(c) 2007-2016 Derek  W. Logue. No part of this website may be used in any way without expressed written consent of the site owner.
Recidivism 102—Sexual Recidivism Stats by Various Studies – Compiled by Once Fallen

This report is a supplement to Once Fallen’s Recidivism 101 article. This chart only consists of raw data contained within the reports.

Recidivism is not as easy to define as people assume. We obviously think of a sex offender recommitting a sex crime, but some studies may include technical
violations, Failure to Register, or non-sex offenses in recidivism numbers. There are a number of studies out there, and all use different standards. For the
sake of simplicity, I am focusing on two of the most common standards—Re-arrest rates and reconviction rates. Even within this narrow definition,
however, there is no universal standard by which these studies follow. Many studies after 2003 have tried emulating the US Department of Justice survey, but
not all follow the pattern.  

Some studies may be repeated here because they break down rates into shorter and longer periods, or some studies may be follow-ups to earlier recidivism
studies. Most studies are limited to between 3 years and 5 years (which is fine since most recidivists commit new crimes within the first three years of
release). Some studies used inmates released during multiple years, further complicating recidivism rates; The Minnesota-B study used 2007 as the cutoff date
regardless of whether the sample was released in 2002 or 1990. That means some people were in the sample longer than others. Some recidivism data may
overlap; some studies, for example, may use the same state recidivism data that was collected in another study.

Unlike other attempts to summarize recidivism studies, I have limited this chart to American re-offense studies. There are a number of reasons for choosing
only American studies, but primarily because policy issues in the USA tend to regulate far more sexual activity than in other countries, even those with sex
offender registry laws like Canada or the UK.

Under re-arrest and re-conviction rate headings, the numbers in parentheses are actual number of recidivists when listed in the study. Unfortunately not all
studies gave the actual numbers, just the percentages who reoffended.

A number of studies here are excluded primarily because they did not cover re-arrest/ reconviction rates, are studies from other countries, or were too vague
to determine the numbers needed here. This is thus not exhaustive, but is comprehensive of those American Recidivism studies with re-arrest or reconviction
stats.

Other similar reports can be found in the following places:































































*Indiana, NY state and Ohio studies used reincarceration as the recidivism standard. Recidivism rates can include sex-related technical violations, but these
numbers do not reflect technical violations.


References:

  1.  Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. “Five Year Recidivism Follow-Up Of Sex Offender Releases.” August 1996
  2.  New York State Department of Correctional Services, Division of Program Planning, Research and Evaluation. “Profile and Follow-up of Sex
    Offenders released in 1986.” July 1996
  3.  Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning and Statistical Analysis Center. “THE IOWA SEX OFFENDER
    REGISTRY AND RECIDIVISM.” December 2000. http://www.humanrights.iowa.gov/cjjp/images/pdf/01_pub/SexOffenderReport.pdf
  4.  Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, “Ten Year Recidivism Follow-up of 1989 Sex Offender Releases.” April 2001. http://www.drc.
    state.oh.us/web/Reports/Ten_Year_Recidivism.pdf.
  5.  US Department of Justice, “Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released into the Community in 1994.” Nov. 2003
  6.  Washington State Institute for Public Policy. “SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES.” August 26,
    2005.
  7.  Michelle L. Meloy, “The Sex Offender Next Door: An Analysis of Recidivism, Risk Factors, and Deterrence of Sex Offenders on Probation.”
    Criminal Justice Policy Review, Volume 16, Number 2, June 2005.  p. 211-236
  8.  eAdvocate, “CHART: Michigan Recidivism Rates: All released sex offenders -vs- non-sex offenders.” May 5, 2009. Information was extrapolated
    from Annual Michigan Department of Corrections, Statistical Report, Parole Board Charts D2 and D2a, years 1990 through 2000. Technical violations
    not included. The Statistical reports for years 1998 to current can be found under the “Publications and information” section of the Michigan Dept. of
    Correcctions website, http://www.michigan.gov/corrections/0,4551,7-119-1441---,00.html.
  9.  Alaska Judicial Council. “Criminal Recidivism in Alaska.” January 2007. This study does not break down the number or registrants nor the exact
    number rearrested in the study. This was a study a all criminals, not just registered citizens
  10.  Indiana Dept. of Correction. “Recidivism Rates Compared 2005-2007.” May 2007. http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/05_07RecidivismRpt.pdf.
  11.  Arizona Dept. of Corrections. “Sex Offender Recidivism.” 2007.  http://www.rsova.info/reports/az_sorecidivism1984-1998.pdf ;
  12.  Minnesota Dept. of Corrections, “Sex Offender Recidivism in Minnesota.” April 2007.
  13.  Ibid. I added this stat because it was in the study. The MInn. DOC points out overall rearrest and reconviction rates lowered as a result of increased
    supervision and treatment of sex offenders. I’d also like to add the year average came from people followed between three and sixteen years.
  14.  California Sex Offender Management Board. “RECIDIVISM OF PAROLED SEX OFFENDERS—TEN (10) YEAR STUDY.” June 2008
  15.  Stan Orchowsky and Janice Iwama. “Improving State Criminal History Records: Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released in 2001.” Justice Research
    and Statistics Association, November 2009. Table 5, p. 17. http://www.jrsa.org/projects/sex-offender-final-report.pdf
  16.  Ibid.
  17.  Ibid.
  18.  Ibid.
  19.  Ibid.
  20.  Ibid.
  21.  Ibid.
  22.  Arizona Criminal Justice Commission. “Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from the Arizona Department of Corrections in 2001.” February 2009
  23.  USM Muskie School of Public Service, Maine Statistical Analysis Center, “SEXUAL ASSAULT TRENDS AND SEX OFFENDER RECIDIVISM IN
    MAINE.” October 2010. This study divided sex offenders into two groups—341 released from prison and 569 RSOs on probation. The recidivism
    rates were the same between the two groups (3.8% and 3.9%, respectively). Thus, combining the total numbers does not influence the results.
  24.  Richard Tewksbury, Wesley G. Jennings and Kristen M. Zgoba. “A longitudinal examination of sex offender recidivism prior to and following the
    implementation of SORN.” Behav. Sci. Law 30: 308–328 (2012)
  25.  Ibid.
  26.  State of Connecticut, Office of Policy and Management, Criminal Justice Policy & Planning Division. “Recidivism among sex offenders in
    Connecticut.” February 15, 2012
  27.  Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D. & Ryan T. Shields, M.S. “SEX OFFENDER RISK AND RECIDIVISM IN FLORIDA.” 2012
  28.  Ibid. Because Levenson and Shields randomly selected 250 registrants from 1999-2000 and 250 registrants from 2004-2005 to conduct the study,
    they could combine five year recidivism rates for both groups but could only get 10 year rates from the 1999-2000 group of 250.
  29.  Kristen M. Zgoba, Michael Miner, Raymond Knight, Elizabeth Letourneau, Jill Levenson, David Thornton. “A Multi-State Recidivism Study Using
    Static-99R and Static-2002 Risk Scores and Tier Guidelines from the Adam Walsh Act.” November 2012.  Table 7, p.20
  30.  Ibid.
  31.  Consortium for Crime and Justice Research, U. of Nebraska – Omaha. “Nebraska Sex Offender Registry Study.” July 31, 2013. Table 5, p.20
  32.  Ibid. Table 6, p.21
  33.  Vermont Center for Justice Research. “SEXUAL CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN: A STUDY OF OFFENDER RECIDIVISM.” January, 2013.
  34. Barbara Levine & Elsie Kettunen. "Paroling people who committed serious crimes: What is the actual risk?"  Citizens Alliance on Prisons & Public
    Spending, Dec. 1, 2014
  35. "Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010: Supplemental Tables: Most serious commitment offense and types
    of post-release arrest charges of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005." US Dept. of Justice, Dec. 2016.
  36. Seung C. Lee, Alejandro Restrepo, Annie Satariano, & R. Karl Hanson. "The Predictive Validity of Static-99R for Sexual Offenders in California: 2016
    Update." State Authorized Risk Assessment Tool for Sex Offenders (CA) Committee. Gov't Report. July 13, 2016. http://www.saratso.
    org/docs/ThePredictiveValidity_of_Static-99R_forSexualOffenders_inCalifornia-2016v1.pdf
Study Location
Study Date
Years of Subject
Release
Sample Size
Followup Period
SO Rearrest Rate
SO Reconviction
Rate
Ohio [1]
1996
1989
826
5
----
5.3% (44*)
New York [2]
1996
1986
556
9
----
6% (34*)
Iowa [3]
2000
1995-1996
434
4.3
----
3.2% (14)
Ohio [4]
2001
1989
879
10
----
8% (70)
US Dept. of Justice [5]
2003
1994
9641
3
5.3% (517)
3.5% (339)
Washington [6]
2005
1994
4091
5
----
2.7% (111)
US (Rutgers U.) [7]
2005
1986
917
3.5
4.5%
----
Michigan [8]
2006
1990-2000
4762
4
----
2.46 (117)
Alaska [9]
2007
1999
----
3
3%
----
Indiana [10]
2007
2002-2004
2502
3
----
2.3% (60*)
Arizona [11]
2007
1984-1998
3205
6.85 Average
----
5.5%
Minnesota [12]
2007
1990-2002
3166
3
7%
6%
Minnesota [13]
2007
1990-2002
3166
8.4
12%
10%
California [14]
2008
1997
3577
10
----
3.38% (121)
Alaska [15]
2009
2001
232
3
3.4%
----
Delaware [16]
2009
2001
88
3
3.8%
----
Illinois [17]
2009
2001
499
3
2.4%
----
Iowa [18]
2009
2001
205
3
3.9%
----
New Mexico [19]
2009
2001
112
3
1.8%
----
South Carolina [20]
2009
2001
300
3
4%
----
Utah [21]
2009
2001
203
3
9%
----
Arizona [22]
2009
2001
290
3
2.4% (7)
0.7% (2)
Maine [23]
2010
2004-2006
910
3
3.8% (35)
----
New Jersey [24]
2011
1990-1994
247
8
13%
----
New Jersey [25]
2011
1996-2000
248
8
9.7%
----
Connecticut [26]
2012
2005
746
5
3.6% (27)
2.7% (20)
Florida [27]
2012
99,00,04,05
477
5
5.2% (22)
----
Florida [28]
2012
1999-2000
241
10
13.7% (33)
----
FL/NJ/MN/SC [29]
2012
1990-2005
1751
5
5.1% (90)
----
FL/NJ/MN/SC [30]
2012
1990-2005
1469
10
13.7% (153)
----
Nebraska Pre-AWA [31]
2013
1997-2008
2816
2
----
1.7% (48)
Nebraska AWA [32]
2013
2009
209
2
----
2.6% (6)
Connecticut [33]
2013
2004-2009
223
3
----
1.3% (2)
Michigan [34]
2014
2007-2010
4109
3
----
0.8% (32)
Federal [35]
2014
2005-2010
20,422
5
5.6%
 
California [36]
2016
Ca. 2010
1626
5
4.8% (78)