Main content

Post-Conviction Supervision - Judicial Business 2014

A total of 132,858 persons were under post-conviction supervision on September 30, 2014, an increase of nearly 1 percent from one year earlier (up 989 persons).

Persons serving terms of supervised release on that date following release from a correctional institution rose 2 percent to 111,585 and amounted to 84 percent of all persons under supervision.

Table 8 Federal Post-Conviction Supervision Fiscal Years 2010 - 2014
Year Persons Received Total Persons Received Total Less Transfers Persons Removed Total Persons Removed Total Less Transfers Persons Under Supervision on September 30
2010 63,381 59,330 59,157 55,080 127,324
2011 64,227 59,984 60,775 56,569 129,780
2012 66,274 62,096 62,805 58,487 132,340
2013 62,940 58,844 62,463 58,345 131,869






Percent Change 2012 - 2013 0.1 0.5 -2.2 -2.0 -0.7

Cases of persons under supervision in the 12-month period ending September 30, 2014, that involved probation imposed by district and magistrate judges fell 6 percent to 19,696 from the previous year and accounted for 15 percent of all persons under post-conviction supervision. The number of parole cases open at the end of 2014 dropped 5 percent to 1,340 (parole is not available for persons sentenced for federal offenses committed on or after November 1, 1987).

Excluding transfers, the number of persons received for supervision during 2014 rose 1 percent to 59,159. The number of persons released from correctional institutions and received for supervised release increased 2 percent to 48,613. For persons entering the system this year, probation cases decreased nearly 5 percent to 9,318, and parole cases (including cases involving special parole, military parole, and mandatory release) grew 7 percent to 383.

Forty-eight percent of persons under post-conviction supervision had been convicted of drug offenses. Twenty-two percent had been convicted of property offenses. Twelve percent had been convicted of firearms offenses. All of these percentages have remained unchanged since 2012.

The number of post-conviction supervision cases closed (including those involving transfers out of districts and deaths) decreased less than 2 percent to 59,297. The proportion of post-conviction cases terminated successfully grew from 72 percent to 73 percent. Of those cases closed successfully, 20 percent were closed by early termination, up from 18 percent the previous year.

Technical violations led to 62 percent of the 14,766 revocations of post-conviction supervision reported, down from 63 percent in 2013. New offenses accounted for the remaining revocations and for 10 percent of all 54,359 supervision cases terminated (excluding transfers out and deaths).

Comparing data for the last days of fiscal years 2010 and 2014 reveals that the number of persons under post-conviction supervision was 4 percent higher in 2014. Offenders convicted of drug offenses rose from 47 percent to 48 percent of persons under post-conviction supervision. Those convicted of property offenses held steady at 22 percent of the total, and those convicted of firearms offenses held steady at 12 percent of the total. Persons serving terms of supervised release following release from a correctional institution have climbed nearly 9 percent over the past five years. In 2014, they represented 84 percent of all persons under supervision, up from 81 percent in 2010. These increases likely stemmed from earlier growth in criminal defendant filings.

For data on post-conviction supervision, see Table 8 and the E series of tables.

Risk Prediction Index

The Risk Prediction Index (RPI) is an eight-question prediction instrument used by federal probation officers to estimate the likelihood that an offender will be arrested or have supervision revoked during his or her term of supervision. RPI scores range from 0 to 9, with a low score representing a lower risk of reoffending and a high score a higher risk of reoffending.

The average RPI score in 2014 was 3.72, the same as in the previous year. This continued a trend of relative stability that has spanned several years. Notwithstanding this stability, the recent scores are associated with a federal supervision population presenting more criminogenic risk and a greater challenge to probation officers and the courts than five years earlier.

Fiscal Year  Average RPI Score
2010 3.56
2011 3.70
2012 3.70
2013 3.72
2014 3.72

Investigative Reports

The number of full presentence reports prepared by probation officers decreased 4 percent to 70,350. Ninety-six percent of the reports (67,432) were presentence guideline reports, which are comprehensive investigative reports prepared in felony or Class A misdemeanor cases for which the U.S. Sentencing Commission has promulgated guidelines. Modified presentence reports, which are less comprehensive, represented 3 percent of total presentence investigative reports. Non-guideline reports involving petty offenses, reports for treaty transfer cases, and supplemental reports to the Bureau of Prisons constituted 1 percent. Non-guideline reports, which involve offenses for which the Sentencing Commission has not promulgated guidelines, increased from 121 to 136.

Substance Abuse Treatment

Federal offenders receive substance abuse treatment from a variety of sources—state programs, local programs, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and Judiciary-funded substance abuse treatment services. The data presented here reflect only Judiciary-funded substance abuse treatment and exclude costs associated with substance abuse testing.

Of the 77,243 offenders under supervision with court-ordered substance abuse treatment conditions, 19,846 received Judiciary-funded treatment (down 3,946 offenders from 2013). The Federal Judiciary spent an average of $975 per offender (up $81) for a total of $19.3 million (down $2 million). Nationwide, 26 percent of offenders with conditions requiring substance abuse treatment received Judiciary-funded treatment, down from 31 percent in 2013.

For additional information on Judiciary-funded substance abuse treatment services in the federal probation system, see Table S-13.