* Cherrie Bucknor is a Research Associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Alan Barber is Director of Domestic Policy
at CEPR.
CEPR
CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH
The Price We Pay:
Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment
for Former Prisoners and People Convicted
of Felonies
By Cherrie Bucknor and Alan Barber*
June 2016
Center for Economic and Policy Research
1611 Connecticut Ave. NW
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20009
tel: 202-293-5380
fax: 202-588-1356
www.cepr.net
Acknowledgements
The authors thank John Schmitt and Kris Warner for creating the methodology used in this paper.
The authors also thank Dean Baker, Kevin Cashman, Tillie McInnis, and Michael Ratliff for helpful
comments.
Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2
Estimating the Number of Former Prisoners and People with Felony Convictions ............... 4
The Effects of Imprisonment and Felony Conviction on Subsequent Employment ............... 8
Assessment of Employment Effects ......................................................................................................... 9
Estimating the Impact of Former Prisoners and People with Felony Convictions on Total
Employment and Output ........................................................................................................ 10
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 13
Appendix .................................................................................................................................. 15
Releases ........................................................................................................................................................ 15
Recidivism ................................................................................................................................................... 17
References ................................................................................................................................ 19
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
1
Executive Summary
Despite modest declines in recent years, the large and decades-long blossoming of the prison
population ensure that it will take many years before the United States sees a corresponding decrease
in the number of former prisoners. Using data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), this report
estimates that there were between 14 and 15.8 million working-age people with felony convictions in
2014, of whom between 6.1 and 6.9 million were former prisoners.
1
Prior research has shown the adverse impact that time in prison or a felony conviction can have on a
person’s employment prospects. In addition to the stigma attached to a criminal record, these
impacts can include the erosion of basic job skills, disruption of formal education, and the loss of
social networks that can improve job-finding prospects. Those with felony convictions also face
legal restrictions that lock them out of many government jobs and licensed professions.
Assuming a mid-range 12 percentage-point employment penalty for this population, this report finds
that there was a 0.9 to 1.0 percentage-point reduction in the overall employment rate in 2014,
equivalent to the loss of 1.7 to 1.9 million workers. In terms of the cost to the economy as a whole,
this suggests a loss of about $78 to $87 billion in annual GDP.
Some highlights of this study include:
Between 6.0 and 6.7 percent of the male working-age population were former prisoners,
while between 13.6 and 15.3 percent were people with felony convictions.
Employment effects were larger for men than women, with a 1.6 to 1.8 percentage-point
decline in the employment rate of men and a 0.12 to 0.14 decline for women.
Among men, those with less than a high school degree experienced much larger employment
rate declines than their college-educated peers, with a drop of 7.3 to 8.2 percentage points in
the employment rates of those without a high school degree and a decline of 0.4 to 0.5
percentage points for those with college experience.
Black men suffered a 4.7 to 5.4 percentage-point reduction in their employment rate, while
the equivalent for Latino men was between 1.4 and 1.6 percentage points, and for white men
it was 1.1 to 1.3 percentage points.
This paper updates earlier CEPR research that also examined the impact of former prisoners and
those with felony convictions on the economy.
2
1
The working-age population refers to adults between the ages of 18 and 64.
2
Schmitt and Warner (2010).
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
2
Introduction
The number of prisoners in the United States has grown dramatically over the past 40 years. In
1980, there were 503,600 people in prisons or jails at the federal, state and local level.
3
By the end of
2014, this number had ballooned to 2,224,400, and an additional 4,708,100 people were on parole or
probation at that time.
4
These figures translate to about 1 in 110 adults behind bars and about 1 in
52 adults on parole or probation. Despite small decreases in the share of people in prison or jail in
recent years, the United States still has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world, second
only to Seychelles.
5
While this growth in the overall number of prisoners, parolees, and probationers has been
documented over time, estimates of the total number of former prisoners and people with felony
convictions have been rare. This report builds off of prior CEPR research examining the population
of former prisoners and people with felony convictions. It estimates both the size (see Figure 1) and
impact of this population on the U.S. labor market.
Time in prison, jail, or even a felony conviction can have a tremendous impact on the lives of
former prisoners and people with felony convictions. A criminal record can negatively affect
prospects for employment, education, public assistance, and even civic participation by making
many people with felony convictions ineligible to vote.
6
Often it is not just the former prisoner or
person with felony convictions impacted; the well-being of their families is often threatened.
7
This
analysis focuses on the negative effect on the employment prospects of former prisoners and people
with felony convictions and the implications for the labor market.
8
The calculations in this paper indicate that in 2014, the year for which there is the latest available
data, the impediments to employment faced by former prisoners and people with felony convictions
3
Bureau of Justice Statistics (2015a).
4
Data on prison and jail inmates for 2014 from Kaeble, Glaze, Tsoutis, and Minton (2015). Prisons are state and federal facilities,
usually run by the government, but sometimes on a contract basis by private companies, that usually hold convicted criminals
with sentences of a year or longer; jails are local facilities, usually run by local governments, but sometimes by contractors, that
usually hold convicted criminals with sentences of less than one year or unconvicted individuals awaiting trial. Data for probation
and parole for 2014 from Kaeble, Maruschak, and Bonczar (2015). “Probation is a court-ordered period of correctional
supervision in the community generally as an alternative to incarceration. In some cases probation can be a combined sentence of
incarceration followed by a period of community supervision. Parole is a period of conditional supervised release in the
community following a prison term…” (p. 2).
5
Walmsley, Roy (2016).
6
Gottschalk (2015).
7
Vallas et al. (2015).
8
The number of people with felony convictions is larger than the number of former prisoners because only about 44 percent of
felons are sentenced to prison.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
3
meant a loss of about 1.7 to 1.9 million workers. This was equal to a roughly 0.9 to 1.0 percentage-
point reduction in the overall employment rate, and a loss of between $78 and $87 billion in GDP.
The uptick in the U.S. incarceration rate and the number of former prisoners and people with felony
convictions in the U.S. are a reflection not of a crime rate spiraling out of control, but of significant
and often unnecessary changes in the criminal justice system. For example, both violent and
property crime rates are much lower today than they were in the 1980s when the incarceration rate
began to increase rapidly.
9
Rather, much of the increase in incarceration is due to strict and often
harsh sentencing probabilities and sentence lengths.
10
This explosion in the number of people in
U.S. prisons and jails has rightly been characterized by Gottschalk as the metastasizing carceral
state.
11
In recent years, there has been broad acknowledgement of the need for reform of the criminal
justice system, due in part to the ways in which it has directly contributed to the increase in mass
incarceration and the collateral costs that have resulted. Calls to address the severity of policies such
as the War on Drugs and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 have
become louder and more critical, from the vocal protests of Black Lives Matter and others to
executive orders and legislation from President Obama as well as both Democrats and Republicans
in Congress.
12
Estimates of the population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions
like the one offered here can play a role in this discussion by demonstrating the negative impact of
aggressive and often ineffective incarceration policies on the overall economy.
9
For violent and property crime rates, see the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reporting Program,
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr, Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting Program (2016).
10
See Schmitt, Warner, and Gupta (2010), pp. 7–9.
11
Gottschalk (2015).
12
Harte (2016).
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
4
FIGURE 1
Estimates of Correctional Populations, 2014
Source and notes: Authors’ analysis of BJS data. High and low estimates for former prisoners (FP) and people with
felony convictions (PFC) vary according to assumptions about recidivism.
Estimating the Number of Former Prisoners and
People with Felony Convictions
There are no publicly available data on the exact size or composition of the population of former
prisoners and people with felony convictions. In lieu of that, this paper provides an indirect estimate
of the former prisoner population, and uses it to estimate the size and composition of the
population of people with felony convictions.
Table 1 displays estimates of the number of former prisoners and people with felony convictions in
2014. These estimates are based on an analysis of Bureau of Justice Statistics data that count the
number of prisoners released each year from 1968 to 2014. Assuming that the age and gender
distributions of released prisoners are the same as the overall prison population, this report “tracks”
each yearly cohort of released prisoners over time. As it is only concerned with the working-age
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
5
population (ages 18 to 64), it allows former prisoners to age out once they reach age 65. Then, age-
group-specific return-to-prison recidivism rates are applied to isolate the former prisoners who do
not return to prison.
13
Here, there is use of both a low and a high measure of the recidivism rate to
account for returns that occur after three years.
Next, an estimate of age-specific death rates are applied, adjusting up accordingly, to account for the
high-risk population of this study.
14
The first two columns of Table 1 imply that the former prisoner
population in the U.S. in 2014 was between 6.1 million (using a high recidivism rate) and 6.9 million
(using a low recidivism rate). See the Appendix for further details on this estimation technique.
TABLE 1
Estimated Number of FP and PFC, 2014
(thousands)
FP
PFC
Release data
Release data
Recidivism
Recidivism
Low
High
Low
High
6,931
6,138
15,752
13,950
Source and notes: Authors’ analysis of BJS data, 1968–2014, see text for details. Number of
people with felony convictions population estimated from FP, assuming: 90 percent of
prisoners are state prisoners, 10 percent are federal prisoners, 42 percent of felons convicted in
state courts are sentenced to prison, 62 percent of felons convicted in federal courts are
sentenced to prison. Sample is restricted to the working-age population (ages 18–64). FP refers
to former prisoners. PFC refers to people with felony convictions.
In the past, researchers have attempted to estimate the former prisoner population. This paper uses
the same methods of Schmitt and Warner (2010). Their report focused on the population of former
prisoners and people with felony convictions in 2008, and their results showed that there were
between 5.4 and 6.1 million former prisoners of working age in 2008. Forecasts made by Bonczar
(2003) imply that there would be about 5.7 million former prisoners in 2008 and 6.2 million former
prisoners in 2010. Extending the methods from this report back to 2010, there were approximately
between 5.6 and 6.3 million former prisoners in 2010.
15
To the best of the authors' knowledge, there
have not been any attempts to estimate the size or characteristics of the former prisoner population
since 2010. However, the methods used in this paper are the same as those used by Schmitt and
Warner (2010), which had results that were broadly consistent with the other estimates mentioned.
The final two columns of Table 1 show estimates of the number of people with felony convictions.
13
About 50 percent of prisoners return to prison within 3 years.
14
Mortality rates for 2014 have yet to be released, so data from 2013 is used (CDC 2016).
15
Uggen, Manza, and Thompson (2006) estimated that there were about 4.0 million former prisoners in 2004. Using the same
methods, Shannon et al. (2011) estimated that there were 5.2 million former prisoners in 2010. These estimates only include those
who are no longer under correctional supervision. Estimates include all former prisoners, including those who are out of prison
but still under correctional supervision (probation or parole).
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
6
Again, there are no direct estimates of this population, but this report uses administrative data on
the percent of felons sentenced to prison, in addition to the estimates of the former prisoner
population presented in this paper to arrive at estimates of the number of people with felony
convictions. About 44 percent of felons are sentenced to prison. The approach used in this paper
estimates that there were between 14.0 million and 15.8 million people with felony convictions in
2014. In their earlier report using the same methods, Schmitt and Warner (2010) estimated that there
were between 12.3 million and 13.9 million people with felony convictions in 2008.
In addition to estimates of the number of former prisoners and people with felony convictions,
another goal of this paper is to determine their demographic characteristics. To estimate these
characteristics, this report first uses the demographic characteristics of current prisoners for selected
years and applies these estimates to the population of former prisoners and people with felony
convictions. Table 2 shows various characteristics of the prisoner population for selected years
from 1960 to 2014. For all years, the male prisoner population greatly outnumbered the female
prisoner population, with men making up at least 93 percent of the population in all years displayed.
In 2014, men made up 93.0 percent of the prison population, and this percentage has remained
mostly steady since 2000.
Education level, race, and age breakdowns are also displayed for the male prison population. Male
prisoners are considerably less educated than the overall male working-age population, with over 85
percent having a high school degree or less. In 2014, about 43 percent of the overall working-age
male population had a high school degree or less.
16
During the same year, 97.4 percent of male
prisoners were of working age, and 31.9 percent were between the ages of 25 and 34. Also in 2014
36.9 percent of male prisoners were Black, 32.3 percent were white, and 22.0 percent were Latino.
16
Authors' analysis of 2014 Current Population Survey Outgoing Rotation Group (CPS ORG) data.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
7
TABLE 2
Estimated Prisoner Demographics, 1960–2014
(percent)
1960
c. 1980
c. 2000
c. 2008
c.2014
Female
3.8
4.0
6.7
6.8
7.0
Male
96.2
96.0
93.3
93.2
93.0
Men only
Less than high school
85.5
51.0
39.6
36.6
36.6
High school
10.6
35.0
49.3
52.0
52.0
Any college
3.9
14.0
11.1
11.4
11.4
White
62.3
42.9
35.3
33.3
32.3
Black
36.1
42.5
46.3
39.2
36.9
Latino
–
12.3
16.7
20.6
22.0
Other
1.6
2.2
1.7
6.9
8.8
18–19
6.3
4.9
2.7
1.7
1.0
20–24
19.7
22.7
16.1
14.5
11.4
25–29
18.2
19.7
18.8
17.2
15.4
30–34
16.2
15.6
18.9
16.6
16.5
35–39
12.7
12.9
17.2
15.8
14.2
40–44
8.6
9.6
12.1
14.1
12.2
45–49
6.2
5.8
6.7
9.5
10.4
50–54
4.2
3.4
3.7
5.3
8.5
55–59
2.8
1.9
1.8
2.7
5.2
60–64
1.4
1.0
0.9
1.3
2.7
18–64
96.4
97.6
98.9
98.7
97.4
Source and notes: In 1960, Latino was not treated as a separate category; all 1960 data from Tables 4 and 25 of U.S.
