Introduction
County jails in Michigan are an important component of the criminal justice system, processing over 300,000 offenders into 94% of the state’s total jail beds in 2003, according to Jail
Jail administrators across the state face challenges in managing the increasing offender population due to limited resources Communities are striving to allocate local resources to alleviate jail overcrowding, but some have been denied funding for jail expansions or new facilities As a result, county jails are frequently releasing offenders early and regularly invoking the County Jail Overcrowding State of Emergency Act (1982 PA 325).
Michigan has faced significant overcrowding in its correctional facilities for years In 2002, the Run-Out-of-Bed date (ROBD) was set for December 2003, but budget constraints within the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) hindered future growth By January 2003, MDOC staff conducted a comprehensive review of departmental policies and, in collaboration with key criminal justice stakeholders, formulated a five-year plan to manage prison growth This strategic plan successfully extended the ROBD to June 2005, where it remains today.
Jails and prisons both aim to protect the public, but jails face unique challenges due to their transient populations Jails accommodate a diverse range of offenders, including sentenced and unsentenced individuals, probation violators, and those awaiting transport to prisons, leading to complex housing issues Specific groups, such as juveniles and the mentally ill, require separation from others, while space constraints further complicate housing arrangements In contrast, state prisons manage a more uniform population for longer periods, resulting in less frequent turnover These fundamental differences contribute to the ongoing challenges of overcrowding in both jails and prisons.
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 13
The relationship between jail and prison overcrowding is interconnected, with actions in one system impacting the other State governments finance and manage prisons, while county governments primarily fund jail operations, overseen by sheriffs Consequently, a substantial amount of taxpayer dollars is allocated for the housing and management of offenders In light of challenging fiscal conditions, it is crucial for the criminal justice community to optimize the use of correctional resources while safeguarding the rights of both defendants and victims, ensuring public safety, and preserving the integrity of the justice system.
Jail and prison overcrowding is a complex issue with no single cause, as it is influenced by varying local procedures and practices throughout the criminal justice system From the initial interaction between law enforcement and offenders to the court's sentencing decisions, discrepancies at each decision point contribute to the problem Additionally, inconsistent policies regarding bonding practices, pretrial services, incarceration during case disposition, and community supervision further exacerbate jail overcrowding.
County jails are expected to stay overcrowded, and state prisons will soon hit their limits unless criminal justice stakeholders collaborate to tackle inefficiencies and explore alternatives to incarceration A cooperative strategy involving key stakeholders reviewing local processes across the entire criminal justice system is essential for effectively addressing jail and prison capacity challenges.
In June 2004, Governor Granholm established the Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding to develop a report outlining strategies for the more effective and efficient use of jail and prison resources, while ensuring public safety remains uncompromised.
The Task Force united a diverse group of esteemed criminal justice professionals, experts, and leaders, many of whom collaborated for the first time, to address local, county, and state interests Notably, this assembly included representatives from the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association (MSA).
The Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan (PAAM), along with the Michigan Association of Counties (MAC), the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), and various judicial associations including the Michigan Judges Association and the Michigan District Judges Association, collaborates with the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO), law enforcement agencies, and defense attorney representatives to enhance the legal framework in Michigan.
Chaired by the Governor’s Deputy Legal Counsel and Criminal Justice Policy Advisor, a task force convened with representatives from the criminal justice system to address jail and prison overcrowding Facilitated by a Principal from the Center for Effective Public Policy on behalf of the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), the assembly thoroughly examined various practices contributing to the issue They identified effective solutions, including best practices and emerging innovations from Michigan and across the nation, aimed at alleviating overcrowding in jails and prisons.
Representatives from various sectors convened to collaboratively tackle the pressing issue of overcrowding in jails and prisons, acknowledging the critical state of the system They aimed to develop strategies that balanced state and local capacity concerns while ensuring public safety The Task Force discovered that few, if any, states had addressed both prison and jail overcrowding concurrently, highlighting the unique challenges they faced in optimizing resources effectively and efficiently.
Based on the Governor’s charge, the Task Force first articulated a mission statement, a set of guiding principles, and a concise statement of the problem.
