Adult Correctional Services in Canada, 2008/2009

Warning View the most recent version.

Archived information

Archived information is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please "contact-us" to request a format other than those available.

by Donna Calverley

Majority of admissions to correctional services in 2008/2009 were to custody
Number of admissions to provincial and territorial custody decreased
Time spent in remand increased over last decade
Large proportion of admissions to remand are for offences against the administration of justice
Number of admissions to intermittent sentences increased
Number of admissions to federal custody declined
Women accounted for about one in ten offenders admitted to custody
Aboriginal people represented more than one in five admissions to custody
Aboriginal women represent substantial share of female admissions
Adults in custody were often young, unmarried males with low levels of education
Admissions to community supervision increased
Admissions to conditional sentences grew for second year in a row
Admissions to conditional sentences are largely for non-violent offences
Conditional sentences for drug offences receive longest supervision orders
Fluctuation in admissions to probation over the last decade
Females account for higher proportions of admissions to community sanctions than custody
Aboriginal adults account for lower proportion of admissions to community services than to custody
Except for full parole in Ontario, grant rates for day and full parole decreased
Expenditures on correctional services
Detailed data tables
References
Notes

The federal government and the provincial and territorial governments share the administration of correctional services in Canada, which include custody (sentenced custody, remand and other temporary detention), community-based sentences (e.g., probation and conditional sentences), statutory release of offenders from custody, and parole supervision (see Text Box 1). 

This Juristat provides information on the adult correctional system caseload and costs, including trends in the supervision of adults admitted to and released from custody and community services, and their characteristics.

Text box 1
The administration of correctional services

Adult offenders sentenced to custody terms of two years or more fall under the federal penitentiary system. Federal correctional services are provided by the Correctional Service Canada (CSC), an agency of Public Safety Canada. CSC is responsible for the administration of sentences and the supervision of offenders. The National Parole Board (NPB), which is also an agency of Public Safety Canada, makes decisions to grant, deny, cancel, terminate or revoke different forms of conditional release, such as parole. The NPB operates at the federal level and in the provinces and territories that do not have their own parole board (i.e., all jurisdictions except Ontario and Quebec).

Custody sentences of less than two years, remand (also known as custody before or during trial or sentencing) and community-based sanctions (such as probation and conditional sentences) are all the responsibility of the provinces and territories. Other forms of temporary detention, such as immigration holds, are a federal responsibility. However, it is largely the provinces and territories that provide space in their facilities for these types of holds and do so through exchange of service agreements with the federal government. In addition, two jurisdictions–Quebec and Ontario–have their own parole boards and are authorized to grant releases to offenders serving less than two years in prison.

End of text box

Majority of admissions to correctional services in 2008/2009 were to custody

In 2008/2009, for the 12 jurisdictions that reported data, there were almost 371,800 admissions1 to adult correctional services. Seven in ten admissions were to custody while 3 in 10 were to community supervision. Admissions to remand accounted for the largest proportion of all admissions in 2008/2009 (41%), followed by probation (23%) and provincial and territorial sentenced custody (22%). Approximately 2% of admissions were to federal custody (Table 1; see Table 2 for data for individual provinces and territories).

Text box 2
Information about survey coverage

The analyses are based on administrative data collected through the Adult Correctional Services (ACS) survey and the Integrated Correctional Services Survey (ICSS) which are conducted by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Not all provinces and territories reported complete data for every reference year. Jurisdictions excluded from particular analyses due to non-reporting are noted throughout the article. Within the period of 2004/2005 through to 2008/2009, the following data are not available:

  • All data for Prince Edward Island for 2004/2005 through to 2006/2007
  • All data for Nunavut for 2006/2007 and 2007/2008
  • Community data for the Northwest Territories for all years
  • Data for Nunavut on most serious offence and sentence length ordered for all years
  • Data for Alberta on age at admission, most serious offence and sentence length ordered for custody for all years

Additionally, admission and release data for Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta (community only), and Correctional Service Canada have been collected through the ICSS, a microdata survey which allows for a broader range of analysis.

