American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 727–745 | Cite as

Correlates of Program Success and Recidivism among Participants in an Adult Pre-Arrest Diversion Program

  • Albert M. KopakEmail author
  • Gregory A. Frost


Adult pre-arrest diversion, also known as “deflection,” programs have great potential to change the way the criminal justice system currently operates. One defining feature of these programs is that they offer eligible adults the opportunity to avoid a formal criminal arrest record and all of the negative consequences that are associated with an arrest. The current study provides an assessment of factors related to successful program completion and post-program recidivism for participants in the Pre-Arrest Diversion/Adult Civil Citation (PAD/ACC) program in Leon County, Florida. Behavioral assessment and formal arrest data were drawn from 854 adults who participated in the program between March 2013 and June 2016. Adults undergo a comprehensive behavioral health assessment which utilizes the Global Assessment of Individual Needs (GAIN–SS). Several behavioral health indicators were associated with program outcome measures, which included successful program completion and post-program arrest. Participants with greater propensity for crime or violence, elevated levels of behavioral problems, and symptoms of a substance use disorder, including a positive drug screen, were more likely to fail to complete the program. Greater indications of behavioral problems and positive drug screen results were also significantly associated with a higher probability of post-program arrest. These results contribute to the lean knowledge related to the performance of these expanding programs, and they also have direct implications for the refinement of the PAD/ACC program.


