Several US States Bet That AI Can Solve Their Prison Recidivism Crisis

America's state prison systems need ways "to keep people from returning to prison," reports the Wall Street Journal, "when an estimated 40% end up back behind bars within three years."

Part of the problem comes in the form of filing cabinets, manila folders, and legacy digital databases. In other words, records for a single prisoner might be kept in a dozen places.

Now a group of 19 prison systems are tackling the problem with digital tools and artificial intelligence in some cases. They are contracting with San Francisco nonprofit Recidiviz, whose computer systems bring together prisoner data from its disparate sources into digital dashboards. From there, corrections staff can see information - such as court records and notes from parole-board hearings - about a prisoner or parolee all in one place.

The company says its efforts are working: Recidivism has fallen 16% in the prison population its systems track. It is the result of "just streamlining these workflows and knitting someone's journey together end to end," says Clementine Jacoby, chief executive officer of Recidiviz.

Some criminal-justice groups show that recidivism is trending downward in general, though most of that data is nearly a decade old. The statistics from 11 states stop at 2019, and for four states stop at 2016. With 10 other states, no data was reported.

Reader Discussion Highlights

On the nature of the "bet" on AI:

• Several commenters express skepticism, noting that the phrasing of a "bet" implies uncertainty and risk.
• One commenter argues that the real change is simply keeping high-risk individuals incarcerated longer, not rehabilitating them: "Sounds like they are not releasing people with a high risk of recidivism. In other words, they haven't fixed the problem of recidivism, they've just kept people in jail longer."

On rehabilitation and human nature:

• A commenter states: "There is a certain percentage of the population who are just horrible, evil people. No amount of 'digital tools and artificial intelligence' can change that. Remove them from society, permanently."
• Another responds: "No that is too strong a claim. The best you can say is, 'There are people we don't know how to rehabilitate.' Our understanding of the brain and psychology is so weak that over the next century or so, our knowledge is going to increase dramatically."
• A third notes that people who genuinely want to reform often find themselves unemployable due to their criminal record, creating conditions that drive them back into crime.

On comparative prison models:

• One commenter points to Norway's prison system as a successful model, citing lower recidivism rates achieved through genuine reform efforts rather than punitive measures.
• Another argues: "Look at the prison models of almost any other industrialized Western country - make even the slightest genuine effort to reform people instead of considering them subhuman to be inhumanely tortured by the circumstances of their confinement followed by blocking them from participating in the economy upon release and results will improve."

On privacy and human rights:

• A commenter raises concerns about privacy rights for incarcerated individuals: "Right to privacy is a human right... you cannot lose a human right, regardless of what you do. It can be temporarily restricted if another thing has priority, but it cannot be removed."
• Another counters by questioning the legal basis for a right to privacy in the U.S. Constitution, particularly after recent Supreme Court decisions.

On the practical impact:

• One commenter notes that a 16% reduction in recidivism is reasonable, given that many incarcerated individuals have committed violent crimes and cannot safely be released.
• Another suggests that keeping habitual criminals incarcerated longer would significantly reduce crime, proposing a "10 strikes and you're out" policy.