Sex Offender Studies

The 2004 Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to analyze the impact and effectiveness of current sex offender sentencing policies. Because the topic is extensive, we are publishing a series of reports. This report describes the recidivism rates of Washington State sex offenders. It examines the 4,091 sex offenders placed in the community from 1994 to 1998 after release from prison or jail or a community supervision sentence. Typically, news articles report sex offender recidivism with one number. This study examines recidivism from multiple perspectives, looking at the type of sex offender (child victim, rapist, sex offender with priors) and the categories of crimes after release (sex, violent, non-violent, misdemeanor). This study defines recidivism as a conviction occurring during the first five years after release to the community. In addition, the time between the date of a recidivism offense and the conviction for that offense-the adjudication period-is taken into account. Our previous work indicates that a one-year adjudication period captures nearly all convictions.

During the summer of 2006, the Division of Probation and Correctional Alternatives (DPCA) conducted a survey of County Probation Departments to assess sex offender management practices. Among the resulting recommendations was that DPCA draft and disseminate a series of research bulletins on issues related to sex offender management so that probation officers in the field would have the latest information. This bulletin represents the first in a series expected to be completed by the end of 2007 that will bring together issues in managing sex offenders on probation, including assessment, re-sentence investigation, treatment, supervision strategies to reduce risk, the use of technology such as Global Positioning Systems (GPS), and forensic computer searches.

How well does Alaska's criminal justice system work to protect the public? What works best? What needs improvement? Can less costly alternatives more effectively promote public safety? Knowing what happens after offenders serve their sentences can help answer these questions. This report by the Judicial Council is the first general study of recidivism in Alaska. It describes the percentages of offenders who were re-arrested, had new court cases filed, were re-convicted, or remanded to custody for new offenses or for probation or parole violations. The report shows how soon after release these events occurred, and what factors were most closely related to an increased chance that offenders would be involved again in the criminal justice system. The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services funded the report.

As interest and concern over sex offenders has increased, so have efforts to control the extent to which they reoffend. As a result, the State of Minnesota has enforced civil commitment statutes, created a sex offender registry, implemented community notification, enhanced the penalties for sex offenders, and increased both the intensity and length of post-release supervision. In examining recidivism among 3,166 sex offenders released from a Minnesota Correctional Facility (MCF) between 1990 and 2002, this report addresses the following question: What are the factors associated with sex offender recidivism?

A total of 3,205 sex offenders were released from the Arizona prison system over the 15-year period FY 1984-FY 1998, for an average of 214 per year. Average yearly sex offender releases increased from 152 over the period FY 1984-FY 1988, to 217 over the period FY 1989-FY 1993, to 272 over the period FY 1994-FY 1998.

Recidivism Rates Compared, 2005 - 2007, is the first comprehensive report published by the Indiana Department of Correction that details the recidivism rates of offenders released from incarceration in Indiana. This report presents recidivism rates for offenders released from the custody of the Indiana Department of Correction for the time period 2002 through 2004. This report defines recidivism as a return to incarceration in the Indiana Department of Correction within three years of the offenders release date. For example, offenders released in calendar year 2004, who returned to prison for either a new conviction or technical violation during 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007, but within three years of release, would be counted in the recidivism rate for 2007.

Allan, et. al. {2003} conducted a retrospective evaluation of the files of 326 JSOs convicted in the Western Australia Children‟s Court from January 1990 to June 1998. Follow-up time from sentencing until the study was finished ranged up to almost 9 years with an average at-risk time of 4.2 years. Thirty-one JSOs or 9.5% of the youth were convicted of new sexual offenses with six of the recidivists convicted of more than one subsequent offense. Of the 326 youth studied, slightly more than 66% were convicted of non-sexual offenses after conviction for a first sexual offense.

The Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) defines recidivism as a return to incarceration within three years of the offender's date of release from a state correctional institution. A recent study by the IDOC calculated the 2008 recidivism rate for offenders released from IDOC during 2005.

The following figures on a ten-year California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) follow-up study of the recidivism of 3,577 individuals convicted of a sex offense who were released from CDCR prisons in 1997 and followed until the end of 2007

A recent study of sexual offenders released from incarceration in Alaska shows that for the three years after the offenders left prison in 2001, the rates of recidivism for sexual offenders were, by most measures, no higher than for offenders in general. The study, which was done by the Alaska Justice Statistical Analysis Center, a subdivision of the Justice Center, compared recidivism for sexual offenders released from prison in 2001 with a random sample of non-sex offenders also released in 2001. The analysis used the three measures most commonly used to determine recidivism: incidents of remand to custody, rearrest, and reconviction on any new offense. The results are similar to those found in an earlier study done by the Alaska Judicial Council. (See Alaska Felony Process: 1999, Alaska Judicial Council, 2004.)

In April 2007, the Minnesota Department of Corrections1 (DOC) published results of a study on 3,166 sex offenders who were released from the state's correctional facilities between 1990 and 2003. Recidivism measures included new arrests, new convictions, and incarceration for new offenses that occurred in Minnesota. This report draws upon the data collected by the DOC, but focuses solely on the sexual recidivism rates2 of the 970 adult sex offenders who were placed under Hennepin County's supervision when released from prison between 1990 and 2003. It is important to bear in mind that during the study's lengthy follow-up period significant changes occurred in how the criminal justice system manages sex offenders. Beginning in the late 1980's, public outcry resulting from high profile sex crimes prompted the enactment of stricter laws and tighter supervision guidelines. For example, risk levels (Level 3, 2, or 1) were not assigned to sex offenders until 1997.

The National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP) was initiated in 1995 to support state activities for the establishment of records systems and the collection and use of criminal history and related records. Since 1995, all states, the District of Columbia, and five U.S. territories have received more than $530 million under the program, which is administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The goal of the NCHIP program is to "improve safety and security by enhancing the quality, completeness, and accessibility of criminal history record information and by insuring the nationwide implementation of criminal justice and noncriminal justice background check systems." In order to accomplish this goal, the program provides financial and technical assistance to the states to improve their criminal records systems and other related systems to support background checks.

In the early 1990s, the Minnesota legislature enacted the predatory offender registration (POR) law, which requires offenders who meet the statutory criteria to register their residences, places of employment, schools, and any vehicles owned or operated by registrants with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. Since its creation nearly 20 years ago, the law has been amended several times to broaden its scope and increase the penalties for registration noncompliance. These changes to the POR law have led to a greater number of sex offenders convicted for failure to register (FTR), which has in turn resulted in more offenders coming to prison for FTR offenses. In fact, FTR is now the most common reincarceration offense for sex offenders released from prison.

Sex offenders make up 6.5 percent of parolees, and have a lower recidivism rate than other offenders. Five percent of released sex offenders who recidivate are convicted of a sex offense, 8.6 percent commit an unrelated crime and 86 percent return to prison on a parole violation. San Francisco has one of the highest recidivism rates in the state-some 78.3 percent go back to prison within three years of release-according to a report released today by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). The study tracked about 108,000 inmates released from state prisons between 2005 and 2006 over the course of three years. Overall, the state recidivism rate, which has long been among the highest in the country, clocks in at 67.5 percent, which is not a significant change from previous statewide tallies.

The following is a collection of recidivism studies comparing the failure rate of all felony offenders to the failure rate of sex offenders who have committed a new sex crime. All of the studies presented on this page are carefully selected state-sponsored studies, authorized by either the federal Government (US Department of Justice) or the several state legislatures and their respective state agencies. Every effort has been made to eliminate purely academic or politically motivated research.

The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of one state's sex offender registration and notification policy in reducing sexual violence. The problem of sexual violence is a national legislative priority as evidenced by numerous sex offender-specific policies enacted at the federal level over the past 15 years. Specifics vary among states regarding criminal justice responses to sex offending, but all such policies have as their primary goals the prevention of sexual violence and the reduction of sexual re-offending.

Concern about sex offenders and their behavior is understandably a topic of great public interest. Numerous public policy proposals target the management of sex offenders in prisons and in communities post‐release. Recent examples of such proposals include, but are not limited to, enhanced sanctions for convicted and repeat sex offenders, civil commitment for predatory sex offenders, the development of sex offender registries, and the use of advanced technology to monitor sex offenders and residency restrictions.1 Unfortunately, the quality and extent of the body of knowledge concerning sex offender behavior has not kept pace with either the sophistication or potential cost of some of these proposed policies.

This study examined the recidivism rates of female sexual offenders. A meta-analysis of 10 studies (2,490 offenders; average follow-up 6.5 years) showed that female sexual offenders have extremely low rates of sexual recidivism (less than 3%). The recidivism rates for violent (including sexual) offences and for any type of crime were predictably higher than the recidivism rates for sexual offences but still lower than the recidivism rates of male sexual offenders. These findings indicate the need for distinct policies and procedures for assessing and managing the risk of male and female sexual offenders. Risk assessment tools developed specifically for male sexual offenders would be expected to substantially overestimate the recidivism risk of female sexual offenders.

The purpose of the present study was to test models of combining static and dynamic risk measures that might predict sexual recidivism among adult male sex offenders better than any one type of measure alone. Study participants were 759 adult male sex offenders under correctional supervision in Vermont who were enrolled in community sex offender treatment between 2001 and 2007. These offenders were assessed once using static measures (Static-99R, Static-2002R and VASOR) based on participants' history at the date of placement in the community. A 22-item dynamic risk measure (SOTNPS) was used multiple times to assess participants, shortly after their entry into community treatment and approximately every six months thereafter. Analyses of SOTNPS scores resulted in the development of a new 16-item dynamic risk measure, the Sex Offender Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS).

REOFFENDING rates by child pornography users are far below rates for assaults, drink-driving or property damage, with fewer than one in 10 people who download sexual images of minors later convicted of the crime again. Despite community concern about the dangers posed by convicted child pornography users, new Corrections Victoria figures reveal only about 7.5 per cent are found to reoffend. The recidivism rate for those convicted of assault is five times as high, according to comparable data from NSW.