DOI: 10.3886/icpsr37829
title: Improving the Accuracy and Fairness of Pretrial Release Decisions: A Multi-Site Study of Risk Assessments Implemented in Four Counties, Indiana, 2015-2018
title: Archival Version

description: This study was a multi-site, quasi-experimental investigation of risk assessment-informed pretrial release decisions relative to decisions made without risk assessments. The study objectives were to investigate whether use of pretrial risk assessments: 1) improved risk management decisions relative to practice as usual; 2) improved the fairness of pretrial release decisions for racial minorities relative to practice as usual; and 3) revealed judge-level variation in pretrial release decisions. Secondary, administrative data were gathered from four counties in Indiana. Apart from risk assessment information, all data represent public records: court, jail and prison. Variables gathered from the data sources fall into three main categories: defendant variables, pretrial release decisions, and pretrial misconduct outcomes. Examples of specific variables include: booking and release dates, bond amounts, number and type of charges, and demographic information (age, sex and race).
description: Risk assessments have emerged as a principal component of evidence-based reform efforts to increase the efficiency, consistency, and accuracy of pretrial release decisions. However, as an evidence-based strategy, risk assessments have proliferated rapidly in pretrial settings without strong evidence of their effectiveness in achieving these goals. Further, although risk assessments have the potential to reduce well-documented, pervasive racial disparities in pretrial case processing, whether risk assessments improve the fairness of pretrial release decisions relative to practice as usual remains to be seen. The overall goal was to assess differences in the accuracy and fairness of pretrial release decisions made with and without risk assessment information. In particular, the study objectives were to investigate whether use of pretrial risk assessments: 1) improved risk management decisions relative to practice as usual; 2) improved the fairness of pretrial release decisions for racial minorities relative to practice as usual; and 3) revealed judge-level variation in pretrial release decisions.
description: Administrative court and jail records were procured from four Indiana counties that piloted a risk assessment instrument (Indiana Risk Assessment System - Pretrial Assessment Tool (IRAS-PAT)) in 2016 to inform pretrial decision-making. Using a multiple nonequivalent comparison group design, defendants who received a pretrial risk assessment during the 1-year pilot period (Pilot condition; n = 2,631) were matched to two separate groups of pretrial defendants without risk assessments. The first comparison group consisted of pretrial defendants who were booked during the 1-year pilot period but did not receive a risk assessment (Pilot Comparison condition; n = 1,580). The second comparison group consisted of pretrial defendants who were booked during the 1-year period prior to the pilot period (Pre-Pilot Comparison condition; n = 3,185).
description: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes..
description: Presence of Common Scales: None
description: Response Rates: Not applicable.
description: Datasets: DS1: Dataset
description: record abstracts
description: Pretrial defendants who were booked into jail in four Indiana counties during the study period. Smallest Geographic Unit: County
description: Across all three groups and four counties, participants represent unique individuals who were booked into each county's local jail between 2015 and 2017 and had formal charges filed in court. All participants had a case disposition by December 31st, 2018.