Essays on the Effectiveness of Diversion Programs in the United States Criminal Justice System
The United States criminal justice system is at a transformative time, with growing public support for reforms that prioritize rehabilitation over punishment. In response to this shift, prosecutor-led diversion programs are being introduced in areas where they were previously absent and expanded with increased resources in regions already established across the United States. This dissertation measures the effectiveness of these programs in three ways and uses data from six diverse U.S. jurisdictions. In the first chapter, I focus on how age-based eligibility criteria shape participation in diversion programs and its effectiveness in reducing recidivism. To do this, I examine data from two jurisdictions, where age cutoffs create natural points of comparison. I use a Fuzzy Regression Discontinuity design to explore whether defendants near these age thresholds are more likely to participate in diversion programs and whether eligibility criteria reduces the likelihood of reoffending. This analysis reveals that defendants below the age threshold (under 25) are substantially more likely to participate in diversion programs than those above the threshold. However, there is no significant impact of diversion program eligibility on recidivism rates at the age cutoff. These results suggest that the increased probability of diversion participation for younger individuals does not translate into significant reductions in recidivism. In the second chapter, I explore how early assessments and improved resource allocation impact the effectiveness of pre-trial diversion programs in a big Texas county. In 2021, a policy reform moved assessments to an earlier stage of the court process, allowing prosecutors and defense attorneys to make more informed decisions about program placement. I use a Difference-in-Differences approach to evaluate how this policy change affected recidivism rates within one year. The findings show that the policy significantly reduced participant recidivism rates, with treatment effects ranging from 6.9 to 13.8 percentage points, depending on the model specification. These reductions are substantial when compared to the mean recidivism rate of 24% among individuals who went through traditional court proceedings. These findings highlight the importance of timely and targeted assessments in ensuring that defendants are matched with programs that best suit their needs. The third chapter expands the focus to evaluate the financial implications of diversion programs in six jurisdictions across three states. I conducted a benefit-cost analysis to measure how these programs reduce incarceration costs and generate broader societal benefits. To estimate causal effects, I apply Nearest Neighbor Matching, enabling me to compare similar defendants who did and did not participate in diversion programs. The general trend observed across the jurisdictions suggests that diversion interventions at different stages—consideration, participation, and completion—consistently reduce recidivism rates within one year. This chapter provides a deeper understanding of the economic trade-offs associated with diversion program initiatives and offers actionable recommendations for policymakers within the six participating jurisdictions.
Diversion, Prosecution, Public Safety, Economics
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations