By Sarah Waite & Alexandria Bradley 

Why read this evidence review? This evidence review provides an in-depth look at women’s problem solving courts (WPSC) which are endorsed by the Sentencing Review as an important component in preventing the unnecessary incarceration of women. Dr Sarah Waite and Dr Alexandria Bradley review the evidence base – to which they are significant contributors –and cover a number of key issues: • The broader context of problem-solving courts internationally and in the UK? • The evolution and current state of WPSC in the UK • The critical success factors for the design and delivery of WPSC which support women, to help them to address their needs and move away from the criminal justice system. The review contains much concrete advice on best practice for voluntary sector organisations looking to get involved in WPSC. 

Suffolk, UK: Clinks, 2025.  12p.

By Emily Rogers.  Katie Holihen, et al.

Homelessness is a growing crisis in America, increasing by 12% between 2022 and 2023 alone. While there are a range of ideas about how to address this issue, in many places across the country, law enforcement officers are still typically the default first responders to these kinds of community concerns. This publication details how communities can strategically plan for and assess their law enforcement homelessness response efforts, using a shared vision, a logic model, and regular assessments to determine if the response is achieving its intended goals. It also discusses the importance of expanding the knowledge base of law enforcement practices and strategies to establish a set of national standards for effective and successful homelessness responses.

New York: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2025. 29p.

By Christian Cochran

Emerging technologies, especially artificial intelligence (AI), are rapidly transforming law enforcement operations. These advancements offer numerous benefits, such as enhanced efficiency, improved public safety, and cost-saving measures for agencies. AI technologies, like predictive policing and facial recognition, hold promises for reducing crime rates and improving investigative efficiency. Yet, significant ethical dilemmas and privacy issues arise from their use, in turn necessitating careful policymaking and oversight. Various case studies illustrate both positive and negative outcomes of AI applications in law enforcement, emphasizing the need for transparency and community involvement. To manage the use of these emerging technologies effectively, state legislatures should explore policy changes and regulatory frameworks. Recommendations include promoting transparency, ensuring oversight, and establishing acceptable use standards. Involving community stakeholders in discussions about AI deployment is also advocated to build trust and accountability between law enforcement and the public. Challenges posed by AI technologies include balancing innovation with presumed privacy. Important United States Supreme Court cases shape the legal landscape regarding privacy expectations and technology use by law enforcement. Additionally, concerns about how the increasing volume of data collected by AI systems is used and protected lead to calls for stricter data privacy laws. While AI offers significant opportunities for improving law enforcement practices, it is crucial to address the accompanying ethical, legal, and privacy challenges. A balanced approach that promotes innovation while safeguarding citizens’ rights and fostering public trust in law enforcement practices is essential to ensuring the right-sized proper implementation of the technology.

Austin, TX Texas Public Policy Foundation and Right on Crime, Right on Crime, 2025. 28p.

By Scott Peyton

The probation and parole division is tasked with collecting monies ordered by courts and/or dictated by Louisiana statute. Collection practices should focus on victim restitution with less emphasis placed on the collection of monies that have little bearing on public safety.

KEY POINTS

• Community supervision is costly, often for reasons unrelated to supervision or the offense committed.

• The ability to pay determination as recommended by the Justice Reinvestment Initiative reforms has been delayed for nearly five years.

• Community supervision should focus on the collection of victim restitution over other legal financial obligations.

• The 10% collection fee that is added to victim restitution should be eliminated to allow for increased monies to victims.

Austin, TX: Right On Crime, 2023, 12p,

By Scott Peyton

The entry points for community supervision in Louisiana are complex and diverse and are the result of years of legislative and policy changes.

KEY POINTS:

• A thorough review of the Probation and Parole budget is recommended to identify opportunities for increased efficiency and to maintain the effectiveness and impact of community supervision. 

• The Louisiana legislature should review and update current Louisiana Department of Corrections policies concerning Earned Compliance Credits to conform with American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) model legislation. 