Civil citation Pre-arrest diversion Deflection Adult Recidivism 


  1. Bernstein, G. (2015). Pre-booking diversion: an alternative to conviction and incarceration. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved February 17, 2017 from
  2. Berson, S. B. (2013). Beyond the sentence-understanding collateral consequences. NIJ Journal, 272, 25–28.Google Scholar
  3. Blumstein, A., & Nakamura, K. (2009). Redemption in the presence of widespread criminal background checks. Criminology, 47(2), 327–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boruchowitz, R. C., Brink, M. N., & Dimino, M. (2009). Minor crimes, massive waste: the terrible toll of America’s broken misdemeanor courts. Washington, DC: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Retrieved June 13, 2016 from Scholar
  5. Brame, R., Turner, M. G., Paternoster, R., & Bushway, S. D. (2012). Cumulative prevalence of arrest from ages 8 to 23 in a national sample. Pediatrics, 129(1), 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brame, R., Bushway, S. D., Paternoster, R., & Turner, M. G. (2014). Demographic patterns of cumulative arrest prevalence by ages 18 and 23. Crime & Delinquency, 60(3), 471–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Callister, S. & Braaten, A. (2016). An evaluation of the Eau Claire County Pre-Charge Diversion Program as measured by two year recidivism rates. Retrieved from the Eau Claire County, Wisconsin website:
  8. Charlier, J. (2015). Want to reduce drugs in your community? You might want to deflect instead of arrest. The Police Chief, 82(9), 30–31.Google Scholar
  9. Clifford, D. R. (2016). Editorial: Pinellas sheriff offers smart pre-arrest diversion proposal. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved February 17, 2017 from
  10. Collins, S. E., Lonczak, H. S., & Clifasefi, S. L. (2015). LEAD program evaluation: recidivism report. Seattle: University of Washington-Harborview Medical Center Retrieved June 13, 2016 from Scholar
  11. Dennis, M. L., Chan, Y. F., & Funk, R. R. (2006). Development and validation of the GAIN short screener (GSS) for internalizing, externalizing, and substance use disorders and crime/violence problems among adolescents and adults. American Journal on Addictions, 15(Supp 1), 80–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dennis, M. L., Feeney, T., Stevens, L. H., & Bedoya, L. (2008). Global appraisal of individual needs-short screener (GAIN-SS): administration and scoring manual version 2.0.3. Normal: Chestnut Health Systems.Google Scholar
  13. Fagan, J., & Freeman, R. B. (1999). Crime and work. Crime and Justice, 25, 225–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Florida TaxWatch Research Institute. (2016). Lower costs & less crime: criminal and juvenile justice reform options for Florida. Tallahassee: Author Retrieved June 15, 2016 from Scholar
  15. Gardner, B. O., Boccaccini, M. T., Bitting, B. S., & Edens, J. F. (2015). Personality assessment inventory scores as predictors of misconduct, recidivism, and violence: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 27(2), 534–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gray, A. R., & Saum, C. A. (2005). Mental health, gender, and drug court completion. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 30(1), 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harris, K. D. (2015). Crime in California. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Justice, California Information Services Division, Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis, Criminal Justice Statistics Center.Google Scholar
  18. Hiday, V. A., & Ray, B. (2010). Arrests two years after exiting a well-established mental health court. Psychiatric Services, 61(5), 463–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson, J. E., Friedmann, P. D., Green, T. C., Harrington, M., & Taxman, F. S. (2011). Gender and treatment response in substance use treatment-mandated parolees. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 40(3), 313–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kopak, A. M., Cowart, J. J., Frost, G., & Ballard, A. (2015). The adult civil citation network: An innovative pre-charge diversion program for misdemeanor offenders. Journal of Community Corrections, 25(1), 5–12.Google Scholar
  21. Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (1993). Turning points in the life course: Why change matters to the study of crime. Criminology, 31(3), 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mauricio, A. M., Little, M., Chassin, L., Knight, G. P., Piquero, A. P., Losoya, S. H., & Vargas-Chanes, D. (2009). Juvenile offenders’ alcohol and marijuana trajectories: Risk and protective factors effects in the context of time in a supervised facility. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 440–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108(5), 937–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Palmer, J. W. (1975). Pre-arrest diversion: The night prosecutor’s program in Columbus, Ohio. Crime & Delinquency, 21(2), 100–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peters, R. H., & Murrin, M. R. (2000). Effectiveness of treatment-based drug courts in reducing criminal recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27(1), 72–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final report of the President’s task force on 21 st century policing. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
  27. Roe-Sepowitz, D., Hickle, K. E., Loubert, M. P., & Egan, T. (2011). Adult prostitution recidivism: Risk factors and impact of a diversion program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50(5), 272–285.Google Scholar
  28. Sacks, S., Melnick, G., Coen, C., Banks, S., Friedmann, P. D., Grella, C., Knight, K., & Zlotnick, C. (2007). CJDATS co-occurring disorders screening instrument for mental disorders: A validation study. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(9), 1198–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Satterberg, D., Pugel, J., Taylor, K., & Daugaard, L. (2013). Seattle LEADs on law enforcement diversion. The e-newsletter of the COPS Office, 6(4), 1–2.Google Scholar
  30. Scott, C. K., Grella, C. E., Dennis, M. L., & Funk, R. R. (2016). A time-varying model of risk for predicting recidivism among women offenders over 3 years following their release from jail. Criminal Justice and Behavior. doi: 10.1177/0093854816632551.Google Scholar
  31. Severson, M. E., Veeh, C., Bruns, K., & Lee, J. (2012). Who goes back to prison; who does not: A multiyear view of reentry program participants. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 51(5), 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith, A., & Maddan, S. (2011). Three-minute justice: haste and waste in Florida’s misdemeanor courts. Washington, DC: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Retrieved June 13, 2016 from Scholar
  33. StataCorp (2015). Stata statistical software: release 14. College Station: StataCorp LP.Google Scholar
  34. Stuckey, S. D. (2008). Collateral effects of arrests in Minnesota. University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 5(1), 336–360.Google Scholar
  35. Subramanian, R., Delaney, R., Roberts, S., Fishman, N., & McGarry, P. (2015). Incarceration’s front door: the misuse of jails in America. New York: VERA Institute of Justice, Center on Sentencing and Corrections Retrieved June 13, 2016 from Scholar
  36. Sweeten, G. (2006). Who will graduate? Disruption of high school education by arrest and court involvement. Justice Quarterly, 23(4), 462–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. The Council of State Governments. (2017). National inventory of the collateral consequences of conviction. Retrieved February 14, 2017 from
  38. Uggen, C., Vuolo, M., Lageson, S., Ruhland, E., & Whitham, H. K. (2014). The edge of stigma: An experimental audit of the effects of low-level criminal records on employment. Criminology, 52(4), 627–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wood, J. (2015). An innovative drug policy that works. Retrieved June 3, 2016 from
  40. Zanis, D. A., Coviello, D. M., Lloyd, J. J., & Nazar, B. L. (2009). Predictors of drug treatment completion among parole violators. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 41(2), 173–180.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Criminology & Criminal JusticeWestern Carolina UniversityCullowheeUSA
  2. 2.Adult Civil Citation NetworkTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations