusetts Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

MASSACHUSETTS

82
The prison population rate in Massachusetts is much lower than
the aggregate state rate. The prison rate has been fairly stable over
the past decade, with a slight decrease from 224 per 100,000 adult
residents in 2011 to 200 in 2014. Massachusetts had the lowest
prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 28% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Massachusetts had the 50th
highest prison population
rate of the states in 2014.
Massachusetts had the 47th
highest parole population
rates of the states in 2014.

The parole population rate has decreased from 78 per 100,000
adult residents in 2004 to 36 in 2014. This is significantly lower
than the aggregate state rate of 305 per 100,000. A large decline
was reported from 2010 to 2011 when the rate decreased from
 
63 to 44. Massachusetts
had one of the lowest parole population
The parole population rate has decreased from 78 per 100,000 adult residents in 2004 to 36 in 2014. 
rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 90% of admissions to parole
This is significantly lower than the aggregate state rate of 305 per 100,000. A large decline was reported 
were due to
a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole
board. from 2010 to 2011 when the rate decreased from 63 to 44. Massachusetts had one of the lowest parole 

population rates of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 90% of admissions to parole 
were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
 
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

36%

35%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

28%

27%

26%

9%

9%

9%

2012

2013

2014

25%
20%
15%

11%

12%

13%

13%
10%

9%

2006

2007

10%

13%

10%

12%

5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2008

Massachusetts

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Massachusetts was
 
much lower than that of the aggregate states. While the states
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Massachusetts had one of
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing
violators in Massachusetts was much lower than that of the aggregate states. While the states 
the lowest percentages of
beginning in 2011, the percentage in Massachusetts also
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
prison admissions due to videcreased slightly around the same time. In 2014, only nine percent
Massachusetts also decreased slightly around the same time. In 2014, only nine percent of prison 
olations of conditional releasof prison admissions in Massachusetts were due to violations of
es of the states in 2014.
admissions in Massachusetts were due to violations of conditional release compared to 28% of the 
conditional
release compared to 28% of the admissions for states
admissions for states in aggregate. Massachusetts had one of the lowest percentages of prison 
in aggregate. Massachusetts had one of the lowest percentages of
admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
prison admissions
due to violations of conditional releases of the
 
states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

83

Chart 3. Massachusetts Grant Rate, Hearing Held, 2013 
Chart 3. Massachusetts Grant Rate, Hearing Held, 2013 

Granted
GrantedDenied
Denied

37%
37%

MASSACHUSETTS

Chart 3a. Massachusetts Grant Rate, 2014

63%
63%

 
 
Chart 3b. Massachusetts Grant Rate, All Hearings Scheduled, 2013 
Chart 3b. Massachusetts Grant Rate, All Hearings Scheduled, 2013 

  

  

Com

Chart 3b. Massachusetts Grant Rate, All Hearings Scheduled, 2013
Granted
Granted

23%
23%

34%
24%

24%

34%

20%

20%

Denied
Denied
Postponed
Postponed
Waived
Waived

 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings that actually occurred in 2013 that resulted in a 
 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings that actually occurred in 2013 that resulted in a 
parole being granted or denied. The second chart shows the percentage of all scheduled hearings that 
Source:parole being granted or denied. The second chart shows the percentage of all scheduled hearings that 
Massachusetts Parole Board 2013 Annual Statistical Report, www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/pb/2013annualstatisticalreport.pdf
resulted in parole being granted or denied and the hearings that were postponed or waived. About two‐
resulted in parole being granted or denied and the hearings that were postponed or waived. About two‐
thirds of the hearings that actually occurred resulted in parole being granted. However, only 54% of 
thirds of the hearings that actually occurred resulted in parole being granted. However, only 54% of 
scheduled hearings led to a decision while the remaining hearings were postponed (24%) or waived 
scheduled hearings led to a decision while the remaining hearings were postponed (24%) or waived 
(23%). 
(23%).   
 
Source: Massachusetts Parole Board 2013 Annual Statistical Report, 
Source: Massachusetts Parole Board 2013 Annual Statistical Report, 
www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/pb/2013annualstatisticalreport.pdf. 
 
www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/pb/2013annualstatisticalreport.pdf. 
 
Chart 3 shows the percentage of parole hearings that actually occurred in 2013 that resulted in a parole being granted or denied. The second chart shows the percentage of
all scheduled hearings that resulted in parole being granted or denied and the hearings that were postponed or waived. About two-thirds of the hearings that actually occurred
resulted in parole being granted. However, only 54% of scheduled hearings led to a decision while the remaining hearings were postponed (24%) or waived (23%).

 

 

109 

109 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

MASSACHUSETTS

84
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

14

14

11

11

12

11

2006

2007

14

15

13

12

15

13

12

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2008

2009

2010

Massachusetts

2011

State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has been slightly higher in recent years in Massachusetts compared to the states
in aggregate,
but remained at a lower rate from 2006 through 2010. In 2014, the rate stood at 12 per 100 parolees in
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
Massachusetts
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has been slightly higher in recent years in Massachusetts 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
compared to the states in aggregate, but remained at a lower rate from 2006 through 2010.  In 2014, 
the rate stood at 12 per 100 parolees in Massachusetts compared to 8 per 100 for the states in 
aggregate.  Massachusetts
States Total

21%

24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Massachusetts, about a fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.
110 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN MICHIGAN

Michigan 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are similar in Michigan compared to the states as a whole, 
though the parole population rates have been somewhat lower in recent years. Parolees have a similar 
likelihood of being re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. About two‐thirds of parole 
hearings result in parole being ordered, a percentage that has fluctuated somewhat over time. Michigan 
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are similar in Michigan compared to the states as a whole, though
currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex 
the parole
population rates have been somewhat lower in recent years. Parolees have a similar likelihood of being
offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
re-incarcerated
compared to the states as a whole. About two-thirds of parole hearings result in parole being
 
ordered, a percentage that has
fluctuated somewhat over time. Michigan currently practices discretionary release
Michigan had the 22nd highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and
 
public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800
700

661

652

659

685

667

647
604

600
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

586
597

500
400
317

308

271

279

2003

2004

312

316

323

300
200

266

245

281

299
317

324

325

308

313

567
582

298

573

572

565

563

561

551

308

306

305

251

241

240

2012

2013

2014

313

100
0
2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Michigan Prison Population

State Prison Population

Michigan Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

MICHIGAN

86
The prison population rate in Michigan is similar to the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate stood at 685 in 2006; thereafter, the rate
declined. In 2014, the prison population rate was 565 in Michigan
versus 551 for all 50 states. Michigan had the 22nd highest prison
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 93% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Michigan had the 22nd highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
Michigan had the 22nd highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

From 2003 to 2010, the parole population rate in Michigan increased and surpassed the aggregate rate by 2009. Since 2010, the
rate has decreased (to 240 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate
rate of 305.From 2003 to 2010, the parole population rate in Michigan increased and surpassed the aggregate rate 
Michigan had the 22nd highest parole population rate of
the states by 2009. Since 2010, the rate has decreased (to 240 in 2014) and is lower than the aggregate rate of 
in 2014. In 2014, 88% of admissions to parole were due to
nd
a discretionary
decision such as the decision
of a parole board.
 highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
305. Michigan had the 22

TEXT) In 2014, 88% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a 
parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
36%

36%

35%

35%

36%

35%

35%

33%
30%

30%

35%

33%

34%

34%

31%

30%

33%

26%

26%

31%
28%

25%

27%

27%
24%

20%

28%

25%

15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Michigan

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were conditional
release violators in Michigan was higher than
 
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Michigan had the 25th highest
remained violators in Michigan was higher than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
percentage of prison admis2011, the aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
percentage in Michigan decreased beginning in 2007
sions due to violations of conand was lower than the aggregate rate for several years, while
Michigan decreased beginning in 2007 and was lower than the aggregate rate for several years, while 
ditional releases of the states
showing an increase about the states’ rate in 2012, then a decline
showing an increase about the states’ rate in 2012, then a decline in 2013. In 2014, just over one quarter 
in 2014.
in 2013. In 2014, just over one quarter of prison admissions in
of prison admissions in Michigan were due to violations of conditional release compared to twenty‐eight 
Michigan were due to violations of conditional release compared
percent of the admissions for states in aggregate. Michigan had the 25th highest percentage of prison 
to twenty-eight percent of the admissions for states in aggregate.
admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
Michigan had the 25th highest percentage of prison admissions
 
due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

87
Chart 3. Michigan Grant Rate, 2013 

Chart 3. Michigan Grant Rate, 2013 

MICHIGAN

Chart 3a. Michigan Grant Rate, 2013

Total Paroles
Ordered

32%

Total Paroles
Ordered
Parole Denials

68%
32%

 
68%
Parole Denials
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2013 that resulted in a parole being ordered or denied. Over two-thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being ordered
Chart 3b. Michigan Grants by Year, 1993‐2013 
with parole being
denied roughly one third of the time.
 
 
 
30000
Chart 3b. Michigan Grants by Year, 1993-2013
Chart 3b. Michigan Grants by Year, 1993‐2013 
 
25000
30000
20000
25000
15000
20000
10000
15000
5000
10000

62%
63%

55%

63%
5000 0
55%

55%

51%

48%

52%

53%

55%

66%

62%
55%

51%

48%

52%

55%

53%

66%

68%

68%

0

Total Paroles Ordered

Parole Denials

 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2013 that resulted in a parole being ordered 
Total Paroles Ordered
Parole Denials
or denied. Over two‐thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being ordered with parole being denied 
 
Chart 3b shows
the outcome of hearings from 1993 to 2013. In recent years, the percentage of hearings that result in a release has increased, though the overall number
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in 2013 that resulted in a parole being ordered 
roughly one third of the time.  
of hearings has decreased since the peak in 2009.
or denied. Over two‐thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being ordered with parole being denied 
 
Source: Michigan
Department of Corrections 2013 Statistical Report, http://www.michigan.gov/documents/corrections/2014-04-04_-_MDOC_2013_Statistical_Report_-_
roughly one third of the time.  
The second chart shows the outcome of hearings from 1993 to 2013. In recent years, the percentage of 
Vers_1_0_452815_7.pdf.
  hearings that result in a release has increased, though the overall number of hearings has decreased 
The second chart shows the outcome of hearings from 1993 to 2013. In recent years, the percentage of 
since the peak in 2009. 
hearings that result in a release has increased, though the overall number of hearings has decreased 
 
since the peak in 2009. 
Source: Michigan Department of Corrections 2013 Statistical Report 
 
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/corrections/2014‐04‐04_‐_MDOC_2013_Statistical_Report_‐
Source: Michigan Department of Corrections 2013 Statistical Report 
_Vers_1_0_452815_7.pdf. 
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/corrections/2014‐04‐04_‐_MDOC_2013_Statistical_Report_‐
 
 
_Vers_1_0_452815_7.pdf. 
 
 

 
 

114 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE
114  PROFILES

MICHIGAN

88
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

17
15

15
13

14
12

14

11

14
11

12

13

10

2011

12

10

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Michigan

2010

State Total

 
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in theyear from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has been higher in Michigan compared to the states in aggregate since 2012,
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
showing rates that were lower from 2007 to 2011. In 2014, the rate stood at 10 per 100 parolees in Michigan compared
to 8 per 100parole during the year. 
for the states in aggregate.
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has been higher in Michigan compared to the states in aggregate 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
since 2012, showing rates that were lower from 2007 to 2011. In 2014, the rate stood at 10 per 100 
parolees in Michigan compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Michigan

States Total
24%

29%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Michigan, twenty-nine percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly higher than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.
115 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN MINNESOTA

Minnesota 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are much lower in Minnesota compared to the states as a 
whole. However, parolees are much more likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a 
whole. Minnesota does not currently practice discretionary release for the majority of offenders; 
discretionary release is still used for inmates convicted prior to the effective date of the determinate 
sentencing statute and for inmates serving life sentences.  
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are much lower in Minnesota compared to the states as a whole.
However,
parolees
are much more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Minnesota does
 
not currently
practice discretionary release for the majority of offenders; discretionary release is still used for inmates
Minnesota had one of the lowest prison population rates of the states in 2014. 
convicted
prior
to the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute and for inmates serving life sentences.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

603

600

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

551

500
400
317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

230

242

235

241

250

250

243

241

242

248

255

128

136

144

144

146

145

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

300
200

209

100
95

102

103

114

121

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

159

0
Minnesota Prison Population

State Prison Population

Minnesota Parole Population

State Parole Population

2014

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

MINNESOTA

90
The prison population rate in Minnesota is much lower than the
aggregate state rate. Over the series, the rate has increased slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was 255 in Minnesota versus
551 for all 50 states. Minnesota had one of the lowest prison population rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 88% of releases from
prison were conditional releases.

Minnesota had the 48th highest prison population rates of
the states in 2014.
Minnesota had the 34th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Minnesota is also much lower than
the aggregate state rate, though it has been increasing gradually
over time. In 2014, the rate was 159 which is much lower than the
aggregate rate of 305. Minnesota had the 34th highest parole popThe parole population rate in Minnesota is also much lower than the aggregate state rate, though it has 
ulation rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, no reported admissions
been increasing gradually over time. In 2014, the rate was 159 which is much lower than the aggregate 
to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision
th
 highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, 
of a parolerate of 305. Minnesota had the 34
board.

LEAVE IN TEXT)In 2014, no reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as 
the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
38%

40%
35%
30%

34%

34%

34%

33%

34%

34%

31%

35%

36%

35%

35%

35%

35%

35%

35%

36%

36%

27%

26%

2012

2013

35%

33%

31%

25%

28%

20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Minnesota

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were  conditional release violators in Minnesota was similar to
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Minnesota had the 15th highremained violators in Minnesota was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
est percentage of prison ad2011, theremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Minnesota 
percentage in Minnesota has, excepting 2011, shown
missions due to violations of
relative stability,
albeit at a higher rate than the states. In 2014,
has, excepting 2011, shown relative stability, albeit at a higher rate than the states. In 2014, thirty‐five 
conditional releases of the
thirty-five percent of prison admissions in Minnesota were due to violations of conditional release compared to 
percent of prison admissions in Minnesota were due to
states in 2014.
violations of conditional release compared to just over one quarter
just over one quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Minnesota had the 15th highest 
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Minnesota had the 15th
percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL 
highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of
OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
conditional
  releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

91

MINNESOTA

Chart 3. Minnesota Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data are only available for the small number of cases the Board of Pardons hears. Since there is no discretionary release, data on discretionary parole release outcomes are
not available.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30
21

23

24
20

20

14

14

20

10

15

15

23

23

23

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

18

14

12

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Minnesota

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Minnesota compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 23 per 100 parolees in Minnesota compared to 8 per 100 for the
parole during the year. 
states in aggregate.
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Minnesota compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 23 per 100 parolees in Minnesota 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

MINNESOTA

92
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Minnesota

States Total
24%

50%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Minnesota, an even 50% of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN MISSISSIPPI

Mississippi	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	are	higher	in	Mississippi	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole	while	
parole	population	rates	have	increased	and	recently	surpassed	the	aggregate	state	rate.	Parolees	are	
about	as	likely	to	be	re-incarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	Mississippi	currently	practices	
discretionary	release	for	the	majority	of	offenders	other	than	violent	and	sex	offenders.	
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Mississippi compared to the states as a whole while parole
	
population rates have increased and recently surpassed the aggregate state rate. Parolees are about as likely to
th
Mississippi	had	the	7
be re-incarcerated
compared to 	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
the states as a whole. Mississippi currently practices discretionary release for the
	 offenders other than violent and sex offenders.
majority of
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1,200

1,000

976

986

956

981

1,035 1,040
976

951

959

995

975
831

800
597

600

603

612

317

308

312

316

615

612

605

597

582

563

561

551

308

313

313

308

306

437

320

303

306

305

2011

2012

2013

2014

600

400

323

317

200

0

247
86

93

92

88

93

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

290

134
2008

2009

2010

Mississippi Parole Population

State Prison Population

Mississippi Prison Population

State Parole Population

	
*The increase in the parole population around 2009 resulted from legislation passed in 2008 which expanded parole eligibility. Additional legislation was adopted
in 2014.
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	

Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
Probation and Parole
in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	

series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
	
The	prison	population	rate	in	Mississippi	is	much	higher	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	The	peak	rate	

MISSISSIPPI

94
The prison population rate in Mississippi is much higher than the
aggregate state rate. The peak rate was in 2007-2008; thereafter,
the rate declined. In 2014, the prison population rate was 831 in
Mississippi versus 551 for all 50 states. Mississippi had the 7th
highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 86%
of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Mississippi had the 7th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.

Mississippi had the 8th highest parole population rate of
From 2003 to 2011, the parole population rate in Mississippi inthe states in 2014.
creased, exceeding the aggregate state rate for the first time in
2011. Large increases in the parole population occurred in 2009
and 2014; the increase in the parole population around 2009 resulted from legislation passed in 2008 which expanded parole elincrease in the parole population around 2009 resulted from legislation passed in 2008 which expanded 
igibility and
additional legislation was adopted in 2014. In 2014,
the paroleparole eligibility and additional legislation was adopted in 2014. In 2014, the parole population rate in 
population rate in Mississippi was 437 which is noticeably higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Mississippi
had the 8th
highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 81% of admissions to parole were duethto
  a disMississippi was 437 which is noticeably higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Mississippi had the 8
cretionaryhighest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 81% of 
decision such as the decision of a parole board.

admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

27%

26%

28%

25%
25%
20%
20%

21%

2010

2011

24%
21%

15%
10%

13%

12%

12%

12%

13%

2006

2007

2008

14%

3%

5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

Mississippi

2009

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Mississippi was lower than
 
that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
Mississippi had the 31st highremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
Mississippi was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained 
est percentage of prison ad2011, the percentage in Mississippi shows a rather steady upward
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Mississippi shows a 
missions that were due to vioincrease until 2012. Following a slight decrease in 2013, and 2014,
rather steady upward increase until 2012. Following a slight decrease in 2013, and 2014, the latter 
lations of conditional releases
the latter reveals that one-fifth of prison admissions in Mississippi
reveals that one‐fifth of prison admissions in Mississippi were due to violations of conditional release 
of the states in 2014.
were due to violations of conditional release compared to just under
st
 
compared to just under one‐quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Mississippi had the 31
one-quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Mississippi
highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states 
had the 31st highest percentage of prison admissions that were
in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
due to violations
of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

95

MISSISSIPPI

Chart 3. Mississippi Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Information on the outcomes of parole hearings was not available from the state. However, one source stated, “Mississippi’s parole grant rate has fluctuated widely over a
relatively short period, from as high as 57 percent in November 2011 to as low as 30 percent in October 2012.”
Source: Final Report December 2013 Mississippi Corrections and Criminal Justice Task Force, www.legislature.ms.gov/Documents/MSTaskForce_FinalReport.pdf, pg. 12.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

10

0

6

7

2006

2007

9
4
2008

4
2009
Mississippi

2010

9

8

10
7

6
2011
State Total

2012

2013

2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has remained lower in Mississippi compared to the states in aggregate
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
throughout most years of the series with the exception of 2012. In 2013, the rate was 7 per 100 parolees in Mississippi
parole during the year. 
compared to
9 per 100 for the states in aggregate.

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has remained lower in Mississippi compared to the states in 
aggregate throughout most years of the series with the exception of 2012. In 2013, the rate was 7 per 
100 parolees in Mississippi compared to 9 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

MISSISSIPPI

96
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2013

Mississippi
22%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Mississippi, just over one-fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN MISSOURI

Missouri 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Missouri compared to the states as a whole. 
Parolees are also more likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Missouri currently 
practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, 
property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are higher in Missouri compared to the states as a whole. Parolees are
also more
  likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Missouri currently practices discretionary
th
release for
the majority of offenders,
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders,
Missouri had the 11
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
and public
  order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800
707

718

597

600

706

700
600
603

683

670

672

674

670

671

612

615

612

605

597

582

500
400

355
402

300

421

432

445

460

434

425

460

676

679

684

563

561

551

447

418

396

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
Missouri Prison Population

State Prison Population

Missouri Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

MISSOURI

98
The prison population rate in Missouri is higher than the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate of 718 occurred in 2004; thereafter, the
rate declined slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate stood at
684 in Missouri versus 551 for all 50 states. Missouri had the 11th
highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 92%
of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Missouri had the 11th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Missouri had the 11th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Missouri is also higher than the aggregate state rate. From 2003 to 2008, the parole population rate
in Missouri increased; thereafter, it decreased every year except
for 2011. In 2014, the parole population rate in Missouri was 396,
higher than the aggregate state rate of 305. Missouri had the 11th
highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 78%
2014, the parole population rate in Missouri was 396, higher than the aggregate state rate of 305. 
of admissions to parole were due
to a discretionary decision such
Missouri had the 11th highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 
as the decision of a parole board.