• To ensure consistency across the state, and to assess the effectiveness of the violation/revocation process, probation and parole should report quarterly revocation data by district office and officer.

• Special and general conditions of supervision should only include conditions directly related to public safety and should be tailored to the specific needs of the probationer. 

• Expand and fund partnerships with non-profit organizations.

Austin, TX: Right On Crime, 2024. 28p.

By Ross Jackson and Nikki Pressley

“Human trafficking survivors in the State of Texas deserve justice. Existing legal protections for victims is inadequate. Amending the existing definition of duress in Texas statute will enable victims to escape unjust prosecution, better steward state resources, and hold true perpetrators accountable.”

KEY POINTS

• Many victims of human trafficking are prosecuted for crimes occurred while under the control of their trafficker.  

• Texas’ current definition of duress fails to protect victims of human trafficking from prosecution by disallowing relevant histories of abuse to be used as an affirmative defense.  

• Texas should amend the definition of duress to bring justice to both offenders and victims.

Austin, TX: Right On Crime, 2024. 12p.

By Ross Jackson, Nikki Pressley

The incarceration of parents has devastating effects on the family unit, especially on health, education, employment, and quality of life outcomes for children. Texas should enact mitigation laws that redirect parents who commit non-violent, non-serious crimes to diversionary programs that keep them at home with their children while serving their sentence.

KEY POINTS

• Incarceration has particularly devastating consequences for children of imprisoned parents, as it harms their mental health and affects their academic performance, employment opportunities, and overall quality of life.

• Many states, including Tennessee, Missouri, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington, have attempted to keep individuals with children closer to their families by enacting caregiver diversion and mitigation laws.

• By enacting mitigation legislation, Texas can keep families together, reduce recidivism, and better steward taxpayer dollars.

Austin TX: Right On Crime, 2024. 12p.

By Nikki Pressley, Ross Jackson

Since the FBI began tracking clearance rates in the 1960s, law enforcement has been solving fewer crimes each year, despite declining crime trends since the 1990s.

KEY POINTS

• Following national trends, violent crime and property crime rates have significantly declined in Texas since the early 1990s when crime in the United States peaked.

• Law enforcement has been solving fewer crimes each year, despite the decline in crime rates.

• In 2023, only 53% of homicides were solved in Texas.

• Potential causes of declining clearance rates include law enforcement staffing challenges, technology challenges, funding gaps, overcriminalization, and a lack of prioritization of cases.

• To increase clearance rates, law enforcement departments need additional resources for crime staff and training, new policies and procedures that target crime ridden areas, increased transparency and accountability mechanisms, and a renewed focus on restoring victims and their families.

Austin, TX: Right On Crime, 2025. 28p.

By Rachel Wright 

“There has been an explosion of criminal laws with little accountability. The key to reigning in potential abuse of the criminal legal system is requiring prosecutors to prove state of mind in all crimes.”

KEY POINTS

• While the number of criminal laws has grown, mens rea requirements have shrunk. This had led to overcriminalization and disparate outcomes.

• Mens rea reforms have enjoyed bipartisan success in the past and should again in the future.

• Strengthening mens rea is key to remedying the larger criminal justice issues of overcriminalization and abuse of prosecutorial discretion.

Austin, TX: Right on Crime, 2025. 16p.

By Amy Smith

Over the past four decades, the rate of incarceration in the United States has skyrocketed to unprecedented heights, both historically and in comparison to that of other developed nations. At far higher rates than the general population, those in or entering U.S. jails and prisons are prone to many health problems. This is a problem not just for them, but also for the communities from which they come and to which, in nearly all cases, they will return.