Mission Statement
The Task Force will present findings to Governor Granholm that:
Guiding Principles
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 15
• Suggest short, intermediate, and long-term strategies for resolving statewide jail overcrowding;
• Acknowledge the interrelatedness of jail and prison overcrowding and capacity;
• Suggest strategies that may include the redistribution and/or addition of resources; and
To effectively address jail population growth and prevent future overcrowding, it is essential to implement a structured and disciplined planning process This involves developing strategic initiatives that focus on data-driven decision-making, enhancing collaboration among stakeholders, and utilizing predictive analytics to anticipate trends Additionally, establishing clear guidelines for inmate intake and release, alongside investing in diversion programs, can significantly mitigate overcrowding issues By prioritizing these strategies, correctional facilities can create a more sustainable approach to managing inmate populations.
The Task Force agreed to adhere to the following 12 principles, which would guide them in their review of jail and prison overcrowding issues and the development of this report:
1 The primary responsibility of the Michigan criminal justice system is to administer justice Another responsibility is to protect citizens and property.
2 Helping offenders become successful citizens is the most effective way to reduce recidivism and protect citizens and property.
3 Effective criminal justice policy utilizes prevention, education, accountability, treatment, and incarceration.
4 An effective corrections system includes an objective assessment process that assists in identifying offender risk and needs, and helps target appropriate, individualized supervision and treatment resources.
5 There are excellent examples of efficient and effective criminal justice systems in Michigan; “models” should be identified.
6 Even though the Michigan criminal justice system operates at a high level of efficiency and effectiveness, there are still improvements that can be made.
7 There is a direct relationship between jail and prison overcrowding and capacity; any strategies suggested will consider this acknowledgement.
Despite Michigan having 82 distinct correctional systems, including 81 jails and one prison, stakeholders can better address jail and prison overcrowding through collaborative efforts rather than operating independently.
9 Agreements will be required from all three branches of government
(legislative, executive and judicial) to manage jail and prison capacity most effectively.
10 Michigan should strive to become a national leader and model for management of jail and prison overcrowding issues.
The Task Force aims to serve as a vital resource for education, training, and information on jail and prison capacity issues in Michigan and nationwide To achieve this, it is essential to utilize current research to inform the use of prisons and local jails, as well as the range of punishments available to the courts By implementing evidence-based practices, the Task Force seeks to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system Furthermore, these practices must focus on measurable, outcome-based performance expectations to ensure accountability and continuous improvement.
Task Force envisions that local criminal justice systems in Michigan should include:
• Systemic, collaborative planning and problem-solving that monitors and evaluates outcomes, plans for and oversees all aspects of local criminal justice systems, and provides a forum for discussion and debate.
• Decisions relating to individual cases, policies, programs, and the system that are based on timely data and information.
• Early pretrial screening tools that accurately identify defendant risk and needs.
• Post-conviction validated assessment tools that accurately identify offender risk and needs.
• Programs that are grounded in research and evidence-based practices.
• Sufficient capacity and resources to address the specific risk and needs of the offender population.
• A team approach in which all stakeholders share responsibility for all successes and failures.
• Operations that are as efficient as possible, without compromising public safety.
• Effective approaches to supervision and monitoring.
• The community as an active partner.
• Victim input at all stages of the planning and implementation process.
Problem Statement and Response
Michigan is facing a critical shortage of jail space, with less than 15% of available capacity utilized on any given day Additionally, the state's prison system, which accommodates 50,000 beds, is experiencing similar constraints, as highlighted by the current ROBD projections from June 2005.
The citizens of Michigan are paying large sums of money to incarcerate offenders while
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 17
Final Report recidivism rates remain high Releasing some inmates early from jail exacerbates the problem of recidivism that, in turn, requires additional use of finite bed space.
Michigan taxpayers need to explore more efficient and effective use of jail and prison resources to prevent overcrowding Implementing best practices and sound planning is essential for ensuring public safety, safeguarding the rights of citizens and crime victims, and keeping dangerous offenders off the streets It's crucial to maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system while actively pursuing justice To alleviate the financial burden on taxpayers, it is vital to reduce the number of citizens entering the criminal justice system, as continued expansion of jail and prison facilities diverts funds from critical state programs like education and health care.
The Task Force Process
The Task Force convened regularly at different locations in Lansing, organized by its members and their respective organizations Over the course of its activities, five formal meetings were held, each typically lasting a full day The inaugural meeting took place on August 19, 2004, in the Governor’s Cabinet Room.
