Second Chances Resource Library

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Washington has two compassionate release programs. “Extraordinary Medical Placement” received a grade of D- and “Extraordinary Release” received a grade of F. Washington’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Tennessee’s three compassionate release programs, “Medical Furlough,” “Executive Clemency Due to Illness or Disability,” and “Geriatric Parole” all received grades of F, and Tennessee’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Pennsylvania’s compassionate release program, “Deferment of Sentence,” received a grade of F, and Pennsylvania’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Oregon’s compassionate release program, “Early Medical Release,” received a grade of F, and Oregon’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Missouri’s two compassionate release programs, “Medical Parole” and “Executive Clemency/Commutation Due to Illness or Age” both received grades of F, and Missouri’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Mayland’s two compassionate release programs, “Medical Parole” and “Geriatric Parole” both received grades of F, and Maryland’s overall grade is also F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. Iowa has no compassionate release program and therefore received an F.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards look at how well states provide compassionate release to medically vulnerable, aging, and terminally ill incarcerated people. They grade each state program on key measures such as eligibility criteria, procedures, release planning, and data collection/public reporting. This infographic shows the overall grade for each state. Unfortunately, the majority of states flunk compassionate release.

This national survey of 1000 registered voters was conducted online October 6–10, 2022. It found that 70% of Americans, across political lines, support compassionate release programs. The poll results provide more detail about this and other related findings.

FAMM’s Compassionate Release Report Cards grade state’s compassionate release mechanisms in seven performance categories. Unfortunately, the majority of states’ programs flunk compassionate release. Those that do not, nonetheless, could stand significant improvement in one or more of the areas we evaluated.

Knowing what doesn’t work is the first step to fixing underperforming programs. The report card project’s aim is to identify barriers to the success of well-intentioned programs that don’t work as intended. We offer this toolkit to lawmakers, advocates, and stakeholders interested in refurbishing the broken programs in their state. We hope that the ideas here will generate improvements in the reach, accessibility, design, and transparency of their state compassionate release programs.