Health and Incarceration is the summary of a workshop jointly sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences(NAS) Committee on Law and Justice and the Institute of Medicine(IOM) Board on Health and Select Populations in December 2012. Academics, practitioners, state officials, and nongovernmental organization representatives from the fields of healthcare, prisoner advocacy, and corrections reviewed what is known about these health issues and what appear to be the best opportunities to improve healthcare for those who are now or will be incarcerated. The workshop was designed as a roundtable with brief presentations from 16 experts and time for group discussion. Health and Incarceration reviews what is known about the health of incarcerated individuals, the healthcare they receive, and effects of incarceration on public health. This report identifies opportunities to improve healthcare for these populations and provides a platform for visions of how the world of incarceration health can be a better place.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. 2013. Health and Incarceration: A Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press

By National Research Council

After decades of stability from the 1920s to the early 1970s, the rate of imprisonment in the United States more than quadrupled during the last four decades. The U.S. penal population of 2.2 million adults is by far the largest in the world. Just under one-quarter of the world's prisoners are held in American prisons. The U.S. rate of incarceration, with nearly 1 out of every 100 adults in prison or jail, is 5 to 10 times higher than the rates in Western Europe and other democracies. The U.S. prison population is largely drawn from the most disadvantaged part of the nation's population: mostly men under age 40, disproportionately minority, and poorly educated. Prisoners often carry additional deficits of drug and alcohol addictions, mental and physical illnesses, and lack of work preparation or experience. The growth of incarceration in the United States during four decades has prompted numerous critiques and a growing body of scientific knowledge about what prompted the rise and what its consequences have been for the people imprisoned, their families and communities, and for U.S. society.

The Growth of Incarceration in the United States examines research and analysis of the dramatic rise of incarceration rates and its affects. This study makes the case that the United States has gone far past the point where the numbers of people in prison can be justified by social benefits and has reached a level where these high rates of incarceration themselves constitute a source of injustice and social harm.

The Growth of Incarceration in the United States recommends changes in sentencing policy, prison policy, and social policy to reduce the nation's reliance on incarceration. The report also identifies important research questions that must be answered to provide a firmer basis for policy. The study assesses the evidence and its implications for public policy to inform an extensive and thoughtful public debate about and reconsideration of policies.

National Research Council. 2014. The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine

Reliable and valid forensic science analytic techniques are critical to a credible, fair, and evidence-based criminal justice system. There is widespread agreement that the scientific foundation of some currently available forensic science methods needs strengthening and that additional, more efficient techniques are urgently needed. These needs can only be met through sustained research programs explicitly designed to ensure and improve the reliability and validity of current methods and to foster the development and use of new and better techniques. This task is challenging due to the broad nature of the field.

Concerns have been raised repeatedly about the ability of the criminal justice system to collect and analyze evidence efficiently and to be fair in its verdicts. Although significant progress has been made in some forensic science disciplines, the forensic science community still faces many challenges. Federal leadership, particularly in regard to research and the scientific validation of forensic science methods, is needed to help meet the pressing issues facing state and local jurisdictions.

This report reviews the progress made by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to advance forensic science research since the 2009 report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward and the 2010 report, Strengthening the National Institute of Justice. Support for Forensic Science Research examines the ways in which NIJ develops its forensic science research priorities and communicates those priorities as well as its findings to the scientific and forensic practitioner communities in order to determine the impact of NIJ forensic science research programs and how that impact can be enhanced.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Support for Forensic Science Research: Improving the Scientific Role of the National Institute of Justice. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By the National Research Council