2014, 78% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole 
board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
50%
43%

45%
40%

39%

42%

44%

44%

45%

35%

36%

35%
30%

31%

33%

34%

34%

46%

46%

35%

35%

48%

46%

46%

27%

26%

2012

2013

47%

33%

25%

28%

20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Missouri

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout this series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Missouri was higher than that
 
of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Missouri had the 6th highest
remained Throughout this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning
Missouri was higher than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained 
percentage of prison admisin 2011, the percentage in Missouri reached 48% in 2011 with
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Missouri reached 48% in 
sions due to violations of conroughly comparable rates thereafter. In 2014, nearly half of prison
2011 with roughly comparable rates thereafter. In 2014, nearly half of prison admissions in Missouri 
ditional releases of the states
admissions in Missouri were due to violations of conditional
were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for 
in 2014.
release compared to just over one-quarter of the admissions for
th
states in aggregate. Missouri had the 6
states in aggregate.
Missouri had the 6th highest highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of 
percentage of
conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
prison admissions
due to violations of conditional releases of the
 
states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

99

MISSOURI

Chart 3. Missouri Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Information that breaks down the outcomes of hearings for discretionary release and non-discretionary conditional release is not available. In 2014, the board approved the
release of 11,316 prisoners.
Source: Missouri Board of Probation and Parole Annual Report 2014, www.doc.mo.gov/Documents/prob/AR%202014%20P&P.pdf.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30
24

25
20

20

10

15

20

21
17

14
15

20
14

14
11

12
8

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Missouri

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Missouri compared to the states in aggregate and has been so for
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
seven out of nine years of the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 17 per 100 parolees in Missouri compared to 8 per 100
parole during the year. 
for the states
in aggregate.

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Missouri compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so for seven out of nine years of the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 17 per 100 parolees in 
Missouri compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

MISSOURI

100
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Missouri

States Total
24%

49%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Missouri, 49% percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN MONTANA

Montana 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Montana compared to the states as a whole. 
Parolees are also more likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states in aggregate. One‐quarter of 
parole hearings lead to a discretionary release, while one‐half are waived and another quarter are 
denied. Montana currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Montana compared to the states as a whole. Parolees
offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
are also more
likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states in aggregate. One-quarter of parole hearings lead
 
to a discretionary
release, while one-half are waived and another quarter are denied. Montana currently practices
rd
Montana had the 33
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
discretionary release for the majority
of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders,
 
drug offenders,
and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600
500

520

400
300

488

488

447

317

308

312

316

117

114

116

115

2003

2004

2005

2006

597

582

563

561

551

463

467

474

484

475

461

460

463

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

130

118

132

129

124

121

129

137

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
Montana Prison Population

State Prison Population

Montana Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

MONTANA

102
The prison population rate in Montana is lower than the aggregate
state rate. Though the rate in Montana has remained fairly stable
over time, the peak rate was in 2005-2006; thereafter, the rate declined slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was 463 in Montana versus 551 for all 50 states. Montana had the 33rd highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 89% of releases
from prison were conditional releases.

Montana had the 33rd highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Montana had the 39th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

Throughout the series, the parole population rate in Montana has
remained relatively stable, though the overall trend has shown a
slight increase. In 2014, the rate in Montana was 137, significantly
lower thanThroughout the series, the parole population rate in Montana has remained relatively stable, though the 
the aggregate rate of 305. Montana had the 39th highest
parole population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, all reported adoverall trend has shown a slight increase. In 2014, the rate in Montana was 137, significantly lower than 
th as the
missions to
parole were due to a discretionary decision such
 highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. 
the aggregate rate of 305. Montana had the 39
decision of(CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, all reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 
a parole board.

decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

27%

25%

26%

25%

26%

20%
15%

19%

19%

19%

19%

2003

2004

2005

2006

25%
22%

22%

2010

2011

26%

28%

23%

23%

2013

2014

10%
5%
0%
2007

2008

Montana

2009

State Institutions

2012

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout
the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional
release violators in Montana was lower than that
 
of the aggregate
states. However, while the states aggregately reMontana had the 28th highest
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
mained steady
for several years before decreasing beginning in
percentage of prison admisMontana was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained 
2011, the percentage
in Montana jumped in 2007, hovered for sevsions due to violations of consteady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Montana jumped in 
eral years approaching the aggregate state rate, but has shown a
ditional releases of the states
2007, hovered for several years approaching the aggregate state rate, but has shown a slight decline 
slight decline
recently. In 2014, twenty-three percent of prison adin 2014.
recently. In 2014, twenty‐three percent of prison admissions in Montana were due to violations of 
missions in
Montana were due to violations of conditional release
comparedconditional release compared to twenty‐eight percent of the admissions for states in aggregate. 
to twenty-eight percent of the admissions for states in
th
 highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases 
aggregate.Montana had the 28
Montana had the 28th
highest percentage of prison
of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
admissions
due to violations of conditional releases of the states
in 2014.  

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

103

Chart 3. Montana Grant Rate, January ‐ October 2015 
 

MONTANA

Chart 3a. Montana Grant Rate, January - October 2015
Chart 3. Montana Grant Rate, January ‐ October 2015 
 
Granted
25%

Granted
Denied

48%
48%

25%
27%

Denied
Waived

27%
  
 
Waived
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in the first ten months of 2015 that resulted in parole being granted, denied, or waived. Nearly half of the hearings were
 
  
waived, while a quarter of hearings resulted in parole being granted and the remaining twenty-seven percent resulted in parole being denied.
  Chart 3b. Montana Grants by Month, January 2013 ‐ October 2015 
   
Chart 3b. Montana Grants by Month, January 2013 - October 2015
Chart 3b. Montana Grants by Month, January 2013 ‐ October 2015 
250
 
250
200
150
100

30%

42%

25%

29%
29%

25%

30%

23%
23%

200
150
100
50

50

0

30%

Jan 2013
2013
Feb Jan
2013
MarFeb
2013
2013
AprMar
2013
2013
May Apr
2013
2013
JunMay
2013
2013
Jul Jun
2013
2013
Aug 2013
Jul 2013
SepAug
2013
2013
OctSep
2013
2013
Nov Oct
2013
2013
Dec 2013
Nov 2013
Jan 2014
Dec 2013
Feb 2014
Jan 2014
Mar 2014
Feb 2014
Apr 2014
2014
MayMar
2014
Apr
2014
Jun 2014
May
2014
Jul 2014
Jun
2014
Aug 2014
Jul 2014
Sep 2014
2014
OctAug
2014
2014
NovSep
2014
2014
Dec Oct
2014
JanNov
2015
2014
FebDec
2015
2014
Mar Jan
2015
2015
AprFeb
2015
2015
MayMar
2015
2015
Jun Apr
2015
2015
JulMay
2015
2015
Aug Jun
2015
2015
Sep 2015
Jul 2015
Oct 2015
Aug 2015
Sep 2015
Oct 2015

30%

42%

Comme
because 
2013 

0

Granted

Denied

Waived

 
Granted
Denied
Waived
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in the first ten months of 2015 that resulted in 
 
Chart 3b shows
the outcome of parole hearings each month from January, 2014 to October, 2015. The rate of parole being granted varies significantly over the months,
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in the first ten months of 2015 that resulted in 
parole being granted, denied, or waived. Nearly half of the hearings were waived, while a quarter of 
varying from 19% to 44%.
parole being granted, denied, or waived. Nearly half of the hearings were waived, while a quarter of 
hearings resulted in parole being granted and the remaining twenty‐seven percent resulted in parole 
Source: State
of Montana Board of Pardons and Parole Statistical Data 2015 (Jan-Oct), http://bopp.mt.gov/Portals/42/history/Statistical_Data_2015/Stats%20October%20
hearings resulted in parole being granted and the remaining twenty‐seven percent resulted in parole 
being denied. 
2015%20Calendar%20year.pdf.
being denied. 
 
  The second chart shows the outcome of parole hearings each month from January, 2014 to October, 
The second chart shows the outcome of parole hearings each month from January, 2014 to October, 
2015. The rate of parole being granted varies significantly over the months, varying from 19% to 44%. 
2015. The rate of parole being granted varies significantly over the months, varying from 19% to 44%. 
  
   (Source: State of Montana Board of Pardons and Parole Statistical Data 2015 (Jan‐Oct) 
(Source: State of Montana Board of Pardons and Parole Statistical Data 2015 (Jan‐Oct) 
http://bopp.mt.gov/Portals/42/history/Statistical_Data_2015/Stats%20October%202015%20Calendar%
http://bopp.mt.gov/Portals/42/history/Statistical_Data_2015/Stats%20October%202015%20Calendar%
20year.pdf) 
20year.pdf) 
 
 
 
 
   

134 

134 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

MONTANA

104
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15
15

15

12

16
14

17
14
14

14

13

15

14

13

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

12

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Montana

2010

2011
State Total

 
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in theyear from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in Montana compared to the states in aggregate and has been so for six
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
out of nine years of the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 13 per 100 parolees in Montana compared to 8 per 100 for the
parole during the year. 
states in aggregate.
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in Montana compared to the states in aggregate and has 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
been so for six out of nine years of the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 13 per 100 parolees in Montana 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Montana

States Total
24%

41%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Montana, forty-one percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.
135 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NEBRASKA

Nebraska 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Nebraska compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees who are at risk of incarceration in Nebraska are more likely to be reincarcerated 
compared to the states as a whole. The majority of parole hearings lead to parole being granted. 
Nebraska currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders.  
Summary:
  Prison and parole population rates are lower in Nebraska compared to the states as a whole. However,
th
paroleesNebraska had the 40
who are at risk of incarceration
in Nebraska are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014 
a whole.  The majority of parole hearings lead to parole being granted. Nebraska currently practices discretionary
release for
the majority of offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

551

500
400
300

358

385

339

333

338

337

330

335

334

338

313

308

306

305

99

89

75

2012

2013

2014

313

317

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

50

62

51

60

60

63

61

69

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

200
100

83

0
2011

Nebraska Prison Population

State Prison Population

Nebraska Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The prison population rate in Nebraska is much lower than the aggregate state rate. In recent years, 

NEBRASKA

106
The prison population rate in Nebraska is much lower than the aggregate state rate. In recent years, however, the Nebraska rate has
increased while the aggregate state rate has decreased. In 2014,
the prison population rate was 385 in Nebraska versus 551 for all
50 states. Nebraska had the 40th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014. In 2014, 65% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Nebraska had the 40th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Nebraska had the 45th highest
parole population rates of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Nebraska is also far lower than the
aggregate state rate, though it has been increasing slightly over
time. In 2014, the parole population rate was 75 in Nebraska versus 305 for all 50 states. Nebraska had one of the lowest parole
The parole population rate in Nebraska is also far lower than the aggregate state rate, though it has 
population rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 98% of admissions
been increasing slightly over time. In 2014, the parole population rate was 75 in Nebraska versus 305 for 
to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision
all 50 states. Nebraska had one of the lowest parole population rates of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, 
of a parole board.

LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 98% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the 
decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

27%

26%

28%

25%
20%
20%
15%
10%

14%

15%

11%

16%
13%

13%

13%

14%

18%

13%
10%

5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Nebraska

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were conditional release violators in Nebraska was much
 
lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Nebraska had the 34th highaggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing
violators in Nebraska was much lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
est percentage of prison adbeginning in 2011, the percentage in Nebraska has been
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
missions that were due to vioincreasing over the past few years. In 2014, nearly a fifth of prison
Nebraska has been increasing over the past few years. In 2014, nearly a fifth of prison admissions in 
lations of conditional releases
admissions in Nebraska were due to violations of conditional
Nebraska were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the 
of the states in 2014.
release compared to just over one-quarter of the admissions for th
admissions for states in aggregate. Nebraska had the 34  highest percentage of prison admissions that 
states in aggregate. Nebraska had the 34th highest percentage
were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional
 

releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

107
Chart 3. Nevada Grant Rate, 2011 

NEBRASKA

Chart 3. Nebraska Grant Rate, 2011
Granted
Denied
Deferred

5%
8%

87%

 
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2011 (the most recent year for which 
Chart 3 shows
the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2011 (the most recent year for which data are available) that resulted in parole being granted, denied, or
data are available) that resulted in parole being granted, denied, or deferred. Eighty‐seven percent of 
deferred. Eighty-seven percent of hearings resulted in parole being granted while the remaining hearings resulted in a denial or deferral.
hearings resulted in parole being granted while the remaining hearings resulted in a denial or deferral. 
Source: 37th Annual Report of the Nebraska Board of Parole FY2011, www.nlc1.nlc.state.ne.us/epubs/P1500/A001-201011.pdf.
 
Source: 37th Annual Report of the Nebraska Board of Parole FY2011, 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
www.nlc1.nlc.state.ne.us/epubs/P1500/A001‐201011.pdf. 
  Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
  50
 
40

30

20

10

15

15

15

15

14
14

15

14

13

11

12

14

19

18

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

15

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Nebraska

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has been higher in Nebraska since 2011 compared to the states in aggregate,
though it was
equivalent to the aggregate state rate in the earlier years from 2006 through 2010. In 2014, the rate stood
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year plus, the reported number of entries to 
at 18 per 100
parolees in Nebraska compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has been higher in Nebraska since 2011 compared to the states in 
aggregate, though it was equivalent to the aggregate state rate in the earlier years from 2006 through 
2010. In 2014, the rate stood at 18 per 100 parolees in Nebraska compared to 8 per 100 for the states in 
aggregate. 

 

139 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NEBRASKA

108
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Nebraska

States Total
24%

30%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Nebraska, thirty percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly higher than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NEVADA

Nevada 
Summary: Prison population rates are slightly higher in Nevada compared to the states in aggregate 
while parole population rates are lower. Parolees are also less likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to 
the states as a whole. Just over one‐half of parole hearings lead to parole being granted while the rest 
resulted in parole being denied. Nevada currently practices discretionary release for the majority of 
offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public 
Summary: Prison population rates are slightly higher in Nevada compared to the states in aggregate while parole
order offenders.  
population rates are lower. Parolees are also less likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole.
 
Just over one-half of parole hearings lead to parole being granted while the rest resulted in parole being denied.
th
Nevada had the 18
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
Nevada currently
practices discretionary
release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex
 
offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800
700

628

648

647

600
597

600

603

680

688
640

612

615

612

618
605

620
597

500
400
317

316

323

317

308

312

206

218

203

188

196

207

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

308

621

582

615

613

576

563

561

551

313

313

308

306

305

243

259

257

259

272

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

300
200

246

100
0
2003

Nevada Prison Population

State Prison Population

Nevada Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

NEVADA

110
The prison population rate in Nevada is slightly higher than the
aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 688 occurred in 2007; since
then, the rate has declined. In 2014, the prison population rate was
576 in Nevada versus 551 for all 50 states. Nevada had the 18th
highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 61%
of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Nevada had the 18th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Nevada had the 17th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Nevada is lower than the aggregate
state rate. From 2003 to 2007, the parole population rate in Nevada decreased; thereafter, it began to increase. In 2014, the rate in
Nevada was 272 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 305.
The parole population rate in Nevada is lower than the aggregate state rate. From 2003 to 2007, the 
Nevada had
the 17th highest parole population rate of the states
parole population rate in Nevada decreased; thereafter, it began to increase. In 2014, the rate in Nevada 
in 2014. In 2014, 67% of admissions to parole were due to a discreth
 highest parole population 
was 272 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Nevada had the 17
tionary decision
such as the decision of a parole board.

rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT)In 2014, 67% of admissions to parole were due to a 
discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
45%

40%

40%
35%

34%

33%
31%

35%

35%

35%

31%

34%

30%

36%

33%
28%

27%

26%

16%

16%

16%

16%

2011

2012

2013

2014

25%
20%

21%

15%
14%

10%

11%

11%

2006

2007

13%

13%

2009

2010

5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2008

Nevada

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout most of the series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Nevada was lower than
 
that of the aggregate states. In 2014, sixteen percent of prison
Throughout most of the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Nevada had the 38th highest
admissions in Nebraska were due to violations of conditional
violators in Nevada was lower than that of the aggregate states. In 2014, sixteen percent of prison 
percentage of prison admisrelease compared to just over one-quarter of the admissions for
admissions in Nebraska were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter 
sions that were due to violastates in aggregate. Nevada had the 38th highest percentage
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Nevada had the 38th highest percentage of prison admissions 
tions of conditional releases
of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional
that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
of the states in 2014.
releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

111

NEVADA

Chart 3. Nevada Grant Rate, Discretionary Parole Hearings, 2015‐2016 
Chart 3a. Nevada Grant Rate, Discretionary Parole Hearings, 2015-2016
Chart 3. Nevada Grant Rate, Discretionary Parole Hearings, 2015‐2016 
Granted
Granted
Denied
Denied
44%
44%

56%
56%

 
 Chart 3b. Nevada Grant Rate, Mandatory Parole Hearings, 2015‐2016 
Chart 3b. Nevada Grant Rate, Mandatory Parole Hearings, 2015‐2016 

  
  

Chart 3b. Nevada Grant Rate, Mandatory Parole Hearings, 2015-2016
Granted
Granted
Denied
Denied
43%
43%

57%
57%

 
The first chart shows the percentage of discretionary parole hearings from the first quarter of fiscal year 
 
The first chart shows the percentage of discretionary parole hearings from the first quarter of fiscal year 
2015 to the first quarter of fiscal year 2016 that resulted in parole being granted or denied. The second 
2015 to the first quarter of fiscal year 2016 that resulted in parole being granted or denied. The second 
Chart 3a
shows the percentage of discretionary parole hearings from the first quarter of fiscal year 2015 to the first quarter of fiscal year 2016 that resulted in parole being
chart shows the same information for mandatory parole releases. While discretionary parole release can 
granted or denied. The second chart shows the same information for mandatory parole releases. While discretionary parole release can be denied for numerous reasons,
chart shows the same information for mandatory parole releases. While discretionary parole release can 
be denied for numerous reasons, "mandatory parole release" can only be denied if a determination is 
“mandatory
parole release” can only be denied if a determination is made that there is a reasonable probability that the prisoner would be a danger to public safety if released
on parole. Just over half of both types of hearings resulted in parole being granted.
be denied for numerous reasons, "mandatory parole release" can only be denied if a determination is 
made that there is a reasonable probability that the prisoner would be a danger to public safety if 
Source: The Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners Quarterly Reports (FY15Q1-FY16Q1), www.parole.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/parolenvgov/content/Information/Q1FY2016_
made that there is a reasonable probability that the prisoner would be a danger to public safety if 
released on parole. Just over half of both types of hearings resulted in parole being granted. 
Jul-Sep%202015.pdf.
released on parole. Just over half of both types of hearings resulted in parole being granted. 
 
 Source: The Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners Quarterly Reports (FY15Q1‐FY16Q1), 
Source: The Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners Quarterly Reports (FY15Q1‐FY16Q1), 
www.parole.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/parolenvgov/content/Information/Q1FY2016_Jul‐Sep%202015.pdf. 
www.parole.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/parolenvgov/content/Information/Q1FY2016_Jul‐Sep%202015.pdf. 
 
 
 
 

 
 

144 
144 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NEVADA

112
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10
9

7

6

2007

2008

0
2006

8
2009
Nevada

5
2010

7
2011

9

9

9

10

8

6
2012

2013

State Total

2014

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

Throughout
most of the series, the rate of incarceration for parolees has been lower in Nevada compared to the states
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
in aggregate.
Since 2012, the rates have been similar. In 2014 the rate stood at 6 per 100 parolees in Nevada compared
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
to 8 per 100parole during the year. 
for the states in aggregate.

 
Throughout most of the series, the rate of incarceration for parolees has been lower in Nevada 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
compared to the states in aggregate. Since 2012, the rates have been similar. In 2014 the rate stood at 6 
per 100 parolees in Nevada compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

Nevada

15%

States Total

24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Nevada, fifteen percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is noticeably lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.
145 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

New Hampshire 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New Hampshire compared to the states as a 
whole. However, parolees are more likely to be re‐incarcerated when compared to the states in 
aggregate. Eighty percent of parole hearings lead to the inmate being approved for release. New 
Hampshire currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New Hampshire compared to the states as a whole.
offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
However, parolees are more likely to be re-incarcerated when compared to the states in aggregate. Eighty percent
 
of parole hearings lead to the inmate being approved for release. New Hampshire currently practices discretionary
New Hampshire had one of the lowest prison population rates of the states in 2014. 
release for
the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders,
 
and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

563

561

551

308

306

305

287

280

500
400
317

308

312

316

323

280

291

317

308

313

300
200
100

313
252

251

250

124

124

2003

2004

255

141

265

162

163

163

2006

2007

2008

266

268

178

191

2009

2010

267
212

207

214

225

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2005

New Hampshire Prison Population

State Prison Population

New Hampshire Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 shows theThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole
in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

NEW HAMPSHIRE

114
The prison population rate in New Hampshire is much lower than
the aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 615 occurred in 2007;
thereafter, the rate has since declined slightly. In 2014, the prison
population rate was 280 in New Hampshire versus 551 for all 50
states. New Hampshire had one of the lowest prison population
rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 96% of releases from prison
were conditional releases.

