By Robin Joy

The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of the Arnold Ventures’ Public Safety Risk Assessment (PSA) in Vermont. This report presents the findings of the study. The Arnold PSA measures the risk of a person failing to appear for a court date (FTA) and engaging in new criminal activity (NCA) or committing a new violent crime (NCV) while out on bail. The PSA relies on criminal histories, the current charged offenses, and the age of the defendant to score the likelihood of a person engaging in the measured behavior. This research was conducted at the request of the Vermont stakeholder group of the National Criminal Justice Reform Project (NCJRP). The NCJRP was supported by the National Governors Association, Arnold Ventures, and the National Criminal Justice Association. This report was funded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Key Findings Overall, the PSA did not perform well in Vermont, and we do not recommend its adoption. It was unable to accurately predict who would not appear while on bail, commit a new crime, or commit a new crime of violence. Additionally, there are racial equity concerns about using criminal histories in criminal justice decision making. The PSA may have performed poorly for a variety of reasons. First, the overall rate of failure to appear (FTA) for the cohort (people arraigned on felony charge in 2016-2017) was 11%. This is low; however, the real number of FTAs are likely higher, but they are not appearing in the official data. Because the PSA relies on criminal histories, the completeness and accuracy affect the score. Not all states report the same level of detail and completeness of records, therefore, the scores are likely off. New crimes of violence while out on bail were also low, with 14% of the cohort being arrested or arraigned with a new crime of violence. About 25% of the cohort committed a new criminal offense (excluding Violations of Conditions of Release), but the PSA did not accurately predict who would commit a new crime.   

Montpelier, VT: Crime Research Group, 2022. 16p.

By Angela E. Addae, Monica Cox

In 2022, Oregon legislators enacted Senate Bill 1510 (SB 1510). SB 1510 appropriated $10,000,000 to the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) to create the Justice Reinvestment Equity Program (JREP). JREP is encompassed under the state’s Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), which includes the Justice Reinvestment Program (JRP) established in 2013. The Oregon Legislature enacted JREP to “promote racial equity, reduce racial disparities, reduce recidivism and decrease a county’s utilization of imprisonment in a Department of Corrections institution, all while protecting public safety and holding offenders accountable.” JREP is administered by the Northwest Health Foundation Fund II (NWHF) and provides grant awards to culturally specific organizations and culturally responsive services, as defined in SB 1510. The Legislative Assembly directed the CJC to “evaluate the implementation of the Justice Reinvestment Equity Program and monitor the progress of subgrants provided by the Northwest Health Foundation Fund II under section 15 of this 2022 Act.” No later than September 30, 2024, the CJC must submit “a report detailing the progress of the evaluation . . . and include recommendations for additional evaluation needs.” The CJC convened an evaluation advisory group and contracted with two external researchers to facilitate the evaluation. Based on analyses of JREP administrative materials, surveys, secondary data, focus groups, interviews, and engagement with over 150 members of the JREP community, the evaluation advisory group proffers the following recommendations: 1. Support the adoption of community engagement practices that prioritize high levels of involvement, collaboration, and empowerment for all phases of JREP. 2. Provide robust support for equity-centric grantmaking, ensuring that grant administrators have the access, resources, flexibility, and time to effectively meet the diverse needs of grant recipients. 3. Implement leadership development and capacity-building initiatives that support emerging leaders and staff, particularly those with lived experience, to promote resiliency and sustainability among culturally specific organizations and culturally responsive programs. 4. Facilitate the creation and expansion of formal partnerships and collaborative frameworks between culturally specific organizations, culturally responsive programs, and state public safety institutions to promote shared goals and mutual accountability. 5. Develop and implement evaluative criteria that incorporate culturally grounded definitions of success, ensuring that the unique contributions of culturally specific organizations and culturally responsive programs are recognized and supported in legislative outcomes.

Salem: Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, 2024. 48p.

By Christi M. Smith

Since 2018, nearly half of states have either passed clean slate automated record-sealing laws, adopted legislation to expunge cannabis convictions, or initiated campaigns to seal certain criminal records. These efforts acknowledge the perpetual, often lifelong barriers that people with publicly available criminal records face. The collateral consequences of a record, even for people who have been arrested but not convicted, make it exceedingly difficult to obtain and maintain basic life stability. For the one in three adults with a criminal record, this often means a lifetime of poverty and negative generational outcomes for dependents.

When people are unable to establish stability or advance in life because of records-based discrimination, the public also suffers negative effects. Being unemployed, underemployed, or employed “off the books” means less money cycling back into the community and reduced tax revenue. This translates to an $87 billion per year loss to the national economy. The social cost of cyclical incarceration and increased likelihood of homelessness among this population is an estimated $1.2 trillion annually. And without legitimate opportunities to provide for oneself and one’s family—combined with a lack of affordable products—people may be disincentivized to remain law-abiding. This can result in increased crime and escalating product costs as stores attempt to reduce retail theft. Our streets are less safe when people who have paid their debt to society and remained law-abiding continue to be excluded from the basic resources they need to survive.

Explainer, Washington, DC: R Street, 2024. 2p.

By Lisel Petis

Law enforcement agencies across the country, regardless of state or jurisdiction population size, are facing challenges on a daily basis, including exhaustion and frustration from dealing with “frequent flyers” and “repeat callers;” continued stress and pressure caused by agency staffing shortages and negative public sentiment; and increased rates of community mental health and substance abuse issues leading to potentially dangerous outcomes. In response, some conservative areas have found a way to better support their local law enforcement and the communities they serve through pre-arrest diversion programs. Pre-arrest diversion models—such as Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD), co-responder and community responder—have become some of the most successful trends in criminal justice. These programs already exist across the nation and have proven efficient and effective in diverting low-level offenders from the criminal justice system. By looking at the execution of LEAD in Laramie County, Wyo., Behavioral Health Connect (BHCON) in El Paso County, Colo. and Community Assistance and Life Liaison (CALL) in St. Petersburg, Fla., other jurisdictions can understand how pre-arrest diversion reduces calls for service, saves police officers’ time and decreases jail populations. Furthermore, these districts serve as an example that allows us to explore how to successfully implement a diversion program and navigate potential challenges.

Key Points: 1. Conservative jurisdictions are turning to novel prearrest diversion models to help with staffing shortages, court backlogs and “frequent flyers” who are often suffering from mental health or addiction issues. 2. Pre-arrest diversion models—such as LEAD, corresponder or community responder—prioritizes police time, court resources and jail space for serious offenses and violent crimes while also repairing law enforcement’s relationship with the community, connecting individuals with services and reducing recidivism. 3. Communities can better support their local law enforcement and overcome concerns of logistics, safety and funding when implementing their own diversion programs.

R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 252 March 2022, 12p