A Natural Experiment in Reform: Analyzing Drug Law Policy in New York City, New York, Quantitative Data, 2006-2012 (ICPSR 34883)
Version Date: Sep 30, 2020 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Jim Parsons, Vera Institute of Justice;
Todd Clear, Rutgers University;
Ernest Drucker, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34883.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
On January 1, 2011, the Vera Institute of Justice (Vera) launched "A Natural Experiment in Reform: Analyzing Drug Law Policy in New York," which was funded by the National Institute of Justice, and conducted by Vera, with the John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, and the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University. This study sought to analyze the effects of recent changes in drug offense sentencing laws in New York State (NYS) and chronicle New York City's experience with drug law reform (DLR). This includes changes in sentencing outcomes for felony drug cases, reoffending, and cost implications, with the hope of informing NYS policy makers, and provide other states across the nation with research to inform their own DLR efforts.
Specifically, this study revolves around the following objectives: 1) describe how the DLR is reflected in actual sentencing outcomes and the extent to which practices of judges, lawyers, and defense attorneys have shifted in response to the reforms; 2) investigate how treatment diversion impacts reoffending and 3) analyze the cost implications of changing drug law sentencing policies. Researchers analyzed administrative data to describe the impacts of reforms on sentencing decisions, collected New York City arrest data for drug felonies between October 1, 2006 and September 30, 2011, and evaluated outcome data measuring recidivism and costs between pre and post DLR periods.
Numerous variables tracking offenders' progress through the criminal justice system were collected including admission to the Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program, arrest and disposition jurisdictions, charges, sentencing, and drug court screening and admission. Arrestees' criminal history and rearrest figures, as well as their sex, race, and ethnic demographics were collected also.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Smallest Geographic Unit View help for Smallest Geographic Unit
City
Restrictions View help for Restrictions
Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reasons for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Study Design View help for Study Design
Researchers conducted analyses centered around three research questions: implementation, reoffending, and cost-benefit analysis. Implementation was assessed through a quasi-experimental design by examining all arrest cases on A through E felony drug charges and specified property charges during two periods: one prior to DLR (January - September, 2008) and one following DLR (January - September, 2010). Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was used to control for the downward trend in felony drug arrests during 2008 through 2010, and for baseline differences between arrestees including demographics, borough of arrest and case disposition, index charge, and criminal history. Sentencing and treatment diversion outcomes were compared for pre and post-DLR groups.
Reoffending was examined by collecting administrative data from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services to track recidivism for a pre-DLR sample who received jail, prison, or probation sentences prior to reform, and a post-DLR sample of people who were diverted to treatment post-DLR. PSM was used to select individuals with similar characteristics in each sample to reduce the effect of confounding variables. Pre and post-DLR sentenced groups were followed, from a minimum of 12 months, to a maximum of 35 months following disposition. Researchers also controlled for the incapacitation effect of jail, prison, and residential treatment on offenders.
Vera's Cost-Benefit Analysis Unit performed a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) based on results from the implementation and reoffending analyses. First, the CBA used data from the implementation analysis to examine citywide costs and benefits, comparing taxpayer costs for handling felony drug arrests in New York City pre and post-DLR. Second, the CBA examined whether drug treatment diversion was cost-effective compared to jail, prison, or probation sentences. This facet also assessed whether justice resources and victim costs offset the cost of increased use of drug treatment services.
Time Method View help for Time Method
Universe View help for Universe
Individuals arrested for A through E drug felonies and specified property offenses in New York City from October 1, 2006 to November 30, 2012.
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection
Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables
The Felony Drug Arrest Trends dataset includes all arrest cases in New York City on A through E arrest category drug felonies, between October 1, 2006 and March 31, 2011. Additional information includes variables regarding charges, sentencing, drug court screening and admission, arrest history, disposition county, arrestees' demographics, and criminal history. Data were updated to June 2012.
The Drug Court Screening dataset combines all cases screened for drug court eligibility, either from the matched felony drug sample (Felony Drug File), or matched specified property sample (Property Charge File). Variables describing arrest history, sentencing, disposition, drug court history, and drug use. Race, ethnicity, and sex demographics are included as well.
The Felony Drug File dataset includes all arrest cases in New York City on A through E arrest category drug felonies, between January 1, 2008 and September 30, 2008, and cases disposed before April 7, 2009; and all cases arrested in New York City on A through E drug felonies between January 1, 2010 and September 30, 2010 and cases disposed before April 7, 2011. Information includes admission to the DTAP program, charges, sentencing, drug court screening and admission, arrest and disposition jurisdictions. Arrestees' sex, race, and ethnicity demographics, as well as criminal history and rearrests instances were included as well. Data were updated to November 30, 2012.
The Property Charge File dataset includes all cases indicted in New York City on specified property charges between January 1, 2008 and September 30, 2008 and cases disposed before April 7, 2009; and arrested and indicted in New York City on specified property charges between January 1, 2010 and September 30, 2010 and cases disposed before April 7, 2011. Information includes admission to the DTAP program, charges, sentencing, drug court screening and admission, arrest and disposition jurisdictions. Arrestees' sex, race, and ethnicity demographics, as well as criminal history and rearrests instances were included as well. The data were updated to November 30, 2012.
The Reoffending Sample dataset includes all individuals indicted in New York City on B through E arrest category drug felonies and property charges with no prior violent convictions between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2008, and sentenced to prison, jail, probation or sentenced as split sentences or time served before April 7, 2009 (Pre-DLR sentenced cases); All individuals indicted in New York City on B through E drug felonies or specified property charges with no prior violent convictions between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2010, and diverted to drug court before November 30, 2011 (Post DLR diverted cases). Information includes admission to the DTAP program, charges, sentencing, drug court screening and admission, arrest and disposition jurisdictions. Arrestees' sex, race, and ethnicity demographics, as well as criminal history and rearrests instances were included as well. The data were updated to November 30, 2012.
Response Rates View help for Response Rates
Not applicable
Presence of Common Scales View help for Presence of Common Scales
none
HideNotes
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.
ICPSR usually offers files in multiple formats for researchers to be able to access data and documentation in formats that work well within their needs. If you have questions about the accessibility of materials distributed by ICPSR or require further assistance, please visit ICPSR’s Accessibility Center.
One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.