On September 22, 2004, PAAM hosted a meeting featuring guest presenters from the Kalamazoo Criminal Justice Council Subsequently, on October 29, 2004, MAC held a meeting where D Alan Henry, Director of the Pretrial Services Resource Center, presented alongside Deborah Green, who addressed the Michigan Supreme Court's initiatives to tackle jail overcrowding Further discussions took place during meetings on November 22, 2004, and January 13, 2005.
2005 meetings were held in the Governor’s Cabinet Room MSA provided lunch in November and the MDOC provided lunch prepared by the Cotton Correctional Facility Food Tech Program in January.
The Task Force held regular meetings alongside the formation of four ad hoc committees dedicated to addressing specific issues related to jail and prison overcrowding The insights and data collected by these committees were presented and discussed during the Task Force's regular sessions The findings and strategic proposals from these committees, which received approval from the entire Task Force, are detailed in this report.
• Target Populations - Chaired by Mike Thomas
• Range of Sanctions - Chaired by Joan Yukins
• Pretrial Issues - Chaired by Stuart Dunnings
• Risk and Needs Assessment - Chaired by Joan Yukins
The Task Force analyzed extensive data to understand the policies and practices affecting jail and prison overcrowding According to jail population data from the JPIS, managed by the MDOC Office of Community Corrections, most county jails in Michigan are operating at or near their rated design bed capacity Additionally, there has been an increase in jail capacity since 1998.
The MDOC Office of Research and Planning provided the Task Force with information regarding available bed space within the Michigan prison system This information is summarized below:
As of the end of 2004, the net operating capacity of the prison system stood at 49,263, with 706 beds remaining vacant Budget proposals suggest maintaining this capacity in the coming year, but projections for prison population growth indicate that achieving this will require the aggressive implementation of both existing and new initiatives aimed at controlling inmate numbers The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) intends to utilize these strategies to ensure that the prison population remains within current capacity limits.
Without intervention, projections indicate that female bed capacity will dip below 50 beds by spring 2005, while male capacity is expected to fall below 300 beds by summer 2005 Crossing these availability thresholds will necessitate bringing additional reserve beds into service, leading to increased costs.
As part of this fiscal year's budget adjustments, the MDOC will maintain approximately 1,100 reserve beds Additionally, there are around 3,000 previously utilized beds that, while not recommended for current use, remain available.
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 19
• Jail capacity in 2003 was 18,034 beds, a 13.9% increase from 1998 (15,826)
• Jail capacity in September 2004, was 18,566 beds, a 17.3% increase since 1998
By the end of 2005, jail capacity is expected to reach 19,022 beds; however, many of these beds have been vacated or are set to close, including facilities in Ionia and Jackson, along with various prison farms, camps, individual housing units, and temporary day room beds Utilizing any of these available beds would lead to increased costs.
The Task Force noted that the MDOC has provided in excess of $271 million to counties statewide through the Office of Community Corrections over the past five years.
In addition, the Task Force discussed trends in arrests and crimes in Michigan:
• According to the 2003 Michigan Uniform Crime Report, crime has decreased by 123,897 from 1998 (1,186,104) to 2003 (1,062,407) and the number of arrests have decreased by 85,648 from 1998 (438,148) to 2003 (352,500)
The Task Force gathered insights from various national and local criminal justice leaders regarding the Michigan Supreme Court's role in addressing jail overcrowding issues Key presentations and discussions on these matters are summarized below.
The Pretrial Services Resource Center (PSRC), a non-profit organization governed by a national board, focuses on research and technical assistance for county governments, with limited support for state entities Established in the 1970s by the U.S Department of Justice under the leadership of Director D Alan Henry, the PSRC was created to address challenges related to pretrial screening, release, and diversion At its inception, there was a significant lack of understanding regarding decision-making in the early stages of the criminal justice system and its effects on jail populations.
Mr Henry presented the Task Force with a comprehensive overview of key decision points and criminal justice processes that influence jail populations He highlighted various strategies employed by jurisdictions nationwide to alleviate overcrowding Furthermore, he noted that local officials often concur with the PSRC's assessments when seeking assistance for local jails, acknowledging the pressing need for effective solutions.
● $10,035,713 for jail construction/expansion funding
● $74,399,965 for comprehensive plans and services
● $101,676,107 for county jail reimbursement effective ways, while assuring that public safety is maintained
Mr Henry acknowledged that he had not previously collaborated with a group focused on tackling both jail and prison overcrowding simultaneously, but he saw a significant opportunity for effective teamwork He emphasized the importance of the Task Force's commitment to data-driven decision-making and expressed his support for the positive direction the Task Force is taking.
The Task Force's initial agreements on data are essential, yet the ambitious agenda poses challenges within the limited timeframe It may be beneficial for the Task Force to create an action blueprint by early 2005, while prioritizing long-term projects for future consideration.
The Kalamazoo Criminal Justice Council (KCJC) provided a comprehensive overview of the local criminal justice system to the Task Force, with key presentations from Sheriff Mike Anderson and Honorable Paul Brindenstine, among other members and staff.
Prosecuting Attorney James Gregart, Honorable J Richardson Johnson, KCJC Executive Director Tammy Woodhams, and Kalamazoo Community Corrections Advisory Board Manager Grace Kalafut highlighted that Kalamazoo County ranks 74th in the state for jail capacity per capita The KCJC has successfully expanded pretrial and sentencing options while regularly monitoring the jail population as a cohesive team Their achievements stem from a "systemic, collaborative 50,000 foot view" of the justice system, emphasizing the importance of teamwork and strategic planning in addressing local incarceration challenges.
• Uniform program and operating standards are important goals.
• Operating a jail is a difficult job.
• The “right” people need to be in the “right” places in order for positive change to occur
• All criminal justice system stakeholders should be at the table for progress to be made.
• A systemic perspective is critically important whether you are planning for a new jail or addressing a particular decision point in the criminal justice system.
• Having a range of sanctions, including prevention programs, pretrial options, and sentencing sanctions is important.
• Accountability and enforcement are important aspects of program integrity.
• Emergency releases are not an effective strategy for managing jail population.
• Validated assessment instruments are important and necessary tools for identifying offender risk and needs.
• Data and information should drive all that is done.
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 21
• Being proactive, not reactive, is always the best approach.
• Secure beds and jails are a necessary part of the range of sanctions
• Without available space, alternative programs are not effective and do not provide integrity to the system.
More information regarding the KCJC can be found at www.kcjc.org
The Supreme Court’s Initiative on Jail Crowding: Deborah Green, the Region I
Local Criminal Justice System Infrastructure: Issues, Best Practices, and Strategies 1 County Jail Capacity and Emergency Release
Jail Population Information System
To effectively prevent jail overcrowding, it is essential to understand the jail's offender population, which includes distinctions between sentenced and unsentenced individuals, as well as felony versus misdemeanor offenders Additionally, analyzing the rates of admissions compared to releases is crucial, as variations in these rates or the lengths of stay can significantly influence the daily number of inmates in jail.
Effectively preventing overcrowding requires the capability for collecting data, monitoring the population, analyzing offender admissions and lengths of stay, and sharing this information with key stakeholders in local jurisdictions
Criminal justice leaders in every community must work together to leverage information effectively, allowing them to create informed policies and practices related to offender jail admissions and the duration of their stays.
In Michigan, JPIS was developed as a means to gather standardized information on jail utilization and demographics from county jails throughout the state
JPIS is the product of a cooperative effort between the MDOC’s Office of Community
The Corrections, County Jail Services Unit, and MSA collaborated with Michigan State University and the NIC to develop JPIS While JPIS was not designed to store all information from each reporting site, it is essential for capturing data related to individual releases effectively.
The Jail Population Information System (JPIS) is designed to monitor and evaluate jail population characteristics to inform policy planning decisions As a comprehensive statewide database, JPIS is adaptable to integrate with existing jail management and Management Information Systems (MIS) across counties Initially created for mainframe processing, JPIS has since evolved to operate in a client/server environment, leveraging bulletin boards and the internet for the collection of monthly data files, along with the distribution of error and analytical reports.
The locally-centered approach to JPIS development has significantly improved the utilization of local jail management systems across Michigan Initially, over half of the counties lacked functional automated systems, and objective inmate risk classification was just beginning Today, all counties have automated systems, with nearly all transmitting electronic data to the central JPIS By 2003, 93.8% of jail beds statewide were included in JPIS, and the requirement for standardized offender classification has driven the adoption of objective classification processes The MSA and MAC have committed to supporting counties that are not yet reporting JPIS data, aiming for 100% reporting of jail beds statewide in the future.
Washington state has established an electronic data-sharing system, mandated by legislation (RCW 36.28A.040), to create a comprehensive statewide jail booking and reporting network This system functions as a central repository for real-time and historical offender information, facilitating communication between city and county jails and various state criminal justice agencies It enables efficient entry and retrieval of offender data and generates ad-hoc reports and summaries for jail management and automated victim notifications For additional details, visit www.leg.wa.gov.
• Explore technologies that streamline the process for collecting and sharing offender data statewide.
• Encourage the MDOC and the State Community Corrections Board to evaluate which
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 25
The inclusion of JPIS data elements is essential for accurate reporting, and it is crucial to determine if JPIS data reporting should be mandated as a prerequisite for funding under the Community Corrections Act, the County Jail Reimbursement Program, and county jail expansion initiatives.
Risk and Needs Assessment
Michigan counties lack a standardized assessment tool to evaluate offender risk and needs concerning recidivism effectively Criminal justice agencies across the state predominantly utilize a traditional supervision model that focuses on individual accountability, managed by a supervising case manager or agent This method overlooks critical research findings that are essential for reducing risk and recidivism rates.
International studies show that specific programs and intervention strategies lead to lasting decreases in recidivism rates The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) outlines a model for applying evidence-based practices in community corrections, highlighting eight key principles for effective offender interventions The first principle, "Assessing Offender Risk/Needs," is essential for implementing successful interventions that not only change offender behavior but also enhance community safety.
The "Criminogenic Need Principle" highlights the dynamic risk factors influencing an offender's behavior, such as their criminal personality, anti-social attitudes, values, beliefs, peer associations, substance abuse, and dysfunctional family background Addressing and changing these factors can significantly reduce the offender's risk of recidivism.
The "Responsivity Principle" emphasizes the importance of aligning offenders with services that consider their unique characteristics, such as culture, gender, motivation, and learning style This alignment is crucial for effectively implementing evidence-based practices in community corrections and plays a significant role in reducing recidivism rates.
Effective supervision and treatment methods must be grounded in evidence-based practices Utilizing these practices enhances the accuracy of assessing offender risks and needs, leading to tailored supervision and treatment strategies for each individual offender.
The concept of "risk" in relation to offender recidivism refers to the likelihood of re-offending, with researchers identifying key factors that predict this behavior Low-risk offenders exhibit fewer and less intense risk factors compared to high-risk individuals, making it crucial to identify these factors for targeted interventions Studies show that higher-risk offenders tend to benefit from intensive services, while lower-risk offenders may experience increased chances of re-offending when subjected to harsher sanctions Therefore, it is essential for local criminal justice stakeholders to engage in community corrections planning to allocate resources effectively, prioritizing high-risk offenders for appropriate services and sanctions This strategic approach enhances public safety by addressing the needs of those most likely to re-offend.
• Encourage local governments to incorporate evidence-based practices in their local criminal justice system.
Mentally Ill Offenders
Offenders with severe mental illness often struggle with both acute and chronic conditions, leading to significant challenges in community functioning A substantial number are homeless, while an increasing portion is incarcerated in jails and prisons across the nation Unfortunately, many jails lack the necessary resources to effectively support this vulnerable population Between 1992 and 2001, Michigan exemplified this issue by closing several facilities, further complicating the situation for mentally ill offenders.
The placement of mentally ill individuals into jails and prisons, rather than state mental health hospitals, poses significant risks to both the individuals and the correctional staff Key factors contributing to this issue include insufficient community support for those with mental health conditions, challenges faced by mentally ill offenders in accessing necessary treatment, and a general lack of understanding about mental illness within law enforcement and society.
County jail administrators are grappling with challenges akin to those encountered by mental health professionals, particularly in preventing suicides among mentally ill inmates The Justice Department reports that suicide is the leading cause of death in jails and ranks as the third leading cause in prisons across the country Notably, in Wayne County, eight inmates tragically took their own lives between 1999 and 2023.
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 27
Final Report and 2002 Six inmates in Macomb county committed suicide between July 2000 and April 2002, and Oakland county recorded its first suicide in more than a decade in 2002
Suicides in Michigan prisons are rare, with only three recorded in 2003 The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) has established comprehensive policies for monitoring suicidal inmates and managing prescribed medications Additionally, the MDOC conducts inspections of county jails to verify that they maintain written policies for inmate care, providing reports to sheriffs and county commissioners to address any identified deficiencies.
As determined by the Department of Community Health (DCH), there are relatively few prisoners with mental health disorders in the Michigan prison system Approximately 2%
Approximately 1,957 individuals suffer from major mental health disorders, while 4% (1,188) experience non-major mental health issues A significant reason for the lower number of mentally ill offenders in the prison system is the diversion of many into more suitable treatment programs.