End of text box

Number of admissions to provincial and territorial custody decreased

In 2008/2009, the number of adults admitted to provincial and territorial sentenced custody increased 1% and the number admitted to remand decreased 1% from the previous year (Table 1). The small change in the number of adults admitted to remand is a change from the overall longer-term trend which saw admissions to remand generally increasing from 1999/2000 to 2007/2008 and admissions to sentenced custody declining.

With more adults being admitted to remand over the years and fewer admitted to provincial and territorial sentenced custody, the number of adults in remand have outnumbered those in sentenced custody since 2004/2005 (Chart 1).2 On any given day in 2008/2009, there were just over 13,500 adults held in remand, compared to almost 10,000 adults held in provincial and territorial sentenced custody (Table 3). Remanded inmates outnumbered sentenced inmates in Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta and British Columbia.

Text box 3
Canada's adult incarceration rate

On any given day in 2008/2009, there were about 37,200 adults in some form of custody in Canada. The majority (64%) of adults in custody were under the responsibility of the provinces and territories (Table 3).

Nationally, there were 141 adults in custody for every 100,000 adults in the population in 2008/2009. The national adult incarceration rate increased 1% from the previous year. Although varied in size, this marks the fourth annual increase in as many years. Incarceration rates increased from the previous year in the majority of jurisdictions, ranging from a 4% increase in Saskatchewan to an 11% increase in the Yukon. Rates declined in Prince Edward Island (-15%) and Ontario (-1%) and remained stable in Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec.3 Since 1999/2000, the incarceration rate has increased 4%, mainly due to increases in remanded adults.4

Typically, adult incarceration rates tend to be highest in the territories and higher in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta than in the other provinces (Table 3).

End of text box

Chart 1
As the number of remanded persons has increased, the number of offenders in sentenced custody has declined

Description

Chart 1 As the number of remanded persons has increased, the number of offenders in sentenced custody has declined

Note: Due to missing data for some years, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and Nunavut have been excluded. 
Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Key Indicator Reports for Adults.

Text box 4
Admissions and average counts: Two ways of counting the use of correctional services

This Juristat makes use of two basic indicators that describe the use of correctional services: the average number, or count, of individuals under correctional supervision and the number of annual admissions to correctional facilities or to community supervision programs.

Counts of the number of persons in custody or serving a sentence in the community at a given point in time provide a snapshot of the daily correctional population and are used to calculate an annual average count. Typically, correctional officials perform daily counts in their facilities and monthly counts of offenders under community supervision. Average counts are more likely to be driven by the length of time under correctional supervision. Average count statistics therefore are more representative of longer term inmates and offenders serving longer term community supervision orders compared to admissions.

Admissions data are collected when an offender enters an institution or community supervision program, and describe and measure the caseflow in correctional agencies over time. While aggregate admissions include all persons passing through the correctional system, they do not indicate the number of unique individuals in the correctional system. The same person can be included several times in the number of admissions. This occurs when the individual moves from one type of correctional service to another (e.g. from remand to sentenced custody) or re-enters the system in the same year.

End of text box

Time spent in remand increased over last decade

In addition to the growth in the number of admissions to remand over the last decade, the length of time served in remand has also increased. In 1999/2000, the median number of days in remand ranged from 2 days in Nova Scotia to 8 days in Ontario. By 2008/2009, the median number of days grew in most jurisdictions, ranging from an increase of 1 day in Quebec and Manitoba to 9 days in the Yukon5 (Table 4).

Large proportion of admissions to remand are for offences against the administration of justice

Among the jurisdictions6 reporting to the ICSS, over 25% of admissions to remand were for offences against the administration of justice (e.g., breach of conditions of probation, bail violations, failure to appear in court). In comparison, 32% were admitted for crimes of violence and 22% for property crimes (Table 5).7  

Text box 5
Bill C-25: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (limiting credit for time spent in pre-sentence custody)

The growing number of admissions to remand, the longer stays in remand, and the declining number of admissions to sentenced custody during the past decade have all been driving forces of change in the custodial population. The role that credit for time served in remand may be contributing to this change has been the focus of recent policy analysis and legislative changes.8 On February 22, 2010, Bill C-25: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (limiting credit for time served), came into effect and provides clear direction in the Criminal Code as to the amount of credit that convicted offenders are to be given at sentencing.

