By Measures for Justice

  After experiencing a series of hurdles obtaining and analyzing criminal justice data in New York State, Measures for Justice (MFJ) set out to better understand the state’s data infrastructure. Drawing on interviews with system stakeholders--including practitioners, policy advocates, and researchers--we explored the quality and availability of criminal justice data in the state of New York. With heated criminal justice reform debates underway, there is a clear need for data that can speak to system performance. And yet our investigation uncovered that, with few exceptions, the mechanisms for criminal justice data collection and release in New York State are broken. Efforts to put data to use across the state are frequently hampered by obscure systems, antiquated technologies, arduous request processes, and a degree of partiality that allows data access to some and not others. The present report explores each of these themes and ultimately suggests four pathways forward for New York agencies looking to pursue equitable and responsible data practices.

Rochester, NY: Measures for Justice, 2021. 23p.

By Sema Taheri, Jennie Brooks, Mason DeLang, Shelby Davis, Hillary Livingston, Nathan LeMahieu, & Trevariana Mason

Despite accounting for a substantial portion of local, state, and federal budgets, our criminal justice institutions are among the least measured systems in our country. In an effort to bring transparency to this sector, MFJ has collected, standardized, and made public 20 states’ worth of criminal justice data.

The purpose of this report is to share what we have learned through this effort, including: (a) what we cannot see when data are missing, and (b) the value that data can provide when they are available and comparable. In particular, we identify patterns around the following:

There is a substantial lack of data around pretrial detention and release decision-making, as well as individual demographics (particularly indigence).

New data privacy laws are also making it needlessly difficult to obtain certain data. This poses challenges to understanding how individuals experience the system in cases that do not result in conviction.

There is great variation in how counties dispose of and sentence nonviolent cases; how financial obligations are imposed on individuals; and the collateral consequences that individuals face when convicted.

Across many of these findings, where demographics are available, we have an opportunity to identify and respond to significant disparities in group outcomes.

This report challenges stakeholders and policymakers to dig deeper into these patterns and missing data. It also implores policymakers and legislators to improve criminal justice data infrastructure to ensure a more transparent, fair, and equitable implementation of justice.

Rochester, NY: Measures for Justice, 2021. 17p.