Download OLS Analysis

ANALYSIS OF THE NEW JERSEY BUDGET
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
STATE PAROLE BOARD
FISCAL YEAR
2012 - 2013
PREPARED BY OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE • APRIL 2012
NEW JERSEY STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
Paul A. Sarlo (D), 36th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic), Chair
Brian P. Stack (D), 33rd District (Part of Hudson), Vice-Chair
Jennifer Beck (R), 11th District (Part of Monmouth)
Anthony R. Bucco (R), 25th District (Parts of Morris and Somerset)
Sandra B. Cunningham (D), 31st District (Part of Hudson)
Linda R. Greenstein (D), 14th District (Parts of Mercer and Middlesex)
Steven Oroho (R), 24th District (All of Sussex, and parts of Morris and Warren)
Kevin J. O'Toole (R), 40th District (Parts of Bergen, Essex, Morris and Passaic)
Joseph Pennacchio (R), 26th District (Parts of Essex, Morris and Passaic)
Nellie Pou (D), 35th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic)
M. Teresa Ruiz (D), 29th District (Part of Essex)
Jeff Van Drew (D), 1st District (All of Cape May, and parts of Atlantic and Cumberland)
Loretta Weinberg (D), 37th District (Part of Bergen)
GENERAL ASSEMBLY BUDGET COMMITTEE
Vincent Prieto (D), 32nd District (Parts of Bergen and Hudson), Chairman
Gary S. Schaer (D), 36th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic), Vice Chairman
Anthony M. Bucco (R), 25th District (Parts of Morris and Somerset)
John J. Burzichelli (D), 3rd District (All of Salem, and parts of Cumberland and Gloucester)
Gary R. Chiusano (R), 24th District (All of Sussex, and parts of Morris and Warren)
Albert Coutinho (D), 29th District (Part of Essex)
Gordon M. Johnson (D), 37th District (Part of Bergen)
Declan J. O'Scanlon, Jr. (R), 13th District (Part of Monmouth)
Troy Singleton (D), 7th District (Part of Burlington)
Bonnie Watson Coleman (D), 15th District (Parts of Hunterdon and Mercer)
Jay Webber (R), 26th District (Parts of Essex, Morris and Passaic)
Benjie E. Wimberly (D), 35th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic)
OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
David J. Rosen, Legislative Budget and Finance Officer
Frank W. Haines III, Assistant Legislative Budget and Finance Officer
Marvin W. Jiggetts, Director, Central Staff
Patricia K. Nagle, Section Chief, Judiciary Section
This report was prepared by the Judiciary Section of the Office of Legislative Services under the direction of the Legislative
Budget and Finance Officer. The primary author was Anne C. Raughley.
Questions or comments may be directed to the OLS Judiciary Section (609-847-3865) or the Legislative Budget and Finance
Office (609-292-8030).
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND STATE PAROLE BOARD
Budget Pages.......
C-5, C-9, C-12, C-26, C-28, C-29, D-57
to D-73, G-1 to G-2, H-13, H-18,
H-20, H-21
Fiscal Summary ($000)
State Budgeted
Federal Funds
Other
Grand Total
Expended
FY 2011
$1,115,567
Adjusted
Appropriation
FY 2012
$1,107,607
Recommended
FY 2013
$1,076,981
Percent
Change
2012-13
( 2.8%)
$7,920
$12,429
$12,780
2.8%
$56,880
$51,221
$52,397
2.3%
$1,180,367
$1,171,257
$1,142,158
( 2.5%)
Personnel Summary - Positions By Funding Source
State
Federal
Other
Total Positions
Actual
FY 2011
8,749
Revised
FY 2012
8,500
Funded
FY 2013
8,667
Percent
Change
2012-13
2.0%
30
27
43
59.3%
297
279
284
1.8%
9,076
8,806
8,994
2.1%
FY 2011 (as of December) and revised FY 2012 (as of January) personnel data reflect actual payroll counts. FY 2013 data reflect the
number of positions funded.
Link to Website: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/legislativepub/finance.asp
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Highlights
•
According to the Department of Corrections' monthly Summary of Residents,
Admissions and Releases report, as of February 29, 2012, there were 23,818 State
sentenced inmates housed in State and county correctional facilities and halfway house
placements, 766 or 3.1 percent fewer inmates than the number housed on January 31,
2011. Of this amount, 20,673 inmates were housed in DOC facilities, 2,823 were
housed in various community based residential facilities, and 322 were housed in the
county jails.
•
FY 2013 budget evaluation data indicates that the department anticipates an average
daily population of 320 inmates housed in the county jails, 6 more inmates than the
average daily population of 314 in FY 2012.
DIRECT STATE SERVICES
•
The Department of Corrections' and the State Parole Board's combined FY 2013 Direct
State Services recommendations total $951.6 million, which is $29.2 million or 3.0
percent less than the FY 2012 adjusted appropriation of $980.8 million. Funding for
institutional operations is recommended at $807.7 million, totaling $29.5 million or 3.3
percent less than the FY 2012 adjusted appropriation of $837.2 million.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
•
The FY 2013 recommendation for departmental salaries and wages totals $599.115
million, $34.628 million or 5.5 percent less than the amount appropriated in FY 2012.
Included in this reduction is $17.2 million in overtime savings department-wide, based
on FY 2012 spending projections. The remaining salary savings is based on reducing
135 funded vacancies, department-wide.
•
The department is recommended to receive $1.216 million in FY 2013 to “refresh and
enhance” its fleet of cars, vans, buses and emergency preparedness vehicles and
supplies. Funding has also been reallocated from institutional accounts to the Central
Office to fund the department-wide upgrade.
•
The Civilly Committed Sexual Offender program is recommended to receive $28.3
million in FY 2013, $1.1 million more than the FY 2012 adjusted appropriation of
$27.2 million. FY 2013 evaluation data indicates that the recommended appropriation
would support 481 patients, 26 more than the number funded during FY 2012.
•
The FY 2013 budget recommends an increase of $4.5 million for Hepatitis C
medications, reflecting the cost of drug therapies recently approved for use to treat
Hepatitis C that will become a part of DOC’s standard of care.
2
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Highlights (Cont’d)
STATE PAROLE BOARD
•
The State Parole Board is recommended to receive $39.4 million for Salaries and Wages
in FY 2013, a decrease of $1.7 million or 4.1 percent under the FY 2012 adjusted
appropriation of $41.1 million. This reduction reflects the annualization of FY 2012
Parole Board savings as well as the elimination of funded vacancies.
•
The Parolee Electronic Monitoring program is recommended to receive $4.165 million
in FY 2013, representing a savings of $428,000.
•
P.L.2007, c.128 made the Satellite-based Monitoring of Sex Offenders pilot program
permanent. The program is recommended to receive $2.619 million in FY 2013, a
reduction of $200,000 under the FY 2012 adjusted appropriation. The reduction
reflects a decrease in the cost of the monitoring services as a result of contract
negotiation.
•
The Parole Violator Assessment and Treatment Program is recommended to receive
$3.029 million in FY 2013, $533,000 or 15 percent less than the amount appropriated
in FY 2012.
GRANTS-IN-AID
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
•
The FY 2013 recommendation for the Purchase of Services for Inmates Incarcerated in
County Penal Facilities totals $4.1 million, a decrease of $1.5 million or 26.1 percent
under the FY 2012 adjusted appropriation of $5.6 million.
Background Paper

Inmate Population Trends
p. 12
3
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Fiscal and Personnel Summary
AGENCY FUNDING BY SOURCE OF FUNDS ($000)
Expended
FY 2011
Adj.
Approp.
FY 2012
Recom.
FY 2013
2011-13
2012-13
$986,908
$980,809
$951,640
( 3.6%)
( 3.0%)
111,923
106,298
104,841
( 6.3%)
( 1.4%)
15,000
20,500
20,500
36.7%
0.0%
1,736
0
0
( 100.0%)
0.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
$1,115,567
$1,107,607
$1,076,981
( 3.5%)
( 2.8%)
$0
$0
$0
0.0%
0.0%
Grants-In-Aid
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
State Aid
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Sub-Total
$0
$0
$0
0.0%
0.0%
Casino Revenue Fund
$0
$0
$0
0.0%
0.0%
Casino Control Fund
$0
$0
$0
0.0%
0.0%
$1,115,567
$1,107,607
$1,076,981
( 3.5%)
( 2.8%)
$7,920
$12,429
$12,780
61.4%
2.8%
$56,880
$51,221
$52,397
( 7.9%)
2.3%
$1,180,367
$1,171,257
$1,142,158
( 3.2%)
( 2.5%)
Percent Change
General Fund
Direct State Services
Grants-In-Aid
State Aid
Capital Construction
Debt Service
Sub-Total
Property Tax Relief Fund
Direct State Services
State Total
Federal Funds
Other Funds
Grand Total
PERSONNEL SUMMARY - POSITIONS BY FUNDING SOURCE
State
Federal
All Other
Total Positions
Percent Change
2011-13
2012-13
Actual
FY 2011
Revised
FY 2012
Funded
FY 2013
8,749
8,500
8,667
( 0.9%)
2.0%
30
27
43
43.3%
59.3%
297
279
284
( 4.4%)
1.8%
9,076
8,806
8,994
( 0.9%)
2.1%
FY 2011 (as of December) and revised FY 2012 (as of January) personnel data reflect actual payroll counts. FY 2013 data reflect the
number of positions funded.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DATA
Total Minority Percent
Department of Corrections
45.1%
46.0%
48.2%
----
----
Parole
37.3%
37.3%
37.7%
----
----
4
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Changes/New Programs ($000)
Budget Item
Adj. Approp.
FY 2012
Recomm.
FY 2013
Dollar
Change
Percent
Change
Budget
Page
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
DIRECT STATE SERVICES
SALARIES AND
WAGES
Detention and
Rehabilitation
$579,953
$547,966
($31,987)
( 5.5%)
D-65
System Wide Program
Support
$38,893
$36,910
($1,983)
( 5.1%)
D-67
Central Planning,
Direction and
Management
$14,897
$14,239
($ 658)
( 4.4%)
D-72
$633,743
$599,115
($34,628)
( 5.5%)
TOTAL
The FY 2013 reductions in the salary accounts are primarily the result of $17.2 million in
overtime savings department-wide, based on FY 2012 spending projections. The remaining
salary savings is based on the elimination of 135 funded vacancies, department-wide.
Detention and Rehabilitation was reduced by 123 funded vacancies, Central Office was
reduced by 5 vacancies and System-Wide was reduced by 7 vacancies. These position
reductions combined with the overtime savings account for the total salary savings.
SERVICES OTHER
THAN PERSONAL
Detention and
Rehabilitation
System Wide Program
Support
TOTAL
$145,480
$146,229
$ 749
.5%
D-65
$8,453
$12,278
$ 3,825
45.3%
D-67
$153,933
$158,507
$ 4,574
3.0%
The recommended increases in the Services Other than Personal Accounts reflect the increased
cost of new medications which have been released to treat Hepatitis C. According to the
Executive, these drugs (Boceprevir and Incivek) have recently been approved by the US Food
and Drug Administration, can cost up to $30,000 per inmate per year and will become part of
the department’s standard of care for Hepatitis C.
5
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Changes/New Programs ($000) (Cont’d)
Budget Item
SPECIAL PURPOSE:
Civilly Committed
Sexual Offender
Program
Adj. Approp.
FY 2012
$27,186
Recomm.
FY 2013
$28,314
Dollar
Change
$ 1,128
Percent
Change
Budget
Page
4.1%
D-65
The recommended increase would fund a new team of therapists for the Civilly Committed
Sexual Offender Unit. FY 2013 evaluation data indicates that the recommended appropriation
would support 481 patients, 26 more than the number funded during FY 2012. The FY 2012
lapse report indicates that the department is planning to lapse $811,000 from this program at
the end of the current fiscal year.
ADDITIONS,
IMPROVEMENTS
AND EQUIPMENT
Detention and
Rehabilitation
$1,930
$1,030
($ 900)
( 46.6%)
D-65
Central Office
$77
$1,896
$ 1,819
2362.3%
D-72
$2,007
$2,926
$ 919
45.8%
TOTAL
For FY 2013, new funding and current funding reallocated from institutional accounts to the
Central Office will support a department-wide vehicle upgrade. The department will acquire
125 new cars and vans to replace vehicles which have logged over 125,000 miles and have
been deemed no longer worth repairing. In addition, 8 new 44-passenger buses for normal and
emergency transport and 2 new buses to facilitate county jail transfers will be acquired.
ALL OTHER FUNDS
Institutional Care and
Treatment
$7,160
$7,368
$ 208
2.9%
D-65
The FY 2013 recommendation for Institutional Care and Treatment, All Other Funds represents
funding awarded to the institutions under the State Facilities Education Act of 1979 (SFEA) (P.L.
1979, c.207). Funds for this program are provided through the Department of Education and
based on annual pupil count that is conducted on the last school day prior to October 16th for
the following school year. Eligible student offenders are 20 years of age or younger on July 1,
enrolled in education programs, and do not yet possess a high school diploma or equivalent.
Funds are distributed proportionally based on each facility's pupil count after adjustments are
made for central office educational support services, various special services and other
contingencies.
6
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Changes/New Programs ($000) (Cont’d)
Budget Item
Administration and
Support Services
Adj. Approp.
FY 2012
$15,346
Recomm.
FY 2013
$16,667
Dollar
Change
$ 1,321
Percent
Change
Budget
Page
8.6%
D-65
The FY 2013 increase in this account reflects receipts from the institutional inmate canteens.
Profits from each of the institution's inmate canteens are transferred to the Inmate Welfare Fund
and used to fund programs and activities which benefit the inmates.
Materials and
Supplies
$949
$1,169
$ 220
23.2%
D-67
The FY 2013 budget recommends $1.169 million for this account, an increase of $220,000 or
23 percent. According to the department, the recommended increase would provide for
emergency preparedness inmate supplies such as mattresses and bedding as well as basic
hygiene supplies and bedding for staff who would be unable to leave an institution in the event
of an emergency.
SPECIAL PURPOSE:
Video
Teleconferencing
$300
$172
($ 128)
( 42.7%)
D-67
The recommended decrease represents efficiencies realized in the DOC video teleconferencing
program. Savings have been realized through the elimination of equipment maintenance
where there is no or very low usage or where equipment has reach “end of life”. In addition,
toll charges have been reduced as a result of newly installed State Parole Board owned systems
at four institutions. The DOC uses video teleconferencing technology to conduct criminal
justice proceedings, including preliminary court activities, parole hearings and deportation
hearings, reducing the need to transport inmates from the secure confines of the correctional
institutions and thus resulting in overtime and transportation savings.
7
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Changes/New Programs ($000) (Cont’d)
Budget Item
GRANTS IN AID:
Purchase of Service
for Inmates
Incarcerated in
County Penal
Facilities
Adj. Approp.
FY 2012
$5,582
Recomm.
FY 2013
$4,125
Dollar
Change
($1,457)
Percent
Change
( 26.1%)
Budget
Page
D-67
Although Executive Order #106, which authorized the Department of Corrections to house
State Sentenced prison inmates in the county jails in order to alleviate overcrowding in the
State’s prisons, expired in March 1998, the Department of Corrections continues to house State
inmates in county penal facilities at various reimbursement rates agreed upon between the State
and the counties. The State has entered into such contracts with eighteen of the State's twentyone counties. According to FY 2013 budget evaluation data, the recommendation would
provide funding for an average daily population of 320 inmates housed in county facilities.
However, the State is required to pay for inmates who stay more than 15 days. This number
has been below 100 inmates per month so far through FY 2012, leading to a savings for the
County Jail account.
FEDERAL FUNDS
Institutional Program
Support
$9,553
$10,154
$ 601
6.3%
D-68
The FY 2013 increase in federal funding represents new funding totaling $400,000 for the US
Department of Justice Second Chance Re-entry program, and an increase of $644,000 for the
Promoting Responsible Fatherhood program, offset by a reduction of $143,000 for the Second
Chance Re-entry Family Based Prisoner Substance Abuse Treatment Program and the
elimination of $300,000 for the Camden County Re-entry Initiative Grant. Federal funds for the
following programs are anticipated in FY 2012:






The Department of Justice Second Chance Re-Entry program is projected to receive
$400,000 in 2013, a new program.
The Promoting Responsible Fatherhood grant is projected at $1,039 in FY 2013, an
increase of $644,000 or 163 percent over the FY 2013 funding level of $395,000.
The Second Chance Re-entry Project Family Based Prisoner Substance Abuse Treatment
program is projected to receive $300,000 in FY 2013, a decrease of $143,000 under the
FY 2012 funding level.
The Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program is projected to receive $200,000
in FY 2013, the same level of funding as received in FY 2012.
The State Criminal Alien Assistance program is anticipated at $4.856 million in FY
2013, the same level of funding as received in FY 2012.
The National Institute of Justice Grant for Corrections Research--Escape Study grant is
projected at $300,000 in FY 2013, the same level of funding as received in FY 2012.
8
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Changes/New Programs ($000) (Cont’d)
Budget Item





Adj. Approp.
FY 2012
Recomm.
FY 2013
Dollar
Change
Percent
Change
Budget
Page
The Inmate Vocational Certifications grant is projected to receive $173,000 in FY 2013,
the same level of funding as received in FY 2012.
The Communications Upgrade – US Department of Commerce grant is projected to
receive $1 million in FY 2013, the same level of funding as received in FY 2012.
The Central Communications Upgrade – US Department of Homeland Security grant is
projected to receive $1 million in FY 2013, the same level of funding as received in FY
2012.
Project INSIDE funding is expected to be $386,000 in FY 2013, the same level of
funding as received in FY 2012.
The department anticipates the receipt of $500,000 in FY 2013 for Technology
Enhancements, the same level of funding as received in FY 2012.
ALL OTHER FUNDS
Institutional Program
Support
$165
$0
($ 165)
( 100.0%)
D-68
The FY 2013 recommendation reflects the elimination of funding for the Nicholson
Foundation Re-Entry grant program.
PAROLE
DIRECT STATE
SERVICES
Salaries and Wages
$41,100
$39,432
($1,668)
( 4.1%)
D-70
The FY 2013 recommendation reflects the annualization of FY 2012 Parole Board savings as
well as the elimination of funded vacancies.
SPECIAL PURPOSE:
Parolee Electronic
Monitoring Program
$4,593
$4,165
($ 428)
( 9.3%)
D-70
The FY 2013 recommendation reflects a $250,000 decrease in the contract for parolee
electronic monitoring services as a result of contract negotiation. An additional $178,000 in
savings from the State Parole Board’s line of credit is also reflected in this line item. In addition,
the number of parolees expected to participate in the program has declined from 268 in FY
2012 to 250 in FY 2013.
9
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Changes/New Programs ($000) (Cont’d)
Budget Item
Satellite Based
Monitoring of Sex
Offenders
Adj. Approp.
FY 2012
$2,819
Recomm.
FY 2013
$2,619
Dollar
Change
($ 200)
Percent
Change
( 7.1%)
Budget
Page
D-70
The FY 2013 recommendation reflects a decrease in the cost of Satellite Based Monitoring of
Sex Offenders services as a result of contract negotiation. Evaluation data indicates that the FY
2013 appropriation level would support 325 program participants, 22 more than the number of
participants supported during FY 2012.
Parole Violator
Assessment and
Treatment Program
$3,562
$3,029
($ 533)
( 15.0%)
D-70
The FY 2013 recommendation reflects unspecified efficiencies generated within the program.
The FY 2013 level of funding would support 135 program participants.
FEDERAL FUNDS
Parole
$750
$500
($ 250)
( 33.3%)
D-71
The FY 2013 decrease in federal funding reflects the elimination of $250,000 in funding for the
Community Mental Health Partnership – Second Chance program. The Parole Board
anticipates the receipt of $500,000 in FY 2013 for the Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative, the same
amount of funding as received in FY 2012.
10
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Significant Language Changes
System-Wide Program Support
New Language
2012 Handbook: p.
2013 Budget: p. D-68
Notwithstanding the provisions of any law or regulation to the contrary, the amount
hereinabove appropriated for Purchase of Community Services shall be subject to the
following condition: in order to permit flexibility and efficiency in the housing of State
inmates, the operational capacity of the Residential Community Release Program, as a place
of confinement, shall be determined by the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections
as authorized by N.J.S.A.30:4--91.2, subject to the approval of the Director of the Division of
Budget and Accounting.
Explanation
The proposed language would give the commissioner of the DOC the authority to determine
the number of residential community release beds that would be available for the placement of
DOC inmates into community settings. It is unclear what specific provisions of law are
intended to be set aside by this language.
Parole
New Language
2012 Handbook: p.
2013 Budget: p. D-71
Of the amounts hereinabove appropriated for Grants--in--Aid, an amount not to exceed
$3,000,000 may be transferred to other state departments or agencies as directed by the
Chairman of the State Parole Board to provide services to parolees as requested by the
Governor’s Task Force on Recidivism Reduction, subject to the approval of the Director of
the Division of Budget and Accounting.
Explanation
The proposed language would permit the State Parole Board to transfer up to $3 million in
funding to other State departments or agencies providing services to parolees as recommended
by the Governor’s Task Force on Recidivism Reduction. The task force was authorized under
Executive Order Number 83, November 28, 2011. The proposed language would provide the
Parole Board with the flexibility to implement any recommendations made by the task force.
The Task Force has been charged with studying the State’s efforts towards the reduction of
criminal recidivism, creating a system whereby those efforts can be benchmarked and
continually evaluated, then presenting ongoing recommendations to the Governor regarding
how best to ensure the effectiveness and success of this State’s efforts towards recidivism
reduction.
11
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2012-2013
Background Paper: Inmate Population Trends
Budget Pages.... D-57 to D-73
Summary
New Jersey's adult and young adult State prison population steadily increased through
the 1980’s and into the 1990’s. Commencing with the year 2000, the stress of prison
population growth abated as inmate populations decreased, providing some relief to the
Department of Corrections. Concurrently, the makeup of the prison population changed from
primarily violent offenders to primarily non-violent offenders with an increasing number of drug
offenders. The FY 2009 closure of Riverfront State Prison has highlighted the State’s focus on
reducing the State prison population in favor of the lower cost alternatives to incarceration and
expanded parole programs. While the overall State prison population has remained relatively
stable since 2000, albeit with slight fluctuations, future inmate population trends will influence
policy decisions and the need for the allocation of resources in upcoming years.
Introduction
The Department of Corrections (DOC) is responsible for custody, care, discipline,
training and treatment of persons committed to State correctional institutions, as well as for
those individuals under community supervision or on parole.
The department has under its jurisdiction 13 institutions: one reception center, eight
housing adult male offenders, one of which is dedicated to the treatment and rehabilitation of
sex offenders; one housing adult female offenders; and three facilities housing youthful
offenders. Additionally, the department is responsible for housing offenders who have
completed their term of incarceration but who have been classified as sexually violent predators
and are considered to be a danger to the public and have been involuntarily committed to one
of two State operated facilities. While the Department of Corrections is responsible for housing
and providing security for these individuals, the Department of Human Services is responsible
for treatment services.
In addition to the State-run institutions, the Department of Corrections houses inmates
in county jails and in various alternatives to incarceration. These placements serve two
functions: to ease the overcrowded conditions within the State operated facilities, and to
provide various treatment and educational services to State sentenced inmates to help ease the
transition back to society at the end of the inmate’s term of incarceration.