Bureau of the Census (1961); for 1980, race is for jail and prison inmates (Ewert, Sykes, and Pettit Table 3, 2014); 1980
gender is from BJS (1982); all education data is for state prisoners only, federal prisoners (10 percent of all prisoners)
are slightly more educated; 1980 education is for 1979 (Pettit and Western, Table 2, 2004); 2000 education is for 1997
(Harlow, Table 6, 2003); 2008 and 2014 education is for 2004 (Glaze and Maruschak, 2008, Appendix Table 16,); 1980
age groups interpolated from 1970 and 1991 data (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1972 and Gilliard and Beck, 1998);
remaining data for 2000 from Harrison and Beck (2001), with age groups 45–49 and 50–54 estimated from the 45–54
age group, age groups 55–59 and 60–64 estimated from the 55+ age group, based on proportions from closest year
available (2007, from West and Sabol, 2008); remaining data for 2008 from Sabol, West, and Cooper (2009); remaining
data for 2014 from Carson (2015).
Using the data from Table 2 on the prisoner population, estimates of the demographic
characteristics of the entire population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions were
created, adjusting for racial differences in recidivism rates and imprisonment rates conditional on
felony conviction.
17
Table 3 displays these estimates.
18
According to this data, in 2014 between
448,000 and 506,000 former prisoners were women, and between 1.0 and 1.2 million people with
felony convictions were women. Between 5.7 and 6.4 million former prisoners were men, and
17
For a more detailed explanation, see Schmitt and Warner (2010), p. 7.
18
Given data constraints, estimates for race and education categories have a higher degree of uncertainty than estimates of the
overall population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions and the male population of former prisoners and
people with felony convictions, and should be viewed as broadly suggestive and not exact estimates.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
8
between 12.9 and 14.6 million people with felony convictions were men. Among male former
prisoners, between 2.6 and 2.9 million had less than a high school degree.
There were notable differences in the racial composition of the population of male former prisoners
and people with felony convictions. There were more Blacks than whites in the former prisoner
population, but there were over 1 million more whites than Blacks in the population of people with
felony convictions. This is the result of disparate sentencing rates between the two races. About 49
percent of Black felons are sentenced to prison, while only about 38 percent of white felons are
sentenced to prison.
19
In 2014, there were approximately between 2.1 and 2.4 million white male
former prisoners and between 5.6 and 6.4 million white males with felony convictions. During the
same year, there were between 2.2 and 2.5 million Black male former prisoners, and between 4.5 and
5.1 million Black males with felony convictions in the United States.
TABLE 3
Estimated Number of FP and PFC, by Education and Race or Ethnicity, 2014
(thousands)
FP
PWC
Release data
Release data
Recidivism
Recidivism
Low
High
Low
High
All
6,931
6,138
15,752
13,950
Female
506
448
1,150
1,018
Male
6,425
5,690
14,602
12,932
Less than high school
2,928
2,593
6,654
5,893
High school
2,556
2,264
5,810
5,145
Any college
941
833
2,138
1,894
White
2,424
2,147
6,378
5,649
Black
2,510
2,223
5,123
4,537
Latino
1,083
959
2,210
1,957
Source and notes: Authors’ analysis, using data in Tables 1 and 2. Race and ethnicity categories
exclude the “other” category in Table 2. Sample restricted to the working-age population (ages 18–
64). FP refers to former prisoners. PFC refers to people with felony convictions.
The Effects of Imprisonment and Felony
Conviction on Subsequent Employment
A large body of evidence demonstrates that prison time and felony convictions can have a lasting
and profound effect on future prospects for employment. In addition to the stigma attached to a
19
BJS “State Court Sentencing of Convicted Felons” for 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
9
criminal record, these impacts include the erosion of basic job skills, disruption of formal education,
loss of networks that can improve job-finding prospects, or deterioration of “people skills.” Schmitt
and Warner’s review of longitudinal surveys, employer surveys, audit studies, aggregated geographic
data, and administrative data suggests that time behind bars can have a significant effect on the
employment of those with prison experience or felony convictions.
20
Similarly, a recent review of the
literature by Travis, Western and Redbum (2014) discussed the potential supply-side effects and
added that “repeated encounters with rejection may lead to cynicism and withdrawal from formal
labor market activity.”
21
And while much of the literature on the effects of incarceration focuses on
men, Decker, Spohn, Ortiz and Hedberg (2014) find in their study that incarceration has a negative
impact on employment for women as well.
22
These hurdles to employment can create an
unfortunate cycle as Berg and Huebner (2011) note that post–incarceration employment significantly
lowers the chances of recidivism.
23
Assessment of Employment Effects
The employment effects of incarceration or a felony conviction vary based on the research
techniques used, the population researched, and the metrics that describe the employment impact.
For the most part, the research shows a moderate to large impact on the employment levels of
former prisoners and people with felony convictions. However, this report is concerned with an
estimate of the impact of the population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions on
the employment levels of all working-age adults, which is somewhat outside the scope of much of
the research on incarceration and employment. Longitudinal surveys of individuals capture much of
the data necessary for the analysis in this paper and typically yield moderate to large effects on
employment levels. Employer surveys and audit studies also show a large impact on employment
levels but are less useful for this present analysis. Aggregate state-level data, though less-directly
applicable, show small to moderate effects. Administrative studies, while more in line
methodologically with longitudinal studies, have technical difficulties and produce results that are
inconsistent with other available data.
To better estimate the impact on employment levels while considering these methodological
differences, this paper uses the three separate estimates employed by Schmitt and Warner (2010).
The estimates examine low-, medium-, and high-effects scenarios to develop estimates of the
employment effects of incarceration. Like Schmitt and Warner:
20
For a thorough examination of research related to the barriers faced by former prisoners and people with felony convictions
through 2010 see Schmitt and Warner (2010), p. 8–12.
21
Travis, Western, and Redburn (2014), p. 239.
22
Decker, Spohn, Ortiz, Hedberg (2014).
23
Berg and Huebner (2011), p. 397.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
10
“In the low-effects scenario, we assume that ex-prisoners or ex-felons pay an employment penalty of
five percentage points (roughly consistent with the largest effects estimated using administrative data
and the lower range of effects estimated using the aggregate data and survey data). In the medium-
effects scenario, we assume that the employment penalty faced by ex-prisoners and ex-felons is 12
percentage points, which is consistent with the bulk of the survey-based studies. In the high-effects
scenario, we assume that the employment penalty is 20 percentage points, which is consistent with the
largest effects estimated in the survey-based studies, as well as, arguably, the findings of the employer
surveys and audit studies.”
24
Estimating the Impact of Former Prisoners and
People with Felony Convictions on Total
Employment and Output
Here, this report estimates the effect of the population of former prisoners and people with felony
convictions on total employment and output. To do so, this report uses the estimates of the
population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions and the outside estimates of the
employment penalty faced by those with prison experience or a felony conviction from the previous
two sections of this paper.
First, the size and demographic characteristics of the population of former prisoners and people
with felony convictions from Table 3 are compared to the overall civilian, non-institutional working-
age population.
25
Table 4 displays estimates of the population of former prisoners and people with
felony convictions as a share of the total working-age population in 2014. Overall, former prisoners
were between 3.2 and 3.6 percent of the non-institutional working-age population. People with
felony convictions were between 7.2 and 8.1 percent. As with those currently behind bars, former
prisoners and people with felony convictions are much more likely to be men than women. In 2014,
an estimated 6.0 to 6.7 percent of the working-age male population were former prisoners, and
between 13.6 and 15.3 percent were people with felony convictions. On the other hand, between
0.45 and 0.51 percent of working-age women were former prisoners, and between 1.0 and 1.2
percent were people with felony convictions.
24
Schmitt and Warner (2010), p. 12.
25
Total population ages 18–64 from the 2014 Current Population Survey Outgoing Rotation Group (CPS ORG).
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
11
There were also notable differences by education level and race, although these estimates are less
precise than those above. Between 26.6 and 30.1 percent of men with less than a high school degree
were former prisoners, and between 60.5 and 68.3 percent were people with felony convictions. By
contrast, only between 1.5 and 1.7 percent of men with any college experience were former
prisoners and between 3.5 and 3.9 percent were people with felony convictions. Black men were
more likely than their white or Latino counterparts to be former prisoners or people with felony
convictions. Between 19.4 and 21.9 percent of Black men were former prisoners, and between 39.5
and 44.6 percent were people with felony convictions.
TABLE 4
Estimated Population of FP and PFC, 2014
(percent)
FP
PFC
Release data
Release data
Recidivism
Recidivism
Low
High
Low
High
All
3.6
3.2
8.1
7.2
Female
0.5
0.5
1.2
1.0
Male
6.7
6.0
15.3
13.6
Less than high school
30.1
26.6
68.3
60.5
High school
8.2
7.3
18.7
16.5
Any college
1.7
1.5
3.9
3.5
White
4.0
3.6
10.6
9.4
Black
21.9
19.4
44.6
39.5
Latino
6.5
5.7
13.2
11.7
Source and notes: Authors' analysis of Table 3 and Current Population Survey data for population.
Sample restricted to the working-age population (ages 18–64). FP refers to former prisoners. PFC
refers to people with felony convictions.
The calculations in Table 4 are then used to determine the reduction in the overall employment rate
that occurs as a result of the employment penalty for former prisoners and people with felony
convictions. Table 5 shows the results of this exercise for men. Three separate sets of measures are
displayed. The first assumes a low, 5 percentage-point employment penalty compared to a similar
worker with no prison experience or felony conviction. The second set of measures assumes a
medium, 12 percentage-point employment penalty, and the last set assumes a high, 20 percentage-
point employment penalty.
Assuming a low employment penalty of 5 percentage points, the population of former prisoners and
people with felony convictions lowered the employment rate of men by between 0.3 and 0.8
percentage points in 2014. Assuming a medium, 12 percentage-point employment penalty, the
population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions lowered the employment rate of
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
12
men by between 0.7 and 1.8 percentage points. With a high employment penalty of 20 percentage
points, this population lowered the employment rate of men by between 1.2 and 3.1 percentage
points.
TABLE 5
Estimated Reduction in Employment-to-Population Rate, All Males 2014
(percent)
FP
PFC
Release data
Release data
Recidivism
Recidivism
Low
High
Low
High
(a) Assuming 5-percentage-point employment penalty for FP and PFC
0.3
0.3
0.8
0.7
(b) Assuming 12-percentage-point employment penalty for FP and PFC
0.8
0.7
1.8
1.6
(c) Assuming 20-percentage-point employment penalty for FP and PFC
1.3
1.2
3.1
2.7
Source and notes: Authors' analysis of Table 4. Sample restricted to the working-age population (ages
18–64). FP refers to former prisoners. PFC refers to people with felony convictions.
Table 6 displays the estimated decline in overall employment rates in 2014, with various
demographic breakdowns. These estimates assume a medium, 12 percentage-point employment
penalty for former prisoners and people with felony convictions. They show that the population of
former prisoners and people with felony convictions reduced the overall employment of the
working-age population by between 0.4 and 1.0 percentage points. The impact was particularly large
for Black men and men with less than a high school degree. The population of former prisoners and
people with felony convictions lowered the employment rates of Black men by between 2.3 and 5.4
percentage points. This population also lowered the employment rates of men with less than a high
school degree by between 3.2 and 8.2 percentage points.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
13
TABLE 6
Estimated Decline in Employment Rates in 2014
(percentage points; assuming 12 percentage-point Employment Penalty)
FP
PFC
Release data
Release data
Recidivism
Recidivism
Low
High
Low
High
All
0.4
0.4
1.0
0.9
Female
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Male
0.8
0.7
1.8
1.6
Less than high school
3.6
3.2
8.2
7.3
High school
1.0
0.9
2.2
2.0
Any college
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
White
0.5
0.4
1.3
1.1
Black
2.6
2.3
5.4
4.7
Latino
0.8
0.7
1.6
1.4
Source and notes: Authors' analysis of Tables 4 and 5. Sample restricted to the working-age
population (ages 18–64). FP refers to former prisoners. PFC refers to people with felony convictions.
The results presented in this paper show how contact with the criminal justice system in the form of
a felony conviction or imprisonment can affect the future employment prospects of former
prisoners and people with felony convictions. In addition to the likely large reductions in personal
earnings as a result of these employment penalties, the economy as a whole suffers from a reduction
in output. More specifically, this report estimates that the population of former prisoners and people
with felony convictions cost the U.S. about 0.45 to 0.5 percentage points of GDP in 2014, or about
$78.1 to $86.7 billion.
26
Conclusion
This paper examines the labor market impact of the growing number of individuals who have been
imprisoned or have felony convictions. The findings presented in this paper show that, in 2014,
overall employment rates were 0.9 to 1.0 percentage points lower as a result of the employment
penalty faced by the large population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions. For
men, their employment rate was 1.6 to 1.8 percentage points lower and for men with less than a high
school degree, their employment rate was 7.3 to 8.2 percentage points lower.
26
This estimate uses an estimate of a 0.9 to 1.0 percentage-point reduction in overall employment rates and assumes former
prisoners and people with felony convictions produce one-half of the output of an average worker.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
14
However, it is not just the individual that suffers; the impact is felt across the U.S. labor market. In
terms of GDP, the calculations in this report suggest that the population of former prisoners and
people with felony convictions led to a loss of $78 to $87 billion in GDP in 2014. While there has
recently been a push from advocates and policy-makers alike to re-examine sentencing policy and
practice, the negative impacts on former prisoners and people with felony convictions themselves
and the economy as a whole will grow in scale unless the burgeoning reform trend continues and
accelerates.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
15
Appendix
To arrive at estimates of the number of former prisoners and people with felony convictions, this
paper uses annual reports of state and federal prisoners in the United States produced by the Bureau
of Justice Statistics. These reports cover the number of prisoners admitted and released, as well as
age-group-specific recidivism rates.
Releases
This report first uses administrative data on the total number of prisoners, number admitted, and
starting with 1977, the number of prisoners released each year. Releases prior to 1977 are estimated
using data on the total number of prisoners and number of admitted prisoners. For example, to
determine the number of prisoners released in 1976, add the total number of admissions (146,388)
to the total number of prisoners in 1975 (240,593), to get 386,981 in 1976. However, in 1976, the
total number of prisoners was 262,833, which suggests that approximately 124,148 prisoners were
released that year. This method is used for all years going back to 1968 (the first year considered
because this paper only covers the working-age population and 64 year-olds in 2014 would have
been 18 years old in 1968). (See Appendix Table 1).
APPENDIX TABLE 1
Total, Admitted, and Released Prisoners, 1967–2014
Year
Total
Admissions
Releases
Year
Total
Admissions
Releases
1967
194,896
N/A
N/A
1991
789,610
466,285
421,687
1968
187,914
72,058
79,040
1992
846,277
480,676
430,198
1969
196,007
75,277
67,184
1993
932,074
500,335
436,684
1970
196,429
79,351
78,929
1994
1,016,691
523,577
437,777
1971
198,061
89,395
87,763
1995
1,085,022
549,313
477,654
1972
196,092
99,440
101,409
1996
1,137,722
542,863
492,069
1973
204,211
109,484
101,365
1997
1,194,334
572,281
517,432
1974
218,466
119,529
105,274
1998
1,248,370
603,510
549,634
1975
240,593
129,573
107,446
1999
1,304,188
611,676
574,624
1976
262,833
146,388
124,148
2000
1,334,174
654,534
635,094
1977
285,456
163,203
147,895
2001
1,345,217
638,978
628,626
1978
294,396
152,039
142,665
2002
1,380,516
660,576
633,947
1979
301,470
161,280
154,958
2003
1,408,361
686,471
656,574
1980
315,956
171,956
158,331
2004
1,433,728
697,066
672,202
1981
353,673
199,943
163,085
2005
1,462,866
730,141
701,632
1982
395,516
218,087
175,607
2006
1,504,598
747,031
709,874
1983
419,346
237,925
213,198
2007
1,532,851
742,875
721,161
1984
443,398
234,293
209,655
2008
1,547,742
738,649
735,651
1985
480,568
258,514
220,485
2009
1,553,574
728,686
729,749
1986
522,084
291,903
248,909
2010
1,552,669
703,798
708,677
1987
560,812
326,228
290,301
2011
1,538,847
671,551
691,072
1988
603,732
365,724
320,460
2012
1,512,430
608,442
636,716
1989
680,907
447,388
369,032
2013
1,520,403
629,962
623,990
1990
739,980
460,769
405,374
2014
1,508,636
626,644
636,346
Source and notes: 1967–1976 total from Cahalan (1986), p. 35; 1968–1970, 1975 admissions from Cahalan p. 36 (data
for missing years were interpolated from adjacent years); 1977–2014 total, admissions, and releases from BJS National
Prisoner Statistics Program.
Next, prison releases are separated into the following age groups: 18–19, 20–24, 25–29, 30–34, 35–
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
16
39, 40–44, 45–49, 50–54, 55–59, and 60–64. This paper assumes that the age distribution of released
prisoners is the same as the age distribution of prisoners in each year (see the estimates in Table 2).
For the years in which direct estimates of the age structure were unavailable, linear interpolation is
used. This paper also assumes that released prisoners are evenly distributed within each age group,
so that, for example, one-fifth of the 60–64 year old age group is assumed to be 60, another one-
fifth is assumed to be 62, and so on. The result of this process is displayed in Appendix Table 2.
APPENDIX TABLE 2
Released Prisoners by Age Group, 1968–2014
Year
18–19
20–24
25–29
30–34
35–39
40–44
45–49
50–54
55–59
1968
4,856
19,559
15,641
11,367
8,690
6,625
4,380
2,710
1,693
1969
4,114
17,058
13,426
9,501
7,243
5,610
3,666
2,242
1,381
1970
4,816
20,548
15,927
10,972
8,339
6,567
4,241
2,560
1,555
1971
5,222
22,487
17,853
12,509
9,433
7,335
4,685
2,818
1,722
1972
5,879
25,567
20,794
14,812
11,085
8,513
5,379
3,223
1,982
1973
5,722
25,139
20,950
15,162
11,265
8,547
5,341
3,188
1,973
1974
5,782
25,675
21,930
16,118
11,892
8,916
5,511
3,276
2,041
1975
5,737
25,763
22,557
16,829
12,333
9,140
5,587
3,309
2,075
1976
6,440
29,258
26,266
19,883
14,477
10,606
6,413
3,782
2,388
1977
7,446
34,246
31,531
24,207
17,516
12,690
7,589
4,457
2,833
1978
6,965
32,449
30,648
23,853
17,157
12,294
7,271
4,252
2,721
1979
7,329
34,608
33,541
26,455
18,919
13,411
7,844
4,567
2,944
1980
7,247
34,710
34,529
27,588
19,620
13,762
7,960
4,615
2,995
1981
7,216
35,082
35,832
28,991
20,507
14,235
8,143
4,699
3,073
1982
7,503
37,053
38,869
31,836
22,402
15,394
8,708
5,002
3,295
1983
8,783
44,109
47,537
39,402
27,586
18,768
10,498
6,003
3,983
1984
8,318
42,514
47,088
39,486
27,511
18,534
10,251
5,834
3,901
1985
8,411
43,803
49,880
42,302
29,334
19,573
10,704
6,063
4,085
1986
9,116
48,427
56,715
48,633
33,571
22,189
11,999
6,763
4,592
1987
10,189
55,286
66,620
57,743
39,683
25,986
13,894
7,792
5,333
1988
10,759
59,713
74,063
64,871
44,391
28,805
15,226
8,495
5,862
1989
11,827
67,246
85,889
76,003
51,793
33,308
17,407
9,662
6,722
1990
12,374
72,202
95,008
84,916
57,634
36,739
18,981
10,480
7,353
1991
12,229
73,374
99,518
89,819
60,723
38,374
19,599
10,762
7,615
1992
12,332
73,707
98,013
90,126
64,171
41,299
21,430
11,767
7,731
1993
12,371
73,830
96,516
90,250
67,015
43,723
22,974
12,616
7,819
1994
12,252
73,171
94,270
89,481
68,746
45,319
24,060
13,212
7,817
1995
13,219
79,027
100,591
96,726
76,420
50,823
27,210
14,942
8,522
1996
13,599
81,452
102,032
98,879
79,824
53,146
28,588
15,699
8,619
1997
13,971
81,754
96,760
99,347
90,551
62,609
34,404
18,892
9,070
1998
14,641
86,705
102,759
105,817
96,156
66,368
36,605
20,101
9,659
1999
15,099
90,504
107,407
110,928
100,496
69,242
38,333
21,049
10,124
2000
16,585
99,701
118,689
122,583
110,998
76,723
42,544
23,363
11,285
2001
17,253
104,310
120,160
121,423
108,986
72,938
40,080
22,011
9,984
2002
17,314
104,344
121,382
122,989
110,222
73,895
40,233
22,089
9,956
2003
12,253
102,217
114,284
110,976
106,317
92,200
57,397
31,496
14,921
2004
11,533
104,454
118,613
110,690
107,877
93,484
59,406
32,577
17,397
2005
13,206
110,736
124,902
116,018
108,815
96,858
63,140
34,631
16,964
2006
10,916
98,764
123,384
115,729
110,153
101,836
71,083
38,976
20,135
2007
11,621
103,272
123,267
120,256
115,693
103,413
68,644
37,639
19,149
2008
11,846
105,038
125,339
122,569
118,222
105,277
70,217
38,595
19,680
2009
11,686
103,900
123,690
121,805
117,376
104,512
69,785
38,450
19,696
2010
9,918
84,140
115,630
115,675
98,354
90,264
80,758
55,621
29,799
2011
10,114
85,405
113,320
114,533
95,429
86,844
76,550
52,996
28,409
2012
8,277
77,043
100,601
106,332
87,230
79,590
69,402
50,937
28,652
2013
6,240
71,135
95,470
104,206
86,735
77,999
67,391
52,415
30,576
2014
6,074
71,791
98,660
105,661
90,477
77,823
66,518
53,822
32,690
Source and notes: Authors' analysis of Appendix Table 1. 1960: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1961), Table 4; 1970: U.S.
Bureau of the Census (1972), Table 3; 1991, 1997, 1999-2014: BJS National Prisoner Statistics Program. For years
where no data are available for prisoners' ages, data are interpolated from adjacent years. 1991, 1997, and 1999–2006
age groups 45–49 and 50–54 are estimated from the 45–54 age group, 55–59 and 60–64 are estimated from the 55+
age group, all based on 2007 proportions.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
17
Recidivism
To arrive at the estimates of the number of former prisoners and people with felony convictions,
this paper also relies on administrative data on three year return-to-prison recidivism rates. Data on
recidivism are available for years 1983, 1994, and 2005. 1983 data are used for years before 1983, and
linear interpolation is used for years between 1983 and 1994. Data from 1994 are used from 1994 to
2004. Return-to-prison rates by age group are not available in the 2005 update, but re-arrest rates by
age group are available. To estimate the return-to-prison rate for each age group, the ratio of re-
arrest to return-to-prison rates for each age group in 1994 was applied to the 2005 data. Appendix
Table 3 shows estimates of age-group-specific recidivism rates from 1968 to 2014. There are two
sets of recidivism rates, a high and a low estimate which account for recidivism beyond three years
after release.
APPENDIX TABLE 3
Age-Group-Specific Recidivism Rates, 1968–2014
Year
18–19
20–24
25–29
30–34
35–39
40–44
45–49
50–54
55–59
60–64
(a) 3-year Recidivism Rate plus 10 percentage points (high recidivism estimate)
1968–1983
54.9
54.9
53.2
53.0
46.5
40.7
35.7
35.7
35.7
35.7
1984
55.5
55.5
54.0
54.1
47.9
42.5
37.1
37.1
37.1
37.1
1985
56.2
56.2
54.9
55.1
49.3
44.2
38.5
38.5
38.5
38.5
1986
56.8
56.8
55.7
56.2
50.7
46.0
39.8
39.8
39.8
39.8
1987
57.5
57.5
56.6
57.3
52.1
47.7
41.2
41.2
41.2
41.2
1988
58.1
58.1
57.4
58.4
53.5
49.5
42.6
42.6
42.6
42.6
1989
58.8
58.8
58.3
59.4
55.0
51.2
44.0
44.0
44.0
44.0
1990
59.4
59.4
59.1
60.5
56.4
53.0
45.4
45.4
45.4
45.4
1991
60.1
60.1
60.0
61.6
57.8
54.7
46.8
46.8
46.8
46.8
1992
60.7
60.7
60.8
62.7
59.2
56.5
48.1
48.1
48.1
48.1
1993
61.4
61.4
61.7
63.7
60.6
58.2
49.5
49.5
49.5
49.5
1994–2004
62.0
62.0
62.5
64.8
62.0
60.0
50.9
50.9
50.9
50.9
2005–2014
62.3
62.3
62.9
64.2
64.8
61.6
61.6
61.6
61.6
61.6
(b) 3-year Recidivism Rate plus 5 percentage points (low recidivism estimate)
1968–1983
49.9
49.9
48.2
48.0
41.5
35.7
30.7
30.7
30.7
30.7
1984
50.5
50.5
49.0
49.1
42.9
37.5
32.1
32.1
32.1
32.1
1985
51.2
51.2
49.9
50.1
44.3
39.2
33.5
33.5
33.5
33.5
1986
51.8
51.8
50.7
51.2
45.7
41.0
34.8
34.8
34.8
34.8
1987
52.5
52.5
51.6
52.3
47.1
42.7
36.2
36.2
36.2
36.2
1988
53.1
53.1
52.4
53.4
48.5
44.5
37.6
37.6
37.6
37.6
1989
53.8
53.8
53.3
54.4
50.0
46.2
39.0
39.0
39.0
39.0
1990
54.4
54.4
54.1
55.5
51.4
48.0
40.4
40.4
40.4
40.4
1991
55.1
55.1
55.0
56.6
52.8
49.7
41.8
41.8
41.8
41.8
1992
55.7
55.7
55.8
57.7
54.2
51.5
43.1
43.1
43.1
43.1
1993
56.4
56.4
56.7
58.7
55.6
53.2
44.5
44.5
44.5
44.5
1994–2004
57.0
57.0
57.5
59.8
57.0
55.0
45.9
45.9
45.9
45.9
2005–2014
57.3
57.3
57.9
59.2
59.8
56.6
56.6
56.6
56.6
56.6
Source and notes: Beck and Shipley (1989), Langan and Levin (2002), and Durose, Cooper, and Snyder (2014). Data
on recidivism are only available for years 1983, 1994, and 2005. For years before 1983, the rate in 1983 was used; for
years 1994-2004, the rate in 1994 was used; for years between these two, data were estimated by interpolation. For
years 2005-2014, recidivism rates were estimated by applying the ratio of re-arrest to return-to-prison rates for each
group from 1994.
In addition, age-group-specific mortality rates are applied, adjusting up by 20 percent to account for
the high-risk population of former prisoners and people with felony convictions.
27
27
Mortality rates for 2014 are not yet available, so data from 2013 is used (CDC 2016).
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
18
The final estimates of the number of former prisoners by age-group in 2014 are displayed in
Appendix Table 4. These estimates exclude those who were in prison in 2014.
APPENDIX TABLE 4
FP in 2014, by Age Group, Estimated from Releases
18–19
20–24
25–29
30–34
35–39
40–44
45–49
50–54
55–59
60–64
Total
High Recidivism Rate
Number
3,462
103,482
313,719
561,470
729,788
862,169
1,000,498
1,017,025
871,744
674,755
6,138,112
% of total
0.1
1.7
5.1
9.1
11.9
14.0
16.3
16.6
14.2
11.0
100
Low Recidivism Rate
Number
3,921
117,223
355,611
637,129
829,082
979,384
1,132,947
1,147,083
977,343
750,990
6,930,712
% of total
0.1
1.7
5.1
9.2
12.0
14.1
16.3
16.6
14.1
10.8
100
Source and notes: Authors' analysis of Appendix Tables 1, 2, and 3. FP refers to former prisoners.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
19
References
Beck, Allen J. 2000. “Prisoners in 1999.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p99.pdf.
Beck, Allen J. Beck, and Jennifer C. Karberg. 2001. “Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2000.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pjim00.pdf.
Beck, Allen J. and Bernard E. Shipley. 1989. “Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1983.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/rpr83.pdf.
Berg, Mark T., and Beth M. Huebner. 2011. “Reentry and the Ties that Bind: An Examination of
Social Ties, Employment, and Recidivism.” Justice Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp.382–410.
Bonczar, Thomas P. 2003. “Prevalence of Imprisonment in the U.S. Population, 1974–2001.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/piusp01.pdf.
Brown, Jodi M. and Patrick A. Langan. 1997. “Felony Sentences in the United States, 1994.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fsus94.pdf.
——. 1999a. “Felony Sentences in State Courts, 1996.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc96.pdf.
——. 1999b. “Felony Sentences in the United States, 1996.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fsus96.pdf.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2016. “Estimated number of persons supervised by U.S. adult
correctional systems, by correctional status, 1980-2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/keystatistics/excel/Correctional_population_counts_by_status
_1980-2014.xlsx.
Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Prisoner Statistics Program. 2015a. “Estimated number of
persons under correctional supervision in the U.S., 1980-2013.” Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/keystatistics/excel/all_%204_pop_counts_1980_2013.xlsx.
——. 2015b. “Sentenced Prisoners Under the Jurisdiction of State or Federal Correctional
Authorities, December 31, 1978–2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_sentenced%20jurisdiction%20count_t
otal.xlsx.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
20
——. 2015c. “Number of Admissions of Sentenced Prisoners to State or Federal Prisons, 1978–
2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_total%20admissions_total.xlsx.
——. 2015d. “Number of Parole Violation Admissions of Sentenced Prisoners to State or Federal
Prisons, 1978–2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_parole%20violation%20admissions.xls
x.
——. 2015e. “Number of New Court Commitment Admissions of Sentenced Prisoners to State
or Federal Prisons, 1978–2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_new%20court%20commitment%20ad
missions.xlsx.
——. 2015f. “Number of Releases of Sentenced Prisoners From State or Federal Prisons, 1978–
2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_total%20releases_total.xlsx.
——. 2015g. “Number of Conditional Releases of Sentenced Prisoners From State or Federal
Prisons, 1978–2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_conditional%20releases.xlsx.
——. 2015h. “Number of Unconditional Releases of Sentenced Prisoners From State or Federal
Prisons, 1978–2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/nps/resources/documents/QT_unconditional%20releases.xlsx.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1982. “Prisoners in 1981.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p81.pdf.
Cahalan, Margaret Werner. 1986. “Historical Corrections Statistics in the United States, 1850–1984.”
Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/pr/102529.pdf.
Carson, E. Ann and William J. Sabol. 2012. “Prisoners in 2011.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf.
Carson, E. Ann, and Daniela Golinelli. 2013. “Prisoners in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases,
1991–2012.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p12tar9112.pdf.
Carson, E. Ann. 2014. “Prisoners in 2013.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau
of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p13.pdf.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
21
Carson, E. Ann. 2015. “Prisoners in 2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau
of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p14.pdf.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2016. “Deaths: Final Data for 2013.”
Washington, D.C.: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf.
Decker, Scott H., Cassia Spohn, and Natalie R. Ortiz. 2014. “Criminal Stigma, Race, Gender, and
Employment: An Expanded Assessment of the Consequences of Imprisonment for
Employment.” Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244756.pdf.
Durose, Matthew R., Alexia D. Cooper, and Howard N. Snyder. 2014. “Recidivism of Prisoners
Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010.” Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rprts05p0510.pdf.
Durose, Matthew and Patrick A. Langan. 2003. “Felony Sentences in State Courts, 2000.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc00.pdf.
Durose, Matthew and Patrick A. Langan. 2004. “Felony Sentences in State Courts, 2002.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc02.pdf.
Durose, Matthew and Patrick A. Langan. 2007. “Felony Sentences in State Courts, 2004.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc04.pdf.
Durose, Matthew R., David J. Levin, and Patrick A. Langan. 2001. “Felony Sentences in State
Courts, 1998.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc98.pdf.
Ewert, Stephanie, Bryan Sykes and Becky Pettit. 2014. “The Degree of Disadvantage: Incarceration
and Inequality in Education.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science, Vol. 651, pp.24–43.
Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting Program. 2016. “Uniform Crime
Reports.” Washington, D.C.: Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/about-
us/cjis/ucr.
Gilliard, Darrell K. and Allen J. Beck. 1998. “Prisoners in 1997.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p97.pdf.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
22
Glaze, Lauren E. and Lauren M. Maruschak. 2008. “Parents in Prison and Their Minor Children.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/pptmc.pdf.
Gottschalk, Marie. 2015. Caught: The Prison State and the Lockdown of American Politics. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Guerino, Paul, Paige M. Harrison, and William J. Sabol. 2011. “Prisoners in 2010.” Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p10.pdf.
Harlow, Caroline Wolf. 2003. “Education and Correctional Populations.” Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/ecp.pdf.
Harrison, Paige M. and Allen J. Beck. 2001. “Prisoners in 2000.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p00.pdf.
Harrison, Paige M. and Allen J. Beck. 2002. “Prisoners in 2001.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p01.pdf.
Harrison, Paige M. and Allen J. Beck. 2003. “Prisoners in 2002.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p02.pdf.
Harrison, Paige M. and Allen J. Beck. 2004. “Prisoners in 2003.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p03.pdf.
Harrison, Paige M. and Allen J. Beck. 2005. “Prisoners in 2004.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p04.pdf.
Harrison, Paige M. and Allen J. Beck. 2006. “Prisoners in 2005.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p05.pdf.
Harte, Julia. 2016. “U.S. senators release final sentencing reform bill.” Reuters, April 28.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-justice-reform-idUSKCN0XP2PI.
Kaeble, Danielle, Lauren Glaze, Anastasios Tsoutis, and Todd Minton. 2015. “Correctional
Populations in the United States, 2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus14.pdf.
Kaeble, Danielle, Laura M. Maruschak, and Thomas P. Bonczar. 2015. “Probation and Parole in the
United States, 2014.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ppus14.pdf.
Langan, Patrick A. 1996. “Felony Sentences in the United States, 1992.” Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fsus92.pdf.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
23
Langan, Patrick A. and Jodi M. Brown. 1997. “Felony Sentences in State Courts, 1994.” Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc94.pdf.
Langan, Patrick A. and Helen A. Graziadei. 1995. “Felony Sentences in State Courts, 1992.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/Felsent.pdf.
Langan, Patrick A. and David J. Levin. 2002. “Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994.”
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/rpr94.pdf.
Pettit, Becky and Bruce Western. 2004. “Mass Imprisonment and the Life Course: Race and Class
Inequality in U.S. Incarceration.” American Sociological Review, Vol. 69, pp. 151–69.
Rosenmerkel, Sean, Matthew Durose, and Donald Farole, Jr. 2009. “Felony Sentences in State
Courts, 2006 - Statistical Tables.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fssc06st.pdf.
Sabol, William J., Heather Couture, and Paige M. Harrison. 2007. “Prisoners in 2006.” Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p06.pdf.
Sabol, William J., Heather C. West, and Matthew Cooper. 2009. “Prisoners in 2008.” Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p08.pdf.
Schmitt, John, Kris Warner, and Sarika Gupta. 2010. “The High Budgetary Cost of Incarceration.”
Washington, D.C.: Center for Economic and Policy Research.
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/incarceration-2010-06.pdf.
Schmitt, John and Kris Warner. 2010. “Ex-offenders and the Labor Market.” Washington, D.C.:
Center for Economic and Policy Research.
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/ex-offenders-2010-11.pdf.
Shannon, Sarah et al. 2011. “Growth in the U.S. Ex-felon and Ex-prisoner Population, 1948 to
2010.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University. http://paa2011.princeton.edu/papers/111687.
Travis, Jeremy, Bruce Western, and Steve Redblum (Eds.). 2014. The Growth of Incarceration in the
United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies
Press.
Uggen, Christopher, Jeff Manza, and Melissa Thompson. 2006. “Citizenship and Reintegration: The
Socioeconomic, Familial, and Civic Lives of Criminal Offenders.” Annals of the American Academy
of Political and Social Science, Vol. 605 (May), pp. 281-310.
The Price We Pay: Economic Costs of Barriers to Employment for Former Prisoners and People Convicted of Felonies
24
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1961. “U.S. Census of the Population: 1960, Vol 2: Subjects Reports, Part
8A: Inmates of Institutions.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/41927948v2p8a-8c_ch02.pdf.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1972. “U.S. Census of the Population: 1970, Vol 2: Subject Reports, Persons in
Institutions and Other Group Quarters.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/42045398v2p4d4ech5.pdf.
U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. 2001. “Monthly Estimates of the United States
Population: April 1, 1980 to July 1, 1999.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/1990s/tables/nat-total.txt.
U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. 2009. “Monthly Population Estimates for the United
States: April 1, 2000 to December 1, 2010.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/state/totals/2009/tables/NA-EST2009-01.xls.
U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. 2015. “Monthly Population Estimates for the United
States: April 1, 2010 to December 1, 2015.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/totals/2014/index.html.
Vallas, Rebecca, Melissa Boteach, Rachel West, and Jackie Odum. 2015. “Removing Barriers to
Opportunity for Parents with Criminal Records and Their Children.” Washington, D.C.: Center for
American Progress. https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/12/09060720/CriminalRecords-report2.pdf.
Walmsley, Roy. 2016. “World Prison Population List, World Prison Brief 2016.” London, UK: Institute for
Criminal Policy Research.
http://www.prisonstudies.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/world_prison_population
_list_11th_edition.pdf.
West, Heather C. and William J. Sabol. 2008. “Prisoners in 2007.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p07.pdf.
West, Heather C. and William J. Sabol. 2010. “Prisoners in 2009.” Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p09.pdf.