The criminal justice system struggles to adequately address the needs of mentally ill offenders, as highlighted by the limitations of the Michigan Mental Health Code Act (1974 PA 258) While this law mandates mental health agencies to divert individuals with serious mental illnesses, emotional disturbances, or developmental disabilities from jail when appropriate, it fails to include those with less severe mental health issues Consequently, Michigan county jails have seen a rise in the number of mentally ill individuals facing prolonged incarceration.
Governor Granholm established the Michigan Mental Health Commission to identify the most pressing issues confronting the current system and to make recommendations that would
County jails in Michigan have a higher percentage of mentally ill offenders compared to the prison system, with a 1988 report by the National Association of Counties indicating that around 10% of jail inmates were considered mentally ill While some individuals with mental health issues may require incarceration due to serious crimes, those incarcerated for minor offenses should be redirected to treatment programs The Mental Health Commission emphasizes the goal of preventing entry into the criminal justice system due to inadequate mental health care and has identified diversion models in Michigan that can provide appropriate care for both adults and children outside of this system The recommendations align with strategies outlined in the report, which can be accessed at www.michigan.gov/mentalhealth.
Many Michigan counties have identified the lengthy forensic evaluation process as a key factor that, if improved, could reduce the number of jail beds needed and lower costs related to housing mentally ill offenders Currently, some offenders spend extended periods in jails awaiting competency hearings By referring these individuals to appropriate mental health agencies for treatment early in the criminal justice process, they could start receiving necessary services before their trials This approach would not only decrease jail time and medical expenses but also mitigate the security risks associated with housing mentally ill inmates.
In 2004, Oakland County launched a jail diversion program aimed at reducing overcrowding by redirecting nonviolent mentally ill offenders from incarceration to treatment facilities This initiative, developed in collaboration with law enforcement, county mental health services, the prosecutor’s office, and the courts, trains police officers to recognize mentally ill individuals and transport them to designated emergency treatment centers instead of jails For additional details, visit www.co.oakland.mi.us/sheriff/news.
The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) has allocated $292,000 to fund a Mental Health Jail Diversion Program in Macomb County, aimed at diverting 100 mentally ill offenders from jail each year This initiative is projected to reduce the average jail stay to 60 days, saving approximately 6,000 jail bed days annually If proven effective, the program could become a model for similar mental health diversion initiatives across Michigan For further details, visit www.macombcountymi.gov/communitycorrections.
• Encourage counties to enhance jail services and diversion programs for mentally ill offenders, especially those awaiting forensic examinations.
• Encourage increased collaboration among courts, law enforcement, corrections,
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 29
Final Report and mental health agencies to identify, divert, and treat mentally ill offenders.
State and Local Partnerships
Statewide alternatives to jail are often underutilized due to several factors, including insufficient comprehensive planning for community corrections, limited involvement from local criminal justice stakeholders in the planning process, a lack of knowledge and confidence in alternatives to incarceration, and inadequate funding resources.
The Community Corrections Act fosters state and local collaborations to create data-driven strategies aimed at mitigating prison and jail overcrowding This legislation empowers local governments to design targeted programs that tackle specific community challenges Additionally, it allocates funding to support the development of these programs and the delivery of essential services within the community The Office of Community Corrections collaborates closely with the MDOC Field Operations to implement these initiatives effectively.
Local governments play a crucial role in implementing the Community Corrections Act by forming a community corrections advisory board and creating a comprehensive corrections plan These plans outline local policies, practices, and programs designed to support communities in achieving their goals.
From 1998 to 2004, local governments received more than $187.5 million from the state to enhance community corrections programs In fiscal year 2005, the Michigan Department of Corrections allocated $31.4 million to support these programs across 73 of the state's 83 counties.
Another initiative targeting best practices is the MPRI, a collaborative effort of the Governor’s office, MDOC, DCH, DLEG, FIA, and community service organizations
The MPRI envisions equipping every offender with essential tools for successful reintegration into the community upon their release from prison Its mission focuses on crime reduction by establishing a comprehensive plan of services and supervision tailored to each offender, facilitated through collaboration between state and local agencies from the moment the offender enters prison until their successful transition back into society.
• Encourage rational planning and collaboration efforts between the state and counties that emphasize efficient and effective utilization of jail and prison resources, and that do not compromise public safety.
• Encourage statewide participation in the Community Corrections Act (1988 PA
• Explore how to involve directors of other state agencies in community corrections issues [e.g., Family Independence Agency (FIA), Department of Community Health (DCH), Department of Labor and Economic Growth (DLEG)]
• Support the MDOC efforts to reduce recidivism through the Michigan Prisoner
ReEntry Initiative (MPRI) and encourage reentry initiatives at local levels.
Recent data from the statewide Offender Management Network Information (OMNI) indicates a notable change in how county jails are utilized for probation violators, specifically from the fourth quarter of 2003 to the third quarter of 2004.
OMNI indicates that during this timeframe, prison and probation dispositions decreased by 4.4% (146 offenders) in 2003 and by 6.5%
(216 offenders) in 2004, while offenders sentenced to jail only increased by 13.4%
Of the 438 offenders sentenced to jail, 73% of these offenders were sentenced to Berrien, Kent, Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne county jails
The JPIS data shows that felony and misdemeanant probation and parole violators occupied 9.87% (512,571 days) of the 79.9% (14,413 reporting capacity) jail beds statewide in FY 2003
Felony probation violators used 5.5% (285,560 days), parole violators used 1.95% (101,334 days),
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 31
Offenders sentenced to jail only
Probation Violators
By allowing probation agents to issue “Probation Violation Waivers” for technical violations, courts can significantly decrease their caseloads and jail admissions This approach, which excludes new crimes, streamlines the process by eliminating the need for petitions or bench warrants Counties in Michigan that have adopted this practice have reported reduced jail admissions and fewer court appearances.
The MDOC's operating procedure emphasizes the importance of collaboration between MDOC staff and local community corrections advisory board managers to create tailored probation violation response guidelines for each county This cooperative approach ensures that local guidelines effectively utilize available resources while aligning with MDOC's overarching probation violation response standards.
In Wayne County’s Circuit Court, a collaborative effort between the Community Corrections Advisory Board and the MDOC Regional I Field Operations Administration has introduced a Show Cause Hearing process, replacing warrants for technical probation violators This innovative approach has significantly decreased the average daily jail population of probation violators from 70 to just 20.
The MDOC should collaborate with local community corrections advisory boards to develop and evaluate probation violation response guidelines tailored to each county By aligning these guidelines with the MDOC’s operating procedures, this approach will optimize the use of local resources and options available within the department's framework.
Decision Points in the Criminal Justice System: Issues, Best Practices, and Strategies 1 Arrest Decisions
County Jail Intake and Release Decisions A Booking
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 33
County jails are complex operations with frequent population turnover The County Jail
Population Information System data for 2003 indicates that over 300,000 offenders were admitted into 94% of the state’s total jail beds
In Arizona, jails streamlined the booking process by implementing internet and application integration technologies that enabled the arresting agencies to enter booking data into the system
The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission has implemented an expedited booking process that allows for much of the offender's information to be preloaded into the database prior to their arrival at the jail, significantly enhancing efficiency and speeding up the booking procedure For more details about this streamlined process, visit their website at www.acjc.state.az.us.
• Encourage local governments to explore ways to expedite processing offenders into jail
Pretrial Services
Charging Decisions and Prosecution
The county prosecuting attorney plays a crucial role in alleviating jail overcrowding by assessing whether a crime has occurred, determining the appropriate charges, and considering alternatives to incarceration This includes evaluating an offender's background and circumstances to decide if they qualify for diversionary programs, such as drug court Many counties in the state have implemented prosecution diversion programs aimed at redirecting nonviolent felony offenders struggling with drug abuse into substance abuse treatment, effectively reducing the prison population.
In 2003, Wayne County implemented measures to reduce emergency conditional releases of pretrial defendants by streamlining case processing This strategy focused on evaluating risk levels and needs while adopting differentiated case management practices The introduction of expedited plea offers and pre-exam hearings significantly improved jail utilization Data from 2003 revealed that over 70% of defendants either accepted the offered plea agreement or waived their preliminary examination, thereby accelerating the trial process for these cases.
The expedited plea/pre-exam program has led to a 40% plea rate and allowed 25% of defendants at pre-exam hearings to secure a personal recognizance bond before trial, plea, or sentencing Without this program, these individuals would face a minimum seven-day wait for bond review and an additional 15 days for sentencing As a result of the program's implementation, the average daily population of the Wayne County jail has decreased by around 90 offenders, significantly alleviating overcrowding.