New Hampshire had the 47th
highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014.
New Hampshire had the 23rd
highest parole population rate
of the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in New Hampshire is also lower than
the aggregate state rate, though it has been increasing steadily
for the past few years. In 2014, the parole population rate in New
Hampshire was 225 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 305.
The parole population rate in New Hampshire is also lower than the aggregate state rate, though it has 
New Hampshire had the 23rd highest parole population rate of the
been increasing steadily for the past few years. In 2014, the parole population rate in New Hampshire 
states in 2014. In 2014, half of admissions to parole were due to a
was 225 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 305. New Hampshire had the 23rd highest parole 
discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, half of admissions to parole 
were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
60%

50%

40%

30%

47%

44%
37%

31%

41%

40%

33%

34%

34%

46%

43%

48%
44%

43%

39%

35%

36%

35%

35%

33%

20%

27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

10%

0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

New Hampshire

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
The percentage
of prison admissions that were conditional
series for all 50 states is shown. 
release violators in New Hampshire is higher than that of the
 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained
The percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in New Hampshire is higher 
New Hampshire had the 9th
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the
than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained steady for several 
highest percentage of prison
percentage in New Hampshire has been increasing. In 2014, fortyyears before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in New Hampshire has been increasing. In 
admissions that were due to
three percent of prison admissions in New Hampshire were due
2014, forty‐three percent of prison admissions in New Hampshire were due to violations of conditional 
violations of conditional reto violations of conditional release compared to about a quarter
release compared to about a quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. New Hampshire had the 
leases of the states in 2014.
of the admissions
for states in aggregate. New Hampshire had
9th highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the 
the 9th highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to
states in 2014. 
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

115
Chart 3. New Hampshire Grant Rate, 2014 

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Chart 3. New Hampshire Grant Rate, 2014
Inmates Approved for
Parole
20%

Inmates Denied
Parole
80%

 
 
Chart 3 shows
the percentage of parole hearings in state fiscal year 2014 that resulted in inmates being approved for parole or denied parole. Eighty percent of hearings
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in state fiscal year 2014 that resulted in inmates 
resulted in the inmate being approved for parole while the remaining twenty percent resulted in parole being denied.
being approved for parole or denied parole. Eighty percent of hearings resulted in the inmate being 
Source: New Hampshire Department of Corrections 2014 Annual Report, www.nh.gov/nhdoc/divisions/publicinformation/documents/annual-report-2014.pdf.
approved for parole while the remaining twenty percent resulted in parole being denied. 
  
Source: New Hampshire Department of Corrections 2014 Annual Report, 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
www.nh.gov/nhdoc/divisions/publicinformation/documents/annual‐report‐2014.pdf. 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
  50
 
40

30

20

10

24
17
15

15

14

20

20

14

14

22

21

21

21

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

12

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

New Hampshire

2011

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in New Hampshire compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 21 per 100 parolees in New Hampshire compared to 8 per 100 for the
states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in New Hampshire compared to the states in aggregate 
and has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 21 per 100 parolees in New Hampshire 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

 

149 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NEW HAMPSHIRE

116
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

New Hampshire

States Total
24%

59%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In New Hampshire, fifty-nine percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NEW JERSEY

New Jersey 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New Jersey compared to the states as a 
whole. However, parolees are re‐incarcerated at rates compared to the states in aggregate. About one‐
third of parole hearings lead to parole being granted, though a fifth of all scheduled hearings did not 
occur. New Jersey currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including some 
violent offenders and sex offenders, as well as all property offenders, drug offenders, and public order 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New Jersey compared to the states as a whole. However,
offenders.  
parolees are re-incarcerated at rates compared to the states in aggregate. About one-third of parole hearings lead
to parole  being granted, though a fifth of all scheduled hearings did not occur. New Jersey currently practices
New Jersey had one of the lowest prison population rates of the states in 2014. 
discretionary
release for the majority of offenders, including some violent offenders and sex offenders, as well as
  offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
all property
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

340

326

551

500
421

411

419

418

407

400
300

391

380

371

351

312

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

218

212

220

228

239

205

230

231

224

219

217

215

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0

New Jersey Prison Population

State Prison Population

New Jersey Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

NEW JERSEY

118
The prison population rate in New Jersey is much lower than the aggregate state rate and has been steadily decreasing since 2005. In
2014, the prison population rate was 312 in New Jersey versus 551
for all 50 states. New Jersey had one of the lowest prison population
rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 39% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

New Jersey had the 45th highest prison population rates of
the states in 2014.
New Jersey had the 26th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in New Jersey is also lower than the aggregate state rate, remaining relatively stable over time. In 2014, the
parole population rate in New Jersey was 215 which is lower than
the aggregate
rate of 305. New Jersey had the 26th highest parole
The parole population rate in New Jersey is also lower than the aggregate state rate, remaining 
population
rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, 64% of admissions to
relatively stable over time. In 2014, the parole population rate in New Jersey was 215 which is lower 
parole were
due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of
th
 highest parole population rate of the states in 
than the aggregate rate of 305. New Jersey had the 26
a parole board.
2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 64% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 

decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%
25%

29%

29%

27%

30%
28%

27%
25%

20%

23%

23%

2009

2010

25%

24%

26%

28%

26%

25%

2013

2014

15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

New Jersey

2011

State Institutions

2012

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in New Jersey was lower
 
than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggreIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
New Jersey had the 25th highgately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginviolators in New Jersey was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
est percentage of prison admisning in 2011, the percentage in New Jersey decreased until 2010,
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
sions due to violations of conincreasing slightly thereafter. In 2014, one quarter of prison admisNew Jersey decreased until 2010, increasing slightly thereafter. In 2014, one quarter of prison 
ditional releases of the states
sions in New Jersey were due to violations of conditional release
in 2014.
comparedadmissions in New Jersey were due to violations of conditional release compared to twenty‐eight 
to twenty-eight percent of the admissions for states in
th
 highest percentage of prison 
percent of the admissions for states in aggregate. New Jersey had the 25
aggregate. New Jersey had the 25th highest percentage of prison
admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
admissions
due to violations of conditional releases of the states
in 2014.

 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

119
Chart 3. New Jersey Grant Rate, 2014 

Chart 3. New Jersey Grant Rate, 2014 
21%
1%
21%
1%

Paroled

33%

45%33%

Denied
Paroled
Deferred
Denied
Hearing Not Held
Deferred

 
45%
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in an inmate being
paroled, Not
parole being
Hearing
Helddenied, a hearing being deferred, or a scheduled
  State and county hearings are combined. Nearly one-half of the hearings resulted in parole being denied, while one-third resulted in parole being granted.
hearing not held.
Another fifth of the hearings were not held.
 
Chart 3b. New Jersey Grants by Year, 2011‐2014 
 
 
 
18,000
Chart 3b. New Jersey Grants by Year, 2011‐2014 
Chart 3b. New Jersey Grants by Year, 2011-2014
  16,000
18,000
14,000
16,000
12,000
14,000
10,000
12,000
8,000
10,000
6,000
8,000
4,000
6,000

2,000
4,000
2,000

38%

0 38%
FY2011

0
FY2011

35%

34%

35%

34%
FY2013

FY2012
Paroled
Denied
FY2012

Deferred

Hearing Not Held
FY2013

NEW JERSEY

Chart 3a. New Jersey Grant Rate, 2014

33%
33%

FY2014

FY2014

 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in an inmate 
Paroled
Denied
Deferred
Hearing Not Held
 
being paroled, parole being denied, a hearing being deferred, or a scheduled hearing not held. State and 
Chart 3b shows
the outcomes of parole hearings for fiscal years 2011 to 2014. While the rate of parole being granted has decreased slightly over the years, the overall
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in an inmate 
county hearings are combined. Nearly one‐half of the hearings resulted in parole being denied, while 
number of hearings has decreased as well.
being paroled, parole being denied, a hearing being deferred, or a scheduled hearing not held. State and 
one‐third resulted in parole being granted. Another fifth of the hearings were not held. 
Source: New
Jersey State Parole Board 2014 Annual Report, www.nj.gov/parole/docs/reports/AnnualReport2014.pdf.
county hearings are combined. Nearly one‐half of the hearings resulted in parole being denied, while 
 
one‐third resulted in parole being granted. Another fifth of the hearings were not held. 
The second chart shows the outcomes of parole hearings for fiscal years 2011 to 2014. While the rate of 
 
parole being granted has decreased slightly over the years, the overall number of hearings has 
The second chart shows the outcomes of parole hearings for fiscal years 2011 to 2014. While the rate of 
decreased as well. 
parole being granted has decreased slightly over the years, the overall number of hearings has 
 
decreased as well. 
  Source: New Jersey State Parole Board 2014 Annual Report, 
www.nj.gov/parole/docs/reports/AnnualReport2014.pdf 
Source: New Jersey State Parole Board 2014 Annual Report, 
 
www.nj.gov/parole/docs/reports/AnnualReport2014.pdf 
   
 
154 
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE
154  PROFILES
 

NEW JERSEY

120
  Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15
14

15

14

14

14

12

12

9

9

8

7

8

8

8

9

8

7

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

New Jersey

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has been similar in New Jersey compared to the states in the aggregate since
2012, though
it was lower than the aggregate rate in earlier years. In 2014, the rate was 7 per 100 parolees in New
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
Jersey compared
to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
parole during the year. 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has been similar in New Jersey compared to the states in the 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
aggregate since 2012, though it was lower than the aggregate rate in earlier years. In 2014, the rate was 
7 per 100 parolees in New Jersey compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

New Jersey
25%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In New Jersey, a quarter of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is similar to the aggregate state proportion
155 
of 24%.
 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NEW MEXICO

New	Mexico	
Summary:	Prison	and	parole	population	rates	are	lower	in	New	Mexico	compared	to	the	states	as	a	
whole.	While	data	on	the	likelihood	of	incarceration	for	parolees	are	not	available,	conditional	release	
violators	make	up	a	larger	share	of	prison	admissions	in	New	Mexico	than	in	the	states	in	aggregate.	
New	Mexico	currently	practices	discretionary	release	only	for	inmates	convicted	prior	to	the	effective	
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New Mexico compared to the states as a whole. While
date	of	the	determinate	sentencing	statute	in	1979	and	for	inmates	serving	life	sentences.		
data on the likelihood of incarceration for parolees are not available, conditional release violators make up a
	
larger share of prison admissionsthin New Mexico than in the states in aggregate. New Mexico currently practices
New	Mexico	had	the	36
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014	
discretionary
release only for inmates
convicted prior to the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute in
	
1979 and for inmates serving life sentences.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

500
400
300

561

551

439

443

306

305

428
452

317

455

308

460

312

456

316

200
100

563

175

191

200

436

437

448

308

313

313

208

203

201

422

418

323

317

238

248

201

323
308

127

142

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

New Mexico Prison Population

State Prison Population

New Mexico Parole Population

State Parole Population

2013

2014

	

*Recent changes
in the New Mexico parole population may be because of changes to parolees serving their parole time in prison. The 2011 parole population is estimated.
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
The state changed their reporting method in 2007, causing the reported population to increase.

each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	

Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andUnited	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	

	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The	prison	population	rate	in	New	Mexico	is	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	The	rate	has	remained	

NEW MEXICO

122
The prison population rate in New Mexico is lower than the aggregate state rate. The rate has remained fairly stable over the
years, with the peak rate of 448 occurring in 2011. In 2014, the
prison population rate was 443 in New Mexico versus 551 for all
50 states. New Mexico had the 36th highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, 74% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

New Mexico had the 36th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
New Mexico had the 36th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in New Mexico is also lower than the
aggregateThe parole population rate in New Mexico is also lower than the aggregate state rate. The state changed 
state rate. The state changed their reporting method
in 2007, causing
the reported population to increase. The 2011
their reporting method in 2007, causing the reported population to increase. The 2011 parole 
parole population
is estimated. Recent changes in the New
population is estimated. Recent changes in the New Mexico parole population may be because of 
Mexico parole
population
may be because of changes to parolees serving their parole time in prison. In 2014, the parole
changes to parolees serving their parole time in prison. In 2014, the parole population rate in New 
population
rate
in
New
Mexico
was reported to be 142, lower than the aggregate rate of 305. New Mexicothhad
the 36th
 highest 
Mexico was reported to be 142, lower than the aggregate rate of 305. New Mexico had the 36
highest parole
population
rate
of
the
states
in
2014.
In
2014,
no
reported
admissions
to
parole
were
due
to
a
discretionparole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, no reported admissions 
ary decision
such as the decision of a parole board.
to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 

 

Chart 2.Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
60%
53%

54%

50%

40%
31%

33%

34%

30%
30%
20%

24%

25%

2003

2004

34%

35%

33%

32%

38%

36%
34%

34%
35%

35%

31%

34%

33%
27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

10%

0%
2005

2006

2007

2008

New Mexico

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
In the earlypublished by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were series for all 50 states is shown. 
conditional release violators in New Mexico was lower
than that  of the aggregate states. However, while the states
New Mexico had the 16th
aggregately
remained steady for several years before decreasing
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
highest percentage of prison
beginningviolators in New Mexico was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
in 2011, the percentage in New Mexico increased until
admissions due to violations
recent years.
The
state
reported
a
much
larger
than
usual
volume
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
of conditional releases of the
of conditional
release
violators
in
2009
and
2010,
dropping
New Mexico increased until recent years. The state reported a much larger than usual volume of 
thereafterconditional release violators in 2009 and 2010, dropping thereafter but still remaining above the 
but still remaining above the aggregate state rate. In
states in 2014.
2014, roughly
a
third
of
prison
admissions
in
New
Mexico
were
aggregate state rate. In 2014, roughly a third of prison admissions in New Mexico were due to violations 
due to violations
of conditional release compared to one-quarter
of conditional release compared to one‐quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. New Mexico 
of the admissions for
states in aggregate. New Mexico had the
had the 16th highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the 
16th highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of
states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
conditional
releases of the states in 2014.
 

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE:  PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES

123

NEW MEXICO

Chart 3. New Mexico Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings in New Mexico are not available. The state conducts limited discretionary parole releases and most releases are mandatory
releases.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart	4.	Rate	of	Incarceration	Per	100	Parolees	at	Risk,	2006-2014	
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

State Total

	
This	chart	shows	the	rate	of	incarceration	per	100	parolees	who	are	at	risk	of	reincarceration	each	
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
year	from	2006	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	United	
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarceratedStates	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	The	incarcerated	population	includes	the	reported	number	
of	parolees	who	exited	parole	to	incarceration	for	any	reason.	The	at-risk	population	is	calculated	as	
Data on thethe	number	reported	on	parole	at	the	beginning	of	the	year,	plus	the	reported	number	of	entries	to	
rate of incarceration for parolees at risk of incarceration are not available for New Mexico as it was not
reported to BJS
during any years of the series.
parole	during	the	year.	
	
Data	on	the	rate	of	incarceration	for	parolees	at	risk	of	incarceration	are	not	available	for	New	Mexico	
as	it	was	not	reported	to	BJS	during	any	years	of	the	series.	
	
	
*Data for New Mexico are not available.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NEW MEXICO

124
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

New Mexico

States Total
24%

*Data not
available

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions.” The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

Data on the percentage of exits from parole that were to incarceration are not available.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NEW YORK

New York 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New York compared to the states as a whole, 
though parole population rates were once higher than the aggregate state rate. Parolees are more likely 
to be re‐incarcerated compared to the states’ overall rate. New York currently practices discretionary 
release for many types of offenders, while sentences for others, including violent offenders sentenced 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in New York compared to the states as a whole, though
after the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute, receive determinate sentences. 
parole population
rates were once higher than the aggregate state rate. Parolees are more likely to be re 
incarcerated compared to the states’ overall rate. New York currently practices discretionary release for many
rd
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
types ofNew York had the 43
offenders, while sentences
for others, including violent offenders sentenced after the effective date of the
 
determinate
sentencing statute, receive determinate sentences.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600
500
400
300

448

437

429

432

425

384

374

366

362

365

317

308

312

316

323

407
352

317

392

597

582

563

561

551

347

338

306

305

376

334

365

322

354

311

302

308

313

313

308

292

200

289

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

New York Prison Population

State Prison Population

New York Parole Population

State Parole Population

2013

2014

 
 
Chart 1 shows
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

NEW YORK

126
The prison population rate in New York is lower than the aggregate state rate. The rate has steadily declined over time and, in
2014, the prison population rate was 338 in New York versus 551
for all 50 states. New York had the 43rd highest prison population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 89% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

New York had the 43rd highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
New York had the 16th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in New York was slightly higher than
the aggregate state rate through 2010. However, like the prison
population rate, it has steadily declined over the years and has
been lower than the aggregate rate since 2011. In 2014, the parole population
rate in New York was 289 and is slightly lower than
The parole population rate in New York was slightly higher than the aggregate state rate through 2010. 
the aggregate
rate of 305. New York had the 16th highest parole
However, like the prison population rate, it has steadily declined over the years and has been lower than 
population
rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, 26% of admissions
the aggregate rate since 2011. In 2014, the parole population rate in New York was 289 and is slightly 
th
to parole were
due
to a discretionary decision such as the decision
 highest parole population rate of the states 
lower than the aggregate rate of 305. New York had the 16
of a parolein 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 26% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 
board.

decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
45%
39%

40%
35%
30%

36%
32%

32%

33%

33%

34%

34%

36%
35%

36%

37%

37%

35%

35%

31%

38%

39%

40%

27%

26%

2012

2013

38%

33%

25%

28%

20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

New York

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
In the earlypublished by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were series for all 50 states is shown. 
conditional release violators in New York was similar to
that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
New York had the 14th highremained In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
est percentage of prison ad2011, the violators in New York was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
percentage in New York shows steady, but incremental
missions that were due to vioremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in New York 
growth, peaking
in 2013 at forty percent. In 2014, thirty-eight
lations of conditional releases
percent ofshows steady, but incremental growth, peaking in 2013 at forty percent. In 2014, thirty‐eight percent of 
prison admissions in New York were due to violations
of the states in 2014.
prison admissions in New York were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐
of conditional release compared to just over one-quarter of the
th
 highest percentage of prison 
quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. New York had the 14
admissions
for states in aggregate. New York had the 14th highest
percentage
of prison admissions that were due to violations of
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
conditional
releases of the states in 2014.
TEXT) 
 

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE:  PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES

127

NEW YORK

Chart 3. New York Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for New York. While outcomes of individual hearings are publicly available, aggregate rates are not available.
Source: Parole Board Interview Calendar, www.parole.ny.gov/calendar.html.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

16

14

15

15

15

14

14

14

15

15

16

15

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

12

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
New York

2010

2011
State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees in New York was similar to the aggregate state rate until 2010. Since 2011, the
rate in Newthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
York has been lower. In 2014, the rate stood at 15 per 100 parolees in the state compared to 8 per 100 for
the states inparole during the year. 
aggregate.
 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees in New York was similar to the aggregate state rate until 2010. 
Since 2011, the rate in New York has been lower. In 2014, the rate stood at 15 per 100 parolees in the 
state compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NEW YORK

128
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

New York

States Total
24%

47%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In New York, almost half of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NORTH CAROLINA

North	Carolina	
Summary:	Prison	and	parole	population	rates	are	lower	in	North	Carolina	compared	to	the	states	as	a	
whole.	Parolees	are	also	less	likely	to	be	re-incarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	North	
Carolina	currently	practices	discretionary	release	only	for	offenders	sentenced	prior	to	the	1994	
Structured	Sentencing	Act.	
	 Prison and parole population rates are lower in North Carolina compared to the states as a whole.
Summary:
th
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
Parolees North	Carolina	had	the	30
are also less likely to be re-incarcerated
compared to the states as a whole. North Carolina currently
practices	 discretionary release only for offenders sentenced prior to the 1994 Structured Sentencing Act.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600
500

528

548

552

555

550

559

555

555

582

563

561

551

498

488

485

308

306

305

535

400
300

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

200

131
95

100

42

45

47

48

48

48

49

50

51

58

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

0
North Carolina Prison Population

State Prison Population

North Carolina Parole Population

State Parole Population

2013

2014

	

*In December,This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
2011, North Carolina passed legislation as part of the Justice Reinvestment Act which mandated post-release supervision for more offenders, increasing
the reported parole population (S.L. 2011-192).

each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	

Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	

	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The	prison	population	rate	in	North	Carolina	is	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	In	recent	years,	the	

NORTH CAROLINA

130
The prison population rate in North Carolina is lower than the aggregate state rate. In recent years, the rate in North Carolina has
decreased faster than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the prison population rate was 485 in North Carolina versus 551 for all 50
states. North Carolina had the 30th highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, 71% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

North Carolina had the 30th
highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014.
North Carolina had the 40th
highest parole population rate
of the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in North Carolina is also much lower than
the aggregate state rate. In December, 2011, North Carolina passed
legislationmandated post‐release supervision for more offenders, increasing the reported parole population (S.L. 
as part of the Justice Reinvestment Act which mandated
post-release supervision for more offenders, increasing the report2011‐192). The rate in 2014 was 131, still lower than the aggregate rate of 305. North Carolina had the 
ed parole population
(S.L. 2011-192). The rate in 2014 was 131, still
th
lower than40
the highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, no 
aggregate rate of 305. North Carolina had the 40th highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In
reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole 
2014, no reported
admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%

33%

34%

34%

36%

35%

35%

35%
33%

31%

30%

27%

26%

28%

25%
20%
15%

15%
10%

10%
5%

4%

3%

4%

2004

2005

1%

4%

3%

4%

4%

5%

3%

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

0%
2003

2006

North Carolina

State Institutions

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout
the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional
release violators in North Carolina was much
  of the aggregate states. However, while the states
lower to that
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
North Carolina had the 40th
aggregately
remained steady for several years before decreasing
highest percentage of prison
beginningNorth Carolina was much lower to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
in 2011, the percentage in North Carolina has been
admissions that were due to
increasingremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in North 
since 2012, corresponding to the timeframe when the
Carolina has been increasing since 2012, corresponding to the timeframe when the parole population 
violations of conditional reparole population
increased. However, it still remains noticeably
leases of the states in 2014.
increased. However, it still remains noticeably lower than the aggregate rate. In 2014, fifteen percent of 
lower than
the aggregate rate. In 2014, fifteen percent of prison
admissions
in North Carolina were due to violations of conditional
prison admissions in North Carolina were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over 
th
release compared
to just over one quarter of the admissions
one quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. North Carolina had the 40
 highest percentage of 
for statesprison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, 
in aggregate. North Carolina had the 40th highest
percentage
of prison admissions that were due to violations of
LEAVE IN TEXT) 
conditional
  releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

131

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings in North Carolina are not available. The state conducts limited discretionary parole releases for offenders sentenced before
the 1994 Structured Sentencing Act and most releases are mandatory releases.
Source: North Carolina Post-Release Supervision and Parole Commission, www.ncdps.gov/Index2.cfm?a=000003,002210.

