FORUM on Corrections Research

Re-profiling the drug offender population in Canadian federal corrections

Larry L. Motiuk and Ben Vuong¹
Research Branch, Correctional Service of Canada

This article replicates a 2000 comparison between drug offenders serving sentences in federal corrections for trafficking, importation, cultivation (including production) and/or possession offences by institutional and conditional release status, trends in admissions and releases, criminal histories, and identified needs at admission as well as on conditional release. Additional comparisons are made between the drug offender groupings and non-drug offenders on type of offence and amount of time served in custody.

Comprehensive information for 2005 was obtained for re-profiling the federal drug offender population² through the Correctional Service of Canada’s Offender Management System, Offender Intake Assessment process,³ and Community Intervention Scale.⁴

National and regional distribution

A review of the Correctional Service of Canada’s Offender Management System (OMS) on December 31, 2005, identified 5,588 drug offenders under federal jurisdiction, representing about one quarter (26%) of the total federal offender population. Breaking this down, 2,360 offenders among the total federal offender population (or 11%) were serving sentences for drug trafficking, 493 (or 2%) for importation, 286 (or 2%) for cultivation, and 3,826 (or 18%) for possession of illicit drugs. Note that we included possession of narcotics (or other illicit substances) for the purpose of trafficking with drug trafficking. Note also that an offender may be serving a sentence for more than one drug offence.

The Service’s Quebec region accounts for the most drug offenders, being responsible for slightly more than one third of the drug offender population. Only in the Quebec region did drug offenders represent more of the federal offender population than was the case nationally.

Institutional population (stock)

The end-of-2005 review also determined that there were 2,654 drug offenders in federal institutions, representing 22.6% of the overall institutional population. More specifically, 1,053 offenders among the overall institutional population (or 9%) were serving sentences for drug trafficking, 133 (or 1.1%) for importation, 158 (or 1.4%) for cultivation/manufacturing, and 1,991 (or 17%) for possession of illicit drugs. Again, some offenders might be represented in more than one drug offence category.

Slightly more than one quarter of federally incarcerated drug offenders were held in maximum-security institutions, about one half were in medium-security institutions and the rest were in minimum-security institutions.

Conditional release population (stock)

This review determined that there were 2,934 drug offenders on conditional release, representing 30.5% of federal offenders on conditional release. Specifically, 1,307 offenders among the conditional release population (or 13.6%) were serving sentences for drug trafficking, 360 (or 3.7%) for importation, 228 (or 2.4%) for cultivation, and 1,835 (or 19.1%) for possession of illicit drugs.

About one half of drug offenders were on full parole, one seventh on day parole and one third on statutory release.

Drug offender population trend

The federal drug offender population has continued to grow - particularly in the conditional release population. Over a 10-year period (December, 31, 1995, to December 31, 2005), the total drug offender population has increased by 5.2%. The drug offender population in institutions has increased by nearly 3%, and the drug offender population under community supervision has increased by 8% (see Table 1).

Table 1: National distribution of drug offenders

National distribution of drug offenders	End of 1995	End of 2000	End of 2005	10-year growth	10-year % change
Institutional	2,590	2,548	2,654	+64	+2.5
Community	2,720	3,231	2,934	+214	+7.9
Total	5,310	5,779	5,588	+278	+5.2

Drug offender admissions (flow)

The absolute number of drug offenders in federal institutions declined very slightly, by 0.3%, over the 2005 calendar year (see Table 2). The Quebec region experienced a slight decrease in the absolute number of drug offenders (-1.3%). The Atlantic, Ontario, Prairie and Pacific regions showed increased numbers of drug offenders in federal custody (+4.8%, +0.3%, +1.3% and +9.2%, respectively).

Table 2: Regional distribution of the federal drug offender institutional population and admissions (2004-2005)

Region	Institutional population 2004 [stock]	Admissions 2005 [flow]	Institutional population 2005 [stock]	Flow-to-stock ratio	Growth %
Atlantic	252	261	264	1:1.01	+4.8
Quebec	991	666	978	1:1.47	-1.3
Ontario	559	571	561	1:0.98	+0.3
Prairie	559	613	566	1:0.89	+1.3
Pacific	261	219	285	1:1.30	+9.2
Total	2,662	2,330	2,654	1:1.14	-0.3
	1999	2000	2000	2000	1999-2000
	2,574	2,324	2,548	1:1.19	-.01

When you examine "flow-to-stock ratios" (the institutional population divided by the number of admissions), you find that, for every admission during 2005, at year-end there were 1.14 drug offenders in federal custody. Moreover, the Quebec and Pacific regions retained a greater number of drug offenders in federal custody relative to the other regions. The Prairie region retained the least number of drug offenders relative to the other regions.

