Expanding the focus of correctional evaluations beyond recidivism: the impact of halfway houses on public safety

Objective

This article reports the findings of a quasi-experimental evaluation of the impact of residential halfway houses (HHs) on public safety in the immediate vicinity of the facilities.

Methods

Instead of focusing on recidivism reduction or cost effectiveness, as is common, outcome measures for this study are limited to the impact on community crime rates, here defined as offenses committed within 1/8 and 1/4 mi radii around a subject facility. A set of fixed effect Poisson regression models were employed to assess the changes in monthly crime counts associated with the opening or closing of an HH (N =?19). A second difference-in-differences analysis (DiD) compares HHs that ceased operation to HHs that remained consistently open for the duration of the study period. A series of robustness checks were conducted.

Results

We find the presence of an active HH is associated with an increase in crime within the immediate vicinity. We identify significant increases in monthly counts of overall crimes reported to law enforcement, as well as in counts for specific crimes of violence, including assaults and robberies with a firearm; property offenses, such as burglary; and in minor and misdemeanor offenses. A closing of an HH is associated with a decrease in reported crimes.

Conclusions

The location of a community-based correctional facility can have a significant and negative impact on public health, largely through decreased levels of local public safety. Evaluations of residential correctional programs should include indicators of community-level impact in addition to individual-level measures of recidivism, particularly when such programs are clustered in at-risk or vulnerable communities.

     

Predicting pretrial misconduct with drug tests of arrestees: Evidence from eight settings

Identifying defendants at high risk of pretrial misconduct is a major problem for the judiciary. Currently, some have argued that testing arrestees for recent drug use is one way to distinguish between those who will and those who will not commit pretrial misconduct. The research reported here questions whether the incremental predictive power resulting from drug testing always improves predictions of pretrial misconduct. Using survival analysis to study time until rearrest and a probit model to analyze the occurrence of a failure to appear, we show that urine test results have no consistent power to predict pretrial misconduct after accounting for defendant's criminal records, community ties, and other factors commonly known by the court. These results are based on our analysis of eight data sets from different locales, time periods, and age groups.     

Diversion in the Canadian Juvenile Justice System: A Tale of Two Cities

Abstract The present study attempted to evaluate the effectiveness of diversion in the juvenile justice system by comparing two different communities. One community has a formalized, well-established diversion program whereas the other community utilizes the Family Court to a much greater extent. Preliminary data suggests no difference in recidivism for a matched sample of young offenders. The implications of the study are discussed in terms of future research on diversion and the need for appropriate comparison groups. In the past two decades, diversion programs have been one of the major innovations within the juvenile justice system. These programs have attempted to divert juveniles from the formal process involving court hearings by creating alternative interventions at the policy and community level. The basic premises underlying these programs is that the formal court system may do more harm than good by labeling youngsters as “delinquent” and rendering them more vulnerable by involvement in an adversary process (Reference numbers 4, 12, 14). Diversion programs that provide youngsters with an opportunity to make restitution or perform community services are compensation for their misbehavior are seen as more immediate and meaningful consequences than awaiting a formal adversarial court hearing (5, 13). However, diversion programs have not met with universal acceptance. Critics have pointed out that programs, in fact, “widen the justice net” by processing children who never would have gone to court anyway (3, 7). As well, concerns have been raised as to the protection of clients' legal rights in the diversion program and the dangers of “double jeopardy” in the event that failure in a program could lead to an even more severe disposition by the court (8, 9). The debate over the effectiveness of diversion programs has been fueled by the lack of research. Although there are many studies that suggest the success of this approach (1, 6, 10), the research has suffered in its credibility due to the absence of appropriate control groups. The present study attempted to fill this significant void in previous evaluations of diversion, by comparing two communities in southwestern Ontario with different approaches to juvenile justice. The cities of Windsor and London are approximately 200 km apart, with comparative populations (200,000 vs 250,000). Windsor has well established diversion programs with substantial support of community agencies, the police force and Crown Attorney's office. This program is described in detail elsewhere (2, 11) so will not be outlined here. London has no such program and consequently has an obviously greater number of youngsters handled through the formalized juvenile court. The authors hoped to capitalize on this “naturally occurring difference” in approach between the two cities by examining the rate of recidivism of young offenders as well as determine their attitudes (and that of their parents) toward the interventions they received. The hypotheses in the pilot studies outlined were that the diversion program youth in Windsor would have a more positive attitude about their intervention and would be less likely to recidivate than a matched sample of youth in London, based on the theoretical underpinning of diversion as well as the results of previous outcome studies.     

On creating ethical,productive, and durable research partnerships with police officers and their departments: a case study of the National Justice Database

ABSTRACT

Translational policing science must begin with explicitly communicated research aims and a shared vision for promoting safety. For researchers to approach police departments without first considering the concerns held by officers and their departments at large, is unethical, unproductive, and undermines efforts to secure longstanding mutually useful researcher-practitioner partnerships. In presenting a case study analysis of the multi-method National Justice Database’s recruitment practices, this article highlights some of the challenges that emerge when articulating study aims that hold relevance for public safety; defining theoretically- and solution-oriented research questions; administrative police data collection, analysis, and dissemination; and bolstering human research subject protection protocols for sworn officers who may be justifiably reluctant to participate in social science research endeavors. Implications for ethical policing research practice, fostering collaborative researcher-practitioner partnerships, and leveraging the benefits of data science are also discussed.