Open Access Publisher and Free Library
03-crime prevention.jpg

CRIME PREVENTION

CRIME PREVENTION-POLICING-CRIME REDUCTION-POLITICS

Posts tagged Urban Institute
A Summary of Two Evaluations of the Misdemeanor Diversion Program in Durham County, North Carolina

By Will Engelhardt and Daniel S. Lawrence

Before the Juvenile Justice Reinvestment Act was implemented in December 2019, North Carolina was the last state that still automatically charged 16- and 17-year-olds as adults in its criminal legal system. In March 2014, led by then–chief district court judge Marcia Morey, a group of stakeholders from Durham County, North Carolina, started the Misdemeanor Diversion Program (MDP) to prevent 16- and 17-year-olds from entering the criminal legal system. The first of its kind in North Carolina, the program provides services including life skills courses, restorative justice efforts, and behavioral health treatment over a 90-day period and has expanded to include adults of all ages. It has also been replicated in certain counties throughout the state. The MDP enables law enforcement officers in Durham County to redirect people accused of committing their first misdemeanor crime(s) to community-based services in lieu of charge, citation or arrest. The purpose is to diminish unnecessary arrests and jail time and the collateral consequences of being charged with and convicted of a crime. A central feature of this program is that it occurs prearrest and precharge, meaning someone law enforcement officers believe may have committed a crime will not be arrested or charged and will not formally enter the justice criminal legal system in any way. In 2020 and 2021, with support from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Safety and Justice Challenge Research Consortium, the Urban Institute conducted in-depth process and impact evaluations of the MDP, the findings of which we summarize in this report. By conducting both types of evaluations, the research team was able to better understand the processes and context that led to observed impacts. In addition, this is the first time a third-party research organization has evaluated the program’s impact, and such an evaluation is critical to demonstrating the program’s usefulness. Key takeaways from the process evaluation (A Process Evaluation of the Misdemeanor Diversion Program in Durham County, North Carolina) and the impact evaluation (An Impact Evaluation of the Misdemeanor Diversion Program in Durham County, North Carolina) are detailed in box 1.

Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2021. 24p.

An Impact Evaluation of the Misdemeanor Diversion Program in Durham County, North Carolina

By Daniel S. Lawrence, Will Engelhardt, Storm Ervin, Rudy Perez

Before the implementation of the Juvenile Justice Reinvestment Act in December 2019, North Carolina was the last state that still automatically charged 16-to-17-year-olds as adults in its justice system. In March 2014, a group of stakeholders from Durham County—led by then–chief district court judge Marcia Morey—started the Misdemeanor Diversion Program (MDP) to prevent 16-to-17-year-olds from entering the justice system. The program has since expanded to include adults up to 26 years old. The first program of its kind in North Carolina, the MDP gives law enforcement officers in Durham County the discretion to redirect people accused of committing their first misdemeanor offense(s) to community-based services (such as life skills courses, restorative justice efforts, and behavioral health treatment) in lieu of citation or arrest. The purpose was to diminish unnecessary arrests and time in jail and the collateral consequences of being charged with and potentially convicted of a crime. What is particularly unique about this program is that it occurs prearrest and precharge, meaning someone law enforcement officers believe may have committed a crime will not be arrested or charged and will not formally enter the justice system in any way. This impact evaluation, the first conducted for the MDP, found that from March 2014 to February 2020, law enforcement officers in Durham County referred fewer than one-quarter of all people eligible for diversion to the MDP, though when they did, the program had positive impacts. In 2020 and 2021, with support from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Safety and Justice Challenge Research Consortium, the Urban Institute conducted an in-depth impact evaluation of the MDP, the findings of which are detailed in this report. This impact evaluation was one component of Urban’s research on the MDP; Urban also conducted a detailed process evaluation that was described in a July 2021 report, A Process Evaluation of the Misdemeanor Diversion Program in Durham County, North Carolina (Engelhardt et al. 2021). Key Takeaways The data examined in this report cover January 2012 to February 2020 and were collected from North Carolina’s Administrative Office of the Courts, the MDP, the Durham Police Department (DPD), and the Durham County Sheriff’s Office. Box 1 provides five key findings the research team derived from these data. In this report, we assess the following: ◼ MDP enrollment ◼ MDP completion rates ◼ the MDP’s impact on new arrests, convictions, and jail admissions for program participants ◼ the MDP’s impact on disparities by race and ethnicity, sex, and age ◼ the MDP’s impact on system-level arrests, convictions, and jail admissions Analyses were separated into two population groups—people ages 16 to 17 and people ages 18 to 21—because each group was eligible for the MDP during different periods. These groups were statistically matched to comparison groups through propensity score matching for the analyses that examined new arrests, convictions, and jail admissions. The comparison groups were well balanced with the MDP participant groups (see appendix D) and were pulled from pools of people who were concurrently eligible for the program but did not participate. Five Key Findings ◼ Approximately 77 percent of people eligible for the MDP were not referred to the program while it was operational from March 2014 to February 2020. ◼ Of those who did participate in the program, there was a very high completion rate of 95 percent. ◼ MDP participants had significantly lower rates of rearrests, convictions, or jail admissions than comparison groups within six months, one year, and two years. ◼ Participation in the MDP significantly reduced disparities in new arrests within two years and in new convictions and jail admissions within six months between 16-to-17-year-old Black people and non-Black people, making the differences in the levels of new arrests between these groups much more equivalent than between Black and non-Black people who did not participate in the MDP. ◼ The MDP did not have a larger impact on countywide rates of arrests, convictions, or jail admissions for either of the two age groups we analyzed

Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2021. 83p.

Optimizing the Use of Video Technology to Improve Criminal Justice Outcomes

By Daniel S. Lawrence, Bryce E. Peterson, Rochisha Shukla, and Lilly Robin

This publication represents a technical summary report of the Urban Institute’s evaluation of efforts with the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) to improve its public surveillance network. The goal of this study was to conduct a rigorous process, impact, and cost effectiveness evaluation of the process MPD took to optimize its network, which included improving operations, installing new cameras, and integrating video analytic technologies into its system. The two video analytic technologies were (1) automatic license plate recognition cameras and (2) high-definition cameras connected to gunshot detection technology. The evaluation used a mixed-methods research design. Qualitative data collection included in-depth observations of the department’s camera operations to understand their practices and determine which types of improvements would most benefit the program, as well as stakeholder interviews with staff members who either worked directly within the camera program or routinely used its footage in their work. We conducted interviews with camera operators, camera program supervisors, shift commanders, crash reconstruction unit officers, specialized investigations division officers, criminal investigations bureau detectives, and civilian managers from the department’s communication division. We also collected numerous quantitative data, including administrative crime data, metadata from the camera system, and systematic data on the costs associated with the system upgrades. We then used these data to assess: (1) the overall impact all of the interventions had on crime at the city, focus area, and intersection levels; (2) the specific impact of the two video analytic components on crime; and (3) the costs of the upgrades relative to their effectiveness. Our findings indicate that the impact of these interventions was mixed. We analyzed data in the two areas where MPD concentrated their surveillance optimization efforts and found some decreases in crime. However, when we focused on our analyses on the specific intersections where cameras and other technologies were installed, our models found increases in some criminal events, which is likely the result of the new cameras capturing crimes that may have otherwise been missed by the department. We also found no significant changes in crime in the areas where the two video analytic technologies were implemented compared to matched comparison areas. The findings from this research yielded several important lessons for improving criminal justice policy and practices. First, police departments must have strong, collaborative relationships with the vendors they select to upgrade their surveillance systems. Second, agencies that engage in efforts to optimize their surveillance systems should regularly re-evaluate their goals and processes to maximize the effectiveness of these new technologies. Finally, departments should ensure that all necessary personnel are made aware of the new technologies and have adequate access to them.

Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2024. 18p.

A Process Evaluation of the Misdemeanor Diversion Program in Durham County, North Carolina

By Will Engelhardt. Storm Ervin, Daniel S. Lawrence, and Rudy Perez

Before its Raise the Age legislation in December 2019, North Carolina was one of the few states that still automatically charged 16- and 17-year-olds as adults in its justice system. In 2013, led by then–chief district court judge Marcia Morey, a group of stakeholders from Durham County, North Carolina, started the Misdemeanor Diversion Program (MDP) to prevent 16- and 17-year-olds from entering the justice system. The first of its kind in North Carolina, the program began in March 2014 and expanded over time to include people of all ages. It has also been replicated in certain counties throughout the state. The MDP allows law enforcement officers in Durham County to redirect people accused of committing their first misdemeanor crime(s) to community-based services in lieu of citation or arrest. The purpose is to diminish unnecessary arrests and time in jail, and the collateral consequences associated with being charged with and potentially convicted of a crime. What is particularly unique about this program is that it occurs prearrest and precharge, meaning someone law enforcement officers may believe has committed a crime is not arrested or charged and does not formally enter the justice system in any way. In 2020 and 2021, with support from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Safety and Justice Challenge Research Consortium, the Urban Institute conducted an in-depth process evaluation of the MDP, the findings of which are detailed in this report. This process evaluation was one component of Urban’s research on the MDP; the research team is also conducting an outcome evaluation that will be described in a fall 2021 report.

Safely and Justice Challenge, 2021. 44p.