NORTH CAROLINA

Chart 3. North Carolina Grant Rate

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

10
3

3

4

14

14

5

4

12
9

9

8

5

5

5

2012

2013

2014

5

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

North Carolina

2011

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in North Carolina compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate was 5 per 100 parolees in North Carolina compared to 8 per 100 for the states
in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in North Carolina compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate was 5 per 100 parolees in North Carolina compared 
to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NORTH CAROLINA

132
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

North Carolina

States Total

12%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In North Carolina, twelve percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN NORTH DAKOTA

North Dakota 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in North Dakota compared to the states as a 
whole. However, in recent years, parolees at risk of incarceration are more likely to be re‐incarcerated 
compared to the states in aggregate. North Dakota currently practices discretionary release for the 
majority of offenders.  
Summary:
  Prison and parole population rates are lower in North Dakota compared to the states as a whole.
However,North Dakota had one of the lowest prison population rates of the states in 2014. 
in recent years, parolees at risk of incarceration are more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the
states in aggregate.
North Dakota currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

563

561

551

313

308

306

305

267

278

281

500
400
317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

268

278

271

280

285

288

284

74

68

75

69

81

82

79

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

300
200
100

254

46

48

58

2003

2004

2005

301

100

102

2013

2014

0
North Dakota Prison Population

State Prison Population

North Dakota Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The prison population rate in North Dakota is much lower than the aggregate state rate. The rate in 

NORTH DAKOTA

134
The prison population rate in North Dakota is much lower than the
aggregate state rate. The rate in North Dakota has remained fairly
stable over the years, with increases in the last three years. In 2014,
the prison population rate was 301 in North Dakota versus 551 for
all 50 states. North Dakota had one of the lowest prison population
rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 87% of releases from prison
were conditional releases.

North Dakota had the 41st highest prison population rates of
the states in 2014.
North Dakota had the 46th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in North Dakota is also significantly lower than theThe	parole	population	rate	in	North	Dakota	is	also	significantly	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate,	
aggregate state rate, though it has increased steadily
over the years.
In 2014, the parole population rate in North Dakota
though	it	has	increased	steadily	over	the	years.	In	2014,	the	parole	population	rate	in	North	Dakota	was	
th
was 102, lower
than the aggregate rate of 305. North Dakota had
102,	lower	than	the	aggregate	rate	of	305.	North	Dakota	had	the	41
	highest	parole	population	rate	of	
the 46th highest
parole population rate of the states in 2014. In
the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	In	2014,	all	reported	admissions	to	parole	were	due	to	a	
2014, all reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

discretionary	decision	such	as	the	decision	of	a	parole	board.	
	
Chart 2.Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
60%
50%
50%

40%
31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

30%

36%

35%

35%

32%

20%

22%

23%

44%

44%

27%

26%

33%
32%

28%

26%
22%

17%

16%

10%
9%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

North Dakota

2009

2010

2011 2012

2013

2014

State Institutions

	 chart
Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this
come from the This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	

Over the years
in the series, the percentage of prison admissions
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
that were conditional release violators in North Dakota has varied
series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
widely, though it has been lower than the aggregate state rate
	
North Dakota had the 38th
in most years. Large percentage changes may be due to the
Over	the	years	in	the	series,	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	violators	
small numbers
of prison admission in North Dakota. While the
highest percentage of prison
in	North	Dakota	has	varied	widely,	though	it	has	been	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate	in	most	years.	
percentage
changes are large, the number of conditional release
admissions that were due to
Large	percentage	changes	may	be	due	to	the	small	numbers	of	prison	admission	in	North	Dakota.		While	
violators admitted
to prison does not change greatly year to
violations of conditional reyear. For example,
in 2004, 93 conditional release violators were
leases of the states in 2014.
the	percentage	changes	are	large,	the	number	of	conditional	release	violators	admitted	to	prison	does	
admitted, while
240
were
admitted
in
2005.
350
were
admitted
not	change	greatly	year	to	year.	For	example,	in	2004,	93	conditional	release	violators	were	admitted,	
in 2008 and 521 were admitted in 2009. In 2014, sixteen percent
while	240	were	admitted	in	2005.	350	were	admitted	in	2008	and	521	were	admitted	in	2009.	
of reported prison admissions in North Dakota were due to
In	2014,	sixteen	percent	of	reported	prison	admissions	in	North	Dakota	were	due	to	violations	of	
violations of
conditional release compared to just over one-quarter
conditional	release	compared	to	just	over	one-quarter	of	the	admissions	for	states	in	aggregate.	North	
of the admissions
for states in
aggregate. North Dakota had the
th
Dakota	had	the	38
	highest	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	due	to	violations	of	conditional	
38th highest
percentage of prison
admissions that were due to
releases	of	the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
	

	
	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE
RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES

135

NORTH DAKOTA

Chart 3. North Dakota Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings in North Dakota are not available.
Source: North Dakota Parole Board, www.nd.gov/docr/adult/tps/board.html.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30
20
20

10

14

15

15

15

16

15

14

14

13
14

16

14

17

12
9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

North Dakota

2011

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has been higher in North Dakota for several years compared to the states in
aggregate,the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
though it was similar to the aggregate rate through 2011. In 2014, the rate stood at 17 per 100 parolees in
parole during the year. 
North Dakota
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has been higher in North Dakota for several years compared to 
the states in aggregate, though it was similar to the aggregate rate through 2011. In 2014, the rate stood 
at 17 per 100 parolees in North Dakota compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

NORTH DAKOTA

136
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

North Dakota
27%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In North Dakota, 27% of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is similar to the aggregate state proportion
of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN OHIO

Ohio	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	have	increased	slightly	and	are	similar	in	Ohio	compared	to	the	states	
as	a	whole	while	parole	population	rates	are	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	However,	parolees	
have	a	slightly	lower	likelihood	of	being	re-incarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	Less	than	
one	tenth	of	parole	hearings	result	in	release	being	granted,	a	percentage	that	has	decreased	over	the	
past	six	years.	Ohio	currently	practices	discretionary	release	only	for	offenders	sentenced	prior	to	the	
July	1,	1996	determinate	sentencing	statute,	and	for	offenders	serving	a	life	sentence	who	were	
Summary:
Prison population rates have increased slightly and are similar in Ohio compared to the states as a
sentenced	on	or	after	July	1,	1996		
whole while parole population rates are lower than the aggregate state rate. However, parolees have a slightly
Source:	www.drc.ohio.gov/web/ParoleBoardHandbook2013.pdf.		
lower likelihood of being re-incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Less than one tenth of parole hearings
	
result in release being granted,
a percentage that has decreased over the past six years. Ohio currently practices
th
Ohio	had	the	19
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014	
discretionary release only for offenders sentenced prior to the July 1, 1996 determinate sentencing statute, and for
offenders	 serving a life sentence who were sentenced on or after July 1, 1996.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600
500

522

520

317

308

312

215

219

226

563

561

551

582

591

588

586

575

573

580

575

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

203

202

188

193

2013

2014

567
531

582

400
300
219
166

200

137

139

2010

2011

165

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2012

Ohio Prison Population

State Prison Population

Ohio Parole Population

State Parole Population

	

*The decrease in Ohio’s parole population beginning in 2009 was related to an Ohio Supreme Court case from October 2009. The result was a mandate to discharge
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
certain persons subject to post-release control, formerly called parole supervision, which was first implemented in November 2009 and continued through February 2010.
each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
A database cleaning
in 2010 also contributed to the decrease.
Chart 1 showsUnited	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The	prison	population	rate	in	Ohio	has	increased	over	the	series	and,	in	2012,	slightly	surpassed	the	
aggregate	rate.	The	peak	rate	of	591	was	in	2008;	thereafter,	the	rate	declined	slightly.	In	2014,	the	

OHIO

138
The prison population rate in Ohio has increased over the series and,
in 2012, slightly surpassed the aggregate rate. The peak rate of 591
Ohio had the 19th highest priswas in 2008; thereafter, the rate declined slightly. In 2014, the prison
on population rate of the states
population rate was 575 in Ohio versus 551 for all 50 states. Ohio
in 2014.
had the 19th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In
th
 highest prison 
2014, 55%prison population rate was 575 in Ohio versus 551 for all 50 states. Ohio had the 19
of releases from prison were conditional releases.
Ohio
had
the 27th highest
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 55% of releases from prison were conditional releases. 
parole population rate of the
The parole  population rate in Ohio is lower than the aggregate state
states in 2014.
rate. The rate
decreased
in
2009
and
2010.
The
decrease
in
Ohio’s
The parole population rate in Ohio is lower than the aggregate state rate. The rate decreased in 2009 

parole population
beginning in 2009 was related to an Ohio Suand 2010. The decrease in Ohio’s parole population beginning in 2009 was related to an Ohio Supreme 
preme Court
case from October 2009. The result was a mandate to
Court case from October 2009. The result was a mandate to discharge certain persons subject to post‐
discharge certain persons subject to post-release control, formerly
release control, formerly parole supervision, from parole. This decision was first implemented in 
parole supervision, from parole. This decision was first implemented
November 2009 and continued through February 2010. A database cleaning in 2010 also contributed to 
in November
2009 and continued through February 2010. A database cleaning in 2010 also contributed to the decrease.
the decrease. Since 2011, the rate has increased again and in 2014 was 193, still lower than the 
Since 2011,
the rate has increased again and in 2014 was 193, still lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Ohio had the 27th
th
aggregate rate of 305. Ohio had the 27
highest parole
population rate of the states in 2014.  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, 
In 2014, just one percent of reported admissions to parole were due to
a discretionary
decision such as the decision of a parole board.
LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, just one percent of reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary 

decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
40%
35%
30%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

25%

27%

26%

28%

20%
20%
18%

15%

16%
14%

10%

17%

16%
12%

12%
10%

5%

11%

12%

13%

0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Ohio

2009

2010

State Institutions

2011

2012

2013

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Ohio was lower than that of
 
the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately reThroughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
mained steady
for several years before decreasing beginning in
Ohio had the 36th highest perOhio was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained 
2011, the percentage in Ohio decreased through 2010, after which
centage of prison admissions
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Ohio decreased through 
it began to
increase again. In 2014, seventeen percent of prison
due to violations of conditional
2010, after which it began to increase again. In 2014, seventeen percent of prison admissions in Ohio 
admissions
in Ohio were due to violations of conditional release
releases of the states in 2014.
comparedwere due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for 
to just over one-quarter of the admissions for states in
th
states in aggregate. Ohio had the 36
 highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of 
aggregate.
Ohio had the 36th highest percentage
of prison admissions dueconditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

178 

139

Chart 3. Ohio Grant Rate, 2015 
 

Chart 3. Ohio Grant Rate, 2015 
 

OHIO

Chart 3. Ohio Grant Rate, 2015
Release Granted
7%

Release Not Granted
Release Granted
93%
7%

Release Not Granted

 
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole release being granted or not granted. Just seven percent of hearings in the year
Chart 3b. Ohio Grants by Year, 2010‐2015 
93%
resulted in parole
release being granted. However, only
old code cases and life sentences are eligible for discretionary release.
3000

 
Chart 3b. Ohio Grants by Year, 2010-2015
2500
Chart 3b. Ohio Grants by Year, 2010‐2015 

 

3000
2000
2500

1500
2000

1000
1500

500
1000

22%

0
500FY2010

12%

11%

9%

FY2011

FY2012

FY2013

4%
FY2014

7%
FY2015

22%

Release 11%
Granted
Release Not Granted
7%
12%
9%
4%
0
 
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole release 

being granted or not granted. Just seven percent of hearings in the year resulted in parole release being 
Release Granted
Release Not Granted
granted. However, only old code cases and life sentences are eligible for discretionary release. 
 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in parole release 
Chart 3b shows
the
same
information
for
fiscal
years
2010
to
2015.
While
the
overall
number
of
hearings
has
decreased
over
time,
the
overall
percentage
of
hearings
that
 
result in release being granted has also decreased, despite a small uptick in FY 2015. This is likely due to a shifting of the composition of old code cases to more serious
being granted or not granted. Just seven percent of hearings in the year resulted in parole release being 
The second chart shows the same information for fiscal years 2010 to 2015. While the overall number of 
offenders.
granted. However, only old code cases and life sentences are eligible for discretionary release. 
hearings has decreased over time, the overall percentage of hearings that result in release being granted 
Source: Ohio Adult Parole Authority Parole Board Report FY2015, www.drc.ohio.gov/web/Reports/ParoleBoard/Fiscal%20Year%202015%20Report.pdf.
  has also decreased, despite a small uptick in FY 2015.  This is likely due to a shifting of the composition 
The second chart shows the same information for fiscal years 2010 to 2015. While the overall number of 
of old code cases to more serious offenders. 
hearings has decreased over time, the overall percentage of hearings that result in release being granted 
 
has also decreased, despite a small uptick in FY 2015.  This is likely due to a shifting of the composition 
 
of old code cases to more serious offenders. 
Source: Ohio Adult Parole Authority Parole Board Report FY2015, 
 
www.drc.ohio.gov/web/Reports/ParoleBoard/Fiscal%20Year%202015%20Report.pdf. 
 
 
Source: Ohio Adult Parole Authority Parole Board Report FY2015, 
 
 
www.drc.ohio.gov/web/Reports/ParoleBoard/Fiscal%20Year%202015%20Report.pdf. 
 
 

 

 

 

180 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE
180 PROFILES

OHIO

140
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

10

14

14

14

12
9

9

8

6

5

6

6

2011

2012

2013

2014

11
7

7

4

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Ohio

4
2010

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in Ohio compared to the states in aggregate and has been so throughout
the series. In
2014, the Ohio rate stood at 6 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 

parole during the year. 
 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in Ohio compared to the states in aggregate and has been 
so throughout the series. In 2014, the Ohio rate stood at 6 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 100 for 
the states in aggregate. 
Ohio
States Total

20%

24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Ohio, a fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly lower than the aggregate state proportion
of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

181 

PAROLE IN OKLAHOMA

Oklahoma 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in Oklahoma compared to the states as a whole while 
parole population rates are lower. Parolees are also less likely to be reincarcerated compared to the 
states as a whole. Oklahoma currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, 
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in Oklahoma compared to the states as a whole while parole
population
rates are lower. Parolees are also less likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole.
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order 
Oklahoma
currently
offenders.   practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex
offenders,
  property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Oklahoma had the 4th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 

Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult
Residents

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1000
900
800

927

932

871

700

603

597

600

317

308

312

154

164

151

900

901

894

887

612

615

612

605

928

912

949

945

877

597

582

563

561

551

600
500
400

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

111

106

93

86

80

88

88

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

300
200

114

100
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Oklahoma Prison Population

State Prison Population

Oklahoma Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

OKLAHOMA

142
The prison population rate in Oklahoma is higher than the aggregate state rate. The rate has not declined in recent years. In 2014,
the prison population rate was 945 in Oklahoma versus 551 for all
50 states. Oklahoma had the 4th highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, 51% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

Oklahoma had the 4th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Oklahoma had the 44th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Oklahoma is lower than the aggregate state rate and has decreased somewhat over time. Data was
not reported in 2007. In 2014, the rate was 88 in Oklahoma, much
lower than the aggregate state rate of 305. Oklahoma had the 44th
highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, all
reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision
in 2014 (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT). In 2014, all reported admissions to parole were due to a 
such as the decision of a parole board.

discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 

Percentage
of Prison
Admissions
that were
Chart 2. Conditional
Release Violators
as a Percentage
of Prison
Admissions, 2003-2014
Conditional Release Violators

0.4
0.35

31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

0.3
0.25

35%

32%
26%

27%

28%

27%

2005

2006

2007

29%

35%

33%

32%

30%

31%

32%

27%

26%

28%

31%

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

24%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2008

Oklahoma

2009

State Institutions

 
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from theviolations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
 
that were conditional release violators in Oklahoma was lower than
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Oklahoma had the 20th highremained violators in Oklahoma was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
steady for several years before decreasing beginning
est percentage of prison adaggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
in 2011, the
percentage in Oklahoma showed slight increases
missions that were due to viobeginningOklahoma showed slight increases beginning in 2005, with a peak of thirty‐two percent in 2011 and 
in 2005, with a peak of thirty-two percent in 2011 and
lations of conditional releases
relative stability thereafter. In 2014, thirty‐one percent of prison admissions in Oklahoma were due to 
relative stability thereafter. In 2014, thirty-one percent of prison
of the states in 2014.
violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for states in 
admissions
in Oklahoma were due to violations of conditional
th
aggregate. Oklahoma had the 20
 highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations 
release compared
to just over one-quarter of
the admissions for
states in aggregate.
Oklahoma had the 20th highest percentage
of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
of prison  admissions that were due to violations of conditional
 
releases of  the states in 2014.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

143

OKLAHOMA

Chart 3. Oklahoma Grant Rates

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for Oklahoma. While outcomes for individual hearings are publicly available, aggregate information is not
available.
Source: Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board 2015 Dockets and Results, www.ok.gov/ppb/Dockets_and_Results/2015_Dockets_&_Results_.html

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk

50
40
30
20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10
8

6

0
2006

2007

2008

4
2009
Oklahoma

3
2010

3
2011
State Total

9

9

8

3
2012

2
2013

2
2014

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in Oklahoma compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate was 2 per 100 parolees in Oklahoma compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 
 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in Oklahoma compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate was 2 per 100 parolees in Oklahoma compared to 8 per 
100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

OKLAHOMA

144
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Oklahoma

States Total

8%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Oklahoma, 8% of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much lower than the aggregate state proportion
of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN OREGON

Oregon 
Summary: Prison population rates are lower in Oregon compared to the states as a whole while parole 
population rates are much higher. Parolees at risk of reincarceration have a similar likelihood of being 
re‐incarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Oregon currently practices discretionary release only 
for inmates convicted prior to the effective date of the determinate sentencing statute (November 1, 
1989), inmates serving life sentences who are eligible for parole, and inmates designated by the courts 
Summary: Prison population rates are lower in Oregon compared to the states as a whole while parole population
rates areas dangerous offenders.   
much higher. Parolees at risk of reincarceration have a similar likelihood of being re-incarcerated compared
 
to the states
as a whole. Oregon currently practices discretionary release only for inmates convicted prior to the
st
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
effectiveOregon had the 31
date of the determinate
sentencing statute (November 1, 1989), inmates serving life sentences who are
  parole, and inmates designated by the courts as dangerous offenders.
eligible for
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
900
800

733

766

778

600

603

700
597

796

612

792

615

765

761

757

754

612

605

597

582

600

752

757

770

563

561

551

500
400
300

471

484

485

487

488

488

489

501

483

488

505

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

484

200
100
0
Oregon Prison Population

State Prison Population

Oregon Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

OREGON

146
The prison population rate in Oregon is lower than the aggregate
state rate, remaining fairly stable over time. In 2014, the prison
population rate was 484 in Oregon versus 551 for all 50 states. Oregon had the 31st highest prison population rate of the states in
2014. In 2014, nearly all reported releases from prison were conditional releases.

Oregon had the 31st highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Oregon had the 4th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Oregon is much higher than the
aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 796 was reported in 2006;
thereafter, the rate declined slightly before increasing again. The
rate in 2014 of 770 is still much higher than the aggregate rate
The parole population rate in Oregon is much higher than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 796 
of 305. Oregon had the 4th highest parole population rate of the
was reported in 2006; thereafter, the rate declined slightly before increasing again. The rate in 2014 of 
states in 2014. In 2014, 23% of admissions to parole were due to a
770 is still much higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Oregon had the 4th highest parole population 
discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 23% of admissions to parole were due to 
a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.3
0.25

26%

26%

2003

2004

27%

27%

27%

27%

27%

26%

28%

27%

26%

27%

27%

27%

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

25%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2005

2006

2007

2008

Oregon

2009

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
series for all 50 states is shown. 
that were conditional release violators in Oregon was lower
 
than that of the aggregate states. However, in recent years, the
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
Oregon had the 23rd highest
aggregate state rate has decreased while the rate in Oregon has
violators in Oregon was lower than that of the aggregate states. However, in recent years, the aggregate 
percentage of prison admisremained fairly stable. By 2012, the rates were effectively equal. In
sions that were due to viola2014, 27%state rate has decreased while the rate in Oregon has remained fairly stable. By 2012, the rates were 
of prison admissions in Oregon were due to violations of
effectively equal. In 2014, 27% of prison admissions in Oregon were due to violations of conditional 
tions of conditional releases
conditional
release compared to 28% of the admissions for states
rd
 highest 
release compared to 28% of the admissions for states in aggregate. Oregon had the 23
of the states in
2014.
in aggregate. Oregon had the 23rd highest percentage of prison
percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. 
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of
the states (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

147

OREGON

Chart 3. Oregon Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for Oregon. However, the board conducts about 20 release hearings a month for old cold cases, inmates
with life sentences that are eligible for parole, and inmates designated by the courts as dangerous offenders.
Source: Oregon Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision Annual Performance Progress Report (APPR) for Fiscal Year (2013-2014), www.oregon.gov/BOPPPS/docs/
APPR13-14.pdf.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10

9

9

8

9

9

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
Oregon

State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees has remained noticeably stable throughout the series. By 2012, the aggregate
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
state rate declined
becoming equivalent to the rate in Oregon. In 2014, the rate was 8 per 100 parolees in Oregon and
parole during the year. 
for the states
in aggregate.
 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees has remained noticeably stable throughout the series. By 2012, 
the aggregate state rate declined becoming equivalent to the rate in Oregon. In 2014, the rate was 8 per 
100 parolees in Oregon and for the states in aggregate.  

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

OREGON

148
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Oregon

States Total
24%

31%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Oregon, almost a third of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN PENNSYLVANIA

Pennsylvania	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	are	slightly	lower	in	Pennsylvania	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	
However,	parole	population	rates	are	much	higher.	In	addition,	parolees	are	about	as	likely	to	be	reincarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	In	recent	years,	a	much	higher	percentage	of	prison	
admissions	in	Pennsylvania	are	conditional	release	violators	compared	to	the	states	in	aggregate.	More	
than	one-half	of	parole	hearings	lead	to	release	being	granted.	Pennsylvania	currently	practices	
Summary:
Prison population rates are slightly lower in Pennsylvania compared to the states as a whole. However,
discretionary	release	for	the	majority	of	offenders,	including	violent	offenders,	sex	offenders,	property	
parole population
rates are much higher. In addition, parolees are about as likely to be re-incarcerated compared
offenders,	more	than	half	of	drug	offenders,	and	less	than	half	of	public	order	offenders.		
to the states
as a whole. In recent years, a much higher percentage of prison admissions in Pennsylvania are
conditional
	 release violators compared to the states in aggregate. More than one-half of parole hearings lead
th
to releasePennsylvania	had	the	27
being granted. Pennsylvania
currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders,
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
including	 violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, more than half of drug offenders, and less than half
of public order offenders.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1,200

1,000
791

809

597

600

790

791

803

603

612

615

473

800

948

745

762

612

605

597

582

563

561

551

503

521

517

517

510

511

503

600

400

200

1,037
1,011 1,032

966

431

429

442

460

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
Pennsylvania Prison Population

State Prison Population

Pennsylvania Parole Population

State Parole Population

		
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
Chart 1 showseach	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
	
*In 2010, Pennsylvania changed its method of reporting county parole data to include some parolees that had previously been classified and reported as probationers.

PENNSYLVANIA

150
The prison population rate in Pennsylvania is slightly lower than the
aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 521 occurred in 2009; thereafter, the rate declined. In 2014, the prison population rate was 503 in
Pennsylvania versus 551 for all 50 states. Pennsylvania had the 27th
highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 84% of
releases from prison were conditional releases.

Pennsylvania had the 27th
highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014.
Pennsylvania had the highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Pennsylvania, has consistently been
far higher  than the aggregate state rate. Since 2010, when Pennsylvania changed
their reporting methods, the rate has increased (to
The parole population rate in Pennsylvania, has consistently been far higher than the aggregate state 
1,037 in 2014)
and
is much higher than the aggregate rate of 305.
rate. Since 2010, when Pennsylvania changed their reporting methods, the rate has increased (to 1,037 
Pennsylvania had the highest parole population rate of the states in
in 2014) and is much higher than the aggregate rate of 305. Pennsylvania had the highest parole 
2014. In 2014, 94% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionpopulation rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 94% of admissions to parole 
ary decision such as the decision of a parole board.

were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
 
Chart 2.Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
 
50%

45%

45%
40%

39%

38%

35%

34%

35%
30%

31%

33%

34%

35%

34%
31%

38%

36%

35%

35%

34%

33%

33%

39%

40%

27%

26%

2012

2013

33%

25%

28%

20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Pennsylvania

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the middle
years of this series, 2006-2010, the percentage
series for all 50 states is shown. 
of prison admissions that were conditional release violators
 
in Pennsylvania was similar to that of the aggregate states.
In the middle years of this series, 2006‐2010, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional 
Pennsylvania had the 7th
However, while the states aggregately remained steady for several
release violators in Pennsylvania was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states 
highest percentage of prison
years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in
aggregately remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in 
admissions due to violations
Pennsylvania has shown a marked increase since then. In 2014,
Pennsylvania has shown a marked increase since then. In 2014, nearly half of prison admissions in 
of conditional releases of the
nearly half of prison admissions in Pennsylvania were due to
Pennsylvania were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one quarter of the 
states in 2014.
violations of conditional release compared to just over one quarter th
admissions for states in aggregate. Pennsylvania had the 7  highest percentage of prison admissions 
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Pennsylvania had the
due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
7th highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of
 

conditional releases of the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

151
Chart 3a. Pennsylvania Grant Rate, 2015
Granted: Parole
to Street
42%

51%
7%

Granted: Parole
to Detainer
Refused

PENNSYLVANIA

Chart 3. Pennsylvania Grant Rate, 2015 

 
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in a decision to grant 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2015 that resulted in a decision to grant parole and be released from incarceration (parole to street), to grant
parole and be released from incarceration (parole to street), to grant parole to serve another detainer 
parole to serve another
detainer (parole to detainer), and to refuse parole. Just over one-half of the hearings resulted in release from incarceration, while 42% led to a refusal
of parole and seven
percent were paroled to a detainer.
(parole to detainer), and to refuse parole. Just over one‐half of the hearings resulted in release from 
Source: Monthlyincarceration, while 42% led to a refusal of parole and seven percent were paroled to a detainer. 
statistic reports for the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, September 2014-August 2015, www.pbpp.pa.gov/Information/reports/Pages/MonthlyProgram.aspx.
 
Source: Monthly statistic reports for the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, September 2014‐
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
August 2015, www.pbpp.pa.gov/Information/reports/Pages/Monthly‐Program.aspx. 
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
 
50
 
 
 
40
 
 
30
 
 
 
20
15
15
14
14
14
 
12
 
9
9
8
10
 
9
8
 
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
 0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
 
 
Pennsylvania
State Total
 
 
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows
the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
  population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
The Pennsylvania
rate of incarceration for parolees is similar when compared to the states in aggregate, though it was
lower at the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the  beginning of the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 7 per 100 parolees in Pennsylvania compared to 8 per 100
  in aggregate.
parole during the year. 
for the states
   
The Pennsylvania rate of incarceration for parolees is similar when compared to the states in aggregate, 
 
though it was lower at the beginning of the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 7 per 100 parolees in 
 
Pennsylvania compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 
 
 

195 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

PENNSYLVANIA

152
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Pennsylvania
18%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Pennsylvania, just less than one-fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is lower than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN RHODE ISLAND

Rhode	Island	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	are	lower	in	Rhode	Island	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole	as	are	its	
parole	population	rates.	However,	parolees	in	Rhode	Island	have	a	similar	likelihood	of	being	reincarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	Rhode	Island	currently	practices	discretionary	release	
for	the	majority	of	offenders.		
	
Summary: Prison population rates are lower in Rhode Island compared to the states as a whole as are its parole
th
population
rates. However, parolees
in Rhode Island have a similar likelihood of being re-incarcerated compared to
Rhode	Island	had	the	38
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
the states	 as a whole. Rhode Island currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

563

561

551

500
484
400
300

428

414

488

490
444

442

405

402

398

401

399

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

48

44

41

44

56

62

71

67

65

60

55

56

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
Rhode Island Prison Population

State Prison Population

Rhode Island Parole Population

State Parole Population

	

*The prison s and
jails form one integrated system in Rhode Island, so the population count includes both. The population also includes inmates under the DOC’s jurisdicThis	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
tion on Home Confinement and at the Institute for Mental Health.

each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	

Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andUnited	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an

series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The	prison	population	rate	in	Rhode	is	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	The	prisons	and	jails	form	

RHODE ISLAND

154
The prison population rate in Rhode is lower than the aggregate state rate. The prisons and jails form one integrated system
Rhode Island had the 38th
in Rhode Island, so the prison population count includes both.
highest prison population rate
The population also includes inmates under the DOC’s jurisdicof the states in 2014.
tion on Home Confinement and at the Institute for Mental Health.
The peak rate occurred during 2006-2008; thereafter, the rate deRhode Island had the 46th
clined. In recent years, the rate has remained stable. In 2014, the
highest parole population rate
prison population rate was 399 in Rhode Island versus 551 for all
of the states in 2014.
50 states. Rhode Island had the 38th highest prison population
th
states.	Rhode	Island	had	the	38
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	In	2014,	26%	of	
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 26% of releases from prison were
conditionalreleases	from	prison	were	conditional	releases.	
releases.

	

The paroleThe	parole	population	rate	is	far	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	In	2014,	the	rate	in	Rhode	Island	
population rate is far lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate in Rhode Island was 55 which is
significantly
less than the aggregate rate of 305. Rhode Island had one of the lowest parole population rate of the states in
was	56	which	is	significantly	less	than	the	aggregate	rate	of	305.	Rhode	Island	had	one	of	the	lowest	
2014. In 2014,
all reported admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board.
parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	In	2014,	all	reported	admissions	

to	parole	were	due	to	a	discretionary	decision	such	as	the	decision	of	a	parole	board.	
	
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.3

27%

26%

19%

18%

28%

23%

0.25
18%

0.2

18%
15%

0.15

18%

15%

14%

13%
11%

0.1
0.05

4%

0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Rhode Island

2011 2012 2013 2014

State Institutions

	
This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
Throughout
the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
	
were conditional
release violators was lower in Rhode Island
compared Throughout	the	series,	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	violators	was	
to that of the aggregate states. However, improved
Rhode Island had the 40th
lower	in	Rhode	Island	compared	to	that	of	the	aggregate	states.	However,	improved	methods	for	
methods for
measuring admissions and releases were introduced
highest percentage of prison
in 2007, someasuring	admissions	and	releases	were	introduced	in	2007,	so	numbers	are	not	comparable	between	
numbers are not comparable between 2006 and 2007.
admissions due to violations
In 2014, fifteen
percent of prison admissions in Rhode Island were
2006	and	2007.	In	2014,	fifteen	percent	of	prison	admissions	in	Rhode	Island	were	due	to	violations	of	
of conditional releases of the
due to violations
of conditional release compared to just over oneconditional	release	compared	to	just	over	one-quarter	of	the	admissions	for	states	in	aggregate.	Rhode	
states in 2014.
th
quarter of Island	had	the	40
the admissions for	highest	percentage	of	prison	admissions	due	to	violations	of	conditional	releases	of	
states in aggregate. Rhode Island
had the 40th
highest percentage of prison admissions due to
the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	
*Improved methods for measuring admissions and releases were introduced in 2007, so numbers are not comparable between 2006 and 2007.

violations of
	 conditional releases of the states in 2014.

	

	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

155

RHODE ISLAND

Chart 3. Rhode Island Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for Rhode Island.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

14

16
13

12

14

14

13

14

12

13

15
8

8

9

9

2011

2012

2013

7

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Rhode Island

State Total

2014

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is similar in Rhode Island when compared to the states in aggregate. In 2014,
the rate for the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
Rhode Island was 7 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
 

parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is similar in Rhode Island when compared to the states in 
aggregate. In 2014, the rate for Rhode Island was 7 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 100 for the 
states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

RHODE ISLAND

156
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Rhode Island
22%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Rhode Island, 22% of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is comparable to the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN SOUTH CAROLINA

South Carolina 
Summary: Prison population rates are higher in South Carolina compared to the states as a whole while 
its parole population rates are lower. Parolees are less likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the 
states in aggregate. South Carolina currently practices discretionary release for the majority of 
offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public 
order offenders.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are higher in South Carolina compared to the states as a whole while its parole
population
  rates are lower. Parolees are less likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states in aggregate. South
th
CarolinaSouth Carolina had the 20
currently practices discretionary
release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
offenders,
property
offenders,
drug
offenders,
and public order offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
800

759

736

716

714

717

704

700
600
597

600

603

612

615

612

692

605

663

597

500
400
317

308

312

316

323

317

308

637

582

614

597

571

563

561

551

306

305

150

139

2013

2014

313

313

308

180

178

168

300
200
103

103

98

100

83

72

56

46

2006

2007

2008

2009

0
2003

2004

2005

2010

2011

2012

South Carolina Prison Population

State Prison Population

South Carolina Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

SOUTH CAROLINA

158
The prison population rate in South Carolina is higher than the
aggregate state rate. Over time, the rate in South Carolina has declined and is now just slightly higher than the aggregate state rate.
In 2014, the prison population rate was 571 in South Carolina versus 551 for all 50 states. South Carolina had the 20th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 63% of releases
from prison were conditional releases.

South Carolina had the 20th
highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014.

South Carolina had the 37th
highest parole population rate
The paroleThe parole population rate in South Carolina is lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2010, South 
population rate in South Carolina is lower than the agof the states in 2014.
Carolina changed its method of reporting parole data to include people on Community Supervision who 
gregate state
rate. In 2010, South Carolina changed its method of
reporting receive both mandatory and discretionary releases and to include those released under the Youthful 
parole data to include people on Community Supervision who Offender Act (young adults ages 18 to 24). These changes increased the reported parole population 
receive both mandatory and discretionary releases and
to includeresulting in the data that are not comparable between 2009 and 2010. Even after the reporting changes 
those released under the Youthful Offender Act (young adults ages 18 to 24). These changes increased the
increased the reported prison population rate, however, South Carolina retains a lower parole 
reported parole
population resulting in the data that are not comparable between 2009 and 2010. Even after the reportpopulation rate than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate was 139 compared to the aggregate rate 
ing changes
increased the reported prison population rate, however, South Carolina retains a lower parole population
th
rate than the
aggregate state rate. In 2014, the
rate was 139 compared to the aggregate rate of 305. South Carolina had
of 305. South Carolina had the 37
 highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, 
the 37th highest
parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 36% of admissions to parole were due to a discreLEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 36% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the 
tionary decision
such as the decision of a parole board.
decision of a parole board. 

 

Chart 2.Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
0.4
0.35
0.3

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%
32%

32%

31%

32%

32%

31%

31%

0.25

27%

26%

28%

29%

0.2

22%

23%

0.15

20%

19%

2013

2014

0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

South Carolina

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2012

 

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 

In the early
years of this series, the percentage of prison admispublished by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
sions that series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in South Carolina was
similar to  that of the aggregate states. However, the rate in South
South Carolina had the 33rd
Carolina has
decreased faster than the aggregate state rate. Over
In the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
highest percentage of prison
the years,violators in South Carolina was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, the rate in South 
both new admissions and conditional release violation
admissions
decreased
in
South
Carolina,
but
conditional
release
admissions that were due to vioCarolina has decreased faster than the aggregate state rate. Over the years, both new admissions and 
violation admissions
decreased faster. In 2014, about a fifth of
lations of conditional releases
conditional release violation admissions decreased in South Carolina, but conditional release violation 
prison admissions
in
South
Carolina
were
due
to
violations
of
conof the states in 2014.
admissions decreased faster.  In 2014, about a fifth of prison admissions in South Carolina were due to 
ditional release compared to just over one quarter of the admisviolations of conditional release compared to just over one quarter of the admissions for states in 
sions for states in aggregate. South Carolina had
the 33rd highest
aggregate. South Carolina had the 33rd highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to 
percentage of prison admissions that were due to violations of
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
conditional
releases of the states in 2014.
 

 
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE
RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES

159

SOUTH CAROLINA

Chart 3. South Carolina Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for South Carolina.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

9

8

7

6

5

4

2011

2012

2013

2014

10
7

6

6

2006

2007

2008

0

8
5
2009

2010

South Carolina

State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in South Carolina compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 4 per 100 parolees in South Carolina compared to 8 per 100 for the
parole during the year. 
states in aggregate.
 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in South Carolina compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 4 per 100 parolees in South Carolina 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

SOUTH CAROLINA

160
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

South Carolina

States Total

13%
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In South Carolina, thirteen percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is noticeably lower than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN SOUTH DAKOTA

South Dakota 
Summary: Prison population rates are similar in South Dakota compared to the states as a whole, while 
parole population rates are higher. Parolees are also more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the 
states as a whole. South Dakota currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, 
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order 
offenders.  
Summary:
Prison population rates are similar in South Dakota compared to the states as a whole, while parole
population
  rates are higher. Parolees are also more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole.
rd
South Dakota
currently practices discretionary
release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex
South Dakota had the 23
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
offenders,
  property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600
598
500
400
300

534

574

540
472

343

559
474

422

597

558

567

560

454

454

464

582

563

561

570

581

578

446

439

387

551
561

407

406

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
South Dakota Prison Population

State Prison Population

South Dakota Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

SOUTH DAKOTA

162
The prison population rate in South Dakota is similar to the aggregate state rate, though it was slightly lower in the early and middle
years of the series. In 2014, the prison population rate was 561 in
South Dakota versus 551 for all 50 states. South Dakota had the
23rd highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014,
84% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

South Dakota had the 23rd
highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014.

South Dakota had the 9th
highest parole population rate
The parole population rate in South Dakota is higher than the agof the states in 2014.
gregate state
rate.
After
increasing
from
2003
to
2006,
the
rate
beThe	parole	population	rate	in	South	Dakota	is	higher	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	After	increasing	from	
gan to decline slightly. In 2014, the rate in South Dakota was 406,
2003	to	2006,	the	rate	began	to	decline	slightly.	In	2014,	the	rate	in	South	Dakota	was	406,	higher	than	
higher than the aggregate rate of 305. South Dakota had the 9th
the	aggregate	rate	of	305.		
highest parole population rate of th
the states in 2014. In 2014, 39%
South	Dakota	had	the	9 	highest	parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	
of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such
TEXT)	In	2014,	39%	of	admissions	to	parole	were	due	to	a	discretionary	decision	such	as	the	decision	of	a	
as the decision
of a parole board; however, the figures reported to
parole	board;	however,	the	figures	reported	to	BJS	do	not	separate	discretionary	and	presumptive	
BJS do not
separate discretionary and presumptive parole releases.

parole	releases.	
	
Chart 2.
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
0.5
0.45

41%
37%

0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25

43%

43%
40%

38%

36%

42%

38%

33%
29%
31%

33%

32%
34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%

33%
27%

26%

28%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
South Dakota

2011 2012 2013 2014

State Institutions

	

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
come from the
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
After increases
in early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators
in Southseries	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
Dakota was higher than that of the aggregate states. The category of “other admissions” was excluded from
the total 	in South Dakota as this category was not consistently reported every year. It is unclear what this figure includes
and including
it reduces the ability to compare the numbers in South Dakota across years. When “other admissions” are
After	increases	in	early	years	of	this	series,	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	
included,release	violators	in	South	Dakota	was	higher	than	that	of	the	aggregate	states.	The	category	of	"other	
the trend is similar to the one reported here, other than large increases in the years for which these figures are
not reported.
2014 admissions are not comparable to earlier years because of changes in reporting methods. In 2014,
admissions"	was	excluded	from	the	total	in	South	Dakota	as	this	category	was	not	consistently	reported	
nearly a third
of prison admissions in South Dakota were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over
every	year.	It	is	unclear	what	this	figure	includes	and	including	it	reduces	the	ability	to	compare	the	
one quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate.
numbers	in	South	Dakota	across	years.	When	“other	admissions”	are	included,	the	trend	is	similar	to	the	
one	reported	here,	other	than	large	increases	in	the	years	for	which	these	figures	are	not	reported.	2014	
admissions	are	not	comparable	to	earlier	years	because	of	changes	in	reporting	methods.	In	2014,	
nearly	a	third	of	prison	admissions	in	South	Dakota	were	due	to	violations	of	conditional	release	
compared	to	just	over	one	quarter	of	the	admissions	for	states	in	aggregate.	
	

