Prisoner Reentry in Michigan

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).

Executive Summary

This report describes the process of prisoner reentry in Michigan by examining the trends in incarceration in the state, the characteristics of the state's released prisoners, the geographic distribution of prisoners returning to communities in Michigan, and the social and economic climates of the communities that are home to the highest numbers of returning prisoners. The report consolidates existing data on incarceration and release trends and presents a new analysis of data on Michigan prisoners released in 2003. The data used in this report were derived from several sources, including the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the U.S. Census Bureau. Highlights from the report are presented below.

Incarceration Trends. Michigan's incarceration trends over the past two decades are similar to those observed at the national level. Between 1980 and 2003, the Michigan prison population more than tripled, increasing from 15,148 to 49,357. Notably, in 2003, the prison population declined for the first time in two decades.

Since 1990, admissions to MDOC have fluctuated moderately around 12,000 per year, with the largest increase occurring from 2001 to 2002 and the largest decrease occurring from 2002 to 2003. Over the same time frame, MDOC's releases increased 41 percent from 9,752 prisoners released in 1990 to 13,707 released in 2003. Releases have shown steady increases since 2000, rising by 26 percent from 2000 to 2003.¹ Notably, a majority (61 percent) of individuals incarcerated in 2001 were on probation or parole at the time of their admission.

Characteristics of Prisoners Released in 2003. Of the prisoners released from MDOC in 2003, most were male (93 percent). The population was fairly evenly divided in terms of race with 53 percent black and 45 percent white. The median age at release was 35.7 years. Over half (58 percent) of all releases had one or more dependents. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) had never been incarcerated in the Michigan prison system.

Approximately one-quarter (26 percent) had been serving time for violent offenses, 17 percent for drug offenses, 33 percent for nonviolent (and nondrug) offenses, and the remaining 24 percent had been incarcerated for a parole technical violation. Excluding parole technical violators (who served an average of 1.8 years), the average time served was 3.7 years.

Release and Supervision Policies and Practices. In 2003, 83 percent of all released prisoners exited prison at the discretion of the parole board to a period of supervision. The number of individuals under supervision has increased in recent years. At the end of 2003, there were 17,449 individuals on parole. In 2003, 3,806 parolees were returned to prison for violations of their parole.

Geographic Distribution of Released Prisoners. Approximately one-third (34 percent) of prisoners released to parole in 2003 returned to Wayne County—a county that already faces greater economic and social disadvantage than many other counties throughout the state. For example, the percentage of families living below the federal poverty level in Wayne County is 72 percent higher than the statewide average, and the Part I crime rate is 57 percent higher in Wayne County. The majority (80 percent) of prisoners released to parole in Wayne County returned to Detroit, where the unemployment rate in 2000 was more double what it was in the rest of the state, and where over one-fifth of the families live in poverty. Among the prisoners released to parole in Wayne County, 41 percent returned to eight zip codes—all of which are in Detroit. Most of those eight zip codes display high levels of economic and social disadvantage.

Notes from this section

1 In this report, "admissions" and "releases" are not the same definitions that MDOC uses; i.e., MDOC does not consider parole technical violators to be "admissions," and therefore, the admissions numbers presented in this report are higher than what MDOC reports.

Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).

Usage and reprints: Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site and may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact [email protected].

If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.

Disclaimer: The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute.