Sources and methodology

Has discretionary parole for new offenses (20 pts)

16 states have abolished discretionary parole for most or all new offenses, although some of these states may have retained a system of mandatory parole for the end of some sentences and all would have retained discretionary parole for offenses committed before the change in the law. These 16 states received a final score of F-. For more on this, see the methodology.

Would mandate face-to-face hearings (15 pts)

Does the board hold face-to-face parole hearings with parole applicants or are applicants only able to meet with board staff, etc.? (For more on the perils of video meetings, see footnote 1.)

Would provide method to challenge incorrect information (6 pts)

Does the board allow parole applicants to rebut information they claim is factually incorrect?

Prohibits input from prosecutors (3 pts)

Does the board prohibit prosecutors from offering testimony at parole hearings? For more on this and why we gave some states partial credit, see our methodology.

Prohibits input from crime survivors (3 pts)

Does the board prohibit survivors of violent crimes from offering testimony at parole hearings? (For more the role that survivors should play, see our article Should prosecutors and survivors have a voice in shortening long sentences? )

Would allow input from applicant, family, community, employers, prison admin (3 pts)

Does the board allow family members and those with day-to-day knowledge of the parole applicant (such as correctional staff) to provide testimony at parole hearings? For more on this, see the relevant section of the report.

Portion of the incarcerated population that the legislature allows the parole board to consider for release by restricting what offense/sentence types are eligible for parole

What percentage of the incarcerated population were eligible to have parole hearings in 2016? For more on the value and weaknesses of this measure as a way to determine how much discretion the legislature gives parole boards, see the methodology.

Employs presumptive parole policies (9 pts)

To what extent does the state offer presumptive parole, which releases incarcerated individuals at their first parole eligibility date without a hearing if they accomplish set criteria?

Does not deny parole for subjective reasons (6 pts)

Ideally, states would prohibit parole boards from denying release for subjective reasons. For more on the importance of objectivity and why we gave some states partial credit, see our methodology.

Would mandate yearly reviews (3 pts)

Does the board review applicants within one year after a denial? For more on the importance of timely re-hearings, see the relevant section of the report.

Would provide case managers to assist individuals (10 pts)

Are case managers provided to parole applicants to assist them prepare for parole hearings?

Would provide individuals with access to all records (10 pts)

Does the board allow parole applicants access to the records and information the board relies on to arrive at its decision?

Would incorporate parole guidelines (8 pts)

Does the board have guidelines based on best practices that it employs to arrive at parole decisions, and are those guidelines made public?

Would require parole board to file yearly report to committee with oversight about parole denials and provide justifications (6 pts)

Does the board file yearly public reports that have statistical measures and explanations of any deviations from parole guideline recommendations? For more on why this detail is essential and why we gave zero points to states that publish statistical reports that do not explain denials, see the methodology.

Would have meaningful appeal process (6 pts)

Are incarcerated individuals who are denied parole offered a meaningful process, administratively or statutorily, to appeal that denial?

Points added for

We gave extra credit for some specific policies that are very likely to help people succeed while on parole. For more, see the extra credit discussion in the methodology

Points deducted for

We removed points for some specific policies that are very likely to make it harder people too succeed while on parole. For more, see the extra credit discussion in the methodology