PDF OF ONE PAGER | PDF OF FULL REPORT
Authors: Chief Paul Pazen and Steven L. Byers, PhD.
The Impact on the Economy
Few people in Colorado have not directly experienced crime. From property offenses to violent crimes, every crime leaves a traumatized victim. Whether the wounds are physical, psychological, or financial, it is important to acknowledge the profound effects that a crime can have on its victims. At Common Sense Institute, our goal is to address the economic impact of crime while remaining conscious of the suffering that it causes.
This report analyzes the cost of juvenile crime in Colorado and its economic impact. This study encompasses the period of 2010 to 2023 and the data comes from Colorado Crime Statistics (2023).
Colorado’s juvenile crime trends tell a mixed story. On the one hand, youth crime rates have fallen in the last 15 years as property crime rates fall, follow. On the other hand, violent youth crime has risen. Meanwhile, the number of juveniles held in arrested and detained has fallen from a combination of alternative sentencing, diversion programs, and increased parole.
It is violent crime that costs more.
Juvenile crime results in direct or tangible costs including unrecovered stolen property, damaged property, victims’ out-of-pocket medical expenses, the cost of police, courts and correctional institutions, and lost earnings by both victims and juvenile perpetrators who are arrested and convicted.
Juvenile crime also inflicts indirect or intangible costs like the pain and suffering of victims, reduced quality of life for everyone, and lower levels of investment and lower property values.[i] Intangible costs are difficult to measure with precision but, among those who have estimated them, there is a consensus that the intangible cost of juvenile crime far exceeds the tangible cost.
Reducing current rates of murder, rape, assault, theft, and robbery by juveniles would produce a wide range of savings and other benefits to families, individuals, property owners and taxpayers. All estimates of the cost of crime in this report are adjusted for inflation and are reported in 2020 dollars so that costs can be compared across years. In 2021, after an extraordinary rise in crime, CSI estimated a total cost of crime of $3.3 billion.
Key Findings
- The juvenile crime rate in Colorado was 29.7 % lower in 2022 than in 2008 (see Figure 8).
- Since 2010, juvenile crime rates have decreased overall but have increased for crimes against person: murder (210%), aggravated assault (17%), and robbery (12.3%).
- The total cost of police-reported juvenile crime is $1.03 billion, and the total cost of all juvenile crime is $3.31 billion (see the following graph).
- Tangible police-reported juvenile crime: $333 million
- Tangible total juvenile crime: $445 million
- Intangible police-reported juvenile crime: $693.1 million
- Intangible total juvenile crime: $2.86 billion
- The total cost of juvenile crime in 2023 was equivalent to $566 per Coloradan.
- The tangible cost of juvenile crime is $445.4 million.
- The intangible cost of juvenile crime is $2.86 billion.
- For every 1% decrease in the number of crimes committed by juveniles, the state adds:
- 57 jobs
- $6.5 million to GDP
- If the population of the Department of Youth Services (DYS) were set to zero (no one is sentenced to the DYS ), total employment would fall by 183 jobs and GDP would fall by $20 million.
- If juvenile crime were to decrease to zero, the economic impact of increased quality of life would add $308 million to GDP and increase employment by 2,978.
- If insurance premiums were to decrease by 2.6% as a result of juvenile crime falling to zero, consumers would have $113.8 billion more in their pockets to spend. It would also add 2,977 jobs and increase GDP by $366 million.
- The total impact of zero crime would be an increase of 5,722 jobs and a $654 million increase in GDP.
- The highest concentration of juvenile crime (share of juvenile crime/share of juvenile population) is highest in Adams County, followed by Fremont, Jefferson, Mesa, and Boulder.
- Adams , El Paso, Jefferson, and Denver Counties combined account for 58% of all juvenile crimes but only 44% of the state’s population.
- The number of supervised individuals by the Division of Youth Services has declined 70% since 2010.
Overview of the Juvenile Population in Colorado
Figure 1 shows the share of the juvenile and adult population from 2010 to 2022 based on U.S. Census data. The share of the juvenile population has decreased from 24.4% in 2010 to 20.7% in 2022.
Figure 1 – Juvenile and Adult Share of Colorado’s Population
Figure 2 shows the age distribution of the juvenile population over time. The juvenile population for ages 0 to 9 has gone from 56.8% in 2010 to 52% in 2022 while ages 10 to 17 has increased from 43.2% in 2010 to 48% in 2022. The juvenile population ages 15 to 17 has increased from 16.5% to 18.2%.
Figure 2 – Age Distribution of Juvenile Population
Figure 3 shows the share of male and female juveniles ages 10 to 17. The distributional share of females and males has shifted slightly since 2010, with a four percentage point decrease in the male share from 51.6% to 51.2% and a four percentage point increase in the female share from 48.4% to 48.8%.
Figure 3 – Female vs. Male Share of Juvenile Population ages 10 to 17.
Data on Juvenile Crime Rates
Juvenile crime data for this report comes from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.[ii] Estimates of the number of juvenile crimes are most likely underestimated by as much as 51% due to missing and unknown data related to the age of offenders. Figure 4 shows the number of reported crimes for ages under 18 and 18 and over, as well as the total for all ages. Assuming that the remainder of reported crime, 186,510 was distributed between under 18 and 18 and over, there would be 37,670 crimes committed by under 18 and 327,993 by 18 and over, each 51% larger than the reported number of crimes for the two age groups. However, there is no evidence to support the assumption that the missing and unknown data is distributed in the same way as those under 18 and 18 and over reported crimes, therefore this report relies on the reported crimes by age.
Figure 4 – Number of Reported Crimes (Under 18, 18 and over, and Total – all Offenders ages)
| Number of Crimes 2023 | ||||||
| Total -All Offender Ages | Under 18 | 18 and over | Sum of Under 18 and 18 and over | Remainder | Juvenile Share of Total Crime | |
| As Reported | 365,663 | 18,456 | 160,697 | 179,153 | 186,510 | 10.3% |
| Scaled up to Account for Missing and Unknown | 365,663 | 37,670 | 327,993 | 365,663 | ||
| Difference between Reported and scaled up. | 19,214 | 168,448 | ||||
| Percentage Difference between Reported and scaled up. | 51% | 51% | ||||
Figure 5 shows the share of adult and juvenile crime over the period 2010 through 2023. The share of adult crime has increased from 83.2% in 2010 to 90% in 2023, and similarly juvenile crime has decreased from 16.8% in 2010 to 10% in 2023. Some of this change in the share of crime committed is the result of the share of the juvenile population decreasing over time from 24.4% in 2010 to 20.7% in 2023. Another contributing factor could be that violent juvenile crimes are primarily committed by males and the share of male juveniles has declined slightly from 51.6% in 2010 to 51.2% in 2023.[iii] Additionally, a study by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention shows that juvenile delinquency for both males and females have been in long term decline, see Figure 6. [iv]
Figure 5 – Share of Juvenile and Adult Crime Over Time 2010 – 2023
| Share of Adult (Over 18) and Juvenile (Under 18) Crime, all Offenses 2010 to 2023 | ||||
| Under 18 – All Offense Types | 18 and Over – All Offense Types | Under 18 Share All Offense | 18 and Over Share of Adjusted All Offense | |
| 2010 | 21,938 | 108,319 | 16.8% | 83.2% |
| 2011 | 21,124 | 113,292 | 15.7% | 84.3% |
| 2012 | 22,907 | 132,238 | 14.8% | 85.2% |
| 2013 | 21,946 | 129,136 | 14.5% | 85.5% |
| 2014 | 22,702 | 137,287 | 14.2% | 85.8% |
| 2015 | 22,383 | 148,463 | 13.1% | 86.9% |
| 2016 | 21,571 | 158,770 | 12.0% | 88.0% |
| 2017 | 21,674 | 165,137 | 11.6% | 88.4% |
| 2018 | 21,463 | 170,521 | 11.2% | 88.8% |
| 2019 | 21,307 | 171,882 | 11.0% | 89.0% |
| 2020 | 14,096 | 164,995 | 7.9% | 92.1% |
| 2021 | 15,404 | 168,102 | 8.4% | 91.6% |
| 2022 | 17,583 | 169,613 | 9.4% | 90.6% |
| 2023 | 18,465 | 161,109 | 10.0% | 90.0% |
Colorado is experiencing the same declines in juvenile crime as the nation. Figure 6 shows the national delinquency offenses per 1,000 youth ages 10 and upper by sex. Nationally, for both males and females, the delinquency case rate increased from 1985 through the mid-1990s. For males, the rate increased 37% to reach a peak in 1995 then fell 80% by 2021. Comparatively, the female rate reached a peak in 1997, 72% above the 1985 rate. This increase was followed by a 76% decline between 1997 and 2021. Rates in 2021 for both males and females were at their lowest level since at least 1985.
The disparity between male and female delinquency case rates declined between 1985 and 2021. In 1985, the delinquency case rate for males was 4 times greater than the rate for females. By 2021, the male rate was 2.6 times the female rate (19.37 compared with 7.34).
Figure 6 – All Delinquency Offenses by Sex (Nationally)
Juvenile Crime Rates
From 2010 through 2023 the juvenile crime rate (ages under 18) has steadily declined 29.7% overall while the adult crime rate (ages 18 and over) has increased 28.8%, see Figure 7.
Figure 7 – Juvenile Crime Rate –All Offenses
Figure 8 shows crimes rates for juveniles and adults. Since 2010, juvenile crime rates have decreased overall but have increased for crimes against person (16.6%), violent crime (7%), murder (210.4%), aggravated assault (17.1%), and robbery (12.3%). Juvenile crime decreased for crimes against property (-48.2%), crimes against society (-43%), and non-consensual sex offenses (-7.6%).
Figure 8 – Adult and Juvenile Crime Rates by Category of Crime
| Adult and Juvenile Crime Rates | |||
| 2010 | 2023 | 2010 – 2023 | |
| All Offenses – Under 18 | 436.1 | 306.5 | -29.7% |
| All Offenses – 18 and over | 2152.9 | 2772.0 | 28.8% |
| Crimes Against Person – Under 18 | 115.8 | 135.0 | 16.6% |
| Crimes Against Person – 18 and over | 659.7 | 945.4 | 43.3% |
| Crimes Against Property – Under 18 | 210.6 | 109.1 | -48.2% |
| Crimes Against Property – 18 and over | 1002.3 | 1265.0 | 26.2% |
| Crimes Against Society – Under 18 | 109.6 | 62.4 | -43.0% |
| Crimes Against Society – 18 and over | 491.0 | 561.6 | 14.4% |
| Violent Crime – Under 18 | 48.7 | 52.1 | 7.0% |
| Violent Crime – 18 and over | 261.4 | 361.7 | 38.4% |
| Murder – Under 18 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 210.4% |
| Murder – 18 and over | 1.6 | 4.1 | 150.0% |
| Aggravated Assault – Under 18 | 22.9 | 26.8 | 17.1% |
| Aggravated Assault – 18 and over | 151.2 | 254.3 | 68.3% |
| Non-consensual Sex Offenses – Under 18 | 20.1 | 18.5 | -7.6% |
| Non-consensual Sex Offenses – 18 and over | 66.8 | 62.6 | -6.2% |
| Robbery – Under 18 | 5.6 | 6.3 | 12.3% |
| Robbery – 18 and over | 41.8 | 40.7 | -2.7% |
Juvenile Crime Concentration by County
Crime concentration is calculated as a county’s share of total crime in Colorado divided by that county’s share of juvenile population. Colorado’s juvenile crime concentration is 1 because 100% of the juvenile crime takes place in Colorado and the state has 100% of the state’s juvenile population. Figure 9 shows the juvenile crime concentration for each of Colorado’s 64 counties for total crime.
Adams County has the state’s highest juvenile crime concentration at 2.12. El Paso county has the largest share of the juvenile population, but the juvenile crime concentration is below the state average at 0.95. Arapahoe County has the state’s second largest share of juvenile population but has a crime concentration of 0.35. Juvenile crime is concentrated in nine counties. Only nine counties have a juvenile crime population higher than the state average, Adams, Fremont, Jefferson, Mesa, Boulder, Archuleta, Alamosa, Weld, and Larimer.
Fifty percent of the juvenile crime concentration occurs in 15 counties, Adams, Fremont, Jefferson, Mesa, Boulder, Archuleta, Alamosa, Weld, Larimer, Gunnison, Routt, El Paso, Denver, Denver, Crowley, and Douglas County.
Figure 9 – County Juvenile Crime Concentration
| Juvenile Crime Concentration by County | ||||||||
| County | Share of Under 18 Years Population | Share of Juvenile Crime | Juvenile Crime Concentration | County | Share of Under 18 Years Population | Share of Juvenile Crime | Juvenile Crime Concentration | |
| Adams | 10.72% | 22.76% | 2.12 | Morgan | 0.61% | 0.31% | 0.52 | |
| Fremont | 0.64% | 1.04% | 1.63 | Huerfano | 0.09% | 0.04% | 0.49 | |
| Jefferson | 8.90% | 12.25% | 1.38 | La Plata | 0.82% | 0.33% | 0.40 | |
| Mesa | 2.64% | 3.49% | 1.32 | Pitkin | 0.22% | 0.09% | 0.39 | |
| Boulder | 4.80% | 5.55% | 1.16 | Grand | 0.22% | 0.08% | 0.37 | |
| Archuleta | 0.19% | 0.21% | 1.10 | Prowers | 0.25% | 0.09% | 0.37 | |
| Alamosa | 0.32% | 0.35% | 1.10 | Arapahoe | 12.06% | 4.23% | 0.35 | |
| Weld | 6.86% | 6.91% | 1.01 | Las Animas | 0.21% | 0.07% | 0.33 | |
| Larimer | 5.45% | 5.47% | 1.00 | Eagle | 0.93% | 0.30% | 0.32 | |
| Gunnison | 0.22% | 0.21% | 0.98 | Rio Blanco | 0.13% | 0.04% | 0.30 | |
| Routt | 0.35% | 0.34% | 0.95 | Chaffee | 0.24% | 0.06% | 0.25 | |
| El Paso | 13.84% | 13.10% | 0.95 | Clear Creek | 0.09% | 0.02% | 0.24 | |
| Denver | 10.71% | 9.47% | 0.88 | Custer | 0.07% | 0.02% | 0.24 | |
| Crowley | 0.07% | 0.06% | 0.88 | Kiowa | 0.03% | 0.01% | 0.21 | |
| Douglas | 7.10% | 6.20% | 0.87 | Park | 0.21% | 0.04% | 0.21 | |
| Montezuma | 0.44% | 0.37% | 0.83 | San Miguel | 0.11% | 0.02% | 0.20 | |
| Dolores | 0.03% | 0.02% | 0.80 | Elbert | 0.45% | 0.08% | 0.17 | |
| Bent | 0.08% | 0.06% | 0.79 | Saguache | 0.10% | 0.02% | 0.16 | |
| Pueblo | 3.01% | 2.28% | 0.76 | Yuma | 0.21% | 0.02% | 0.10 | |