Drug offender releases (flow)

The number of drug offenders supervised under some form of conditional release increased by 1.4% over the 2005 calendar year (see Table 3). Note that any offender who was at the end of their sentence was removed from the release figures.

Table 3: Regional distribution of the federal drug offender conditional release population and releases (2004-2005)

Region	Conditional release population 2004 [stock]	Releases 2005 [flow]	Conditional release population 2005 [stock]	Flow-to-stock ratio	Growth %
Atlantic	270	274	298	1:1.09	+10.4
Quebec	931	811	961	1:1.18	-0.32
Ontario	728	573	722	1:1.26	-0.80
Prairie	629	661	629	1:0.95	0.0
Pacific	336	260	324	1:1.25	-3.6
Total	2,894	2,579	2,934	1:1.14	+1.4
	1999	2000	2000	2000	1999-2000
	3,185	2,556	3,231	1:1.26	+1.4

When you examine "flow-to-stock ratios" (the conditional release population divided by the number of releases), you find that, for every release during 2005, at year-end there were 1.14 drug offenders under community supervision. Interestingly, this is exactly the same figure we found for the custodial population. Regionally, in 2005, the Atlantic region experienced the most growth in the absolute number of drug offenders under community supervision, with an increase of 28 cases. An examination of the 2005 regional flow-to-stock ratios, however, reveals that the Ontario and Pacific regions experienced the lowest retention of drug offenders under community supervision relative to the number of community supervision releases.

Overlap with other major offence categories

To examine overlap with three major offence categories - homicide, sex offences and robbery - across the four drug-offender groupings, we separated the end-of-December 2005 institutional (stock) and conditional release (stock) populations (see Table 4).

We can see from Table 4 that drug offenders in federal custody who were serving sentences for drug trafficking and possession were also likely to be serving sentences for other offences, particularly robbery.

Table 4: Distribution of overlap with other major offence categories

Population/ Offence	Trafficking	Importation	Cultivation	Possession
Institutional	9.2% (1,053)	1.2% (133)	1.4% (158)	17.3% (1,991)
Homicide	11.6% (122)	1.5% (2)	8.9% (14)	10.0% (199)
Sex offence	6.5% (75)	0.9% (0)	3.7% (9)	8.8% (135)
Robbery	33.9% (372)	8.0% (13)	23.2% (35)	46.9% (817)
Drug:
Trafficking	-	19.5% (26)	39.2% (62)	25.8% (513)
Importation	2.7% (26)	-	2.5% (4)	1.6% (32)
Cultivation	5.9% (62)	3.8% (4)	-	4.9% (98)
Possession	48.7% (513)	24.1% (32)	62.0% (98)	-
Conditional release	13.3% (1,307)	3.7% (360)	2.3% (228)	11.2% (1,099)
Homicide	5.7% (75)	0.03% (1)	3.0% (7)	9.0% (99)
Sex	2.2% (29)	0.03% (1)	1.8% (4)	5.2% (57)
Robbery	14.9% (195)	3.3% (12)	11.9% (27)	36.9% (401)
Drug:
Trafficking	-	17.5% (63)	30.2% (69)	47.9% (526)
Importation	4.8% (63)	-	1.8% (4)	4.5% (49)
Cultivation	5.3% (69)	1.1% (4)	-	13.0% (143)
Possession	40.2% (526)	13.1% (49)	62.7% (143)	-

Time served

The average time served (at the end of 2005) for drug offenders in federal custody was about 2.2 years, ranging from .01 to 36 years. (Cases whose conditional release was revoked and who therefore had to serve the remainder of their sentence in custody were removed from the analyses.) On conditional release, drug offenders had accumulated, on average, 3.9 years of time served (total of time spent incarcerated as well as time spent on conditional release), ranging from .1 to 35 years.

Not surprisingly, the average amount of time served for drug offenders across the various groupings (see Table 5) was found to be substantially shorter than that of non-drug offenders (e.g., homicide, sex, robbery), in institutions and on conditional release.