Prison Population Changes
The following chart tracks the State prisons' population from the late 1980's through
2011. On December 31, 1987, the Department of Corrections housed 15,945 adult and young
adult State sentenced inmates in State and county correctional facilities and in various
community based halfway house facilities. On December 31, 1999, the high point in the State
prison population, the number of State sentenced inmates totaled 30,818 adult and young adult
inmates in State and county correctional facilities and community placements. On December
31, 2011 the State sentenced prison population totaled 23,842 inmates, 6,976 inmates fewer
than the number housed in 1999, a decline of about 23 percent.
12
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2011-2012
Background Paper: Inmate Population Trends (Cont’d)
Total Inmate Population
20
11
20
08
20
05
20
02
19
99
19
96
19
93
19
90
19
87
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
-
Inmate Population
Source: New Jersey Department of Corrections, "Residents, Admissions and Releases" report,
issued monthly by the DOC Division of Policy Analysis and Planning.
The growth during the 1990’s was due primarily to the enactment of various laws aimed
at securing a safer environment for New Jersey's population through new and longer sentences
for various drug offenses, drug related criminal activity and violent crimes. In addition,
minimum mandatory sentences imposed on several offenses required longer prison stays for
convicted offenders. Finally, statutes mandating stiffer parole eligibility criteria served to keep
offenders incarcerated longer, swelling the State prison population.
The more recent reductions in the State sentenced prison population can be attributed
to the fact that many inmates who had been sentenced under the mandatory minimum
sentence statutes began to reach the end of their terms of incarceration and were paroled. In
addition, increases in State Parole Board staff permitted the Parole Board to expand its
alternatives to incarceration programs, to implement new programs and to reduce the backlog
of inmates awaiting parole hearings. The Statewide expansion of the Drug Court program and
the Judiciary’s Intensive Supervision program have also contributed to the reduction in the State
prison population.
Offender Characteristics
Over time, the makeup of the State sentenced prison population had begun to show a
disproportionate increase in the number of drug offenses over the increase in violent crime. For
example on December 31, 1986, a total of 11 percent of the State prison population were drug
offenders. Another 61 percent were convicted of violent crimes, while the remaining 28
percent were convicted of all other types of crimes. In January, 1998 drug offenders accounted
for 34 percent of the total prison population, the proportion of violent offenders declined to 40
percent, and those convicted of other offenses totaled 26 percent of the inmate population.
13
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2011-2012
Background Paper: Inmate Population Trends (Cont’d)
While the number of drug offenses had risen during the intervening years since 1986, these
numbers have recently begun to decline as a result of the State’s use of alternative programs
such as drug court, which provides treatment rather than incarceration for non-violent drug
offenders. As of January 2012, a total of 22 percent of the State prison population were drug
offenders. Another 54 percent of the State sentenced prison population were convicted of
violent crimes, while the remaining 24 percent were convicted of all other types of crimes.
The following chart illustrates to makeup of the State sentenced prison population by
offense.
Inmate Population by Offense
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2000 2003 2008 2011
Other
Drug
Violent
Source: New Jersey Department of Corrections "Offender Characteristics Report", issued by the
DOC Division of Policy Analysis and Planning.
Mandatory Minimum Sentences
During the 1980's and into the 1990's, the Legislature’s efforts to reduce and punish
crime in New Jersey included enacting statutes imposing mandatory minimum sentences on
individuals convicted of crimes. Under a mandatory minimum term, an inmate must serve a
specified minimum amount of time in prison before becoming eligible for parole. Prior to the
enactment of these laws, convicted offenders generally served from one-third to one-half of the
sentence imposed due to time and work credits earned while incarcerated and the parole
process.
The following chart illustrates that since 1986, the number of inmates serving
mandatory minimum terms generally grew at a greater pace than the total number of inmates in
the correctional population. In 1986, about 43 percent of the State's total adult population
were serving mandatory minimum terms. By 2011 this proportion increased to 71 percent of
the total inmate population. Because of this increasing proportion of inmates serving
mandatory minimum sentences, several bills have been introduced relaxing mandatory terms.
14
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2011-2012
Background Paper: Inmate Population Trends (Cont’d)
Inmate Population by Mandatory Term
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1986
1989
1992
1995
1998
Mand Min
2000
2003
2008
2011
No Mand Min
Source: New Jersey Department of Corrections "Offender Characteristics Report", issued by the
DOC Division of Policy Analysis and Planning.
Alternative Housing Options
As the DOC’s prison population grew during the 1980’s and 1990’s, the department
faced the task of acquiring secure housing to meet its mandate to house the State’s convicted
offenders. In response, the DOC enlisted county jails and expanded its use of community
based halfway houses and treatment facilities and various alternatives to incarceration. Recent
trends show the department placing more reliance on halfway house alternatives than on
county facilities as a housing option. County jails have remained an important facet of the
department's overall housing strategy because this is where the overflow of State sentenced
prison inmates are housed at any given time. The number of inmates housed in the counties
has been largely dependent upon the number of admissions processed each month offset by the
number of releases and paroles granted, and is subject to monthly fluctuations.
In December 1986, while the Department of Corrections had a total of 14,346 inmates,
11,937 of them, or 83 percent, were housed in State facilities. Of the remaining number, 2,244
(16 percent) were housed in county facilities and 165 (1 percent) were housed in community
settings (which includes both community based treatment centers and alternatives to
incarceration). In December, 2011, the number of State sentenced inmates totaled 23,842.
The number housed in State facilities totaled 20,755 inmates, comprising 87 percent of the
prison population, slightly more than the percentage of inmates housed in 1986. The number
of county placements declined to 200 (1 percent), and the number of community placements
totaled 2,887 (12 percent). The increasing use of community placements reflects the State’s
attempt during the past several years to reduce the number of inmates housed in the counties as
well as an effort to expand the use of alternatives to incarceration. In FY 2013, the State
projects that the number of inmates housed in the counties will total 320.
The following charts illustrate the shift in the use of county facilities and the
department's increasing reliance on community based alternatives to incarceration.
15
Department of Corrections and State Parole Board
FY 2011-2012
Background Paper: Inmate Population Trends (Cont’d)
Population Distribution
December 1986
1%
16%
83%
Total Inmates Housed in State Facilities
Total Inmates Housed in Counties
Total Inmates Housed in Community Settings
Population Distribution
December 2011
12%
1%
87%
Total Inmates Housed in State Facilities
Total Inmates Housed in Counties
Total Inmates Housed in Community Settings
Source: New Jersey Department of Corrections, "Residents, Admissions and Releases" report,
issued monthly by the DOC Division of Policy Analysis and Planning.
16
OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
he Office of Legislative Services provides nonpartisan assistance
to the State Legislature in the areas of legal, fiscal, research, bill
drafting, committee staffing and administrative services. It operates
under the jurisdiction of the Legislative Services Commission, a bipartisan body consisting of eight members of each House. The Executive
Director supervises and directs the Office of Legislative Services.
T
The Legislative Budget and Finance Officer is the chief fiscal officer for
the Legislature. The Legislative Budget and Finance Officer collects and
presents fiscal information for the Legislature; serves as Secretary to the
Joint Budget Oversight Committee; attends upon the Appropriations
Committees during review of the Governor's Budget recommendations;
reports on such matters as the committees or Legislature may direct;
administers the fiscal note process and has statutory responsibilities for
the review of appropriations transfers and other State fiscal transactions.
The Office of Legislative Services Central Staff provides a variety of
legal, fiscal, research and administrative services to individual legislators, legislative officers, legislative committees and commissions, and
partisan staff. The central staff is organized under the Central Staff
Management Unit into ten subject area sections. Each section, under a
section chief, includes legal, fiscal, and research staff for the standing
reference committees of the Legislature and, upon request, to special
commissions created by the Legislature. The central staff assists the
Legislative Budget and Finance Officer in providing services to the
Appropriations Committees during the budget review process.
Individuals wishing information and committee schedules on the FY
2013 budget are encouraged to contact:
Legislative Budget and Finance Office
State House Annex
Room 140 PO Box 068
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-8030 • Fax (609) 777-2442