ROBINA INSTITUTE:	 PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS
50 STATES
	

163

SOUTH DAKOTA

Chart 3. South Dakota Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for South Dakota.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

18

19

19

20

18

21

19

18
13

10

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

South Dakota

2011

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is higher in South Dakota compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the state’s rate stood at 13 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is higher in South Dakota compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the state’s rate stood at 13 per 100 parolees compared to 8 
per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

SOUTH DAKOTA

164
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

South Dakota

States Total
24%

35%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In South Dakota, just over one-third of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is higher than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN TENNESSEE

Tennessee 
Summary: Prison population rates are similar in Tennessee compared to the states as a whole while 
parole population rates are lower. However, parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to 
the states as a whole. Tennessee currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders.  
Summary:
  Prison population rates are similar in Tennessee compared to the states as a whole while parole
st
population
rates are lower. However,
parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states as a
Tennessee had the 21
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
whole. Tennessee
currently
practices
discretionary
release for the majority of offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

603

600

612

615

612

605

597

600
574

578

581

317

308

312

500

582

563

561

551

580

573

570

569

557

560

573

560

565

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

242

250

255

265

273

267

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

400
300
200
180

188

192

2003

2004

2005

210

224

223

2006

2007

2008

100
0
Tennessee Prison Population

State Prison Population

Tennessee Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
The prison population rate in Tennessee is similar to the aggregate state rate. It has been relatively 

TENNESSEE

166
The prison population rate in Tennessee is similar to the aggregate
state rate. It has been relatively stable over time, with the lowest
rate observed in 2006 and peak rates in 2005 and 2011. In 2014,
the prison population rate was 569 in Tennessee versus 551 for all
50 states. Tennessee had the 21st highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014. In 2014, 68% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

Tennessee had the 21st highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
Tennessee had the 18th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Tennessee is lower than the aggregate state rate, though it has been slowly increasing over time. In
2014, the rate in Tennessee was 267, lower than the aggregate rate
of 305. Tennessee had the 18th highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014. In 2014, 97% of admissions to parole were due
to a discretionary decision such as the
th decision of a parole board.

305. Tennessee had the 18  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
TEXT) In 2014, 97% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a 
Chart 2.parole board. 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.45
0.4

38%

40%

40%

42%

41%

38%

0.35
0.3

33%

34%

41%

34%

35%

36%

35%

36%
35%

31%

37%

38%

40%

40%

33%

0.25

27%

26%

2012

2013

28%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Tennessee

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
This chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Tennessee was higher than
 
the aggregate
state rate. After declining from 2007 to 2010, the
Tennessee had the 11th highproportionThroughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
in Tennessee increased again as the aggregate rate
est percentage of prison addeclined. Tennessee was higher than the aggregate state rate. After declining from 2007 to 2010, the proportion 
In 2014, forty percent of prison admissions in Tennessee
in Tennessee increased again as the aggregate rate declined. In 2014, forty percent of prison admissions 
missions that were due to viowere due to
violations of conditional release compared to just over
in Tennessee were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one quarter of the 
lations of conditional releases
one quarter
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Tennessee
th
 highest percentage of prison admissions that 
admissions for states in aggregate. Tennessee had the 11
of the states in 2014.
had the 11th highest percentage of prison admissions that were
were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

167

TENNESSEE

Chart 3. Tennessee Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcome of parole release hearings are not available for Tennessee. While the outcomes are not reported, 5,938 release hearings were conducted by Board Members and Parole Hearing officers in fiscal year 2014-2015.
Source: State of Tennessee Board of Parole Annual Report 2014-2015, www.tn.gov/assets/entities/bop/attachments/2014-15_BOP_Annual_Report.pdf, pg. 6.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

12

15

11

14

11

14

14

8

8

2009

2010

12

11

11

11

10

9

9

8

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

Tennessee

State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is slightly higher in Tennessee compared to the states in aggregate, though it
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
was lower through 2011. In 2014, the rate was 11 per 100 parolees in Tennessee compared to 8 per 100 for the states
parole during the year. 
in aggregate.
 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is slightly higher in Tennessee compared to the states in 
aggregate, though it was lower through 2011. In 2014, the rate was 11 per 100 parolees in Tennessee 
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

TENNESSEE

168
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Tennessee

States Total
24%

40%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Tennessee, forty percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN TEXAS

Texas 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are higher in Texas compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are less likely to be reincarcerated compared to the states in aggregate. About a 
third of parole hearings lead to parole being granted. Texas currently practices discretionary release for 
the majority of offenders.  
Summary:
  Prison and parole population rates are higher in Texas compared to the states as a whole. However,
parolees are less likely tothbe reincarcerated compared to the states in aggregate. About a third of parole hearings
Texas had the 6  highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
lead to parole being granted. Texas currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
1200

1000

1,050 1,039
1,025 1,018

995

978

951

945

800

600

597

600

603

643

631

618

612

615

612

921

872

867

837

605

597

582

563

561

551

592

589

584

583

570

569

589

574

562

400

200

317

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
Texas Prison Population

State Prison Population

Texas Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
The prison population rate in Texas is much higher than the aggregate state rate. However, throughout 

TEXAS

170
The prison population rate in Texas is much higher than the aggregate state rate. However, throughout the series, the rate has shown a
steady decline. In 2014, the prison population rate was 837 in Texas
versus 551 for all 50 states. Texas had the 6th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 85% of releases from prison
were conditional releases.

Texas had the 6th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Texas had the 5th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Texas is also much higher than the aggregate state rate, and has slightly declined over time. In 2014, the parole population rate in Texas was 562 which is much higher than the
aggregate rate of 305. Texas had the 5th highest parole population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 96% of admissionsthto parole were
aggregate	rate	of	305.	Texas	had	the	5
due to a discretionary
decision such as the decision of a	highest	parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	
parole board.

LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	In	2014,	96%	of	admissions	to	parole	were	due	to	a	discretionary	decision	such	as	the	
decision	of	a	parole	board.	
Chart 2. Conditional
Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
0.45
39%

0.4

36%

33%

0.35
0.3

38%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%
35%

31%

35%

33%

35%

32%

33%

32%

27%

26%

32%

32%

0.25
0.2

32%

28%

15%

0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Texas

2011 2012 2013 2014

State Institutions

	
*In 2003, Texas reported a large number of admissions (20,411) categorized as “other admissions.” Excluding these admissions for 2003, 21% of admissions to prison
were conditional This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	
release violators.

violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
Chart 2 shows the
percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
The percentage
of prison admissions that were conditional release
	
violators in Texas
declined faster than the aggregate state rate from
The	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	violators	in	Texas	declined	faster	
2006 to 2011.
However, while the aggregate state rate declined
Texas had the 18th highest
at this point,than	the	aggregate	state	rate	from	2006	to	2011.	However,	while	the	aggregate	state	rate	declined	at	
the rate in Texas remained unchanged. A very low
percentage of prison admisthis	point,	the	rate	in	Texas	remained	unchanged.	A	very	low	rate	is	reported	in	2003	and	is	not	
rate is reported
in 2003 and is not comparable to other years
sions that were due to violacomparable	to	other	years	due	to	reporting	differences.	In	2003,	a	large	number	of	“other	admissions”	
due to reporting
differences. In 2003, a large number of “other
tions of conditional releases of
admissions”were	reported;	when	this	category	is	excluded,	21%	of	admissions	to	prison	in	2003	were	conditional	
were reported; when this category is excluded, 21%
the states in 2014.
of admissions
to prison in 2003 were conditional release violators
release	violators	in	Texas.	In	2014,	nearly	a	third	of	prison	admissions	in	Texas	were	due	to	violations	of	
in Texas. In 2014,
nearly a third of prison admissions in Texas were
conditional	release	compared	to	just	over	one	quarter	of	the	admissions	for	states	in	aggregate.	Texas	
th
due to violations
of conditional
release compared to just over one
had	the	18
	highest	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	due	to	violations	of	conditional	releases	
quarter of the
admissions for states in aggregate. Texas had the
of	the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	
18th highest
	 percentage of prison admissions that were due to
violations of	 conditional releases of the states 	in 2014.
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

171
Chart 3. Texas Grant Rate, 2014 

Granted

Chart 3. Texas Grant Rate, 2014 

TEXAS

Chart 3. Texas Grant Rate, 2014

Denied

36%

64%

Granted

Denied

 
36%
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being granted or denied. The second chart shows this information for fiscal years
Chart 3b. Texas Grants by Year, 1999‐2014 
1999, 2004, 2009,
and 2014. In fiscal year 2014, thirty-six percent of parole hearings resulted in parole being granted. The grant rate has increased over time, doubling from an
64%
earlier figure of just eighteen percent in fiscal year
1999.

100%

Source: Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles FY2014 Annual Statistical Report, www.tdcj.state.tx.us/bpp/publications/FY2014%20BPP%20StatisticalReport.pdf.

90%

  80%
Chart 3b. Texas Grants by Year, 1999-2014
Chart 3b. Texas Grants by Year, 1999‐2014 
70%

 

100%
60%
90%
50%
80%
40%
70%
30%
60%
20%
50%
10%
18%
40%
0%
30%FY1999
20%

30%

30%

FY2004

FY2009

30%

Granted

Denied
30%

36%

FY2014
36%

 
18%
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
0%
granted or denied. The second chart shows this information for fiscal years 1999, 2004, 2009, and 2014. 
FY1999
FY2004
FY2009
FY2014
In fiscal year 2014, thirty‐six percent of parole hearings resulted in parole being granted. The grant rate 
Granted
Denied
has increased over time, doubling from an earlier figure of just eighteen percent in fiscal year 1999.  
 
 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2014 that resulted in parole being 
Source: Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles FY2014 Annual Statistical Report, 
granted or denied. The second chart shows this information for fiscal years 1999, 2004, 2009, and 2014. 
www.tdcj.state.tx.us/bpp/publications/FY2014%20BPP%20StatisticalReport.pdf. 
In fiscal year 2014, thirty‐six percent of parole hearings resulted in parole being granted. The grant rate 
 
has increased over time, doubling from an earlier figure of just eighteen percent in fiscal year 1999.  
  
 
Source: Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles FY2014 Annual Statistical Report, 
 
www.tdcj.state.tx.us/bpp/publications/FY2014%20BPP%20StatisticalReport.pdf. 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
220 
 
ROBINA
INSTITUTE:
STATE
DATA
PAROLE
PROFILES
 
 
 
10%

TEXAS

172
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12

10
8

7

0
2006

2007

5

5

5

2008

2009

2010

Texas

4
2011

9

9

8

4

5

5

2012

2013

2014

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is lower in Texas compared to the states in aggregate and has been so throughout
the series. In
2014, the rate for Texas stood at 5 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 

parole during the year. 
 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
The rate of incarceration for parolees is lower in Texas compared to the states in aggregate and has 
been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate for Texas stood at 5 per 100 parolees compared to 8 per 
100 for the states in aggregate. 
Texas
States Total

19%

24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Texas, about one-fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly lower than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

221 

PAROLE IN UTAH

Utah 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Utah compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to states in aggregate. Utah currently 
practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, 
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are lower in Utah compared to the states as a whole. However,
property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders. 
parolees  are more likely to be reincarcerated compared to states in aggregate. Utah currently practices discretionary
release for
the majority ofndoffenders,
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders,
Utah had the 42
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014.   
and public order offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600

597

582

563

561

551

500
400
300

378

371

366

359

350

358

356

354

353

345

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

201

194

194

202

197

155

152

152

164

162

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

356

363

317

204

200
100

172

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Utah Prison Population

State Prison Population

Utah Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 showsThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 

UTAH

174
The prison population rate in Utah is much lower than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 378 occurred in 2005; thereafter,
the rate declined slightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was
345 in Utah versus 551 for all 50 states. Utah had the 42nd highest
prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 67% of releases
from prison were conditional releases.

Utah had the 42nd highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Utah had the 32nd highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Utah is also much lower than the
aggregate state rate. Since 2007, the rate in Utah has declined
overall. In 2014, the rate was 162 in Utah which is lower than the
aggregate rate of 305. Utah had the 32nd highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 92% of admissions to
parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision
of a parole board.
nd

305. Utah had the 32  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
In 2014, 92% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a 
Chart 2.parole board. 
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.5

46%

0.45

44%

46%

47%

47%

48%

45%
39%

0.4
0.35
0.3

45%

31%

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%

38%

38%

36%

33%

0.25

27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Utah

2009

2010

State Institutions

2011

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Utah was higher than that of
 
the aggregate states. In 2014, nearly half of prison admissions in
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
Utah had the 7th highest perUtah were due to violations of conditional release compared to
Utah was higher than that of the aggregate states. In 2014, nearly half of prison admissions in Utah were 
centage of prison admissions
just over one-quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate.
due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for states in 
due to violations of condiUtah had the 7th highest percentageth of prison admissions due to
aggregate. Utah had the 7  highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional 
tional releases of the states in
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

175

UTAH

Chart 3. Utah Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for Utah.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

28

15

28

15

27

14

29

14

26

26

14

25

23

26

12

10

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Utah

2010

2011

State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is much higher in Utah compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 26 per 100 parolees in Utah compared to 8 per 100 for the states in
aggregate.parole during the year. 
 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is much higher in Utah compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series. In 2014, the rate stood at 26 per 100 parolees in Utah compared to 8 
per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

UTAH

176
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Utah

States Total
24%

70%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Utah, seventy percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN VERMONT

Vermont	
Summary:	Prison	and	parole	population	rates	are	lower	in	Vermont	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	
However,	parolees	are	somewhat	more	likely	to	be	re-incarcerated	compared	to	the	states	in	aggregate.	
Vermont	currently	practices	discretionary	release	for	the	majority	of	offenders.		
	
th
Vermont	had	the	39
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
Summary:
Prison and parole population
rates are lower in Vermont compared to the states as a whole. However,
parolees	 are somewhat more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the states in aggregate. Vermont currently
practices	 discretionary release for the majority of offenders.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

563

561

551

500
400
300

409

411

317

308

200
100

168

193

431

312
220

456

433

316

323

198

191

2006

2007

430

449

418

411

406

412

392

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

220

220

208

214

207

217

219

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0
2003

2004

2005

Vermont Prison Population

State Prison Population

Vermont Parole Population

State Parole Population

	

*Prisons and jails
form one integrated system in Rhode Island, so the state’s prison population counts include both prisons and jail populations.
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	

Chart 1 shows each	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.

series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
	
The	prison	population	rate	in	Vermont	is	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate.	The	peak	rate	of	456	

VERMONT

178
The prison population rate in Vermont is lower than the aggregate
state rate. The peak rate of 456 occurred in 2006; thereafter, the
rate declined across most years. In 2014, the prison population
rate was 392 in Vermont versus 551 for all 50 states. Vermont had
the 39th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In
2014, 84% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Vermont had the 39th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Vermont had the 24th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Vermont is also lower than the aggregate rate. In 2014, the rate in Vermont was 219 which is noticeably
lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Vermont had the 24th highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 75% of
admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as
the decision of a parole board.

highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT)In 2014, 75% of 
admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.8
0.7
0.6

52%

54%

53%

54%

33%

34%

34%

65%

65%

66%

65%

35%

36%

35%

35%

69%

69%
64%

65%

27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

0.5
0.4
31%

33%

0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Vermont

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout
the series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional
release violators in Vermont was higher than that
 
of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
Vermont tied with Idaho for
Throughout the series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in
the highest percentage of
Vermont was higher than that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained 
2011, the percentage in Vermont has remained relatively steady
prison admissions that were
steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Vermont has remained 
since jumping in 2007 to sixty-five percent. In 2014, almost two
due to violations of condirelatively steady since jumping in 2007 to sixty‐five percent. In 2014, almost two thirds of prison 
thirds of prison admissions in Vermont were due to violations
tional releases of the states in
admissions in Vermont were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter 
of conditional release compared to just over one-quarter of the
2014.
of the admissions for states in aggregate. Vermont tied with Idaho for the highest percentage of prison 
admissions for states in aggregate. Vermont tied with Idaho for
admissions that were due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN 
the highest percentage of prison admissions that were due to
TEXT) 
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

179

VERMONT

Chart 3. Vermont Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for Vermont.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

10

15

10

12

2006

2007

14

14

11

11

2008

2009

14

12

11

11

2010

2011

12

12

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

10

0
Vermont

State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees was slightly lower in Vermont compared to the states in aggregate through
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
2011. In 2012,
the aggregate rate declined while the rate in Vermont remained steady. In 2014, the rate stood at 10
parole during the year. 
per 100 parolees
in Vermont compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees was slightly lower in Vermont compared to the states in aggregate 
through 2011. In 2012, the aggregate rate declined while the rate in Vermont remained steady. In 2014, 
the rate stood at 10 per 100 parolees in Vermont compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

VERMONT

180
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Vermont

States Total
24%

30%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Vermont, thirty percent of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly higher than the aggregate
state proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN VIRGINIA

Virginia	
Summary:	Prison	population	rates	are	similar	in	Virginia	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole	while	parole	
population	rates	are	lower.	However,	parolees	at	risk	of	incarceration	are	more	likely	to	be	reincarcerated	compared	to	the	states	as	a	whole.	Virginia	currently	practices	discretionary	release	only	
for	inmates	convicted	prior	to	the	effective	date	of	the	determinate	sentencing	statute	(January	1,	
1995),	for	those	with	multiple	misdemeanors	committed	prior	to	July	1,	2008,	and	for	offenders	who	
Summary:
Prison population rates are similar in Virginia compared to the states as a whole while parole population
rates are have	indeterminate	sentences	under	the	Youthful	Offender	Act.		
lower. However, parolees at risk of incarceration are more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the
states as 	a whole. Virginia currently practices discretionary release only for inmates convicted prior to the effective
th
date of the
determinate sentencing
statute (January 1, 1995), for those with multiple misdemeanors committed
	highest	prison	population	rate	of	the	states	in	2014.	
Virginia	had	the	17
prior to July
	 1, 2008, and for offenders who have indeterminate sentences under the Youthful Offender Act.
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700

628

627

614

600
597

600

603

627
612

642

615

637

612

626

605

610
597

610

582

500

586

578

581

563

561

551

400
300

317

308

312

87

77

78

316

323

317

308

75

76

313

313

308

306

305

43

36

31

28

27

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100

116
68

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Virginia Prison Population

State Prison Population

Virginia Parole Population

State Parole Population

	
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
Chart 1 showseach	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
aggregate series
for all 50 states is shown.
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
	
The	prison	population	rate	in	Virginia	is	similar	to	the	aggregate	state	rate,	though	it	has	consistently	
*Due to several changes in recordkeeping procedures between 2007 and 2010, data on parole populations in Virginia are not comparable between these years.

VIRGINIA

182
The prison population rate in Virginia is similar to the aggregate
state rate, though it has consistently remained slightly higher than
the aggregate rate. The peak rate of 642 occurred in 2007; thereafter, the rate declined along with the aggregate rate. In 2014, the
prison population rate was 581 in Virginia versus 551 for all 50
states. Virginia had the 17th highest prison population rate of the
states in 2014. In 2014, 91% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Virginia had the 17th highest
prison population rate of the
states in 2014.
Virginia had the second lowest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Virginia is much lower than the aggregate rate.
  Due to several changes in recordkeeping procedures
between 2007
and 2010, data on parole populations in Virginia
The parole population rate in Virginia is much lower than the aggregate rate. Due to several changes in 
are not comparable
between these years. In 2014, the parole poprecordkeeping procedures between 2007 and 2010, data on parole populations in Virginia are not 
ulation rate
in
Virginia
was 27 which is much lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Virginia had the second lowest parole
comparable between these years. In 2014, the parole population rate in Virginia was 27 which is much 
population
rate
of
the
states in 2014. In 2014, 34% of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as
lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Virginia had the second lowest parole population rate of the 
the decision
of
a
parole
board.
states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 34% of admissions to parole were due to a 

discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.3

27%

26%

28%

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
5%
0.05

5%

5%

4%

5%

5%

3%

1%

1%

2%

2010

2011

2012

1%

1%

2013

2014

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Virginia

2009

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
Throughout
this series, the percentage of prison admissions that
series for all 50 states is shown. 
were conditional release violators in Virginia was much lower than
 
that of the aggregate states. This is likely due to the very small
Throughout this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in 
Virginia had one of the lowest
population that is under parole supervision in the state. In 2014,
Virginia was much lower than that of the aggregate states. This is likely due to the very small population 
percentages of prison admisjust under one percent of prison admissions in Virginia were due to
that is under parole supervision in the state. In 2014, just under one percent of prison admissions in 
sions that were due to violaviolations of conditional release compared to about a quarter of the
Virginia were due to violations of conditional release compared to about a quarter of the admissions for 
tions of conditional releases
admissions for states in aggregate. Virginia had one of the lowest
states in aggregate. Virginia had one of the lowest percentages of prison admissions that were due to 
of the states in 2014.
percentages of prison admissions that were due to violations of
violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
conditional releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

183

VIRGINIA

Chart 3. Virginia Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Aggregate data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available from Virginia. However, outcomes for individual hearings are publicly available.
Source: Monthly Parole Decisions, http://vpb.virginia.gov/parole-decisions/.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

10
1

7

6

6

2009

2010

2011

2012

0
2006

2007

2008

Virginia

State Total

10

11

9

8

2013

2014

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
Data on theof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
rate of incarceration for parolees in Virginia is available beginning in 2009. In 2013, after fairly steady
increases the
rate of incarceration for paroles in Virginia surpassed the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate stood at
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
11 per 100 parole during the year. 
parolees in Virginia compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
 
 
Data on the rate of incarceration for parolees in Virginia is available beginning in 2009. In 2013, after 
fairly steady increases the rate of incarceration for paroles in Virginia surpassed the aggregate state 
rate. In 2014, the rate stood at 11 per 100 parolees in Virginia compared to 8 per 100 for the states in 
aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

VIRGINIA

184
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014

Virginia

States Total
24%

46%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Virginia, nearly half of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is much higher than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN WASHINGTON

Washington	
Summary:	Prison	and	parole	population	rates	are	lower	in	Washington	compared	to	the	states	as	a	
whole.	However,	a	larger	share	of	prison	admissions	is	due	to	conditional	release	violators	compared	to	
the	states	as	a	whole.	About	half	of	release	hearings	for	sex	offenders	with	indeterminate	sentences	
result	in	a	finding	that	the	inmate	is	releasable;	the	proportion	is	lower	for	hearings	for	old	code	cases.	
Washington	has	an	indeterminate	sentence	review	board	which	currently	practices	discretionary	release	
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Washington compared to the states as a whole. However,
only	for	inmates	imprisoned	for	a	felony	committed	prior	to	the	effective	date	of	the	determinate	
a larger share of prison admissions is due to conditional release violators compared to the states as a whole.
sentencing	statute	(July	1,	1984),	for	inmates	serving	life	sentences,	and	for	some	sex	offenders	who	
About half of release hearings for sex offenders with indeterminate sentences result in a finding that the inmate
committed	an	offense	after	August	31,	2001.		
is releasable;
the proportion is lower for hearings for old code cases. Washington has an indeterminate sentence
	 which currently practices discretionary release only for inmates imprisoned for a felony committed
review board
prior to the Washington	had	one	of	the	lowest	prison	population	rates	of	the	states	in	2014.	
effective date of the determinate sentencing statute (July 1, 1984), for inmates serving life sentences,
	 sex offenders who committed an offense after August 31, 2001.
and for some
Chart	1.	Prison	and	Parole	Population	per	100,000	Adult	Residents,	2003-2014	

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600

582

563

561

551

325

335
296

332

306

305

500
400
300

352

357

367

317

308

312
244

200

363

362

316

323

261

265

358

358

353

341

317

308

313

313

308

161

168

129

135

2009

2010

2011

2012

235

181

100
2

3

2003

2004

0
2005

2006

2007

2008

Washington Prison Population

State Prison Population

Washington Parole Population

State Parole Population

2013

2014

	
This	chart	shows	the	population	in	prison	and	on	parole	per	100,000	adult	residents	at	yearend	for	
Chart 1 shows theeach	year	from	2003	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	
population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
United	States	series	and	the	Prisoners	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	
aggregate series for
all 50 states is shown.
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
	
*Due to changes in recordkeeping procedures, parole population data between 2004 and 2005 and between 2012, 2013, and 2014 are not comparable for Washington.

WASHINGTON

186
The prison population rate in Washington is much lower than the aggregate state rate. In recent years, the Washington rate has declined
Washington had the 44th highslightly. In 2014, the prison population rate was 332 in Washington
est prison population rates of
versus 551 for all 50 states. Washington had one of the lowest pristhe states in 2014.
on population rates of the states in 2014. In 2014, 89% of releases
from prison that were either conditional or unconditional were conWashington had the 31st highditional releases, including releases to probation, supervised man2014. In 2014, 89% of releases from prison that were either conditional or unconditional were 
est parole population rate of
datory releases, and other unspecified conditional releases.
conditional releases, including releases to probation, supervised mandatory releases, and other 
the states in 2014.

The paroleunspecified conditional releases. 
population rate in Washington is also lower than the ag  rate. Due to changes in recordkeeping procedures,
gregate state
The parole population rate in Washington is also lower than the aggregate state rate. Due to changes in 
parole population
data between 2004 and 2005 and between
recordkeeping procedures, parole population data between 2004 and 2005 and between 2012‐2014 are 
2012-2014
are not comparable for Washington. In 2014, the parole
population
rate in Washington was 181 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Washington had the 31st highest
not comparable for Washington. In 2014, the parole population rate in Washington was 181 which is 
st
parole population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, just four percent of admissions
to parole were due to a discretionary
 highest parole population rate of the 
lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Washington had the 31
decision such
as
the
decision
of
a
parole
board.
states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, just four percent of admissions to parole were due to 

a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.7
0.6

55%
50%

0.5

46%

0.4
31%

33%

0.3

34%

35%

55%

63%

27%

26%

28%

2012

2013

2014

58%

47%

36%

35%

35%

33%

31%
26%

0.2
0.1

34%

57%

62%

13%

0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Washington

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
The percentage
of prison admissions that were conditional release
series for all 50 states is shown. 
violators in
  Washington has been rising over time and surpassed
the aggregate
state rate by 2006. In 2014, nearly two thirds of prison
The percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in Washington has been 
Washington had the 3rd
admissions
in
Washington were due to violations of conditional
rising over time and surpassed the aggregate state rate by 2006. In 2014, nearly two thirds of prison 
highest percentage of prison
release compared
to just over one-quarter of the admissions for
admissions in Washington were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐
admissions due to violations
rd
states in aggregate.
Washington had the 3rd highest percentage
 highest percentage of prison 
quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Washington had the 3
of conditional releases of the
of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
admissions due to violations of conditional releases of
states in 2014.
the states  in 2014.
 
 
 

ROBINA INSTITUTE:  PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

187

Chart 3. Washington Grant Rate, CCB Releases, 2015 

Co
iss

WASHINGTON

Chart 3a. Washington Grant Rate, CCB Releases, 2015
Releasable
Not Releasable

1%

Pending

43%

56%

Chart 3. Washington Grant Rate, CCB Releases, 2015 

Commented [ALW18]
issue! 

 

 

Chart 3a shows the outcomes of CCB parole release hearings during fiscal year 2015 while theReleasable
second chart shows this information for fiscal years 2012 to 2015. CCB
hearings are for offenders
who committed certain sex crimes after August 31, 2001. The second set of charts shows this same information for indeterminate hearings
Chart 3b. Washington Grants by Year, CCB Releases, 2012‐2015 
Releasable
which includes old code cases. In fiscal year 2015, more than1%
one-half of CCB release hearingsNot
resulted
in a finding that the inmate was releasable, while nearly all of the
remaining hearings resulted
in a finding that the inmate was not releasable. This is much higher than for indeterminate sentence hearings; just fourteen percent of these
350
Pending
hearings resulted in a finding that the inmate was releasable. An additional twenty-eight percent resulted in a conditional release, for a total of forty-two percent that were
43%
granted some type of release. Half of the hearings resulted in a finding
of not releasable. The percentage of indeterminate sentence release hearings that resulted in a
56%
finding of releasable has been
declining
over
time,
likely
as the composition of old code cases shifted to more serious offenders.
300
Source: Washington Indeterminate Sentence Review Board Fiscal Year Data Reports 2012 to 2015, www.doc.wa.gov/isrb/docs/isrb-fiscal-year-reports.pdf.

250

 

 
Chart
3b. Washington Grants by Year, CCB Releases, 2012-2015
200
Chart 3b. Washington Grants by Year, CCB Releases, 2012‐2015 
350

150
300

100

250

52%

61%

56%
54%

50
200
150
0

FY2012

100

FY2013

52%

61%
Releasable

FY2014
Not Releasable
54%

50

FY2015

Pending 56%

 
0
Chart 3c. Washington Grant Rate, Indeterminate Hearings, 2015 
FY2012

FY2013

Releasable

FY2014

Not Releasable

 

FY2015

Pending

 
Releasable
 
Chart 3c. Washington Grant Rate, Indeterminate Hearings, 2015 
Chart 3c.
Washington Grants by Year, Indeterminate
Hearings, 2012-2015
Not Releasable
Chart 3d. Washington Grants by Year, Indeterminate Hearings, 2012‐2015 
8% 14%
Conditional Release
180

28%

160

8% 14%

140
120
100

 
 

50%

28%

Pending
Releasable
Not Releasable
Conditional Release
Pending

 

50%

80

 

60

 
  40
20

 
 

241 

32%
27%

0
FY2012

FY2013
Releasable

Not Releasable

14%

27%
FY2014
Conditional Release

241 

FY2015
Pending

 
The first chart shows the outcomes of CCB parole release hearings during fiscal year 2015 while the 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
second chart shows this information for fiscal years 2012 to 2015. CCB hearings are for offenders who 
committed certain sex crimes after August 31, 2001. The second set of charts shows this same 

WASHINGTON

188
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

10

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Washington

2011
State Total

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated
population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
the number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
parole during the year. 
 
Washington
States Total
Information on the rate of incarceration for parolees is not available for Washington. 

24%
*Data not
available

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole
in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

Data on the percentage of exits from parole due to incarceration is not available for Washington.

 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

243 

PAROLE IN WEST VIRGINIA

West Virginia 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in West Virginia compared to the states as a 
whole. Parolees have a similar likelihood of being re‐incarcerated compared to the aggregate state rate. 
Just over one third of parole hearings lead to release being granted, while the remaining hearings result 
in parole being denied or further consideration is required. West Virginia currently practices 
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are lower in West Virginia compared to the states as a whole. Parolees
discretionary release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property 
have a similar
likelihood of being re-incarcerated compared to the aggregate state rate. Just over one third of
offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
parole hearings
lead to release being granted, while the remaining hearings result in parole being denied or further
 
consideration
is
required. West Virginia
currently practices discretionary release for the majority of offenders,
nd
West Virginia had the 32
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

600
500
400
300

335
317

356

308

371

312

399

316

420

418

323

317

200
100

81

85

99

2003

2004

2005

106

2006

436

308

597

582

455

464

313

313

127

138

129

122

2007

2008

2009

2010

563
480

308

139

139

2011

2012

561

551

463

469

306

305

173

187

2013

2014

0
West Virginia Prison Population

State Prison Population

West Virginia Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 shows theThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole
in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

WEST VIRGINIA

190
The prison population rate in West Virginia is lower than the aggregate state rate, though it has been steadily increasing over time. In
2014, the prison population rate was 469 in West Virginia versus
551 for all 50 states. West Virginia had the 32nd highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 67% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

West Virginia had the 32nd
highest prison population rate
of the states in 2014.
West Virginia had the 29th
highest parole population rate
of the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in West Virginia is also lower than the
aggregate state rate, yet it too has been steadily increasing over
time. In 2014, the parole population rate was 187 which is much lowThe	parole	population	rate	in	West	Virginia	is	also	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate,	yet	it	too	has	
er than the
aggregate rate of 305. West Virginia had the 29th highest parolebeen	steadily	increasing	over	time.	In	2014,	the	parole	population	rate	was	187	which	is	much	lower	
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, all reported
th
than	the	aggregate	rate	of	305.	West	Virginia	had	the	29
admissions
to parole were due to a discretionary decision such as 	highest	parole	population	rate	of	the	states	in	
2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	In	2014,	all	reported	admissions	to	parole	were	due	to	a	discretionary	
the decision
of a parole board.

decision	such	as	the	decision	of	a	parole	board.	
	
Chart 2.
Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart	2.	Conditional	Release	Violators	as	a	Percentage	of	Prison	Admissions,	2003-2014	
0.45

40%

0.4
34%

0.35
0.3

33%

34%

34%

35%

34%
35%

36%

35%

36%
35%

31%

35%

34%

27%

0.2

39%

33%

0.25

0.15

38%

26%

28%

15%
11%

10%

0.1
0.05
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
West Virginia

2011 2012 2013 2014

State Institutions

	 in 2006.
*Large percentage changes in West Virginia are due to small base rates; in 2005, 386 admissions to prison were due to conditional release violations versus 965
This	chart	shows	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	each	year	from	2003	to	2014	that	were	due	to	

Chart 2 shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
violations	of	parole	or	other	conditional	release.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Prisoners	series	
come from the
Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	aggregate	
series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	
Since 2006,
the percentage of prison admissions that were
	 release violators in West Virginia has been equal to or
conditional
higher than
that of the aggregate states. Large percentage changes
Since	2006,	the	percentage	of	prison	admissions	that	were	conditional	release	violators	in	West	Virginia	
West Virginia had the 16th
in West Virginia
are due to small base rates; in 2005, 386 admissions
has	been	equal	to	or	higher	than	that	of	the	aggregate	states.	Large	percentage	changes	in	West	Virginia	
highest percentage of prison
to prison are	due	to	small	base	rates;	in	2005,	386	admissions	to	prison	were	due	to	conditional	release	violations	
were due to conditional release violations versus 965 in
admissions due to violations
2006. In 2014, about a third of prison admissions in West Virginia
versus	965	in	2006.	In	2014,	about	a	third	of	prison	admissions	in	West	Virginia	were	due	to	violations	of	
of conditional releases of the
were due to violations of conditional release compared to just
states in 2014.
conditional	release	compared	to	just	over	one-quarter	of	the	admissions	for	states	in	aggregate.	West	
over one-quarter of the admissions
for states in aggregate. West
th
Virginia	had	the	16
	highest	percentage	of	prison	admissions	due	to	violations	of	conditional	releases	of	
Virginia had
the 16th highest percentage
of prison admissions due
the	states	in	2014.	(CALL	OUT,	LEAVE	IN	TEXT)	
to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014.
	

	

	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

191
Chart 3. West Virginia Grant Rate, 2009 

WEST VIRGINIA

Chart 3a. West Virginia Grant Rate, 2009

West Virginia Grant Rates

Granted
Denied

Chart 3. West Virginia Grant Rate, 2009 
35%

36%

Further Consideration

West Virginia Grant Rates

Granted

29%

Denied

35%
36%
 
Further Consideration
 
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2009 that resulted in parole being granted, parole being denied, or further consideration required. This is
the most recentChart 3b. West Virginia Grants by Year, 2007‐2009 
information publically available. Thirty-six percent of release hearings resulted in parole being granted, while nearly the same amount resulted in parole

being denied. The remaining twenty-nine percent resulted
in further consideration being required. Over the last three years of available data, the percentage of hearings
29%
that result in parole being granted or denied has decreased while the percentage requiring further consideration has increased.

West Virginia Grants by Year

Source: 55th West Virginia Parole Board Annual Report July 1, 2008 - June 30, 2009, www.paroleboard.wv.gov/SiteCollectionDocuments/55th%20Annual%20Report%20
 
FY%2008.09.pdf.

  4000
Chart 3b. West Virginia Grants by Year, 2007‐2009 
3500

Chart 3b. West Virginia Grants by Year, 2007-2009

West Virginia Grants by Year

3000
4000
2500
3500
2000
3000
1500
2500
1000
2000
500

45%

41%

1500
0
1000 FY07
41%
500

Granted

36%

FY08
45%
Denied
Further Consideration

FY09
36%

 
0
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2009 that resulted in parole being 
FY07
FY08
FY09
granted, parole being denied, or further consideration required. This is the most recent information 
publically available. Thirty‐six percent of release hearings resulted in parole being granted, while nearly 
Granted
Denied
Further Consideration
 
the same amount resulted in parole being denied. The remaining twenty‐nine percent resulted in 
This chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2009 that resulted in parole being 
further consideration being required. Over the last three years of available data, the percentage of 
granted, parole being denied, or further consideration required. This is the most recent information 
hearings that result in parole being granted or denied has decreased while the percentage requiring 
publically available. Thirty‐six percent of release hearings resulted in parole being granted, while nearly 
further consideration has increased. 
the same amount resulted in parole being denied. The remaining twenty‐nine percent resulted in 
 
further consideration being required. Over the last three years of available data, the percentage of 
Source: 55th West Virginia Parole Board Annual Report July 1, 2008 ‐ June 30, 2009, 
hearings that result in parole being granted or denied has decreased while the percentage requiring 
www.paroleboard.wv.gov/SiteCollectionDocuments/55th%20Annual%20Report%20FY%2008.09.pdf. 
further consideration has increased. 
 
Source: 55th West Virginia Parole Board Annual Report July 1, 2008 ‐ June 30, 2009, 
www.paroleboard.wv.gov/SiteCollectionDocuments/55th%20Annual%20Report%20FY%2008.09.pdf. 

 

247 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

192

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 

WEST VIRGINIA

Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014
50
40
30
20

17

10

15

14
15

16

15

16

14

14

14

15

14

13
8

12

9

9

8

2012

2013

2014

0
2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

West Virginia

2011

State Total

 

This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 
The rate of of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees in West Virginia has been similar to or slightly higher than the aggregate state rate
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2014, the rate declined to 8 per 100 parolees in West Virginia which is equal to the rate for the
parole during the year. 
states in aggregate.
 
The rate of incarceration for parolees in West Virginia has been similar to or slightly higher than the 
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
aggregate state rate throughout the series. In 2014, the rate declined to 8 per 100 parolees in West 
Virginia which is equal to the rate for the states in aggregate. 

West Virginia
20%

States Total
24%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In West Virginia, one-fifth of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This is slightly lower than the aggregate state
proportion of 24%.

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

248 

PAROLE IN WISCONSIN

Wisconsin 
Summary: Prison population rates are lower in Wisconsin compared to the states as a whole while 
parole population rates are higher. However, parolees at risk of incarceration have a similar likelihood of 
being reincarcerated compared to the states as a whole. Wisconsin currently practices discretionary 
release only for inmates convicted prior to the effective date of its determinate sentencing statute 
Summary:
Prison population rates are lower in Wisconsin compared to the states as a whole while parole popu(December 31, 1999).  
lation rates
  are higher. However, parolees at risk of incarceration have a similar likelihood of being reincarcerated
compared to the states as a whole.
Wisconsin currently practices discretionary release only for inmates convicted
Wisconsin had the 26th highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
prior to the effective date of its determinate sentencing statute (December 31, 1999).
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600
500

549

552

541
369

400
317
300
290

554

557

544

383

334

399

421

582

563

561

551

535

522

517

513

507

507

447

450

460

454

457

449

308

312

316

323

317

308

313

313

308

306

305

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

200
100
0
2003

Wisconsin Prison Population

State Prison Population

Wisconsin Parole Population

State Parole Population

 

Chart 1 shows theThis chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation and Parole
in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
 

WISCONSIN

194
The prison population rate in Wisconsin is lower than the aggregate state rate. The peak rate of 557 occurred in 2007; thereafter,
the rate declined along with the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the
prison population rate was 507 in Wisconsin versus 551 for all 50
states. Wisconsin had the 26th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014. In 2014, 95% of releases from prison were conditional releases.

Wisconsin had the 26th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
Wisconsin had the 7th highest
parole population rate of the
states in 2014.

From 2003 to 20011, the parole population rate in Wisconsin increased, staying higher than the aggregate rate. In 2014, the parole population rate in Wisconsin was 449, much higher than the
aggregate rate of 305. Wisconsin had the 7th highest parole popFrom 2003 to 20011, the parole population rate in Wisconsin increased, staying higher than the 
ulation rate of the states in 2014. In 2013, two percent of admisaggregate rate. In 2014, the parole population rate in Wisconsin was 449, much higher than the 
sions to parole were due to a discretionary decision thsuch as the
aggregate rate of 305. Wisconsin had the 7  highest parole population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL 
decision of a parole board.

OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2013, two percent of admissions to parole were due to a discretionary decision 
such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.45
40%
0.4
0.35
0.3

41%

39%

40%

39%

40%

39%

36%
31%

36%

33%
33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

32%
35%

35%

31%

33%

0.25

27%

26%

2012

2013

28%

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Wisconsin

2009

2010

2011

State Institutions

2014

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
In the earlyseries for all 50 states is shown. 
years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions
that were  conditional release violators in Wisconsin was similar to
that of theIn the early years of this series, the percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release 
aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately
remained steady for several years before decreasing beginning
Wisconsin had the 18th highviolators in Wisconsin was similar to that of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately 
in 2011, the percentage in Wisconsin increased until 2007 and
est percentage of prison adremained steady for several years before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Wisconsin 
remained steady until 2013. In 2014, nearly a third of prison
missions due to violations of
increased until 2007 and remained steady until 2013. In 2014, nearly a third of prison admissions in 
admissions in Wisconsin were due to violations of conditional
conditional releases of the
Wisconsin were due to violations of conditional release compared to just over one‐quarter of the 
release compared to just over one-quarter of the admissions for th
states in 2014.
admissions for states in aggregate. Wisconsin had the 18  highest percentage of prison admissions due 
states in aggregate. Wisconsin had the 18th highest percentage
to violations of conditional releases of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of
 
the states in 2014.

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

195

WISCONSIN

Chart 3. Wisconsin Grant Rate

*Data not
available

Data on the outcomes of parole release hearings are not available for Wisconsin.