Table 5: Average time served (years) across drug and non-drug offender groupings

Population	Trafficking	Importation	Cultivation	Possession	Non-drug
Institutional	2.2 (.03 to 33)	1.1 (.07 to 4)	1.2 (.06 to 10)	2.0 (.01 to 36)	4.2 (.01 to 45)
Conditional release	4.9 (0.2 to 35)	5.0 (0.2 to 34)	2.0 (0.4 to 22)	2.9 (0.1 to 34)	8.6 (0.2 to 65)

Profiling men and women drug offenders

The Correctional Service of Canada’s Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) process collects and stores information on every federal offender’s criminal and mental health background, social situation and education, factors relevant to determining criminal risk (such as number/variety of convictions and previous exposure/response to youth and adult corrections) and factors relevant to identifying offender needs (such as employment history, family background, criminal associations, addictions and attitudes). While the results help determine what type of institution an offender will be placed in and the content of his or her correctional plan, we can also use this information in aggregate form to get a comprehensive profile of the federal offender population by looking at a distribution of selected criminal history and case need variables.

In November 1994, the OIA process was implemented Service-wide. Six years later, in our first profile of the drug offender population, we extracted case-specific information on available OIAs contained in OMS. In this, our newly updated profile, we focused on men and women offenders who had full OIAs and were under federal supervision on December 31, 2005.

Criminal history

As mentioned, the OIA process collects extensive information on each federal offender’s criminal history at the time of admission to federal custody. In Table 6, we present comparative statistics on selected criminal history variables for federally sentenced men and women offenders across four drug-offender groupings.

Table 6: Criminal histories across drug offender groupings

Variable	Trafficking		Importation		Cultivation		Possession
	Men (1,835)	Women (115)	Men (330)	Women (82)	Men (347)	Women (3)	Men (3,163)	Women (141)
Young offender history
Previous offences	39.1%	22.6%***	10.6%	11.0%ns	29.1%	-	49.0%	23.2%***
Community supervision	30.0%	18.3%***	7.1%	8.5%ns	19.9%	-	39.4%	19.3%***
Open custody	20.9%	9.6%***	4.0%	3.7%ns	13.3%	-	27.7%	10.7%***
Secure custody	22.8%	7.8%***	5.5%	4.9%ns	14.8%	-	29.6%	17.1%*
Adult offender history
Previous offences	87.3%	73.9%***	52.5%	36.6%***	83.9%	-	88.2%	72.3%***
Community supervision	77.4%	61.7%***	38.4%	23.2%*	72.0%	-	79.1%	58.9%***
Provincial term(s)	70.7%	56.1%***	29.7%	17.1%*	65.6%	-	74.4%	49.3%***
Federal term(s)	45.5%	17.4%***	12.8%	1.2%***	33.4%	-	44.5%	12.8%***
Note: n’s may vary slightly due to missing cases.
Statistical significance men versus women: *** The difference is statistically significant p < .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05; ns = not significant.

With respect to drug trafficking offenders, there were statistically meaningful differences between men and women offenders on each of the selected young- and adult-offender-history variables. As a group, men offenders serving sentences for drug trafficking had more extensive criminal history backgrounds than their women counterparts.

Among drug importation offenders, there were no statistically meaningful differences between men and women offenders at admission in their young offender histories. Men offenders were, however, more likely than women offenders to have an adult offender history.

While there was a negligible number of women offenders for whom a drug cultivation/manufacturing offence was recorded, the majority of men in this category had extensive previous adult criminal histories.

Men and women drug offenders serving sentences for drug possession were found to have had previous young offender histories and extensive previous adult criminal histories. These results were more pronounced among men offenders.

Identified needs at admission

Earlier, we noted that the Service has an automated means of collecting information on offenders’ criminogenic needs via the OIA process. This information is organized into seven need domains with a rating determined on the offender’s level of need in each of the seven domains (see Table 7) as well as an overall need level reflecting the offender’s situation at the time of admission to federal custody. OMS currently contains the identified need levels gathered since implementation of the OIA Case Needs Identification and Analysis (now known as the Dynamic Factors Identification and Analysis). This information can be retrieved at any time to provide caseload snapshots.

Among drug trafficking offenders, there were statistically meaningful differences between men and women offenders at admission in the areas of employment, marital/family relations, associates and attitude. Among drug importation offenders, there were statistically meaningful differences between men and women offenders at admission in every need area except employment (see Table 7). More specifically, men drug-trafficking and importation offenders were more likely than their women counterparts to be needy in the areas of associates and attitude, whereas women offenders were more likely to be needy in the areas of employment and marital/family relations.