| Rio Grande | 0.19% | 0.15% | 0.75 | Baca | 0.06% | 0.01% | 0.09 | |
| Garfield | 1.22% | 0.92% | 0.75 | Lincoln | 0.08% | 0.01% | 0.07 | |
| Summit | 0.40% | 0.29% | 0.73 | Conejos | 0.16% | 0.01% | 0.03 | |
| Logan | 0.33% | 0.23% | 0.70 | Cheyenne | 0.03% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Montrose | 0.71% | 0.50% | 0.70 | Costilla | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Delta | 0.49% | 0.34% | 0.68 | Gilpin | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Otero | 0.35% | 0.24% | 0.68 | Hinsdale | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Broomfield | 1.28% | 0.80% | 0.62 | Jackson | 0.02% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Kit Carson | 0.15% | 0.09% | 0.59 | Mineral | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Teller | 0.33% | 0.20% | 0.58 | Ouray | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Washington | 0.09% | 0.05% | 0.57 | Phillips | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Lake | 0.10% | 0.05% | 0.54 | San Juan | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
| Moffat | 0.27% | 0.14% | 0.52 | Sedgwick | 0.04% | 0.00% | 0.00 | |
Number of Juvenile Crimes By County
Figure 10 – Number of Juvenile Crimes by County
| Number of Juvenile Crimes in 2023 | |||||||
| No. of Juvenile Crimes | No. of Juvenile Crimes | No. of Juvenile Crimes | No. of Juvenile Crimes | ||||
| Colorado | 18,456 | Alamosa | 64 | Grand | 15 | Baca | 1 |
| Adams | 4,200 | Delta | 62 | Elbert | 14 | Conejos | 1 |
| El Paso | 2,417 | Routt | 62 | Las Animas | 13 | Kiowa | 1 |
| Jefferson | 2,261 | La Plata | 60 | Bent | 11 | Lincoln | 1 |
| Denver | 1,747 | Morgan | 58 | Chaffee | 11 | Cheyenne | 0 |
| Weld | 1,276 | Eagle | 55 | Crowley | 11 | Costilla | 0 |
| Douglas | 1,145 | Summit | 54 | Lake | 10 | Gilpin | 0 |
| Boulder | 1,025 | Otero | 44 | Washington | 9 | Hinsdale | 0 |
| Larimer | 1,009 | Logan | 43 | Huerfano | 8 | Jackson | 0 |
| Arapahoe | 781 | Archuleta | 39 | Park | 8 | Mineral | 0 |
| Mesa | 644 | Gunnison | 39 | Rio Blanco | 7 | Ouray | 0 |
| Pueblo | 421 | Teller | 36 | Clear Creek | 4 | Phillips | 0 |
| Fremont | 192 | Rio Grande | 27 | Dolores | 4 | San Juan | 0 |
| Garfield | 170 | Moffat | 26 | San Miguel | 4 | Sedgwick | 0 |
| Broomfield | 147 | Prowers | 17 | Yuma | 4 | ||
| Montrose | 92 | Kit Carson | 16 | Custer | 3 | ||
| Montezuma | 68 | Pitkin | 16 | Saguache | 3 | ||
The Cost of Juvenile Crime
The inputs to the model are the number of crimes for the following categories of police-reported crime: murder, rape, sexual assault, robbery, assault, arson, burglary, larceny/theft, motor vehicle theft, fraud, buying stolen property, vandalism, prostitution/pandering, drug possession/sales, gambling violations, weapons violations, liquor law violations, drunkenness, disorderly conduct, vagrancy, and curfew/loitering violations. Statistics for these crime categories were obtained from Colorado Crime Statistics.[v]
Many crimes go unreported to the police. This analysis accounts for this by inflating police-reported crime values based on national statistics on the ratio of unreported to reported crimes. The tangible cost of crime is the sum total of the following categories of cost: medical, mental health, lost productivity, property loss, public services related to crime, adjudication and sanctioning, and perpetrators’ lost work. The intangible cost of crime is defined as costs related to quality-of-life losses. The total cost of crime is the sum total of tangible and intangible costs.
Figure 11 shows the costs of crime by category of police-reported crime and total crime. The tangible cost of police-reported juvenile crime is $332.7 million, the intangible (quality of life) cost is $693.1 million, and the total cost is $1.03 billion. The tangible cost of all crime, which includes police-reported crime and non–police-reported juvenile crime, is $445.4 million, the intangible cost is $2.9 billion, and the total cost is $3.3 billion ($566 per Coloradan).
Figure 11 – Cost of Juvenile Crime in 2022
| 2023 Total Cost of Juvenile Crime in Colorado, (Millions of 2020 Dollars) | |||||||||||
|
PR = Police-reported |
Medical | Mental Health | Productivity | Property Loss | Public Services * | Adjudication & Sanctioning | Perpetrator Work Loss | Subtotal: Tangible Costs | Quality of Life | Total Cost | |
| Murder | $0.38 | $0.40 | $51.50 | $0.01 | $5.86 | $17.02 | $1.25 | $76.41 | $169.68 | $246.09 | |
| Rape | $18.79 | $46.25 | $43.97 | $2.14 | $0.09 | $2.54 | $0.25 | $114.03 | $2,380.98 | $2,495.00 | |
| Rape (PR) | $4.24 | $7.70 | $7.26 | $0.23 | $1.22 | $54.66 | $5.46 | $80.76 | $373.16 | $453.93 | |
| Other Sexual Assault (PR) | $0.03 | $0.08 | $0.08 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.02 | $0.00 | $0.22 | $4.20 | $4.42 | |
| Robbery | $0.96 | $0.12 | $1.82 | $1.01 | $0.60 | $8.81 | $0.89 | $14.21 | $8.08 | $22.29 | |
| Robbery (PR) | $0.71 | $0.08 | $1.35 | $0.55 | $0.67 | $5.86 | $0.59 | $9.81 | $5.77 | $15.58 | |
| Assault | $23.17 | $2.61 | $13.85 | $0.69 | $36.26 | $48.36 | $4.50 | $129.45 | $298.13 | $427.57 | |
| Assault (PR) | $12.72 | $2.70 | $11.16 | $0.57 | $37.11 | $41.17 | $3.83 | $109.25 | $139.53 | $248.78 | |
| Arson | $0.31 | $0.01 | $0.34 | $2.45 | $0.50 | $0.33 | $0.02 | $3.96 | $0.80 | $4.76 | |
| Burglary | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.06 | $5.48 | $0.93 | $2.87 | $0.87 | $10.22 | $0.00 | $10.22 | |
| Burglary (PR) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.02 | $1.62 | $0.38 | $0.40 | $0.12 | $2.53 | $0.00 | $2.53 | |
| Larceny/Theft | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.35 | $13.44 | $3.71 | $37.66 | $0.80 | $55.95 | $0.00 | $55.95 | |
| Larceny/Theft (PR) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.07 | $2.90 | $2.92 | $6.80 | $0.14 | $12.84 | $0.00 | $12.84 | |
| Motor Vehicle Theft | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.06 | $4.45 | $0.46 | $7.07 | $0.68 | $12.72 | $0.00 | $12.72 | |
| Motor Vehicle Theft (PR) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.08 | $6.11 | $0.69 | $1.58 | $0.15 | $8.61 | $0.00 | $8.61 | |
| Fraud (TC) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.01 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.01 | $0.00 | $0.01 | |
| Fraud (PR) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.01 | $0.37 | $0.02 | $0.01 | $0.00 | $0.41 | $0.00 | $0.41 | |
| Buying Stolen Property | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.27 | $0.93 | $0.06 | $1.26 | $0.00 | $1.26 | |
| Vandalism | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.92 | $0.06 | $1.62 | $0.12 | $2.71 | $0.00 | $2.71 | |
| Prostitution/Pandering | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.02 | $0.06 | $0.01 | $0.09 | $0.00 | $0.09 | |
| Drug Possessions/Sales | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $11.02 | $7.86 | $0.76 | $19.65 | $0.00 | $19.65 | |
| Gambling Violations | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| Weapons Carrying | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.07 | $2.35 | $0.23 | $2.65 | $0.00 | $2.65 | |
| Liquor Laws | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.06 | $0.96 | $0.09 | $1.11 | $0.00 | $1.11 | |
| Drunkenness | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| Disorderly Conduct | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.01 | $0.18 | $0.02 | $0.21 | $0.00 | $0.21 | |
| Vagrancy | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.01 | $0.09 | $0.01 | $0.10 | $0.00 | $0.10 | |
| Curfew/Loitering (PR) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.01 | $0.09 | $0.01 | $0.10 | $0.00 | $0.10 | |
| All PR Crime | $18.39 | $10.96 | $71.85 | $15.73 | $60.90 | $141.99 | $447.87 | $332.70 | $693.14 | $1,025.84 | |
| All Crime CO TC Crime | $43.64 | $49.45 | $112.03 | $30.98 | $59.96 | $138.74 | $1,367.14 | $445.37 | $2,861.87 | $3,306.83 | |
Economic Impact of Juvenile Crime
Although the cost of all Colorado juvenile crime in 2022 was $3.31 billion, that amount does not describe the totality of crime’s economic impact in the state. There is a large body of research concerning the connection between crime and the economy that has produced widely varying results.
Mincer (1981) showed that acquired abilities of individuals are the ones which have an impact on economic growth. Together with an increase in physical capital, they create the framework of the aggregate production function, and yield higher economic growth.[vi]
An economy that attracts and maintains its human capital stock and encourages investment in physical capital (businesses, factories, infrastructure, universities and so on) will have higher economic growth if its crime rate is under control. High crime rates can discourage businesses and citizens, leading them to relocate to areas that they perceive are safer. This phenomenon has been demonstrated repeatedly here in the United States. Many crime-ridden city centers have deteriorating local economies. St. Louis, San Francisco, Portland (Oregon), and Seattle are prime examples.
For instance, as crime increased, since 2019, based on publicly available data on businesses filing changes of address with the U.S. Postal Service, 2,692 businesses in downtown Portland’s have left the area’s five zip codes.[vii] In San Francisco, out of 203 retailers that were open in 2019, only 107 are still operating in the downtown area.[viii]
The counterargument to the causality described in the previous paragraph is that a deteriorating economy and the loss of jobs causes crime to increase. Undoubtedly, this is true; there are many examples throughout the Rust Belt of factory closures gutting cities and causing crime to rise dramatically.
There is a statewide industry that manages crime including the criminal justice system, public defenders, the Division of Youth Services, and communities and businesses that provide services to the Department of Youth Services. In order to evaluate the benefits of reducing crime, it is necessary to look at the economic benefits that this industry provides to the economy. The difficulty of determining the net economic impact of reducing crime can best be illustrated by the following scenario. Hypothetically, it is assumed that resources are put into effect that reduce crime to zero and the population in the Division of Youth Services (incarceration and parole) becomes zero.
Some of the benefits of this are: 1) Former juvenile offenders are released and they re-enter the labor force and increase gross income in the economy. 2) The youth correctional facilities are closed, so the cost of maintenance and upkeep is reduced to zero and the facilities can be repurposed. 3) Government budgets targeting crime prevention and policing can be spent in other areas like infrastructure or education and/or taxes can be lowered.
Some of its detriments are: 1) disemployment of the police, Division of Youth Services personnel, parole officers, lawyers, district attorneys, bail bondsmen, etc., who may have to be retrained and educated or may never be gainfully employed again. 2) Closures of juvenile facilities currently serving as major employers in the community will cause a decrease in demand for services that support the operations and the workers who are employed at the facilities.
CSI regularly utilizes the REMI PI+ dynamic economic model to assess the economic impact of policy initiatives, changes to tax law, economic subsidies, and the like. It was used for this report to examine the impact of reducing crime to zero: the economic cost of the juvenile offender population vanishing alongside the economic benefits of restoring crime’s $2.86 billion of quality-of-life costs to the state and reducing insurance premiums by 2.6%. The impacts of these three components are presented separately and in combination.
Incarcerated Population Becomes Zero
According to the Colorado Division of Juvenile Services there are 550 juveniles in total that are detained, committed, or on parole. In the REMI model, there is a policy variable called “Prison Population.” Changing this variable affects the stock of incarcerated people in state, federal, and local jails. Reducing Colorado’s juvenile offender population by 550 has the following economic impact: employment decreases by 183, GDP decreases by $20 million, and personal income falls by $25 million. The impact on individual industries is shown in Figure 12. The services sector experiences the largest decrease in jobs followed by state and local government, construction, and retail/wholesale trade.
Figure 12 – Employment Impact of Zero Prison Population
| Employment Impact of Zero Juvenile Youth Services Population | |
| Industry | Change in Jobs |
| All Industries | -183 |
| Natural Resources | -1 |
| Construction | -30 |
| Manufacturing | -4 |
| Retail and Wholesale | -24 |
| Transportation and Public Utilities | -5 |
| Services | -82 |
| State and Local Government | -37 |
Cost of Crime Related to Quality of Life Decreases to Zero
The largest component of the total cost of juvenile crime is quality–of-life cost (totaling $2.86 billion). In REMI, the policy variable “Non-pecuniary (Amenity) Aspects” represents a quality-of-life measure; an area with a positive amenity is considered to have a high quality of life rating relative to the nation. Quality of life refers to things like weather, air quality, crime rates, etc.— attractiveness of an area not explained by economic costs. An amenity increase perceived as a real compensation gain makes a region more attractive, so a greater number of economic migrants enter the region.
The economic impact of a $2.86 billion increase in quality of life (because crime has vanished) results in an increase of 2,978 jobs and a $308 million increase in GDP. Figure 13 shows the employment impacts in the Denver metro region and the rest of Colorado by industry. The Denver metro area realizes 61% of the employment increase.
Figure 13 – Economic Impact of the Cost of Quality of Life Due to Zero Crime
| Employment Impact of Increase in the Quality of Life Due to Zero Crime | |||
| Industry | Denver Metro | Rest of Colorado | Statewide |
| All Industries | 1,807 | 1,171 | 2,978 |
| Natural Resources | 11 | 6 | 17 |
| Construction | 264 | 189 | 453 |
| Manufacturing | 49 | 28 | 77 |
| Retail and Wholesale | 183 | 129 | 312 |
| Transportation and Public Utilities | 68 | 26 | 94 |
| Services | 882 | 469 | 1351 |
| State and Local Government | 420 | 324 | 744 |
Economic Impact of Decreased Insurance Premiums Related to Tangible Cost of Crime Being Zero
The primary assumptions of CSI’s insurance premium modeling are that $455.4 million of tangible crime is reported to the insurance industry and that insurance companies respond by increasing premiums by 2.6% of what they would be otherwise. There is support for these assumptions: the Colorado Department of Insurance reported that, from January 2019 to December 2022, homeowners insurance rates increased by 51.7% on average.[ix] Health insurance premiums have increased by 19.56% from 2022 to 2023 according to a report by Value Penguin.[x] Premiums would increase by $113.8 billion to cover the submitted claims of about $19.49 per Coloradan. If crime were to vanish, however, this would leave more in consumers’ pockets to spend. In this scenario, consumer spending is increased by $113.8 billion and the price of insurance decreases by 2.6% which is 10.3% of the 25% increase. This was chosen because juvenile crime makes up 10.3% of total crime. The impact on employment is an increase of 2,977 , and the GDP impact is an increase of $366 million. Figure 14 shows the employment impact by industry and region.
Figure 14 – Employment Impact of a 25% Decrease of Insurance Premiums
| Employment Impact of a 25% Decrease of Insurance Premiums | |||
| Industry | Denver Metro | Rest of Colorado | Statewide |
| All Industries | 2112 | 865 | 2,977 |
| Natural Resources | 10 | 6 | 16 |
| Construction | 342 | 170 | 512 |
| Manufacturing | 49 | 21 | 70 |
| Retail and Wholesale | 228 | 107 | 335 |
| Transportation and Public Utilities | 65 | 17 | 82 |
| Services | 1,322 | 491 | 1,813 |
| State and Local Government | 96 | 53 | 149 |
Economic Combined Impact of Zero Cost of Crime
Combining the three previous scenarios and modeling the impact of crime decreasing to zero produces the following results: Employment increases by 5,722 and GDP increases by $654 million. Figure 15shows the employment impact by industry.
Figure 15 – Total Employment Impact of Crime Decreasing to Zero
| Combined Impact of Crime Decreasing to Zero | |||
| Industry | Denver Metro | Rest of Colorado | Statewide |
| All Industries | 3,603 | 1,919 | 5,722 |
| Natural Resources | 20 | 12 | 32 |
| Construction | 596 | 339 | 935 |
| Manufacturing | 97 | 46 | 143 |
| Retail and Wholesale | 403 | 221 | 624 |
| Transportation and Public Utilities | 131 | 40 | 171 |
| Services | 1,850 | 911 | 2,761 |
| State and Local Government | 506 | 350 | 856 |
Juvenile Arrests and the Colorado Division of Youth Services
Figure 16 shows the number of juvenile arrests from 2010 through 2023. The number of arrests for female juveniles has fallen 38% since 2010. Arrests of male juveniles has dropped 49% since 2010. Overall, for all genders the number of arrests has declined 46% since 2010.
Figure 16 – Colorado Juvenile Arrests by Sex
| Arrests – Under Age 18 | ||||||||||||||
| 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | |
| All Genders | 15,856 | 15,147 | 15,728 | 14,923 | 15,528 | 14,458 | 13,259 | 12,625 | 11,938 | 11,721 | 6,319 | 6,254 | 7,755 | 8,578 |
| Female | 4,803 | 4,556 | 4,643 | 4,460 | 4,945 | 4,488 | 4,286 | 3,830 | 4,009 | 3,832 | 1,768 | 1,965 | 2,584 | 2,973 |
| Male | 11,053 | 10,591 | 11,085 | 10,463 | 10,583 | 9,970 | 8,973 | 8,795 | 7,929 | 7,889 | 4,551 | 4,289 | 5,171 | 5,605 |
With the decline in juvenile crime and the number of juvenile arrests, it is surprising to see the large decrease in the population of juveniles under the supervision of the Colorado Division of Youth Services. Figure 17 shows the average daily population of juveniles who are detained, committed residential, paroled, and the sum total.
Total detained are juveniles awaiting court ordered hearings, these have decreased 45% since 2010. Total committed residential are juvenile serving sentences, these have declined 75% since 2010. Total paroled youth are those juveniles on supervised parole, these have dropped 78% since 2010. Overall, the population of juveniles in the Division of Youth Services has fallen 70%.
According to the Division of Youth Services, “The shrinking juvenile justice population involves all aspects of the system, including but not limited to declining arrests, juvenile delinquency court filings, new probation intakes, as well as detention admissions and new commitments.”[xi]
Juvenile detention populations – According to the Division of Youth Services, a significant factor in the decline of the detention population is the result of the passage of Senate Bill 19-108, which limits the use of detention to only those children who either pose a substantial risk of serious harm to others, or that are a flight risk from prosecution.
Juvenile commitments – Senate Bill 19-108 created the Juvenile Justice Reform Committee. The committee is tasked with developing assessment and screening tools for criminogenic risk and needs, mental health needs, and diversion program eligibility. The bill also required the adoption of an actuarial risk assessment and the implementation of a length of stay matrix and release guidelines for those under the custody of the Division of Youth Services. According to the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, these changes, along with increased use of diversion programs and alternative sentencing options, will result in a reduction of detention and commitment populations.
Probation – In April of 2020 the Division of Youth Services responded to orders issued by the Governor giving the Division of Youth Services the authority to place youth on juvenile parole without approval from the Juvenile Parole Board. Per the Division of Youth Services, “An unprecedented number of youth were subsequently released from residential placement to parole.”
Figure 17 – Average Daily Population Colorado Division of Youth Services
| Average Daily Population Colorado Division of Youth Services
(Data Source :Division of Criminal Justice/ Office of Research and Statistics) |
||||
| Total Detained | Total Committed Residential | Total Parole Youth | Total Detained + Committed + Parole | |
| 2010 | 345.4 | 1054.6 | 437.6 | 1837.6 |
| 2011 | 325.4 | 1005.6 | 385.5 | 1716.5 |
| 2012 | 308.4 | 875.2 | 360.3 | 1543.9 |
| 2013 | 295 | 807.5 | 284.8 | 1387.3 |
| 2014 | 288.2 | 757 | 243.4 | 1288.6 |
| 2015 | 274.9 | 711.6 | 241.6 | 1228.1 |
| 2016 | 254.8 | 645.4 | 238.3 | 1138.5 |
| 2017 | 265.4 | 647.3 | 210.1 | 1122.8 |
| 2018 | 257.8 | 602.4 | 214.5 | 1074.7 |
| 2019 | 239.4 | 492.3 | 205.2 | 936.9 |
| 2020 | 151.7 | 367.8 | 195 | 714.5 |
| 2021 | 158.1 | 296.9 | 112.8 | 567.8 |
| 2022 | 173.5 | 263.2 | 112.7 | 549.4 |
| 2023 | 190.2 | 263.8 | 98.5 | 552.5 |
| % Change 2010 -2023 | -44.9% | -75% | -77.5% | -69.9% |
Colorado Division of Youth Services Budgets
CSI pulled budget data for the Colorado Division of Youth Services from reports to Joint Budget Committee Department of Human Services (Division of Child Welfare and Division of Youth Services) to determine the cost per supervised juvenile, either detained, committed, or paroled.
Figure 18 shows the fiscal year budgets beginning in 2010-11 through 2022-23. Over this period, the budgeted dollars are basically unchanged, but has decreased in real terms as measured in 2010 dollars by 27.8%%. The number of full time employees has increased 16.3% while the number of supervised individuals (detained, committed or on parole) has decreased 70%. The estimated real budget per supervised individual has increased 141.6%.
Figure 18 – Budget, FTEs, and Supervised Population in the Division of Youth Services
| Budget for the Division of Youth Services | ||||||
| Total Budget Division of Youth Services | Total Budget Division of Youth Services in 2010 Dollars | Total FTE’s | Total Detained + Committed + Parole | Real Budget per Supervised Juvenile | ||
| FY 2010-11 | $ 134,678,334 | $ 134,678,334 | 998.4 | 1837.6 | $ 73,290 | |
| FY 2011-12 | $ 132,272,757 | $ 130,060,706 | 998.4 | 1716.5 | $ 75,771 | |
| FY 2012-13 | $ 117,611,031 | $ 112,266,342 | 937.8 | 1543.9 | $ 72,716 | |
| FY 2013-14 | $ 118,630,629 | $ 111,364,164 | 937.8 | 1387.3 | $ 80,274 | |
| FY 2014-15 | $ 108,023,178 | $ 99,851,012 | 944 | 1288.6 | $ 77,488 | |
| FY 2015-16 | $ 112,282,784 | $ 104,027,562 | 998.7 | 1228.1 | $ 84,706 | |
| FY 2016-17 | $ 118,359,331 | $ 108,316,926 | 1034.2 | 1138.5 | $ 95,140 | |
| FY 2017-18 | $ 128,250,160 | $ 114,494,294 | 1140.6 | 1122.8 | $ 101,972 | |
| FY 2018-19 | $ 133,331,303 | $ 116,523,648 | 1225.9 | 1074.7 | $ 108,424 | |
| FY 2019-20 | $ 142,236,199 | $ 122,483,940 | 1218.5 | 936.9 | $ 130,733 | |
| FY 2020-21 | $ 130,385,189 | $ 108,020,075 | 1161.1 | 714.5 | $ 151,183 | |
| FY 2021-22 | $ 132,069,218 | $ 101,715,606 | 1161.1 | 567.8 | $ 179,140 | |
| FY2022-23 | $ 134,328,670 | $ 97,267,489 | 1161.1 | 549.4 | $ 177,043 | |
| % Change 2010-11 to 2022-23 | -0.3% | -27.8% | 16.3% | -70% | 141.6% | |
Concluding Remarks
Despite the high collective value of the many businesses and services that comprise the industry dedicated to crime management in Colorado, the cost of crime as a whole is far greater. Determining the value of a total reduction in crime, though unrealistic, illustrates the enormous burden crime imposes on our economy and citizens. The goal of policymakers who want to see Colorado thrive should be to take immediate steps to further reduce juvenile crime. There are massive economic benefits to all Coloradans when crime is low. Policy, despite its intention to create a more humane criminal justice system, has instead adversely affected the quality of life enjoyed by the state’s law-abiding majority. Victims should be prioritized, not juvenile perpetrators. It is time for legislators and leaders to act to reverse current trends, recognize the need to punish illegal behavior, and impose strong penalties on criminals at all levels of crime. Failure to do so will only cause Colorado to become a less attractive location for people and businesses.
[i] Shapiro, R.J,. Hassett, K. A., “The Economic Benefits of Reducing Violent Crime, A Case Study of 8 American cities.” Center for American Progress, June 2012.
[ii] Colorado Crime Statistics (state.co.us)
[iii] Characteristics and Patterns of At-Risk Juveniles and Factors That Contribute to Violence Committed By or Against Juvenileshttps://ojjdp.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh176/files/pubs/jvr/1.html
[iv]OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book. Online. Available:
https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/court/JCSCR_Display.asp?ID=qa06240. December 22, 2023.
[v] Colorado Crime Statistics (state.co.us)
[vi] Mincer, J. (1981). Human Capital and Economic Growth. NBER Working Paper Series #803, 1-25.
[vii] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11807717/Portland-business-owners-say-theyre-fleeing-city-en-masse-crime.html
[viii] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12101001/Crime-ridden-San-Francisco-lost-HALF-downtown-stores-COVID-hit-95-shuttering.html
[ix] Homeowner Availability Study -Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) – Division of Insurance, Prepared by Oliver Wyman,
[x] https://www.valuepenguin.com/average-cost-of-health-insurance
[xi] Colorado Division of Criminal Justice – Adult and Juvenile Correctional Populations Forecasts (January 2023)