Eyewitness identifications play an important role in the investigation and prosecution of crimes, but they have also led to erroneous convictions. In the fall of 2013, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation called upon the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to assess the state of research on eyewitness identification and, when appropriate, make recommendations. In response to this request, the NAS appointed an ad hoc study committee that we have been privileged to co-chair. The committee’s review analyzed relevant published and unpublished research, external submissions, and presentations made by various experts and interested parties. The research examined fell into two general categories: (1) basic research on vision and memory and (2) applied research directed at the specific problem of eyewitness identification. Basic research has progressed for many decades, is of high quality, and is largely definitive. Research of this category identifies principled and insurmountable limits of vision and memory that inevitably affect eyewitness accounts, bear on conclusions regarding accuracy, and provide a broad foundation for the committee’s recommendations. Through its review, the committee came to recognize that applied eyewitness identification research has identified key variables affecting the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. This research has been instrumental in informing law enforcement, the bar, and the judiciary of the frailties of eyewitness identification testimony. Such past research has appropriately identified the variables that may affect an individual’s ability to make an accurate identification. However, given the complex nature of eyewitness identification, the practical difficulties it poses for experimental research, and the still ongoing evolution of statistical procedures in the field of eyewitness identification research, there remains at the time of this review substantial uncertainty about the effect and the interplay of these variables on eyewitness identification. Nonetheless, a range of practices has been validated by scientific methods and research and represents a starting place for efforts to improve eyewitness identification procedures. In this report, the committee offers recommendations on how law enforcement and the courts may increase the accuracy and utility of eyewitness identifications. In addition, the committee identifies areas for future research and for collaboration between the scientific and law enforcement communities. We are indebted to those who addressed the committee and to those who submitted materials to the committee, and we are particularly indebted to the members of the committee. These individuals devoted untold hours to the review of materials, meetings, conference calls, analyses, and report writing. This report is very much the result of the enormous contributions of an engaged community of scholars and practitioners who reached their findings and recommendations after many vigorous and thoughtful discussions. We also would like to thank the project staff, Karolina Konarzewska, Steven Kendall, Arlene Lee, and Anne-Marie Mazza, and editor Susanna Carey for their dedication to the project and to the work of the committee.

National Research Council. 2014. Identifying the Culprit: Assessing Eyewitness Identification. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By Holly Rhodes

The Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop in April 2018 to examine how the criminal justice system affects the fundamental status of people as members of society and to consider next steps for research, practice, and policy for the field. Ruth Peterson (Ohio State University), chair of the workshop planning committee, stated that the goal of the workshop was to find common ground to work toward a criminal justice system that avoids social exclusion through consequences “so severe or lasting as to violate one's fundamental status as a member of society.” Instead, she said, the system should reflect the principles of citizenship and social justice with a “fair distribution of rights, resources and opportunities.” Robert Crutchfield (University of Washington), member of the planning committee, added that the workshop was specifically designed to explore the reasons for the disparate experiences of individuals involved with the criminal justice system by race, ethnicity, and gender, the mechanisms that cause them to persist, and what can be done through policy and practice to minimize those differences. Participants—including researchers, policy makers, and advocates for victims and offenders—discussed issues in five areas: the role of criminal justice in social exclusion; patterns of inequality in criminal justice; collateral sanctions of the criminal justice system; special concerns for youth and young adult populations; and next steps for research, policy, and practice.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. The Criminal Justice System and Social Exclusion: Race, Ethnicity, and Gender: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By Steve Olson and Karen M. Anderson

The United States is home to 4.4 percent of the world’s population, yet it has 21.3 percent of the world’s individuals experiencing incarceration (Walmsley, 2015). Though the total is down from its peak in 2008, in 2016, 1.5 million people were in prison and 630,000 were in jails—a seven-fold increase since the 1970s. The high rate of incarceration in the United States is a major contributor to the nation’s health inequities. African Americans are more than three times as likely to be incarcerated as whites, and incarceration rates are also elevated for Hispanics, Native Americans, and other population groups compared with the general population. In addition, people who are incarcerated differ from the general U.S. population in terms of poverty levels, geographic origins, gender, and a wide range of health indicators. Health equity, then, intersects with incarceration, reentry, and community health. To examine the connection between incarceration and health inequities, the Roundtable on the Promotion of Health Equity held a workshop on June 6, 2018, titled The Effects of Incarceration and Reentry on Community Health and Well-Being. As part of its commitment to hold workshops in parts of the United States that are particularly affected by the issues being discussed, the roundtable held the workshop at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, which has one of the highest rates of incarceration of any major American city. It is important to note that the programs and models that are described in this Proceedings of a Workshop are all Philadelphia based, as this is where the workshop took place. As Antonia Villarruel, Margaret Bond Simon Dean of Nursing at the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing and chair of the roundtable, said in her opening remarks, holding the workshop at the University of Pennsylvania “represents the university’s commitment, as well as the school’s commitment, to working with vulnerable populations, health equity, and social justice.” Winston Wong of Kaiser Permanente also emphasized the place-based nature of the roundtable’s work. “We look at people and we look at communities,” he said. “We look at how individuals who are part of the fabric of our communities are impacted. And we look at assets as much as we look at barriers and obstacles.”