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006‐2014 
50

40

30

20

10

15

15

16

16

14
14

14
13

14

12
9

9

11

10

11

10

2010

2011

2012

2013

8

0
2006

2007

2008

2009
Wisconsin

State Total

2014

 

Chart 4 shows the
rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
This chart shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each 
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the United 
The incarcerated population includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
number reported
on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an 

aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. The incarcerated population includes the reported number 

The rate ofof parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at‐risk population is calculated as 
incarceration for parolees is similar in Wisconsin compared to the states in aggregate and has been so
throughoutthe number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to 
the series. In 2013, the most recent year for which data are available, the rate stood at 10 per 100 parolees
parole during the year. 
in Wisconsin
compared to 9 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
 

 
The rate of incarceration for parolees is similar in Wisconsin compared to the states in aggregate and 
has been so throughout the series. In 2013, the most recent year for which data are available, the rate 
stood at 10 per 100 parolees in Wisconsin compared to 9 per 100 for the states in aggregate. 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

WISCONSIN

196
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2013

Wisconsin

States Total
24%

39%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Wisconsin, thirty-nine percent of the exits from parole were due to incarceration in 2013, the most recent year for
which data are available. This is noticeably higher than the aggregate state proportion of 24% in 2014 (28% in 2013).

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

PAROLE IN WYOMING

Wyoming 
Summary: Prison and parole population rates are lower in Wyoming compared to the states as a whole. 
However, parolees are more likely to be re‐incarcerated compared to the aggregate state rate. Nearly 
two‐thirds of parole hearings lead to release being granted. Wyoming currently practices discretionary 
release for the majority of offenders, including violent offenders, sex offenders, property offenders, 
drug offenders, and public order offenders.  
Summary:
Prison and parole population rates are lower in Wyoming compared to the states as a whole. However,
parolees  are more likely to be re-incarcerated compared to the aggregate state rate. Nearly two-thirds of parole
th granted. Wyoming currently practices discretionary release for the majority of
hearingsWyoming had the 24
lead to release being
 highest prison population rate of the states in 2014. 
offenders,
including
violent
offenders,
sex offenders, property offenders, drug offenders, and public order offenders.
 
Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003‐2014 

Chart 1. Prison and Parole Population per 100,000 Adult Residents, 2003-2014
700
597

600

603

612

615

612

605

597

600
500

514

525

317

308

312

152

146

2003

2004

494

532

513

503

316

323

317

156

170

174

175

2005

2006

2007

2008

582

563

561

519

488

492

505

501

308

313

313

308

306

159

148

173

174

2010

2011

2012

2013

551
535

400
300
200

145

305
160

100
0
2009

Wyoming Prison Population

State Prison Population

Wyoming Parole Population

State Parole Population

2014

 
This chart shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for 
Chart 1 shows the population in prison and on parole per 100,000 adult residents at yearend for each year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the
Probation andeach year from 2003 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation and Parole in the 
Parole in the United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an
aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
United States series and the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A 
series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown. 
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
The prison population rate in Wyoming is lower than the aggregate state rate. However, in recent years, 

WYOMING

198
The prison population rate in Wyoming is lower than the aggregate
state rate. However, in recent years, the rate has increased in Wyoming while the rate has decreased for the states in aggregate. In
2014, the prison population rate was 535 in Wyoming versus 551
for all 50 states. Wyoming had the 24th highest prison population
rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 69% of releases from prison were
conditional releases.

Wyoming had the 24th highest prison population rate of
the states in 2014.
Wyoming had the 33rd highest parole population rate of
the states in 2014.

The parole population rate in Wyoming is also lower than the
aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate in Wyoming was 160 which
is lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Wyoming had the 33rd
highest parole
population rate of the states in 2014. In 2014, 89%
The parole population rate in Wyoming is also lower than the aggregate state rate. In 2014, the rate in 
rd
of admissions
to
parole were due to a discretionary decision such as
 highest parole 
Wyoming was 160 which is lower than the aggregate rate of 305. Wyoming had the 33
the decision
of
a
parole
board.
population rate of the states in 2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) In 2014, 89% of admissions to parole 

were due to a discretionary decision such as the decision of a parole board. 
Chart 2.  Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003-2014
Chart 2. Conditional Release Violators as a Percentage of Prison Admissions, 2003‐2014 
0.4
0.35

33%

34%

34%

35%

36%

35%

35%
33%

31%

0.3

27%

26%

28%

0.25
0.2

16%

16%

0.15

12%

13%

2005

2006

15%

14%

14%

14%

2008

2009

2010

2011

12%

19%

20%

2013

2014

15%

0.1
0.05
0
2003

2004

2007

Wyoming

State Institutions

2012

 

Chart 2 showsThis chart shows the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to 
the percentage of prison admissions each year from 2003 to 2014 that were due to violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart
come from the Prisoners series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.

violations of parole or other conditional release. The data for this chart come from the Prisoners series 
published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate 
The percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release
series for all 50 states is shown. 
violators in Wyoming is lower than that of the aggregate states.
 
However, while the states aggregately remained steady for several
Wyoming had the 32nd highThe percentage of prison admissions that were conditional release violators in Wyoming is lower than 
years before
decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in
est percentage of prison adWyomingthat of the aggregate states. However, while the states aggregately remained steady for several years 
has shown an increase recently increasing. In 2014,
missions due to violations of
before decreasing beginning in 2011, the percentage in Wyoming has shown an increase recently 
one-fifth of prison admissions in Wyoming were due to violations
conditional releases of the
increasing. In 2014, one‐fifth of prison admissions in Wyoming were due to violations of conditional 
of conditional
release compared to just over one-quarter of the
states in 2014.
release compared to just over one‐quarter of the admissions for states in aggregate. Wyoming had the 
admissions
for states in aggregate. Wyoming had the 32nd highest
nd
32 of highest percentage of prison admissions due to violations of conditional releases of the states in 
percentage
prison admissions due to violations of conditional
2014. (CALL OUT, LEAVE IN TEXT) 
releases of the states in 2014.
 

 

 

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

199
Chart 3. Wyoming Grant Rate, 2012 

WYOMING

Chart 3a. Wyoming Grant Rate, 2012

Wyoming Grant Rates

Granted
Not Granted

Chart 3. Wyoming Grant Rate, 2012 
37%
63%
Wyoming
Grant Rates

Granted
Not Granted

 
 
37%
Chart 3a shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2012 that resulted release being granted or not granted. The second chart shows this information for fiscal
Chart 3b. Wyoming Grants by Year, 2010‐2012 
years 2010 to 2012.
In 2012, nearly two-thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being granted. This percentage has increased during the fiscal years for which there is
63%
1200
Source: Wyoming Board of Parole Annual Report Fiscal Year 2012, www-wsl.state.wy.us/slpub/reports/Board%20of%20Parole.pdf.
information.

1000

 
Chart 3b. Wyoming Grants by Year, 2010-2012
Chart 3b. Wyoming Grants by Year, 2010‐2012 

 

800
1200
600
1000
400
800
200
600

48%

4000
FY10
200

48%

63%

57%

FY11
57%
Granted
Not Granted

63%

FY12

 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2012 that resulted release being 
0
granted or not granted. The second chart shows this information for fiscal years 2010 to 2012. In 2012, 
FY10
FY11
FY12
nearly two‐thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being granted. This percentage has increased during 
Granted
Not Granted
the fiscal years for which there is information.  
 
 
The first chart shows the percentage of parole hearings in fiscal year 2012 that resulted release being 
Source: Wyoming Board of Parole Annual Report Fiscal Year 2012, www‐
granted or not granted. The second chart shows this information for fiscal years 2010 to 2012. In 2012, 
wsl.state.wy.us/slpub/reports/Board%20of%20Parole.pdf. 
nearly two‐thirds of the hearings resulted in parole being granted. This percentage has increased during 
 
the fiscal years for which there is information.  
  
 
Source: Wyoming Board of Parole Annual Report Fiscal Year 2012, www‐
wsl.state.wy.us/slpub/reports/Board%20of%20Parole.pdf. 
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
257 
  
ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES
 
 

WYOMING

200
Chart 4. Rate of Incarceration Per 100 Parolees at Risk, 2006-2014

Chart	4.	Rate	of	Incarceration	Per	100	Parolees	at	Risk,	2006-2014	
50

40
30
30

20

15

15

14

14

14

12
9

10
9

8

10

0
2006

2007

9

8

2010

2011

6
2008

2009
Wyoming

7
2012

12

9

8

2013

2014

State Total

	
This	chart	shows	the	rate	of	incarceration	per	100	parolees	who	are	at	risk	of	reincarceration	each	
Chart 4 shows the rate of incarceration per 100 parolees who are at risk of reincarceration each year from 2006 to 2014. The data for this chart come from the Probation
year	from	2006	to	2014.	The	data	for	this	chart	come	from	the	Probation	and	Parole	in	the	United	
and Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). A series for the individual state and an aggregate series for all 50 states is shown.
The incarcerated population
includes the reported number of parolees who exited parole to incarceration for any reason. The at-risk population is calculated as the
States	series	published	by	the	Bureau	of	Justice	Statistics	(BJS).	A	series	for	the	individual	state	and	an	
number reported on parole at the beginning of the year, plus the reported number of entries to parole during the year.
aggregate	series	for	all	50	states	is	shown.	The	incarcerated	population	includes	the	reported	number	
of	parolees	who	exited	parole	to	incarceration	for	any	reason.	The	at-risk	population	is	calculated	as	
The rate of incarceration for parolees is much higher in Wyoming for 2014 compared to the states in aggregate, though
the	number	reported	on	parole	at	the	beginning	of	the	year,	plus	the	reported	number	of	entries	to	
it was lower than the aggregate state rate through 2012. The large changes between 2013 and 2014 for Wyoming
parole	during	the	year.	
are due to low base rates. In 2013, 80 parolees were incarcerated versus 151 in 2014. In 2014, the rate was 30 per 100
	
parolees in Wyoming
compared to 8 per 100 for the states in aggregate.
The	rate	of	incarceration	for	parolees	is	much	higher	in	Wyoming	for	2014	compared	to	the	states	in	
aggregate,	though	it	was	lower	than	the	aggregate	state	rate	through	2012.	The	large	changes	between	
Chart 5. Parole Exits, 2014
2013	and	2014	for	Wyoming	are	due	to	low	base	rates.	In	2013,	80	parolees	were	incarcerated	versus	
151	in	2014.	In	2014,	the	rate	was	30	per	100	parolees	in	Wyoming	compared	to	8	per	100	for	the	states	
Wyoming
States Total
in	aggregate.	
*The large changes between 2013 and 2014 for Wyoming are due to low base rates. In 2013, 80 parolees were incarcerated versus 151 in 2014.

24%
69%

Completions	 n Incarcerations
Chart 5 shows the percentage of people who exit parole to incarceration. All other exits are included in “completions”. The data for this chart come from the Probation and
Parole in the United States series published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

In Wyoming, more than two-thirds of the exits from parole are due to incarceration. This figure is much higher than the
aggregate state proportion of 24%.

	
ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

259	

201

The purpose of this report is to enable and encourage
comparisons among state parole systems that have
never before been possible. As discussed in the report’s
Introduction, the statistics collected here should not
automatically be accepted at face value. We counsel
readers to use caution, and to treat the 50-State Data
Briefs as a first step toward an understanding of the bigpicture outcomes associated with different prison release
and parole revocation systems across the country. We are
proud of the range of questions raised by the data—but
the use to which the data will be put is largely up to the
report’s consumers. For example, we make no claim of
having discovered “best” and “worst” practices across
the states.
Certain patterns, or noticeable lack of patterns, appear
in the Data Briefs as a whole. For instance, there does
not always appear to be a clear connection between a
state’s prison rate and its parole supervision rate; nor do
large numbers of parolees on supervision reliably signal
that parole boards are especially liberal in their release
decisions. The statistical history of many states defy such
common-sense expectations. Some have high prison
and parole supervision rates. Louisiana is an example. In
2014, Louisiana had the highest prison population rate
and the third highest parole population rate of all of the
states. However, only five percent of admissions to parole
were due to a discretionary decision of the parole board in
2014. Other states, in contrast, have low prison and parole
population rates. An example of this is Massachusetts
which had the lowest prison population rate and one of
the lowest parole population rates. Unlike Louisiana, the
majority of admissions to parole (ninety percent) were
due to the discretionary action of the paroling authority.
For other states, the prison population rate may be low
while the parole population rate is high. Oklahoma serves
as an example. It had the fourth highest prison population
rate of the states and the forty-fourth highest parole
population rate; all reported admissions to parole were
due to a discretionary decision. A final category of states
includes those with a high prison population rate and a
low parole population rate, such as New York. New York
has the eighth lowest prison population rate (or the fortythird highest rates) of all 50 states but the sixteenth highest
parole population rate. About a quarter of admissions to
parole were due to discretionary decisions in 2014.

From an analysis of this kind, we can begin to group
states that fall into similar classifications—at least on
the statistical dimensions collected in this report. Table
1 below is an example of the comparisons that may be
drawn.

Table 1. 2X2 Comparison of Selected States
According to Their Rates of Imprisonment and
Parole Supervision, 2014.

Low Parole

High Parole

Low Prison

High Prison

Massachusetts

Alabama

Maine

Arizona

Minnesota

Delaware

North Dakota

Oklahoma

Iowa

Alaska

New Hampshire

Louisiana

New Jersey

Mississippi

New York

Texas

INTRODUCTION

CONCLUSION

States may also be grouped by (1) the percentages of
their prison admissions that are due to parole revocations,
matched against (2) their parole supervision rates. For
some states, both the parole supervision rate (PR) and the
percentage of prison admissions due to parole revocations
(AR) are high—a combination that many would expect.
Missouri is an example of this: the state had the eleventh
highest PR while nearly half of prison admissions were
due to conditional release violators (compared to an
aggregate rate of twenty-eight percent for the states). For
other jurisdictions, such as Rhode Island, both the PR and
the AR are low. Rhode Island had one of the lowest PRs of
any state in 2014. At the same time, the Rhode Island’s AR
stands at fifteen percent, well below the norm. However,
for other states, these two factors are not ranked similarly.
For example, states such as Vermont have a low PR and
a high AR. For example, Vermont had the 24th highest
PR in 2014 (about a third lower than the aggregate state
rate), yet nearly two-thirds of admissions to prison were
due to conditional release violators. Flipping commonsense expectations in the opposite direction, states such
as Mississippi had a high PR but a low AR compared with
other states. In recent years, the parole population rate

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

CONCLUSION

202
in Mississippi has surpassed the aggregate state rate;
however, only about a fifth of prison admissions in 2014
were due to conditional release violators.
Once again, states with different experiences can be
organized under headings suggested by the data. Table
2 makes the point, pictorially, that parole supervision
populations have very different impacts on prison
admissions from state to state.
Table 2. 2X2 Comparison of Selected States According
to Their Rates of Parole Supervision and Percentage of
Prison Admissions Due to Parole Revocations, 2014.

Low Parole

High Parole

Low CR Violator

High CR Violator

Florida

Colorado

Massachusetts

Vermont

Rhode Island

Washington

Virginia

Utah

Louisiana

Arkansas

Mississippi

Kentucky

Oregon

Missouri

South Dakota

Pennsylvania

Lastly, states vary quite a bit in rates of parole revocations
measured against the number of parolees who were on
supervision in their systems in any given year. For example,
Utah—which has a low parole population rate compared
to the aggregate state rate—incarcerates parolees at-risk
at a rate more than three times higher than other states.
The probability of revocation among all at-risk parolees
was 26 per 100 parolees in Utah in 2014, and about 8
per 100 for the states aggregately. On the other hand,
Wisconsin—which has a higher than average parole
population rate—revokes parolees-at-risk at a rate similar
to the states in aggregate (around 9 per 100 parolees).

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

The discussion above is intended only to be suggestive of
the innumerable possible uses of the 50 State Data Briefs.
In preparing the report, we were surprised time and again
by the reactions of individual readers of early drafts. For
anyone with a genuine interest in the professional and
academic “fields” of prison release policy, we expect the
report to be a “page-turner.” (Our apologies to the majority
of readers, who will not be quite so enthralled.) We are
looking forward to the many observations, hypotheses,
conclusions, corrections, criticisms, and suggestions
for improvement that this report will provoke. And most
of all, the Robina Institute as a whole looks forward to a
reinvigoration of policy debate aimed at improving the
work of American paroling agencies.

203

Appendix (see if we can put in two columns) 
Appendix, continued (2 columns)
1. State Prison Rates 2014, Ranked
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

 

Louisiana
Delaware
Alaska
Oklahoma
Alabama
Texas
Mississippi
Arizona
Arkansas
Georgia
Missouri
Idaho
Florida
Kentucky
Connecticut
Indiana
Virginia
Nevada
Ohio
South Carolina
Tennessee
Michigan
South Dakota
State Institutions (Total)
Wyoming
Hawaii
Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
Colorado
Illinois
North Carolina
Oregon
West Virginia
Montana
California
Maryland
New Mexico
Kansas
Rhode Island
Vermont
Nebraska
Iowa
Utah
New York
Washington
New Jersey
North Dakota
New Hampshire
Minnesota
Maine
Massachusetts

1,075
951
948
945
849
837
831
827
791
696
684
675
649
637
590
584
581
576
575
571
569
565
561
551
535
528
507
503
502
488
485
484
469
463
459
454
443
443
399
392
385
371
345
338
332
312
301
280
255
209
200

2. State Parole Rates 2014, Ranked

3. Conditional Release Violators 2014,
% of Prison Admissions, Ranked

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

23
24
25
25
27
28
28
28
31
32
33
34
34
36
36
38
38
40
40
40
43
44
45
45
47
48
49
50

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Pennsylvania
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oregon
Texas
Kentucky
Wisconsin
Mississippi
South Dakota
Alaska
Missouri
Idaho
Georgia
State Institutions (Total)
Illinois
California
New York
Nevada
Tennessee
Maryland
Colorado
Iowa
Michigan
New Hampshire
Vermont
Alabama
New Jersey
Ohio
Indiana
West Virginia
Kansas
Washington
Utah
Wyoming
Minnesota
Arizona
New Mexico
South Carolina
Hawaii
Montana
North Carolina
North Dakota
Delaware
Connecticut
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
Florida
Virginia
Maine

1037
962
838
770
562
492
449
437
406
402
396
350
336
305
300
294
289
272
267
249
245
242
240
225
219
216
215
193
189
187
186
181
162
160
159
147
142
139
139
137
131
102
92
91
88
75
56
36
29
27
2

1
1
3
4
5
6
7
7
9
10
11
12
12
14
15
16
16
18
18
20
21
22

Vermont
Idaho*
Washington
Arkansas
Colorado
Missouri
Utah
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire
Kentucky
Tennessee
Maryland
Hawaii
New York
Minnesota
West Virginia
New Mexico
Texas
Wisconsin
Oklahoma
Illinois
Louisiana
State Institutions
Oregon
Iowa
New Jersey
Michigan
Maine
Kansas
South Dakota
Montana
Mississippi
Wyoming
South Carolina
Delaware
Nebraska
Ohio
Arizona
North Dakota
Nevada
Connecticut
North Carolina
Rhode Island
California
Indiana
Georgia
Alabama
Massachusetts
Virginia
Florida
Alaska

263 
	

65%
65%
63%
55%
48%
47%
45%
45%
43%
41%
40%
39%
39%
38%
35%
34%
34%
32%
32%
31%
30%
29%
28%
27%
26%
25%
25%
24%
23%
23%
23%
21%
20%
19%
18%
18%
17%
17%
16%
16%
15%
15%
15%
14%
13%
10%
10%
9%
1%
0%
N/A

CONCLUSION

Appendix

265	

	

ROBINA INSTITUTE: STATE DATA PAROLE PROFILES

About the Parole Release and Revocation Project
The Parole Release and Revocation Project is committed to engaging paroling authorities in both indeterminate
and determinate sentencing states in examining all elements of the discretionary parole release and post-release
violations process. A goal of this project is to enhance the quality of decision-making at every stage. As described
below, the project is currently engaged in the development of legal profiles and conducting a comprehensive
survey of parole boards. This project will also feature on-site work with selected paroling jurisdictions

ROBINA INSTITUTE
OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE
UNIVERSITY

OF

MINNESOTA LAW SCHOOL

About the Robina Institute

The Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice brings legal education, legal and sociological research,
theory, policy, and practice together to solve common problems in the field of criminal justice. Through this
work, we initiate and support coordinated research and policy analysis and partner with multiple local and
state jurisdictions from across the nation to provide recommendations and build links between researchers,
practitioners, lawmakers, governing authorities, and the public.
The Robina Institute’s focus is to build these connections through three program areas: Criminal Justice
Policy, Criminal Law Theory, and Sentencing Law and Policy. The emphasis in all three areas is on new ways
of conceptualizing criminal law and its roles, and new ways of thinking about responses to crime. The Robina
Institute is currently working on several research projects, including four in the Sentencing Law and Policy
Program Area that take a close look at issues states and jurisdictions face in sentencing policy and guidelines:
the Probation Revocation Project; the Parole Release and Revocation Project; the Criminal History Project; and
the Sentencing Guidelines Repository Project.
The Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice was established in 2011 at the University of Minnesota
Law School thanks to a generous gift from the Robina Foundation. Created by James H. Binger (’41), the Robina
Foundation provides funding to major institutions that generate transformative ideas and promising approaches

ROBINA INSTITUTE: PAROLE RELEASE AND REVOCATION ACROSS 50 STATES

 

 

Prisoner Education Guide side
Advertise Here 4th Ad
Federal Prison Handbook - Side