07-12-2000 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Washington State Institute for _ Public Policy ne Evergreen State College • Seminar 3162 • Olympia, WA 98505 • (360) 866 -6000, ext. 6380 • FAX (360) 866 -6825 January 1998 Watching the Bottom Line: Cost - Effective Interventions for Reducing Crime in Washington How does a homeowner know if it's "worth it" to insulate a house? Using pocket -book economics, the homeowner determines if the savings in future heating bills are greater than the cost of the insulation. Some insulation investments are cost-effective, others are not. How do we know if it's "worth it" to spend tax dollars on a particular crime prevention program? It's worth it if future savings to taxpayers and potential victims of crime are greater than the cost of the program. Some programs are cost - effective, others are not. The Washington State Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to evaluate the costs and benefits of certain criminal justice policies, violence prevention programs, and other efforts to decrease criminal recidivism and at -risk behaviors of youth.' This progress report contains information on several interventions that have been shown to work, some that have not, and some that are promising but not yet fully evaluated. Similar to the home insulation example, this analysis focuses on the "bottom -line" economics of different programs that try to reduce criminal behavior, by comparing up -front program costs paid by taxpayers to any future benefits that a program produces. Research Approach The goal of the Institute's research is to identify interventions that lower crime and lower total costs to taxpayers and crime victims. To do this, the Institute is systematically reviewing published research in the United States on juvenile delinquency interventions. Many programs are designed for youth already in the juvenile justice system, where the goal is to reduce subsequent criminal activity. Other prevention programs seek to lower the chance that a young person will commit crimes in the first place. We focus on both categories, concentrating on studies that use sound research designs and are published in peer- reviewed joumals.2 Crime imposes costs that are paid by crime victims, and by taxpayers who fund the police, courts, and correctional systems. If a program reduces subsequent criminal activity, then some of these future costs can be avoided. The Institute estimates the magnitude of these avoided costs and stacks them up against the taxpayer -cost of particular programs. The result provides information on the net economic benefit of different options available to the legislature and other decision- making bodies.3 This is the same type of financial analysis that an investor might use to study rates of return on mutual funds, real estate, or other altemative investments; the focus is on the comparative bottom line. ' RCW 13.40.500 and RCW 70.190.050. 2 The Institute is conducting the review of the literature In conjunction with the Social Development Research Group, School of Social Work, University of Washington. 3 In a forthcoming technical report, the Institute will describe in detail the analytical methods used to make these calculatk Page 29