CJA NEW YORK CITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCY, INC. Jerome E. McElroy Executive Director THE DAY CUSTODY PROGRAM: SECOND YEAR REPORT Project Director Freda F. Solomon, Ph.D. Senior Research Fellow FINAL REPORT August 2008 52 Duane Street, New York, NY 10007 (646) 213-2500 THE DAY CUSTODY PROGRAM: SECOND YEAR REPORT Project Director Freda F. Solomon, Ph.D. Senior Research Fellow Project Co-Director Elyse J. Revere Research Analyst Project Programmer: Geraldine Staehs-Goirn Information Systems’ Department Programmer/Analyst Project Staff: Steve Mardenfeld Senior Research Assistant Raymond Caligiure Graphics and Production Specialist Annie Su Administrative Associate FINAL REPORT August 2008 © 2008 NYC Criminal Justice Agency, Inc. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report could not have been done without the assistance of many at CJA, and without the cooperation of the Center for Alternative Sentences and Employment Services (CASES), under the leadership of Joel Copperman its CEO and President. I am fortunate to have Elyse Revere as a collaborator on this project. Since early in the project she assumed day-to-day management of our program data collection. She was assisted in quality-control tasks by Ray Caligiure and Steve Mardenfeld. In addition, Elyse Revere provided invaluable assistance in the creation of the data sets used in this and the previous year’s study, performed much of the data analysis, and contributed to the writing of this report. Steve Mardenfeld provided additional assistance in the analysis of the recidivism data new to this year’s report. We are indebted to Geraldine Staehs-Goirn, the project’s programmer, for her skillful programming and understanding of the research process. Thanks also are due to Frank Sergi, CJA’s Director of Program Planning, and members of the Data Entry Unit under his supervision, for their help in resolving CJA database issues. My thanks also go to my colleague Mary Phillips for her suggestions regarding creating matched comparison groups, which were incorporated into the recidivism analysis, and to Jerry McElroy, CJA’s Executive Director, and my colleague Richard Peterson, for their review of an earlier draft of this report. We are greatly appreciative of the efforts of many at CASES who worked to make program information and data available to us. Special thanks are due to Elida Fahie, Director of Court Programs, Tonya C. Harvell, the program’s Executive Assistant, Quinn Cushing, Information Services Director, and Shana McMahan, Director of Strategic Planning and Analysis, as well as the court and program staff on who we ultimately rely for collecting data. In addition, Geraldine Ferrara, CJA’s counsel, along with CASES’ counsel Ellen Fried, successfully concluded the data-sharing agreement necessary to make this inter-organization collaboration possible. The seeds of the Day Custody Program developed from the work of the Discharge Planning Collaboration, an initiative begun by Martin Horn, NYC Commissioner of Correction, and Linda Gibbs, then Commissioner of NYC’s Department of Homeless Services. The Day Custody Program is made possible through the cooperation of the New York City Department of Correction, and by the commitment to data-driven policy, and openness to innovation, on the part of the City’s Office of the Criminal Justice Coordinator. While there were many who assisted in a myriad of ways, I alone am responsible for the design of this research project and the contents of this report. Freda F. Solomon, Ph.D. Senior Research Fellow & Project Director TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................1 PART ONE: THE DAY CUSTODY PROGRAM THE DAY CUSTODY PROGRAM .......................................................................4 Introduction ...............................................................................................................4 Program Eligibility .....................................................................................................5 Data Sources, Data Collection and Information Sharing...........................................8 PART TWO: THE PROGRAM’S SECOND YEAR SECOND YEAR DAY CUSTODY SENTENCED CASES............................10 Characteristics of Defendants in the DCP-Sentenced Cases .................................10 CJA Recommendation and Community Ties Characteristics..................................13 Arrest Crime Types and Severities for DCP-Sentenced Cases ..............................15 Charge Composition at Criminal Court Arraignment...............................................17 Measuring Program Success: Retention.................................................................18 Time from Sentencing to Program Intake ...............................................................20 Setting Jail Lengths for Program Failure.................................................................22 Penalties for Program Failure .................................................................................26 SECOND YEAR DAY CUSTODY REJECTED CASES ...............................31 Rejection Source and Reason ................................................................................31 Characteristics of Defendants in DCP-Screened and Rejected Cases...................33 CJA Recommendation and Community Ties Characteristics..................................35 Arrest Crime Types and Severities for Rejected Cases..........................................37 Non-DCP Sentenced Case and Defendant Characteristics by Source of Rejection.............................................................................................................38 Court Outcomes for Rejected Cases ......................................................................43 Arraignment Charge Composition for Rejected Cases Convicted at Arraignment ..45 Arraignment Decision Making for Non-DCP Sentenced Cases by Rejection Source ....................................................................................................46 RE-ARRESTS OF DEFENDANTS IN DCP-SENTENCED CASES ..........51 RE-ARRESTS OF DEFENDANTS WITHIN FIVE MONTHS OF THE FIRST (OR ONLY) DCP-SENTENCED CASE ..............................................................................53 Prevalence of Recidivism........................................................................................53 Time to First Prosecuted Re-arrest.........................................................................54 Type and Severity of Prosecuted Charge on the First Re-arrest ............................55 Spotlight Targeting on First Prosecuted Re-arrests ...............................................59 Criminal Court Decision Making in First Prosecuted Re-arrest Cases....................60 Sentencing for Conviction in the First Re-arrest Case: Jail, Length of Jail..............61 Frequency of Re-arrests .........................................................................................63 RE-ARRESTS OF DEFENDANTS IN ALL SECOND-YEAR DCP-SENTENCED CASES........................................................................................................................65 Prevalence of Recidivism........................................................................................65 Time to a Prosecuted Re-arrest within Five Months of the Compliance Date for Each DCP-Sentenced Case ...................................................................................67 Spotlight Targeting on First New Arrests ................................................................68 PART THREE: COMPARING RECIDIVIM BETWEEN DAY CUSTODY SENTENCED CASES AND DEFENDANTS AND THOSE IN A PRE-PROGRAM PERIOD COMPARING RECIDIVISM BETWEEN DCP-SENTENCED CASES AND DEFENDANTS IN THE FIRST TWO PROGRAM YEARS WITH THOSE IN A PRE-PROGRAM PERIOD ..........................................................70 Creating Pre-Program Comparison Groups............................................................71 Re-arrests Among Pre-Program and DCP-Sentenced Cases and Defendants ......73 Times to First Re-Arrests for Defendants in Pre-Program and DCP-Sentenced Cases......................................................................................................................76 Frequency of Re-arrests .........................................................................................78 COMPARING SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM CASES AND DEFENDANTS WITH MATCHED COMPARISON GROUPS ..................................................81 Creating Matched Comparison Groups...................................................................83 Testing for Differences in Recidivism Between Categorical Groups of Successful Defendants in Each Program Year and Defendants in Matched Comparison Group Cases......................................................................................................................86 Prevalence of Re-arrest Between Matched Comparison Groups of Pre-Program and Successful DCP-Sentenced Defendants .........................................................87 Time to First Re-Arrest Between Successful DCP-Sentenced and Matched Comparison Group Defendants ..............................................................................88 Frequency of Re-arrests Between Successful DCP-Sentenced and Matched Comparison Group Defendants ..............................................................................89 PART FOUR: SUMMARY SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................92 APPENDIX CJA’S