07-12-2000 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Five of the programs are for youth not involved in the criminal justice system. These programs typically try to affect several behaviors —for example, teen pregnancy, substance abuse, and academic performance —in addition to preventing future criminal activity. Although society and taxpayers can benefit in many ways from reductions in these other behaviors, at present the Institute's analysis is restricted to measuring crime- related costs. The remaining 11 programs are for youth already involved in the juvenile court system. Some are for first- or second -time juvenile offenders while others are for chronic or serious offenders. Usually the primary goal of these offender -based programs is to reduce the chance that a juvenile will commit subsequent criminal offenses. Analyzing the comparative economics of these programs requires interpretation beyond the reported research results. Because most studies do not analyze program economics, the Institute takes five analytical steps in reviewing each program. Table 2 displays the results. (A forthcoming Institute report will describe the technical detail behind these estimates.) 1. How could a particular program be applied in Washington? For each intervention, the Institute estimates the most likely practical application within the state's justice or early intervention systems. For example, most of the juvenile offender programs listed on Tables 1 and 2 could be implemented in Washington through the juvenile courts. 2. Can a program produce the same results in another setting? Many programs have demonstrated results in small experimental settings. Their success rates, however, may not hold when they are replicated, especially on a larger scale. Rather than assuming that the results achieved in one setting are always transferable, the Institute considers each program individually, analyzing factors such as the strength of the research design, the length of the follow -up period, and the size the of experiment. This process generally results in reduced estimates of the expected effects for each intervention. 3. How much does a program cost? The Institute estimates the costs to taxpayers to implement each program. 4. What is the value of a program's crime reduction for the state? If a program succeeds in lowering crime rates, some costs of crime can be avoided in the future. The Institute analyzes these life -cycle costs for the criminal justice system, estimating the marginal operating and capital costs of police, courts and prosecutors, local govemment juvenile and adult corrections' costs, and state govemment costs for the Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration and the Department of Corrections. The Institute uses national estimates to measure the monetary costs incurred by the direct victims of crime. If an intervention can lower the amount of future crime, it can lower crime victim costs in addition to criminal justice system costs paid by the taxpayer.5 5. What are the summary economic statistics for a program? Combining all of this information allows the calculation of standard economic measures. In Table 2 we show the net present value of each program from a taxpayer's perspective, and from a combined perspective of taxpayers and crime victims. We also show two other statistics: the number of years it takes for a taxpayer to be "paid back" for the up -front cost of the program, and the minimum percentage reduction in felonies the program needs to achieve to break even. s See, Victim Costs and Consequences: A New Look, U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1996. Monetary Couhof- pocket's victim costs per felony crime include estimated medical spending, mental health payments, lost future eamings, and property damage. Page 32