Historically, the Criminal Code indicated that there was judicial discretion in deciding the amount of credit an offender could receive at sentencing for the time spent in remand. In addition to considering the length of time served in remand when deciding on a sentence upon conviction, judges could also factor in the physical conditions of an individual's stay in remand. While both the decision to grant credit for time served and the determination of an appropriate amount of credit rested with the sentencing judge, a general rule of providing two days credit for every day spent in remand was considered appropriate (Martin's Criminal Code, 2009). 

Bill C-25 amended section 719(3) of the Criminal Code to cap the amount of credit that can be given for time served in remand to a ratio of one day for one day unless exceptional circumstances exist. For example, if an offender served nine months in remand and is sentenced to four years imprisonment, the net sentence would be three years and three months (four years minus nine months). As this legislation sets a maximum, a judge may elect to give less credit than one for one, including no credit. Bill C-25 also indicates that, in exceptional circumstances, a judge may grant a ratio of 1.5 to 1, but the court is required to explain the reasons for the additional credit. This flexibility, however, cannot apply to individuals who have violated conditions of bail or have been denied bail because of their criminal record.9

End of text box

Number of admissions to intermittent sentences increased

An intermittent sentence is a custodial sentence that is served within separate time periods, most commonly on weekends. Section 732 of the Criminal Code stipulates that a sentence of 90 days or less may be served intermittently and sets out the circumstances which judges must consider when determining if an intermittent sentence is appropriate.

In 2008/2009, the number of admissions to intermittent sentences increased 6% over the previous year, and grew in 6 of the 10 reporting jurisdictions.10 Compared to 2004/2005, admissions to intermittent sentences have grown 10%, a trend which has largely been driven by Quebec where the number of admissions has grown 48%. 

In the jurisdictions reporting detailed microdata, the profile of offenders admitted to intermittent sentences differed from those admitted to full-time sentenced custody in that they were more frequently male (95% versus 89%), tended to be older (median age of 34.1 years versus 32.7) and were more frequently convicted of impaired driving (14% versus 3%) and other Criminal Code traffic offences (12% versus 4%).11

Number of admissions to federal custody declined

In 2008/2009, there were approximately 8,300 admissions to federal custody, declining 3% from the previous year. This decline marks the first notable decrease in admissions to federal custody since 2003/2004 (Chart 2). 

Chart 2
First notable decrease in admissions to federal custody since 2003/2004

Description

Chart 2 First notable decrease in admissions to federal custody since 2003/2004

Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Adult Correctional Services Survey.

After rising for four consecutive years, the number of offenders in federal prisons on any given day remained stable in 2008/2009 at about 13,300 (Table 3). Federal offenders continued to account for about 4 in 10 adults in custody in Canada.

Text box 6
Correctional facilities

In 2008/2009, there were 234 correctional facilities across Canada, of which 57 were under federal jurisdiction and 177 were under provincial or territorial jurisdiction.1

Of the 57 federal institutions, 17 were deemed as minimum security, 19 as medium, 8 as maximum and 13 as multi-level security. These institutions reported a capacity of 14,761 bed spaces in 2008/2009, which represented approximately 40% of the total institutional capacity in Canada. Since 2000/2001, total federal custodial capacity has increased by 8% (Table 6).

There were also 16 federal community correctional centres, such as half-way houses, in operation at year-end with a capacity of 453 spaces. Between 2000/2001 and 2008/2009, the number of federal community correctional centers has ranged from 16 to 18 and the capacity ranged from 505 to 526 spaces.

The 177 provincial and territorial facilities reported a total operational capacity of 23,843 spaces in 2008/2009. Of these 177 facilities, 97 were classified as secure2 and the remaining 80 were deemed to be minimum security institutions.3 Since 2000/2001, the capacity of the provincial and territorial custodial correctional system has increased by 8%, largely driven by capacity increases in Quebec (+26%) and Ontario (+13%). Newfoundland and Labrador reported a decrease of 25% in its total institutional capacity.