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 37
Final Report elimination of emergency administrative releases
• Encourage prosecuting attorneys to increase the use of diversion programs.
• Explore the preliminary examination process to determine whether changes might expedite cases through the system.
Bail and Sentencing Decisions A Case Management
The judiciary plays a crucial role in shaping the jail population, as judges at both district and circuit court levels significantly influence jail admissions and the duration of offenders' stays By setting bond amounts, judges decide who remains in jail before trial, while also determining sentencing outcomes and conditions.
A review of community corrections plans under the Community Corrections Act highlights several best practices across various counties In Midland County, a human services coordinator identifies nonviolent defendants in jail who haven't posted low bonds, advising the court on potential releases Calhoun County District Court judges have established a bond review process lasting three to five days, while the circuit court judge conducts regular bond reviews for bound-over cases Ingham County 54-A District Court has implemented a seven-day personal recognizance bond policy to reduce jail overcrowding, and in Kalamazoo County, judges often apply non-cash bond conditions to facilitate releases.
Courts can also reduce jail admissions and defendants’ lengths of stay by instituting delay reduction measures According to A Second Look at Alleviating Jail Crowding – A Systems
Perspective (U.S Department of Justice, October 2000), some courts in California and Florida have implemented a judicial warrant review process as part of their strategy to reduce jail overcrowding.
Monroe County's district court has implemented a "Fast Tracking Arraignment" process aimed at reducing the number of arrests for misdemeanant warrants Offenders receive mailed notices encouraging them to voluntarily appear in court during designated hours instead of facing arrest Additionally, the court handles pleas for felony cases, and weekend arrests are arraigned within 24 hours by an on-call magistrate These initiatives streamline the court process and minimize jail time for offenders.
• Encourage the judiciary to actively participate in efforts to reduce jail overcrowding by utilizing the Michigan Supreme Court Jail Crowding Prevention and Response
• Encourage authorizing district courts judges to accept felony pleas.
• Encourage the use of technology to expedite the transfer of records from district courts to circuit courts.
• Evaluate sentencing practices to determine whether appropriate offenders are being incarcerated.
Pre-sentence Investigations
Administrative guidelines for PSIs mandate a proposed plan that evaluates the offender's strengths, weaknesses, abilities, behavioral patterns, and readiness for change If probation is suggested, a supervision plan must be developed However, the department lacks a formal needs assessment tool, and the risk assessment instrument used for sentencing recommendations for prison-bound offenders has not been validated since 1996 To maintain reliability, it is essential that risk assessment instruments are revalidated every three years.
The absence of a validated risk assessment tool leads to subjective evaluations of an offender's likelihood of recidivism Implementing a validated risk instrument in the Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI) process could help incorporate an offender's risk level into the PSI Guidelines, addressing issues like jail and prison overcrowding caused by lengthy sentences Furthermore, without a validated needs assessment tool, it becomes challenging to accurately evaluate and prioritize an offender's needs, hindering the effective matching of offenders to suitable intervention or treatment programs.
Michigan Task Force on Jail and Prison Overcrowding 39
The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) is legally required to complete Presentence Investigations (PSIs) for all felony convictions across the state and for misdemeanor convictions upon court request, producing around 50,000 reports each year As per MDOC policy, agents must prepare PSIs for incarcerated offenders within three weeks of referral, while those for offenders released on bond have a four-week preparation period.
Promoting non-incarcerative sentencing options, such as fines, community service, and restitution, is essential for low-risk offenders who do not endanger society These alternatives not only alleviate the burden on the prison system but also foster rehabilitation and reintegration into the community By prioritizing these measures, we can create a more just and effective approach to justice that benefits both individuals and society as a whole.
Encouraging the MDOC to implement a validated risk and needs assessment during the pre-sentence investigation process can provide agents with a valuable tool This instrument can help recommend alternatives to incarceration and determine suitable jail or prison terms for low-risk offenders, ensuring that public safety remains a priority.
The MDOC should mandate that probation agents focus on prioritizing the preparation of pre-sentence investigation reports (PSIs) This process should begin with those convicted offenders facing prison sentences, followed by individuals likely to receive jail time, and finally, those currently out on bond.
The MDOC should establish a streamlined process to guarantee that the immediate transfer of all prison-bound offenders to the state prison system is not hindered by any modifications made to the Presentence Investigation (PSI) during courtroom sentencing.