Table 7: Identified needs of drug offenders at admission

Variable	Trafficking		Importation		Cultivation		Possession
	Men (2,054)	Women (117)	Men (369)	Women (85)	Men (362)	Women (1)	Men (3,532)	Women (97)
Employment	46.7%	70.9%***	41.5%	48.2%ns	33.2%	-	52.7%	67.8%***
Marital/ Family	23.8%	40.2%***	9.8%	23.5%***	14.9%	-	27.9%	39.9%**
Associates	82.2%	73.5%*	80.0%	70.6%*	78.7%	-	76.3%	70.6%ns
Substance abuse	56.9%	64.1%ns	26.6%	14.1%*	47.0%	-	68.9%	65.7%ns
Community functioning	26.1%	25.6%ns	20.1%	36.5%**	11.6%	-	28.8%	21.0%*
Personal/ Emotional	66.0%	65.0%ns	52.9%	45.9%***	49.2%	-	76.1%	66.4%**
Attitude	71.3%	45.3%***	61.0%	21.2%***	70.2%	-	69.2%	39.9%***
Note: Statistical significance men versus women: *** The difference is statistically significant p < .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05; ns = not significant.

There was only one woman offender for whom a drug cultivation/manufacturing offence was recorded. Men offenders in this category were most needy in the area of associates.

Although men and women drug offenders serving sentences for drug possession were found to be needy in most areas, women offenders were more likely to have been experiencing difficulties in the areas of employment and marital/family relations at the time of admission to federal custody. Men offenders were more likely to be needy in the areas of personal/emotional orientation and attitude.

Identified needs on conditional release

Since 1993, the Service has had an automated means of monitoring offenders’ risk/needs levels in the community. Historically, OMS has contained the overall risk/need ratings and identified need levels gathered since implementation of the Community Risk/Needs Management Scale (now known as the Community Intervention Scale or Reintegration Potential Reassessment). This scale provides an overview of an offender’s risk and need level at the time of their release into the community. This information can be retrieved at any time to provide a snapshot of the conditional release population.

Table 8: Identified needs of drug offenders on conditional release

Variable	Trafficking		Importation		Cultivation		Possession
	Men (1,028)	Women (55)	Men (211)	Women (57)	Men (177)	Women (1)	Men (1,411)	Women (67)
Employment	35.9%	58.2%***	29.4%	42.1%ns	27.1%	-	42.8%	53.7%ns
Marital/ Family	18.0%	34.6%**	11.0%	24.6%**	12.9%	-	21.7%	36.9%**
Associates	58.5%	56.4%ns	50.0%	66.7%*	60.1%	-	62.1%	59.1%ns
Substance abuse	39.3%	49.1%ns	18.7%	14.0%ns	34.8%	-	54.0%	67.2%*
Community functioning	21.2%	20.0%ns	16.3%	38.6%***	10.7%	-	23.2%	21.5%ns
Personal/ Emotional	47.7%	45.5%ns	41.4%	42.1%ns	40.7%	-	59.7%	53.7%ns
Attitude	40.6%	36.4%ns	36.4%	19.3%*	45.4%	-	47.4%	38.5%ns
Note: Statistical significance men versus women: *** The difference is statistically significant p < .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05; ns = not significant.

In Table 8, we see that, overall, drug trafficking offenders on conditional release were most needy in the areas of employment, associates, substance abuse and personal/emotional orientation. Among drug importation offenders, the major areas of difficulty were in employment, associates and personal/emotional orientation. Conditionally released offenders serving sentences for drug cultivation/manufacturing (men only; there was only one woman with this offence) were most needy in the areas of associates and attitude. Finally, offenders serving sentences for drug possession were found to be needy in most areas while on conditional release.

Among the various drug-offender groupings, there were statistically meaningful gender differences in some of the need areas. Overall, women drug-trafficking offenders on conditional release were significantly more likely than their male counterparts to have difficulties in employment and marital/family relations.

Women offenders serving sentences for importation were significantly more likely than their male counterparts to be needy in the areas of marital/family relations, associates and community functioning. Men offenders in this offence category were more likely to have difficulties in the area of attitude.

Finally, conditionally released women offenders serving sentences for drug possession were more likely than men offenders to be experiencing problems in the areas of marital/family relations and substance abuse.

Discussion

The capacity to produce meaningful, timely and accurate profiles of selected offender characteristics has served to raise awareness about the composition of the federal drug offender population.

In Canada, drug offenders comprise a substantial proportion of those under federal supervision. As a group, drug offenders in federal corrections are likely to have been convicted of another serious offence (such as robbery), have had previous involvement with the criminal justice system as a youth and/or adult, and have some unique criminogenic needs (e.g., employment, negative peer attachments).

Such findings point to the need for offering specialized programs and services to drug offenders. Moreover, careful attention should be paid to these individuals while in custody and during the reintegration process.

---