1. Excludes Prince Edward Island and Nunavut.
2. Includes institutions with a combination of maximum, medium, or minimum level of security.
3. Data on provincial and territorial community correctional centers are not collected.

End of text box

Women accounted for about one in ten offenders admitted to custody

In 2008/2009, women accounted for 6% of admissions to federal custody, 12% of admissions to provincial and territorial sentenced custody and 13% of admissions to remand. Among the provinces and territories, there were variations in the proportion of women admitted to sentenced custody. The proportion of female admissions to provincial and territorial sentenced custody ranged from 6% in Nunavut to 15% in Saskatchewan (Table 7).

Aboriginal people represented more than one in five admissions to custody

Aboriginal people had higher levels of representation in correctional services admissions than in the Canadian adult population. In 2008/2009, Aboriginal people accounted for 27% of admissions to provincial and territorial sentenced custody, 18% of admissions to federal custody and 21% of admissions to remand (Table 7). According to the 2006 Census, the Aboriginal representation in the Canadian adult population was 3%.

Based on the 11 jurisdictions that have reported consistently over time, the representation of Aboriginal people among sentenced custody admissions has increased by two percentage points since 2004/2005 (Table 8). 

Aboriginal women represent substantial share of female admissions

Aboriginal women represent a substantial proportion of all women admitted to custody. In 2008/2009, Aboriginal women represented 28% of all women remanded and 37% of women admitted to sentenced custody. In comparison, Aboriginal men represented 20% of remanded men and 25% of men admitted to sentenced custody.12
 
Since 2004/2005, the representation of Aboriginal women among female admissions to sentenced custody has increased by 6 percentage points, while the representation among remand admissions has increased by 2 percentage points. In contrast, there has been a smaller increase for male Aboriginal admissions. From 2004/2005, the representation of Aboriginal men admitted to sentenced custody increased 2 percentage points and the representation of remanded Aboriginal men increased 1 percentage point13 (Chart 3).  

Chart 3
Aboriginal people more highly represented among female admissions, and representation has grown from 2004/2005 to 2008/2009

Description

Chart 3 Aboriginal people more highly represented among female admissions, and representation has grown from 2004/2005 to 2008/2009

Note: Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta, and Nunavut.
Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Adult Correctional Services Survey.

Adults in custody were often young, unmarried males with low levels of education

In the provincial jurisdictions that reported to the ICSS in 2008/2009,14 almost 45% of offenders in custody were under 30 years of age (Table 9).

The majority of individuals in provincial custody in those same jurisdictions were single (62%).15 Offenders in common-law and marital relationships were a minority (14% and 11%, respectively) (Table 9). 

In Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan the population in custody had a relatively low level of education. Forty-five percent of individuals in custody and aged 25 years and older had less than a high school diploma (Table 9). 

When an individual is admitted to custody, tools to assess needs are often used to determine relevant treatment and programming for an offender. Tools are also used to assess the risk of future offending. Saskatchewan and Correctional Service Canada currently report data on offender needs.16 Data are collected for assessed offenders on needs in seven possible domains: attitude, criminal peers and companions (social interaction), drug or alcohol abuse (substance abuse), employment, family/marital relationships (marital/family), community functioning and emotional stability of the individual (personal/emotional). An individual is identified as having a need when the level of need has been rated as medium or high as of their most recent assessment17 (Table 9).

In 2008/2009, the majority of individuals in Saskatchewan custodial services were identified as having a medium or high level of need for all domains, ranging from 55% identified as having treatment needs in the family/marital domain to 92% needing substance abuse treatment. Most individuals in Saskatchewan were identified as having four to five needs. Very few individuals (4%) were identified as having zero to one need.  

In 2008/2009, 86% of individuals in federal custody18 were identified as having treatment needs in the personal/emotional domain, followed by treatment needs for substance abuse, social interaction, attitude and employment. Less than half were assessed as having needs in the family/marital domain (46%) and the community functioning domain (34%) (Table 9).19

Offenders in federal custody were most often single (51%), and almost one-third (30%) were in a common law relationship (Table 9).

Admissions to community supervision increased

In 2008/2009, admissions to community supervision increased by 3%, with increases reported in probation, conditional sentencing and releases from federal custody20 (Table 1).

At the end of any given month in 2008/2009, there were almost 120,000 offenders being supervised in the community. Over 80% of offenders under community supervision were on probation, followed by conditional sentences (11%), federal supervision (6%) and provincial parole (1%) (Table 3).

Admissions to conditional sentences grew for second year in a row

Conditional sentencing was implemented in 1996 and provided the courts with a new sentencing option that permitted a sentence of imprisonment of less than two years to be served in the community.21 One of the objectives of the conditional sentence is to reduce the reliance on incarceration.22

In 2008/2009, there were about 18,400 admissions to conditional sentences, marking an increase of 4% from the previous year (Table 1). Based on the 9 jurisdictions that have consistently reported data over time, the number of admissions to conditional sentences grew steadily from 1999/2000 to 2002/2003, but has fluctuated since (Chart 4).23

Chart 4
Admissions to conditional sentences have fluctuated since 2002/2003

Description

Chart 4 Admissions to conditional sentences have fluctuated since 2002/2003

Note: Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta, Northwest Territories and Nunavut due to missing data.
Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Adult Correctional Services Survey.

At the end of any given month in 2008/2009, there were about 13,500 adults serving a conditional sentence in the community, up 5% from the previous year (Table 3).

Admissions to conditional sentences are largely for non-violent offences

Among jurisdictions reporting to the ICSS, admissions to conditional sentences were most often related to non-violent offences, such as property offences (28%) and drug offences (21%). Drug offences accounted for a higher proportion of admissions to conditional sentences than to other correctional programs. For example, they accounted for 6% of probation admissions, 6% of provincial and territorial sentenced custody admissions and 20% of federally sentenced admissions in 2008/2009. Over one-quarter (26%) of conditional sentence admissions among jurisdictions where data were available were for a violent offence (Table 10).24

Conditional sentences for drug offences receive longest supervision orders

The median number of days ordered amounted to less than 12 months for all offence groupings except drug offences where the median days amounted to exactly 12 months (Table 10). In all jurisdictions, the sentence length of conditional sentences ordered for drug offences was longest compared to all other offences.

There was little difference in the median number of days ordered for property offences and violent offences (184 days and 183 days respectively) (Table 10).

Fluctuation in admissions to probation over the last decade

In 2008/2009, the number of admissions to probation increased 3% from the previous year (Table 1). Admissions to probation increased from 1999/2000 to 2002/2003, when the number of admissions to probation peaked. Admissions then declined in 2003/2004. Since 2004/2005, there has been little fluctuation in the number of admissions to probation (Chart 5).25 

Chart 5
Admissions to probation, 1999/2000 to 2008/2009

Description

Chart 5 Admissions to probation, 1999/2000 to 2008/2009

Note: Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut
Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Adult Correctional Services Survey.

At the end of any given month in 2008/2009, there were about 98,600 adults on probation, up 3% from the previous year (Table 3).

Females account for higher proportions of admissions to community sanctions than custody

Typically, females account for larger proportions of offenders admitted to probation and conditional sentences than to sentenced custody. In 2008/2009, females accounted for 18% of probation intakes, and 19% of those admitted to a conditional sentence (Table 7).

Aboriginal adults account for lower proportion of admissions to community services than to custody

In 2008/2009, Aboriginal adults represented 18% of probation admissions and 20% of admissions to conditional sentence compared to 25% of admissions to provincial and territorial sentenced custody and 21% of remand admissions (Table 7).

