U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Recidivism: Tracking, Methodology and Reporting

NCJ Number
198113
Journal
Corrections Compendium Volume: 27 Issue: 11 Dated: November 2002 Pages: 11-19
Author(s)
Cece Hill
Date Published
November 2002
Length
9 pages
Annotation
This document describes the tracking and reporting of recidivists in 47 United States and 5 Canadian jurisdictions.
Abstract
Formally tracking recidivists after release from correctional institutions is undertaken by 62 percent of U.S. systems and by 3 Canadian systems. The primary tracking measure for 29 percent of the U.S. respondents is “return to prison.” Three U.S. systems identified “re-arrest” as their measure and seven systems indicated “reconviction.” The length of time released inmates are tracked varies considerably among the systems. In Canada, the average length is 2 years, while in the United States it is 3 years. Formal tracking systems were developed internally in 70 percent of the participating U.S. systems. Thirty-six percent of U.S. and 32 percent of Canadian systems provide information on recidivism by including results in departmental publications available to the public and by posting them on the Internet. Findings became part of formal research studies in only nine of the reporting U.S. systems and none in Canada. Systems were asked if they kept records of programs in which inmates had participated while incarcerated that might affect their rate of return. Forty-seven percent of the reporting U.S. systems keep such records, but in varying degrees, and include in those reports at least a portion of programs. Fifty-one percent did not conduct a study of comparison of the types of crimes for which recidivists had been incarcerated with the types of crimes for which they are returned to the systems. Five systems were planning to implement this practice. The data-gathering systems that responded to this survey indicated that they were using expanded analysis methods for determining recidivism rates.