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. The Effects of Incarceration and Reentry on Community Health and Well-Being: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By Committee on the Future of Voting

During the 2016 presidential election, America's election infrastructure was targeted by actors sponsored by the Russian government. Securing the Vote: Protecting American Democracy examines the challenges arising out of the 2016 federal election, assesses current technology and standards for voting, and recommends steps that the federal government, state and local governments, election administrators, and vendors of voting technology should take to improve the security of election infrastructure. In doing so, the report provides a vision of voting that is more secure, accessible, reliable, and verifiable.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Securing the Vote: Protecting American Democracy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By Richard Rosenfeld and Amanda Grigg

The criminal legal system in the United States has vast reach. Over 75 million American adults have an arrest or criminal record of some kind and 4.3 million remain under community supervision. Over 600,000 people were released from state and federal prisons each year between 2000 and 2019 with the hope that they will successfully reintegrate into their communities. Their success or failure is used as an indicator of our criminal legal system’s effectiveness. Tracking the success of those released from prison can tell us whether the criminal legal system is fulfilling its mission and whether public investments are being put to effective use. The successful reintegration of those released from prison is also often used as an indicator of public safety. In fact, the National Institute of Corrections describes successful reintegration as a “critical aspect of correctional missions to improve public safety.” Nevertheless, while evaluations of success among individuals released from prison affect perceptions of the performance of our institutions and the safety of our communities, our attempts to evaluate success face serious limitations.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. The Limits of Recidivism: Measuring Success After Prison. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By Bruce Western, Khalil Gibran Muhammad, Yamrot Negussie, and Emily Backes

A large research literature has documented substantial racial and ethnic disparities at each stage of the criminal justice process. Black American, Latino, and Native American people have all been found to experience relatively high rates of arrest, pretrial detention, incarceration, and community supervision compared to White people. At the same time, community violence poses a significant risk to health and well-being for disadvantaged communities. Researchers have wrestled with the complex relationship between racial disparities in crime and disparities in criminal justice involvement. Racial inequality can drive disparities in both crime and system involvement; racial differences in criminal victimization, offending, and incarceration can further exacerbate racial inequality in socioeconomic life. In 2020, the Committee on Law and Justice of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened an expert ad hoc committee to review and assess the scientific evidence on how racial inequalities in criminal justice might be reduced through public policy. The Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System was assembled to carry out this study and produce a consensus report. The committee reviewed and synthesized a diverse body of evidence from a variety of disciplines, including criminology, sociology, law, economics, psychology, history, and public policy, and it gathered public testimony from a variety of community participants in the course of three public workshops. Box S-1 includes key definitions and terminology derived from these efforts. This report builds on the work of researchers, practitioners, policy makers, and community representatives who have been working to address racial inequality in the criminal justice system for decades. It was prepared in the contemporary context of a global pandemic, the police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and other Black Americans, and subsequent protests against racial injustice. Moreover, gun violence—often concentrated in low-income Black communities—increased sharply in 2020 and 2021, posing an additional threat to racial equity. The current moment is thus marked by opportunity and urgency. The report offers an account of the research evidence that can inform the public conversation and the policy discussion over reducing racial inequality in the criminal justice system and advancing racial equity. Given the complexity and deep historical roots of contemporary racial inequality in the United States, the committee has considered both policy reforms to the criminal justice system and policy reforms that address social, economic, and environmental conditions that give rise to inequalities in crime and justice. Criminal justice reforms that can reduce the scale of police stops and prison admissions, the duration of long sentences, and the duration and intensity of community supervision are likely to produce large absolute reductions in criminal justice involvement in minority communities. However, the criminal justice system does not operate in a vacuum, and reductions of criminal justice inequalities also depend in part on social and economic policy. Criminal justice reform can be buttressed by reducing the socioeconomic disadvantages that disproportionately increase the risks of criminal justice contact among the residents of low-income communities, who are disproportionately Black, Latino, or Native American. Given this context, the report considers both criminal justice reforms and alternative strategies that lie outside the criminal justice system for reducing violence and other crime. The committee also found significant limitations in the available data and research evidence and offers recommendations for their development that might also help in overcoming racial inequality.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice, and Policy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press

Facial recognition technology (FRT) is an increasingly prevalent tool for automated identification and identity verification. The use of FRT in a wide and growing variety of contexts has brought into increasing focus both the potential benefits of using FRT and concerns about impacts on equity, privacy, and civil liberties. In 2021, the Department of Homeland Security requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conduct a study that considers current capabilities, future possibilities, societal implications, and governance of FRT. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) joined as a formal sponsor of the study in March 2023.

The National Academies established the Committee on Facial Recognition: Current Capabilities, Future Prospects, and Governance to conduct this study (for biographical information, see Appendix C). The study addresses current use cases; explains how facial recognition technologies operate; and examines the legal, social, and ethical issues implicated by their use. The full statement of task for the committee is shown in Appendix A.

The committee met in person in July 2022 and February 2023 and met virtually 16 times to receive briefings from experts and stakeholders (for a list of presentations, see Appendix B), review relevant reports and technical literature, deliberate, and develop this report.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Facial Recognition Technology: Current Capabilities, Future Prospects, and Governance. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By The American Immigration Council

This fact sheet explains: • Where fentanyl is smuggled into the United States? • Who is smuggling fentanyl into the United States?

Over the last decade, a surge in the availability and use of synthetic opioids has led to a staggering toll of overdoses in the United States. From 2013 to 2023, the national drug overdose death rate more than doubled, with drug overdose deaths peaking in 2022 at 107,941. 1 Much of this was due to the rise in fentanyl, a powerful synthetic opioid commonly used for pain management in hospital settings, which was also responsible for 70 percent of overdose deaths in 2023. 2 While overdose deaths have fallen from their record highs,3 the threat posed by synthetic opioids remains — as does the importance of properly understanding how fentanyl enters the United States. Background This fact sheet uses two separate datasets to confirm what has long been reported by law enforcement sources and other researchers: that the majority of fentanyl smuggled across the southern border enters not on the backs of migrants crossing the border on foot, but in the vehicles and on the bodies of U.S. citizens and other lawful entrants seeking admission at land ports of entry.4 Using two separate datasets described below, we confirm roughly four in five people apprehended for smuggling fentanyl into the United States at the southern border between October 2018 and June 2024 were U.S. citizens — the rest were largely individuals with visas, border crossing cards, or other permission to enter the United States lawfully at a port of entry. Despite this reality, many Americans falsely believe that migrants are the ones bringing fentanyl into the country.5 This narrative has been fueled by political rhetoric that seeks to link the issue of migration at the southern border directly with the opioid epidemic.6 However, this data shows conclusively that the two issues are distinct. Migrants are not responsible for the fentanyl epidemic. Rather, there is bipartisan agreement that efforts to reduce the volume of fentanyl smuggled across the southern border should focus primarily on ports of entry,7 where millions of people enter every month. Longstanding weaknesses in port security permit transnational criminal organizations to hide small volumes of the powerful synthetic opioid among other lawful trade and traffic and remain the border’s biggest vulnerability to fentanyl smuggling