Use of Risk Assessments in Pretrial Supervision Decision-Making and Associated Outcomes

Abstract

Despite the growing use of both pretrial risk assessment and supervision as pretrial reform strategies, there has been limited investigation on the effectiveness of risk assessment-informed pretrial supervision. We conducted a multi-site, retrospective investigation in 1,505 pretrial defendants from four local jurisdictions to examine risk assessment-informed pretrial supervision decisions and associated pretrial misconduct outcomes. Our findings showed pretrial supervision decisions were generally consistent with structured guidelines and defendant risk classifications. Use of bond and electronic monitoring had little impact on pretrial misconduct. However, more frequent pretrial monitoring was associated with higher rates of pretrial misconduct across all risk levels. Reducing supervision conditions and monitoring for low-risk defendants, in particular, may help reduce rates of misconduct in pretrial populations.

Pretrial Risk Assessment, Release Recommendations, and Racial Bias

“…However, even in the low-risk condition, in which the person was described as only 10% likely to fail or 90% likely to succeed, almost half of the participants recommended release with conditions. Unnecessary conditions of pretrial release could increase the likelihood of pretrial failure (Lowder & Foudray, 2021). Indeed, the adverse consequences of over-intervention are widely documented in other stages of the criminal legal system (Andrews & Dowden, 2006).…”

Pretrial Decision-Making Matrices: The Role of Risk and Charge Weighting in Risk Assessment–Guided Decisions

“…However, among typically sized matrices (i.e., those that were 3 × 3 or 3 × 4), we found no consistent evidence that pretrial risk assessment consideration was lower among more serious charge types. Finally, previous studies have examined rates of adherence to structured guidelines in the pretrial context (Copp et al, 2022; Danner et al, 2015; Lowder et al, 2021; Lowder & Foudray, 2021), and we used these estimates to project the potential influence of risk assessments on decisions. We do not know the exact rates of adherence to structured guidelines across all 29 counties that provided matrices.…”

“…In another study, Lowder and colleagues (2021) found 73.8% of release decisions were adherent to structured guidelines in the year following pretrial risk assessment implementation and across three counties. Another multijurisdictional study found slightly lower rates of adherence to structured guidelines for supervision decisions (60%; Lowder & Foudray, 2021). A final study in a single jurisdiction found much lower rates of adherence to structured guidelines in a 2-year postimplementation period (25%–47%; Copp et al, 2022).…”

Technical Violations and Their Effects on Pretrial/Bond Supervision Outcomes

“…Bolger and Phillips (2021) examined predictors of pretrial failure for 286 individuals participating in a pretrial supervision program, concluding that criminal history and education level were predictive of failure. In contrast, an analysis of pretrial defendants from four jurisdictions found that while the use of bond and electronic monitoring had little impact on pretrial misconduct, more frequent monitoring was associated with misconduct across all risk levels (Lowder & Foundray, 2021). Thus, it is plausible that pretrial defendants with more conditions of release may have poorer outcomes than those who have less restrictive conditions.…”