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

Cost Benefit of Parole Supervision in New York State - What Does It Mean for the Taxpayer?

NCJ Number
89812
Author(s)
W V Collier
Date Published
1982
Length
19 pages
Annotation
An analysis of funds expended by New York State's Division of Parole in supervising 7,054 individuals released from a correctional facility in 1981 revealed that parole is a cost-beneficial public service, with actual or potential money saved from fewer reimprisonments far exceeding parole operating costs.
Abstract
The study considered expenditures for the 1981-82 fiscal period, including direct costs for parole supervision and indirect and administrative expenses. Benefit was defined as money saved by the State due to averted reimprisonment of parolees. Supervisory standards called for four to six parolee-parole officer contacts per month for new releasees. Over two-thirds of the sample were released to New York City. About half were black, 30 percent were white, and 19 percent were Hispanic. The most prevalent offenses were robbery and burglary. Over half had little or no prior criminal history, and 35 percent had only some record. The median time spent in a correctional institution was 25.4 months. By March 1982, 91.4 percent of the 1981 releasees remained in the community as law-abiding citizens, and the remainder had returned to prison. Almost three-quarters of the successful parolees were employed, compared to 27.6 percent of the recidivists. The average per capita cost of parole was $1,547 or $4.24 per day, whereas the average annual per capita cost for imprisonment was $14,603 or $40 a day. Calculations showed that parole supervision produced an annual savings of $53 million, not including money saved from not constructing new prison cells. Increasing caseloads for probation officers could be counterproductive, but the State could save more money with alternatives to incarceration for parolees who do not commit a new crime but return to prison for violating conditions of parole. The State could save additional funds by providing more job training and placement for offenders. Tables and seven footnotes are included.