Except for full parole in Ontario, grant rates for day and full parole decreased

The rate at which federal offenders were granted day release by the National Parole Board (NPB) decreased 6 percentage points between 2004/2005 and 2008/2009. For provincial offenders, grant rates for day release by the NPB fluctuated between 2004/2005 and 2007/2008, and decreased 18 percentage points from the previous year. The rate at which full parole was granted by the NPB for provincial offenders also saw a notable decrease in 2008/2009. In contrast, the rate at which full parole was granted to offenders in Ontario by the Ontario Provincial Parole Board increased 12 percentage points over the five year period (Table 11).

In 2008/2009, there were about 9,300 conditional releases.26 Most conditional releases (5,676) were to statutory release, followed by releases to day and full parole granted by the NPB (2,340) and provincial parole (1,333).27

The majority of conditional releases are completed 'successfully', meaning they were not terminated. Releases are terminated if there is a breach of conditions or if there is a new offence. Of the over 10,100 completed federal releases28 in 2008/2009, 70% were completed successfully, 23% were terminated due to a breach of conditions and 7% due to commission of a new offence.

There were 476 releases from provincial and territorial custody29 granted by the NPB that were completed in 2008/2009. Over three-quarters (77%) of these releases were completed successfully, while 21% were terminated due to a breach of condition and 2% due to a commission of a new offence.

Expenditures on correctional services

In 2008/2009, adult correctional service expenditures totalled almost $3.9 billion, marking a 7% increase from the previous year when controlling for inflation. Operating expenditures increased for both the provincial and territorial system (+6%), and the federal system (+8%).

Slightly more than half of all correctional service expenditures in 2008/2009 were in the federal system (54%) and the remaining 46% was in the provincial and territorial systems. Operating costs exclude capital expenditures, such as the cost of building new prisons.

Overall, custodial services represented the largest share of expenditures in both the federal (65%) and provincial and territorial systems (79%). The cost of imprisoning people is typically higher than supervising them in the community (e.g. while they are on probation, serving a conditional sentence, etc.) (Table 12). In 2008/2009, the provinces and territories spent slightly over $1.4 billion to operate prisons, compared to about $299 million to supervise offenders in the community.

It is usually more costly to house federal inmates than inmates in the provincial and territorial system. On average, in 2008/2009, institutional expenditures amounted30 to almost $323 per day per federal inmate, compared to about $162 per day per provincial or territorial inmate (Table 13).31 The federal system, which houses and serves offenders sentenced to periods of custody of two years or more, requires higher levels of security as well as longer-term specialized programming (Johnson, 2004). 

Controlling for inflation, average daily inmate costs for federal inmates have increased annually since 2006/2007. In comparison, the provincial and territorial average daily cost per inmate fluctuated between $136 and $143 over same period. (Table 13).

Detailed data tables

Table 1 Number of admissions to adult correctional services, reporting jurisdictions, 2007/2008 and 2008/2009

Table 2 Number of admissions to adult correctional services, by program and jurisdiction, 2008/2009

Table 3 Average counts of persons in adult correctional services, by program and jurisdiction, 2008/2009

Table 4 Median days served in remand and sentenced custody, 1999/2000 to 2008/2009

Table 5 Number of adults admitted to remand by most serious offence, selected jurisdictions, 2008/2009

Table 6 Provincial and territorial, and federal capacity and facilities, 2000/2001 to 2008/2009

Table 7 Characteristics of adult offenders admitted to correctional services, 2008/2009

Table 8 Percentage of admissions to sentenced custody, by Aboriginal identity, 2004/2005 to 2008/2009

Table 9 Characteristics of adults involved in custodial correctional services, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Correctional Service Canada (CSC), 2008/2009

Table 10 Admissions to conditional sentence by most serious offence and median days ordered, selected jurisdictions, 2008/2009

Table 11 Grant rates for full and day parole, 2004/2005 to 2008/2009

Table 12 Operating expenditures of the adult correctional system, 2008/2009

Table 13 Institutional and average daily cost of persons in provincial, territorial and federal custody, current and constant 2002/2003 dollars, 1999/2000 to 2008/2009

References

Casavant, L. 2009. "Bill C-25: Truth in Sentencing Act." LS-638E. Parliamentary Information and Research Service. Library of Parliament.
www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/LegislativeSummaries/40/2/c25-f.pdf (accessed March 23, 2010).

Johnson, S. 2004. "Adult Correctional Services in Canada, 2002/03." Juristat. Vol. 24, no. 10. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-XIE. Ottawa.
www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x2004010-eng.pdf (accessed March 23, 2010).

Kong, R. and V. Peters, 2008. "Remand in adult corrections and sentencing patterns." Juristat. Vol. 28, no. 9. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X. Ottawa. www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2008009/article/10706-eng.htm (accessed March 23, 2010).

MacKay, R. 2005. "Conditional Sentences." PRB 05-44E. Parliamentary Information and Research Service. Library of Parliament.

Martin's Annual Criminal Code, 2009. Canadian Law Book. Aurora, Ontario.

Statistics Canada. 2009. "Adult and youth correctional services: Key indicators, 2008/2009.' The Daily. December 8, 2009. Ottawa, Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/091208/dq091208a-eng.htm (accessed March 23, 2010).

Notes

  1. The Northwest Territories and Nunavut are excluded due to missing data.
  2. For more information on average counts see; Statistics Canada, Daily, December 8, 2009. 'Adult and youth correctional services: Key indicators'.
  3. Excludes Nunavut.
  4. Excludes Prince Edward Island and Nunavut.
  5. In Newfoundland and Labrador, remand admission data exclude remands involving short periods of incarceration as these are managed by the RCMP. This may explain why longer remand stays are reported by this province.
  6. Includes Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Saskatchewan.
  7. In Newfoundland and Labrador, remand admission data exclude remands involving short periods of incarceration as these are managed by the RCMP. This may partly explain the higher proportion of admissions for violent offences.
  8. See Kong and Peters, 2008.
  9. For more information see Casavant, 2009.
  10. Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta and Nunavut.
  11. Includes Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Saskatchewan.
  12. Excludes Prince Edward Island.
  13. Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta, and Nunavut.
  14. Provinces providing custodial information to the Integrated Correctional Services Survey (ICSS), include Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Saskatchewan. These jurisdictions provide microdata, which allow analysis at the person level.
  15. Analysis is based on the most recent admission of 75,559 individuals involved in custody in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Saskatchewan. Proportions are presented only for individuals for whom characteristics are known and reported.
  16. Other provincial jurisdictions reporting to the ICSS do not yet have the ability to record needs information in their administrative systems, and/or the ability to transfer the information to the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics.
  17. Minimum number of reported needs in Saskatchewan is 0; maximum number of needs is 6.
  18. Analysis is based on the most recent admission of 22,656 individuals involved in federal custody. Proportions are presented only for individuals for whom characteristics are known and reported.
  19. Minimum number of federal needs reported is 0; maximum number is 7.
  20. Releases from federal custody represent movement from custody to federal conditional release and include provincial and territorial and federal offenders on day parole and full parole, and federal offenders on statutory release.
  21. There are additional restrictions to conditional sentences which are set out in section 742.1 of the Criminal Code. Among the restrictions for its use are offences for which a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment applies, even if it is for less than two years.
  22. For more information see MacKay, 2005.
  23. Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta, Northwest Territories and Nunavut.
  24. Data are from the Integrated Correctional Services Survey (ICSS) and include Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta data only.
  25. Excludes Prince Edward Island, Alberta, Northwest Territories and Nunavut.
  26. A conditional release is a gradual release of an inmate into a community program, such as day parole, full parole or statutory release.
  27. For more information of conditional releases and outcomes. See Tables 14, 35, 39 and 40 of the Adult Correctional Services (ACS) survey 2008/2009 Reference Tables.
  28. Includes day parole, full parole and statutory release.
  29. Includes day and full parole.
  30. Trends in expenditures are examined in constant dollars to take inflation into account and to allow for year to year comparison.
  31. Daily offender cost is calculated by dividing the operational expenditures by the 'total days stayed'. 'Total days stay' is based on average daily (actual-in) counts of inmates multiplied by the number of days in the year. Custodial services operating costs constitute total operating expenditures for government facilities as well as purchased services related to institutional activities.
Date modified: