Whats It Called When You Go to Jail Again

Arrest, Release, Repeat:

How police and jails are misused to respond to social problems

Past Alexi Jones and Wendy Sawyer Tweet this
Baronial 2019
Press release

Police and jails are supposed to promote public safety. Increasingly, notwithstanding, law enforcement is called upon to respond punitively to medical and economic problems unrelated to public prophylactic issues. As a result, local jails are filled with people who need medical intendance and social services, many of whom bike in and out of jail without ever receiving the assist they need. Conversations nigh this trouble are becoming more frequent, just until at present, these conversations have been missing three fundamental data points: how many people go to jail each yr, how many return, and which underlying problems fuel this cycle.

In this written report, we fill this troubling data gap with a new analysis of a federal survey, finding that at least iv.9 million people are arrested and jailed each year,¹ and at least ane in 4 of those individuals are booked into jail more than than one time during the same yr.ⁱⁱ Our analysis shows that repeated arrests are related to race and poverty, also as high rates of mental illness and substance use disorders. Ultimately, we observe that people who are jailed have much higher rates of social, economic, and health problems that cannot and should non be addressed through incarceration.

Fortunately, as we discuss in our recommendations, there are policy solutions that tin break this cycle of incarceration by addressing people's needs in their communities rather than through the criminal justice organization.

Past the numbers: At least 4.9 1000000 individuals are arrested and booked per year

Using nationally representative data from the National Survey on Drug Apply and Health (NSDUH), we find that at least four.9 meg individuals were arrested and booked in 2017^three. Of those 4.ix million individuals, iii.5 million were arrested only once in 2017; 930,000 were arrested twice; and 430,000 were arrested iii or more times.

People with multiple arrests unduly come from marginalized populations

Nigh broadly, we find important demographic differences between people with multiple arrests in the by twelvemonth and those with no arrests or just ane abort. Our analysis shows that people with multiple arrests are disproportionately: Black, depression-income, less educated, and unemployed. Moreover, the vast bulk are arrested for non-violent offenses. This suggests that instead of incarceration, which diminishes economical prospects, public investments in employment assist, education and vocational grooming, and financial assist would aid mediate the conditions that lead marginalized individuals to police contact in the showtime identify.

Slideshow 1. Swipe for more demographic comparisons of people jailed once in a year, multiple times, or not at all. For the raw data used to construct these graphs, come across Appendix Table 1.

Specifically, we observe that:

• Black Americans are overrepresented among people who were arrested in 2017. Despite making upwardly merely 13% of the general population, Blackness men and women account for 21% of people who were arrested just once and 28% of people arrested multiple times in 2017. This is partly reflective of persistent residential segregation and racial profiling, which subject Black individuals and communities to greater surveillance and increased likelihood of police stops and searches.
• Poverty is strongly correlated with multiple arrests. Nearly half (49%) of people with multiple arrests in the past year had individual incomes below $x,000 per yr. In dissimilarity, near a third (36%) of people arrested only once, and simply i in five (21%) people who had no arrests, had incomes beneath $10,000.
• Depression educational attainment increases the likelihood of arrest, particularly multiple arrests. Two-thirds (66%) of people with multiple arrests had no more than than a high school education, compared to one-half (51%) of those who were arrested once and a 3rd (33%) of people who had no arrests in the by twelvemonth.^v
• People with multiple arrests are 4 times more likely to be unemployed (15%) than those with no arrests in the by year (4%).
• Almost people arrested multiple times don't pose a serious public safe take a chance. The vast majority (88%) of people who were arrested and jailed multiple times had not been arrested for a serious fierce law-breaking in the past year.^six

People with multiple arrests accept greater health needs

In add-on to social and economic factors, our analysis too shows that people who are arrested and booked more than once per twelvemonth often accept underlying health issues, many of which can lead to police force contact. Our finding that people with multiple arrests have depression rates of violence but serious medical and mental health needs gives new urgency to the growing concerns that jails have become "the de facto mental wellness care organization in many communities," and that police force are often used to respond to medical and mental health problems, not to matters of public condom.

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

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

• Over half (52%) of people arrested multiple times reported a substance use disorder in the past yr. ⁷ In contrast, 36% of people arrested once and but vii% of people who were not arrested had a substance use disorder in the past twelvemonth.
• People with multiple arrests were iii times more probable to take a serious mental disease (25% vs. 9%) and 3 times more likely to study serious psychological distress, including symptoms of depression and anxiety, than people with no arrests in the past year (30% vs 11%).
• People with multiple arrests were less likely to have access to health care. Individuals who were arrested and booked more than in one case were over 3 times more than probable to have no health insurance (27%) compared to those with no arrests in the past year (viii%), and slightly more than likely to lack insurance than people arrested only once (23%).
• HIV prevalence was eleven times college among people with multiple arrests (i.68%) compared to people with no arrests in the past year (0.xv%). There is a significant overlap between social determinants of HIV and adventure factors for incarceration; for instance, intravenous drug use, homelessness, and poverty all increase the risk of both HIV and incarceration. Moreover, incarceration tin can be particularly unsafe for people living with HIV, as many jails fail to provide appropriate HIV intendance.

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

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

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

Although no national data has been published on this phenomenon, several cities have studied how their jails are used and reported that a pocket-size portion of people account for a big number of arrests. Unnecessary arrests cost cities and counties millions of dollars but exercise nothing to gear up the underlying medical, economic, and social bug. For instance, in New York City, a report of frequent utilizers found that the 800 people with the about arrests accounted for eighteen,713 jail admissions and $129 1000000 in custody and health costs over v years. In Camden, New Jersey, researchers establish that 5% of adults accounted for 25% of all arrests over the 5-twelvemonth study menstruation.

Slideshow 2. Swipe for more particular on the economic, racial, and health disparities betwixt "frequent utilizers" and people who had no past-year arrests. For the raw data used to construct these graphs, see Appendix Table 2

To better provide national data on "frequent utilizers", nosotros likewise looked specifically at people who were arrested and booked three or more than times in the past year. We constitute similar, but ofttimes more extreme, results compared to the findings discussed to a higher place:

• 42% of people arrested and booked 3 or more times were Blackness.
• Most half (fifty%) of those about frequently arrested had annual incomes below $10,000 and 85% had incomes below $20,000.
• Educational attainment was lowest among people with 3 or more arrests in a year. Three-quarters (74%) had a high school education or less — with 38% without a high school diploma.
• The majority of people (61%) arrested 3 or more times reported having a substance use disorder. Over a quarter (27%) had a serious or moderate mental affliction.
• People with 3 or more arrests were more likely to have been diagnosed with chronic health conditions compared to those with no arrests, including heart conditions (15% vs. 10%), HIV (four.12% vs. 0.15%), cirrhosis (3.47% vs. 0.21%), and hepatitis B or C (2.43% vs. 1.04%).
• Frequent utilizers were more likely to use emergency rooms multiple times in the past year. 36% of frequent utilizers had used the emergency 2 or more times in the past year, compared to eleven% of people with no arrests.

Frequent utilizers are characterized by serious public health needs, mental health or substance use disorders, and unstable housing conditions. While interventions specifically targeting frequent utilizers of the criminal justice arrangement are still relatively rare, programs in New York City and Denver have demonstrated that it is possible to terminate people from cycling in and out of jail by providing appropriate medical intendance and social services in the customs, including supportive housing, mental wellness and substance use treatment, and case direction. These services, which address the underlying issues that tin lead to justice involvement, are more price-efficient, effective, merely, and humane than incarcerating people.

Conclusion

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

Recommendations

Frequently arresting, jailing and rejailing people who pose little public safe run a risk has immediate moral and fiscal costs. These costs are compounded as underlying medical, financial, educational, and mental health needs are exacerbated by arrest and detention. To break this bike, policymakers at the state and local level should:

Redirect taxpayer dollars from jails to expand admission to wellness services:

• Counties should resist jail expansion, shut jails when possible, and instead invest in increasing health intendance capacity. Because of the limited number of psychiatric beds, which are frequently much further away than jails, police enforcement officers often find information technology easier to transport people with serious mental disease to jail. The Treatment Advancement Center estimates information technology is 2.five times quicker for police enforcement to ship someone to a jail compared to a medical facility. For example, there are 25 detention sites across Dallas County, Texas, but there are only 3 psychiatric diversion sites for police force enforcement. For more on how counties reduce jail populations and invest in community health, see our report Does our canton really need a bigger jail? A guide for avoiding unnecessary jail expansion.
• Invest in community-based mental health intendance and treatment for substance use disorders, which tin prevent criminal justice involvement in the first place. Inquiry has demonstrated that access to handling tin reduce both vehement and financially motivated crimes in a community. Moreover, investing in such handling is estimated to yield a $12 render for every $1 spent, equally information technology reduces future criminal offence, costly incarceration, and lowers health care expenses.
• Counties should also provide testify-based mental health and substance use disorder treatment in jails, including medication-assisted treatment, and connect people with medical care and wellness insurance upon release to ensure their treatment is not disrupted.

