Seattle's Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD): Program effects on recidivism outcomes

被引:79
作者
Collins, Susan E. [1 ]
Lonczak, Heather S. [1 ]
Clifasefi, Seema L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Harborview Med Ctr, Harm Reduct Res & Treatment Ctr, Dept Psychiat & Behav Sci, 325 Ninth Ave,Box 359911, Seattle, WA 98104 USA
关键词
Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion; Drug offenses; Prostitution offenses; Recidivism; Harm reduction; OFFENDERS;
D O I
10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.05.008
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
Drug users and dealers frequently cycle through the criminal justice system in what is sometimes referred to as a "revolving door." Arrest, incarceration and prosecution have not deterred this recidivism. Seattle's Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) program was established to divert these individuals to case management and supportive services instead of jail and prosecution. A nonrandomized controlled evaluation was conducted to examine LEAD effects on criminal recidivism (i.e., arrests, criminal charges). The sample included 318 people suspected of low-level drug and prostitution activity in downtown Seattle: 203 received LEAD, and 115 experienced the system-as-usual control condition. Analyses were conducted using logistic generalized estimating equation models over both the shorter term (i.e., six months prior and subsequent to evaluation entry) and longer term (i.e., two years prior to the LEAD start date through July 2014). Compared to controls, LEAD participants had 60% lower odds of arrest during the six months subsequent to evaluation entry; and both a 58% lower odds of arrest and 39% lower odds of being charged with a felony over the longer term. These statistically significant differences in arrests and felony charges for LEAD versus control participants indicated positive effects of the LEAD program on recidivism.
引用
收藏
页码:49 / 56
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 13121901 WASH STAT I
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2015, PROPENSITY SCORE ANA
[3]   An Introduction to Propensity Score Methods for Reducing the Effects of Confounding in Observational Studies [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2011, 46 (03) :399-424
[4]   A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. [J].
Benson, K ;
Hartz, AJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (25) :1878-1886
[5]   Systematic review of the impact of adult drug-treatment courts [J].
Brown, Randall T. .
TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH, 2010, 155 (06) :263-274
[6]  
Collins S.E., 2011, Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies for Managing High-Risk Behaviors, V2nd
[7]  
Fletcher D.R., 2013, People, Place and Policy, V1, P80
[8]  
Goetz Barry., 2006, Contemporary Drug Problems, V33, P473, DOI [10.1177/009145090603300307, DOI 10.1177/009145090603300307]
[9]  
Hardin JW, 2003, Generalized estimating equations
[10]   The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diversion and aftercare programmes for offenders using class A drugs: a systematic review and economic evaluation [J].
Hayhurst, Karen P. ;
Leitner, Maria ;
Davies, Linda ;
Flentje, Rachel ;
Millar, Tim ;
Jones, Andrew ;
King, Carlene ;
Donmall, Michael ;
Farrell, Michael ;
Fazel, Seena ;
Harris, Rochelle ;
Hickman, Matthew ;
Lennox, Charlotte ;
Mayet, Soraya ;
Senior, Jane ;
Shaw, Jennifer .
HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2015, 19 (06) :1-+