Overview
The Worcester County District Attorney’s Office—Middle District (WCDA) Young Adult Diversion Program was initiated with the primary goal of helping youths with minor offenses avoid getting a criminal record. The underlying philosophy is that a youthful criminal record can have negative impacts on educational, employment, and societal development throughout life, and that certain youthful transgressions can be effectively redressed through education and service opportunities. While WCDA has created a program to accomplish this goal, we identified several ways in which its administration of this program could be strengthened. Specifically, WCDA has not set up a process to identify, collect, and evaluate relevant program data; does not ensure that all the work done by participants is adequately documented; and does not ensure that all participants complete the required education program. As a result, WCDA’s ability to measure the results of the program and determine whether any changes to the program are necessary is limited.
WCDA should consider establishing a process to assess the effectiveness of the YA Diversion Program
WCDA could improve its program by establishing a process to identify, collect, and evaluate relevant Young Adult Diversion Program data, such as whether participants have reoffended after successfully completing the program.
To determine the extent to which this program reduces recidivism for participants, we tested 50 of 402 participants enrolled in the program during the period June 1, 2013 through December 31, 2016 and determined that 46 of the 50 successfully completed the Young Adult Diversion Program. We reviewed court records for those 46 participants and determined that 9 (19.6%) committed further crimes3 after successfully completing the program. The crimes were committed between 68 and 890 days after program completion. If WCDA had collected and evaluated this information, it could have assessed the program’s effect on recidivism and considered potential improvements to the program.
Authoritative Guidance
The Urban Institute, a 50-year-old nonprofit organization that researches social and economic policy, has issued a report titled Improving Recidivism as a Performance Measure. The report states,
Ongoing data collection and analysis is necessary for any performance measure. Without year-to-year data, policymakers are unable to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of government agencies or the programs they implement.
Although WCDA is not required to follow this guidance, it can be considered a best practice.
Reasons for Noncompliance
WCDA personnel told us that the Young Adult Diversion Program does not have the resources to collect and analyze program data that could provide information about the program’s effectiveness, such as participants’ recidivism rate, because of staffing issues. The program has only two employees (two part-time diversion officers).
Files did not have documentation that all participants completed all program requirements
WCDA did not have supporting documentation that all program participants completed certain conditions of its Young Adult Diversion Program, specifically the online education program and the community service. Without obtaining and retaining this documentation, WCDA cannot be certain that participants successfully met all of the program’s requirements before their charges were dismissed.
We reviewed the records of 50 out of 402 participants for the period June 1, 2013 through December 31, 2016. Of the 50 participants, 46 completed the program, and 13 of those completed the required online education program; however only 8 of these 13 participants had completion certificates for the program in their files. In addition, 36 of the 46 participants’ files did not include documentation that the required community service hours were performed.
Authoritative Guidance
The Office of the State Comptroller has issued an Internal Control Guide for all state agencies to use when developing their internal control systems. In emphasizing the importance of proper documentation, this guide points to the US Government Accountability Office’s document Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, which states,
Documentation . . . provides a means to retain organizational knowledge and mitigate the risk of having that knowledge limited to a few personnel, as well as a means to communicate that knowledge as needed to external parties.
Proper administration of this program would require WCDA to maintain all the documentation necessary to substantiate that all participants are held to the same standard and have successfully completed all program components before they are eligible to have their cases dismissed.
Reasons for Issue
WCDA officials stated that the diversion officers talk to the field supervisors of the community service program to ensure that participants complete the required community service. They did not explain why some files lacked documentation for the online education program.
Additionally, the section of WCDA’s Programmatic Policies that applies to the Young Adult Diversion Program states that WCDA staff members will ensure that participants comply with program requirements, but does not state specific procedures for performing or documenting this.
WCDA did not require most Young Adult Diversion Program participants to complete online education
Of the 46 records we reviewed of Young Adult Diversion Program participants who completed the program, 32 (70%) indicated that the participants were allowed to perform four more hours of community service (in addition to the eight hours required by the program) instead of a required online education program. Such education programs provide important information to participants, including information on the legal repercussions and other negative consequences of their crimes, as well as behavior-change strategies. Without requiring participants to complete an online education program, WCDA cannot be certain that participants receive all the information they need to change their behavior and possibly reduce recidivism.
Authoritative Guidance
WCDA’s Young Adult Diversion Program policy states, “The [participant] must successfully complete an online education program.”
Reasons for Noncompliance
WCDA officials stated that the online education programs were not offered for every type of crime committed by participants. During the audit period, WCDA required participants to complete the alcohol intervention program if their offense was alcohol-related and a shoplifting educational program if their offense was shoplifting or petty theft. If a participant committed a different type of crime, s/he was not required to complete either of these programs because they did not address the participant’s crime. WCDA did not offer education programs for other common types of criminal offenses of program participants, such as disorderly conduct, vandalism, or criminal trespass.
Additionally, some participants who should have been required to complete an online education program did not have access to a computer, and one could not speak English (the only language offered by the software vendor for WCDA’s online education programs).
Recommendations
- WCDA should identify the relevant data that could be used to assess the effectiveness of its Young Adult Diversion Program, establish a formal process to collect and evaluate this information, and use it to make any necessary program enhancements. If WCDA believes it needs more resources to perform these functions, including additional personnel, it should try to identify existing resources that could be allocated to these activities and/or request additional funding from the Legislature for this purpose.
- WCDA should amend its Programmatic Policies to require written documentation to substantiate the completion of the Young Adult Diversion Program.
- WCDA should maintain all such documentation in each participant’s file. Specifically, it should obtain certificates of completion for online programs and have authorized community service personnel complete and sign a document stating that the participant has completed community service.
- WCDA should expand its current online education programs to include all types of criminal offenses in the Young Adult Diversion Program. For criminal offenses covered by the Young Adult Diversion Program that have no online education programs, WCDA should offer an in-person program.
- WCDA should remove barriers to accessing online education programs by determining whether a different vendor offers similar programs in different languages and suggesting alternatives (such as public libraries) to individuals who state that they do not have access to a computer.
Auditee's Response
I am pleased to report that we have already implemented two of the three recommendations regarding the diversion program. Although court dockets previously served as our primary documentation for successful program participation, we are now including similar documentation in our office files. The online education program has also been adjusted to accommodate the varying needs of participants.
There is one recommendation that gives me pause, however, and I believe merits further consideration. Specifically, I have several concerns regarding your recommendation to collect data in connection with the Young Adult Diversion Program.
First, the District Attorney’s Office does not collect data unless specifically mandated by statute, regulation, or requirements of financial grants. As your report indicated, this office does not have the resources to embark on data collection, and I would add that we do not have the authority to collect data on individuals in this circumstance.
Second, the report’s focus on recidivism may be misleading. The stated purpose of the diversion program is to “allow the first time offenders a chance to avoid having a criminal record.” While reducing recidivism is certainly a laudable goal, I would not want to mislead you, the Legislature, or the public into believing that the program is aimed at such a goal. The legislature’s recent criminal justice reform efforts include decriminalizing many non-violent misdemeanors and appears to also support the same goal of our diversion program to reduce the number of youths burdened with a criminal record. Given the limited and strict eligibility requirements for participation in the diversion program, the risk of recidivism is necessarily on the low end so I am not sure that data collection would be helpful.
Third, the data collection recommended by your report would not give much insight into recidivism. Statistics compiled would say very little unless they could be compared against data collected from individuals similarly situated who do not participate in the diversion program. So, again, I fear that we may mislead people by suggesting that the program reduces recidivism when, in fact, the raw data would not shed any light on that issue.
Finally, the recommendation is somewhat at odds with the premise of the diversion program. The program is designed to help young adults avoid the stigma of a criminal record for minor offenses. As your audit indicates, the vast majority of participants complete the program successfully without further interaction with law enforcement. Secretly monitoring these participants for the purpose of data collection strikes me as a bit of a betrayal of the promise of the program. We want people to successfully complete the program and move on without any strings attached.
Auditor's Reply
We believe that the actions taken by WCDA, as stated in its response, to address our concerns about the documentation of participation in the Young Adult Diversion Program and the related online educational programs were responsive to our concerns and should allow it to administer this program more effectively.
While we recognize that WCDA has limited resources, the collection and evaluation of data in the Young Adult Diversion Program, in our opinion, will aid in the proper administration of this program. For example, collecting information on why some participants did not participate and/or could not complete the program could allow WCDA to identify any potential barriers to successful program completion and address them accordingly. While WCDA may not have the authority to collect some data, we believe that at least some of the information that it would need to collect to effectively monitor and assess the impact of its Young Adult Diversion Program is accessible to WCDA, since the Office of the State Auditor was able to obtain this information.
Most publicly available information on diversion programs on both a state and a national level indicates that one of the primary goals of this type of program is to reduce recidivism.4 Although we understand that there are limitations on how the recidivism rate in this population should be interpreted, we believe that WCDA should consider aligning itself with national standards and view a reduction in the recidivism rate for program participants as a primary goal of the program. Although the rate at which participants reoffend is only one metric, it does provide some understanding of the impact the program has on participants.
Finally, although WCDA believes that collecting and using program data would be at odds with the premise of the Young Adult Diversion Program, we believe this information could be used also to provide a level of transparency to program participants, the Legislature, and the public regarding the program’s effectiveness. Program information could be collected, retained, used, and disseminated in a secure manner that would protect the privacy of participants but also be useful in program administration.
| Date published: | March 23, 2018 |
|---|