Connect people with social services:

• Expand job grooming and placement services, educational opportunities, and financial assistance for low-income individuals.
• Expand social services for people with unstable housing, focusing on "Housing Starting time." This approach acknowledges that stable homes are often necessary before people can address unemployment, illness, substance utilise disorder, and other problems. "Housing Start" reforms, forth with expanded social services, would assist to disrupt the revolving door of release and reincarceration. Research has plant that supportive housing may even pay for itself by reducing people'southward use of other public services, such as emergency medical care.

Reduce the number of arrests and jailable offenses:

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

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

• States and counties should create pre-arrest diversion programs then people with mental illness and substance use disorders can avoid arrest birthday and exist diverted directly to appropriate handling and services. For example, Police Enforcement Assisted Diversion (Pb) is a pre-arrest diversion program designed for people for people that appoint criminal activity due to unmet behavioral health needs or poverty. Under LEAD, law enforcement diverts peoples who would otherwise be arrested to case managers who reply to the firsthand crisis and provide long term intensive case management, including substance use disorder handling and housing.
• When people with substance apply disorders and/or mental illnesses are arrested, states should brand handling-based diversion programs and other harm reduction strategies the default instead of jail. States should ensure their diversion and impairment reduction programs are fully funded.⁹

Evaluate and address the needs frequent utilizers:

• Collect and clarify data in club to identify frequent utilizers and to design interventions. Since frequent utilizers interact with not just the criminal justice arrangement, but also healthcare and homeless services, information technology is important to integrate data beyond agencies. This data is crucial to understanding local frequent utilizer populations and designing effective, bear witness-based interventions. Interventions should likewise address racial and ethnic disparities in the frequent utilizer population.

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

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

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

Because of the limitations in both national criminal justice and homelessness information, there is no obvious way to supplement the NSDUH to guess the number of people who were arrested and booked in 2017 merely excluded from the survey. Neither the BJS nor FBI'south Uniform Offense Reporting Programme program keeps track of the number of unique individuals arrested or jailed over the grade of a twelvemonth. All the same, given the high rate of weekly jail turnover (54%) and the fact that the average length of stay in jails in 2017 was just 26 days, we concluded that most of the people who made upwards the x.six one thousand thousand total jail admissions in 2017 were likely still included in NSDUH.

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

Data Analysis

For our assay, we used the Substance Corruption and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA's) public online data analysis system (PDAS) to run cross tabulations on the National Survey on Drug Utilize and Health, 2017. Our analysis included the variables NOBOOKY2 for the number of times arrested and booked, EDUHIGHCAT for education, NEWRACE2 for race, IRPINC3 for income, HIVAIDSEV for HIV status, BKSRVIOL for whether someone had committed a vehement crime, UDPYILAL for substance employ disorder, SMMIYR_U for serious or moderate mental illness, SPDYR for serious psychological distress, IRWRKSTAT18 for employment, CIRROSEVR for cirrhosis, HRTCONDEV for heart condition, and HEPBCEVER. In order to look at what offenses people committed, we used the following variables: BKMVTHFT (theft), BKDRUNK (drunkenness), BKDRUG (drug offenses), and BKOTHOF2 (for "other offenses," including additional drug violations, theft violations, probation and parole violations, and traffic violations).

For researchers who want to replicate our work, nosotros found it helpful to have the steps discussed beneath. When possible, we used variables that were recoded and imputed past SAMHSA so that "Bad information" "blank" "refused" or "don't know" responses were already accounted for and excluded in our analysis and weighting. For variables where SAMHSA did not provide a recoded version, we recoded all missing information, such as "Bad data," "Refused," "Bare," and "Don't Know," into "NA."

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

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

Read most the information

Appendix

To benefit other researchers who wish to build upon our analysis or need the precise data behind our graphs, this appendix shares our complete data. The commencement appendix corresponds with the first part of the written report focusing on those with multiple arrests (that is, two or more arrests within 12 months). The 2nd table corresponds with the frequent utilizer department, focusing on the subset of people with multiple arrests that are arrested three or more times within a yr.

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

Tabular array 1. This table summarizes demographic, economic, and health information for people with no arrests, one abort, and multiple arrests in the past year.

	Anybody surveyed	No arrests in the past twelvemonth	1 abort in the past yr	Multiple arrests in the past yr
Employment status
Employed full fourth dimension	45.26%	45.44%	44.28%	32.74%
Employed part time	11.78%	xi.81%	10.58%	ix.43%
Unemployed	three.94%	3.72%	12.39%	15.07%
Other	29.85%	29.86%	25.74%	33.53%
12-17 Year olds	9.17%	9.xvi%	seven.01%	9.23%
Race/Ethnicity
Not-Hispanic White	62.76%	63.15%	53.49%	45.79%
Non-Hispanic Black/African American	12.08%	11.eighty%	20.lxx%	28.08%
Non-Hispanic Native American or Alaskan Native	0.54%	0.51%	2.66%	2.46%
Not-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander	0.39%	0.38%	ane.02%	i.20%
Non-Hispanic Asian	5.62%	five.72%	1.64%	ane.29%
Not-Hispanic more than one race	i.80%	1.78%	ii.93%	3.23%
Hispanic	xvi.lxxx%	xvi.67%	17.56%	17.96%
Sex
Male	48.51%	47.98%	66.88%	77.71%
Female	51.49%	52.02%	33.12%	22.29%
Teaching
Less than high school	eleven.13%	x.72%	twenty.21%	35.91%
High school graduate	22.15%	21.93%	30.62%	29.61%
Some college or associates degree	28.23%	28.30%	32.19%	21.29%
College graduate	29.32%	29.88%	9.97%	iii.96%
12-17 Year olds	9.17%	ix.16%	7.01%	9.23%
Income
Less than $10,000	21.63%	21.18%	35.85%	48.60%
$10,000 — $19,999	17.89%	17.66%	27.10%	29.35%
$20,000 — $29,999	13.11%	13.07%	14.57%	12.86%
$30,000 — $39,999	10.88%	11.01%	vi.76%	four.18%
$forty,000 — $49,999	8.65%	viii.76%	4.82%	1.24%
$l,000 — $74,999	12.62%	12.77%	8.09%	3.02%
$75,000 or more	fifteen.22%	15.55%	2.81%	0.76%
Covered by any health insurance
Yeah	90.58%	xc.99%	75.69%	71.84%
No	8.87%	viii.49%	23.35%	27.17%
North/A	0.56%	0.52%	0.96%	0.99%
Past year serious or moderate mental affliction
Yes	9.50%	9.23%	22.45%	24.78%
No	90.fifty%	90.77%	77.55%	75.22%
Past year psychological distress
Yes	11.22%	x.88%	26.72%	30.15%
No	88.78%	89.12%	73.28%	69.85%
Past year illicit drug or alcohol dependence or abuse
Yes	7.27%	6.63%	36.27%	51.54%
No	92.73%	93.37%	63.73%	48.46%
HIV
Yes	0.16%	0.fifteen%	0.35%	1.68%
No	98.80%	98.95%	98.72%	96.31%
N/A	ane.04%	0.90%	0.93%	3.01%

Table 2. This table summarizes demographic, economical, and health information for people with no arrests, one arrest, two arrests, and three or more arrests in the past year. This corresponds with the section of the report about frequent utilizers, which nosotros defined as individuals with three or more arrests within 12 months.

	Anybody surveyed	No arrests in the past twelvemonth	1 abort in the past year	2 arrests in the past year	3 or more arrests in the past year
Employment status
Employed full fourth dimension	45.26%	45.44%	44.28%	34.18%	29.62%
Employed part time	11.78%	11.81%	10.58%	10.78%	6.48%
Unemployed	3.94%	3.72%	12.39%	14.24%	16.88%
Other	29.85%	29.86%	25.74%	33.76%	33.03%
12-17 Year olds	nine.17%	9.sixteen%	7.01%	7.03%	13.99%
Race/Ethnicity
Not-Hispanic White	62.76%	63.15%	53.49%	47.32%	42.46%
Not-Hispanic Blackness/African American	12.08%	11.80%	twenty.70%	21.63%	42.08%
Non-Hispanic Native American or Alaskan Native	0.54%	0.51%	ii.66%	2.05%	three.36%
Not-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander	0.39%	0.38%	1.02%	ane.63%	0.27%
Non-Hispanic Asian	5.62%	5.72%	one.64%	ane.71%	0.38%
Not-Hispanic more than one race	1.80%	one.78%	2.93%	3.81%	1.96%
Hispanic	16.eighty%	16.67%	17.56%	21.86%	9.fifty%
Sex
Male	48.51%	47.98%	66.88%	77.00%	79.25%
Female	51.49%	52.02%	33.12%	23.00%	xx.75%
Education
Less than high school	11.xiii%	ten.72%	20.21%	34.76%	38.42%
High school graduate	22.15%	21.93%	30.62%	26.92%	35.43%
Some college or assembly degree	28.23%	28.30%	32.xix%	26.26%	10.51%
College graduate	29.32%	29.88%	ix.97%	5.03%	1.64%
12-17 Yr olds	9.17%	9.16%	7.01%	7.03%	13.99%
Income
Less than $x,000	21.63%	21.18%	35.85%	48.02%	49.96%
$10,000 – $19,999	17.89%	17.66%	27.10%	26.68%	35.60%
$20,000 – $29,999	13.11%	13.07%	fourteen.57%	fifteen.12%	7.56%
$30,000 – $39,999	10.88%	xi.01%	6.76%	4.73%	2.89%
$40,000 – $49,999	8.65%	8.76%	iv.82%	0.94%	1.95%
$l,000 – $74,999	12.62%	12.77%	8.09%	3.72%	1.36%
$75,000 or more	15.22%	fifteen.55%	2.81%	0.78%	0.69%
Covered by any health insurance
Yes	90.58%	90.99%	75.69%	72.13%	71.19%
No	viii.87%	8.49%	23.35%	27.38%	26.72%
Northward/A	0.56%	0.52%	0.96%	0.48%	2.09%
Past twelvemonth serious or moderate mental disease
Yes	ix.fifty%	9.23%	22.45%	23.91%	26.82%
No	90.50%	90.77%	77.55%	76.09%	73.18%
Past yr psychological distress
Yes	11.22%	10.88%	26.72%	27.25%	36.94%
No	88.78%	89.12%	73.28%	72.75%	63.06%
Past year illicit drug or alcohol dependence or abuse
Yep	7.27%	vi.63%	36.27%	47.33%	threescore.66%
No	92.73%	93.37%	63.73%	52.67%	39.34%
HIV
Yes	0.16%	0.15%	0.35%	0.56%	4.12%
No	98.fourscore%	98.95%	98.72%	96.13%	93.52%
Due north/A	1.04%	0.xc%	0.93%	3.31%	two.37%
Hepatitis B or C
Yes	1.09%	1.04%	2.l%	9.47%	2.43%
No	97.87%	98.06%	96.57%	87.22%	95.21%
North/A	i.04%	0.90%	0.93%	3.31%	2.37%
Cirrhosis
Aye	0.22%	0.21%	0.86%	0.55%	3.47%
No	98.74%	98.89%	98.21%	96.14%	94.16%
N/A	i.04%	0.90%	0.93%	3.31%	2.37%
Heart Status
Yes	9.66%	nine.73%	five.36%	6.21%	14.56%
No	89.31%	89.37%	93.71%	xc.48%	83.07%
Due north/A	one.04%	0.90%	0.93%	3.31%	2.37%
Number of emergency room visits in the past twelvemonth
None	72.33%	72.93%	51.55%	53.48%	42.66%
One	14.eighteen%	14.05%	22.49%	21.04%	18.26%
Ii	7.08%	half dozen.94%	12.32%	16.thirty%	23.52%
3 plus	4.31%	4.16%	9.82%	ix.13%	12.33%
N/A	2.11%	ane.92%	3.81%	0.05%	3.23%

About the Prison Policy Initiative

The not-profit, non-partisan Prison house Policy Initiative was founded in 2001 to expose the broader harm of mass criminalization and spark advocacy campaigns to create a more only order. Through accessible, big-moving picture reports, the organization helps the public engage more fully in criminal justice reform. Its previous reports Era of Mass Expansion and Detaining the Poor helped put the need for jail and bail reform into the national conversation. More recently, it published, by the same author, Does our county really need a bigger jail? A guide for avoiding unnecessary jail expansion. The Prison house Policy Initiative also leads the nation's fight confronting prison house-based gerrymandering and plays a leading role in protecting the families of incarcerated people from the predatory prison and jail telephone and video calling industries.

About the authors

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

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

Acknowledgments

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

ericksondientiong.blogspot.com

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