Skip navigation.
Home | About Us | Contact Us
Rick Scott, Governor
Florida Department of Corrections, Secretary Julie L. Jones

Florida Department of Corrections
Julie L. Jones, Secretary

Recidivism Rates - Model Factor Tables for Inmates Released 2012

Table 1. Hazard Ratios for Categorical Factors Selected by Model (Male)

Factors Values Overall Releases 2012
(Available Data Only)
Percent of Release Cohort Recidivism Rate Hazard Ratio
Supervision to Follow Yes 9,595 36% 39% 2.065**
No 17,291 64% 20%  
Gang Membership Yes 2,245 8% 45% 1.67**
No 24,641 92% 25%  
Ethnicity Hispanic 2,579 10% 22% 0.725**
Non-Hispanic 24,307 90% 27%  
Custody at Release Low (Community or Minimum) 12,191 45% 22% 0.82*
Criminal History Other Violent Offenses
Committed within 15 Years
Prior to Admission
8,881 33% 29% 0.919**
Worst Offense was Murder 817 3% 24% 0.73**
Spouse Have a Positive Influence Yes 13,195 50% 26% 0.94**
No 13,074 50% 28%  
Friends Have a Negative Influence Yes 1,735 7% 34% 1.173**
No 24,534 93% 26%  
Friends Have a Positive Influence Yes 15,890 60% 26% 0.941*
No 10,379 40% 29%  
Bus Ticket Furnished for Release Transportation Yes 10,599 39% 30% 1.067**
No 16,287 61% 25%  
**: p-value ≤ 0.01; *: 0.01 < p-value <0.05; NS: Not Significant at α = 0.05

Table 2. Hazard Ratios for Continuous Factors Selected by Model (Male)

Factors Value Median Mean Hazard Ratio
Criminal History Number of Prior Prison Commitments (0-8) 0.0 0.8 1.173**
Age at First Offense Age at First Offense (13-81) 20 23 0.966**
Institutional Behavior Number of Disciplinary Reports During the Current Incarceration (0-154) 1.0 2.8 1.009**
Education Level Most Recent Tests of Adult Basic Education (TABE) Score (Grade Equivalents of 1-12.9) 6.7 0.963**
Number of Visits Inmate Gets 12 Months Prior to Release Number of Visits(0-69) 0 0.4 0.974**
Substance Abuse Severity Score Inmate-Reported Drug Screening Score (0-14) 4.0 5.1 1.01**
Criminal History Number of Theft Offenses within 5 Years Prior to Admission (0-57)) 0.0 0.9 1.034**
Number of Other Offenses within 5 Years Prior to Admission (0-10) 0.0 0.3 1.071**
Number of Burglary Offenses (0-41) 0.0 1.1 1.027**
**: p-value ≤ 0.01; *: 0.01 < p-value <0.05; NS: Not Significant at α = 0.05; †: An average cannot be calculated for grade equivalent TABE scores since these are not interval scale.

Table 3. Hazard Ratios for Categorical Factors Selected by Model (Female)

Factors Values Overall Releases 2012
(Available Data Only)
Percent of Release Cohort Recidivism Rate Hazard Ratio
Supervision to Follow Yes 1,070 30% 19% 2.075**
No 2,506 70% 10%  
Custody at Release Low (Community or Minimum) 2,535 71% 10% 0.771**
Most Serious Crime in Inmate History Murder 85 2% 7% 0.465*
Inmate Admits to having Enemies outside of Prison Yes 114 3% 7% 0.537*
No 3,387 97% 12%  
Family has a Positive Influence on the Inmate Yes 3,021 86% 12% 0.777*
No 480 14% 15%  
**: p-value ≤ 0.01; *: 0.01 < p-value <0.05; NS: Not Significant at α = 0.05; ***: Sample size is too small.

Table 4. Hazard Ratios for Continuous Factors Selected by Model (Female)

Factors Value Median Mean Hazard Ratio
Criminal History Number of Prior Prison Commitments (0-7) 0.0 0.4 1.287**
Age at First Offense Age at First Offense (14-64) 24.0 26.3 0.947**
Substance Abuse Severity Score Inmate-Reported Drug Screening Score (0-14) 7.0 6.8 1.052**
Criminal History Number of Theft offense Counts within 5 years prior to admission(0-42) 0 1.4 1.04**
Most Recent TABE Score Educational Level (1-12) 8.6 0.963**
**: p-value ≤ 0.01; *: 0.01 < p-value <0.05; NS: Not Significant at α = 0.05; †: An average cannot be calculated for grade equivalent TABE scores since these are not interval scale.

Note that hazard ratios in the above tables are interpreted as the multiple of the likelihood of failure. For example, in Table 1 male inmates who are gang members have a hazard ratio of 1.67. This ratio means that a male inmate who is a gang member is (1.67-1=0.67) 67% more likely to fail than a male inmate who is not a gang member with all other factors held constant (meaning they are identical on all factors in the model except for gang membership).

On the other hand, if the hazard ratio is less than one, the interpretation is a percent reduction in likelihood to fail. For example, in Table 1 a male Hispanic inmate is (1-0.725=.275) 27.5% less likely to recidivate than a non-Hispanic male inmate with all other factors held constant.

For those measures that are expressed as numeric counts instead of dichotomous (Yes/No), the hazard ratios show the increase or decrease per unit increase in the factor. For example, in Table 2 for each additional disciplinary report a male inmate receives while incarcerated, his likelihood of recidivating increases by (1.009-1=.009) 0.9%. For each additional grade level tested, his likelihood of recidivating decreases by (1-0.963=0.037) 3.7%.



Privacy Policy | Accessibility