National Academies Report Urges Data Transparency, Racial Equity, and Alternatives to Incarceration

Generated Image

New report from National Academies of Sciences calls for data transparency and racial equity in prosecution.

A new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine lays out a roadmap for transforming prosecution in the United States, focused data transparency, racial equity, and diversion from incarceration.

The report, Examining Prosecution: Proceedings of a Workshop, summarizes findings from a September 2024 convening of national experts, prosecutors, researchers, and advocates, and underscores the critical, yet often overlooked, role that prosecutors play in shaping the outcomes—and inequities—of the U.S. criminal legal system.

“Prosecutors increasingly recognize their power, influence, and discretion as possible levers to mitigate racial disparities in the criminal legal system, the growth of incarceration, and incarceration of innocent individuals,” said workshop chair Preeti Chauhan of John Jay College of Criminal Justice in her opening remarks.

The workshop focused on highlighting practices that reduce racial and ethnic disparities, offer alternatives to incarceration, and promote accountability and community trust. Importantly, it sought to center racial and economic fairness in prosecutorial decision-making, an area of the justice system long considered a “black box” resistant to transparency and research.

One of the central themes of the workshop was the growing use of diversion programs to reduce incarceration without compromising public safety. In multiple jurisdictions, studies show that diverting individuals—particularly those facing nonviolent charges—can substantially reduce recidivism.

Amanda Agan of Cornell University presented research from Suffolk County, Massachusetts, showing that individuals who were not prosecuted for low-level nonviolent misdemeanors were 58% less likely to face a new criminal complaint over the next two years. Among those who completed diversion programs, felony complaints dropped by an astonishing 75%.

These findings were echoed in San Francisco, where researchers found that felony diversion programs reduced the likelihood of reconviction, even among individuals with serious criminal histories.

“Diversion appears to be more effective at reducing recidivism than traditional case adjudication,” concluded UC Berkeley’s Steven Raphael.

The report also examines how prosecutorial discretion can either reinforce or reduce racial disparities. In Florida, for example, researchers found that Black defendants were more likely to receive prison sentences than white defendants, even when controlling for case characteristics.

However, in jurisdictions led by “progressive prosecutors,” racial disparities in outcomes were significantly reduced.

In North Carolina, a longitudinal study tracked how prosecutorial charging decisions affected incarceration. From 1995 to 2010, prosecutors were less likely to reduce charges for Black defendants when it would help them avoid mandatory prison—a practice that compounded racial disparities.

But by 2014–2019, prosecutors were more likely to reduce charges for Black defendants, suggesting an offsetting effect that contributed to the broader decline in racial incarceration gaps.

“Prosecutors can fill prisons, destroy lives, and exacerbate racial disparities,” noted University of Maryland’s Brian D. Johnson. “But they also have the power to do the opposite.”

Several presenters emphasized the importance of building data culture within prosecutors’ offices. Prosecutorial Performance Indicators (PPI), community dashboards, and public reports on racial equity are increasingly being used to foster transparency and accountability.

Kimberly Foxx, State’s Attorney for Cook County, described how declining to prosecute low-level drug offenses reduced the number of such cases referred by police, as law enforcement adjusted to the new policy. “Doing nothing,” she said, “can be more impactful than performative diversion programs.”

GRO Community in Chicago launched an innovative gun diversion program that uses therapy and cognitive behavioral strategies to serve young men—most of them Black—arrested for unlawful gun possession. “Most of these men are just trying to protect themselves or their families,” said GRO’s Aaron Mallory. Of 73 participants, 63 completed the program, and those who did had significantly lower arrest and conviction rates.

While the report highlights recent advances, it also cautions that much more research and structural reform is needed.

“The overall evidence base for best practices in prosecution and policy recommendations remains underdeveloped,” said Johnson. The workshop calls for expanded partnerships between researchers and prosecutors and increased investment in data infrastructure and accountability mechanisms.

Ultimately, the report underscores that prosecution is not just a legal function but a moral and political one.

As Shaffer noted, “An execution says more about us as a society than it does about the person condemned.”

The same, the workshop suggests, could be said for prosecution. When wielded thoughtfully, prosecutorial discretion can be a powerful tool for justice.

Categories:

Breaking News Everyday Injustice

Tags:

Author

  • David Greenwald

    Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

    View all posts

10 comments

  1. “Importantly, it sought to center racial and economic fairness in prosecutorial decision-making, an area of the justice system long considered a “black box” resistant to transparency and research.”

    So more lenient sentences based on one’s race? That’s never going to fly…

      1. So what does fairness equal to you David when it comes to prosecutorial decision-making?

        I would think lenient would be at the top of your list.

        1. You start with a premise I fundamentally disagree with – that the only lever we have is length of time locking someone in a cage. I think that is a problematic paradigm. It doesn’t work for fairness or equity and it really doesn’t work well for public safety.

          1. But it’s still advocating for whatever prosecutorial outcome that is determined to be based on one’s race.

          2. I think you’re thinking about this in reverse – the existing outcome are heavily skewed – and research has shown that a lot of that is based on things like: (1) policing patterns, (2) what types of crimes get arrested and prosecuted, (3) and inequities within the prosecutorial decisions themselves.

            There is a reason why even a fairly conservative prosecutor like Reisig, piloted a racially blind system for making prosecution decisions. It’s an acknowledgement that he knew that race was a factor.

            The most glaring statistic is drug prosecutions. By all measures whites and Blacks use and sell drugs at comparable rates, and yet Blacks are arrested and prosecuted at six times the rate of whites. That serves as a gateway into the criminal legal system and often it catches those people for life.

          3. “There is a reason why even a fairly conservative prosecutor like Reisig, piloted a racially blind system for making prosecution decisions. It’s an acknowledgement that he knew that race was a factor.”

            1. So you would expect a conservative prosecutor to racist?
            2. A racially blind system isn’t the same as adjusting for race.
            3. You just said something nice about Reisig. Did you want a chance to walk that back?

          4. ” A racially blind system isn’t the same as adjusting for race.”

            True. But my point was somewhat different, I noted this as an indicator that Reisig understood there was a problem, not that his solution was optimal for solving that problem.

          5. “A racially blind system isn’t the same as adjusting for race”

            Now I can get behind that. You can’t get any more fair and equal than that. David, are you on board?

  2. “Prosecutors can fill prisons, destroy lives, and exacerbate racial disparities,”

    You know who else can fill prisons and destroy lives, and maybe the last one? Criminals. That’s who.

    “Doing nothing can be more impactful than performative diversion programs.”

    Nothing is more impactful than doing nothing. OK then . . .

    ” . . . an innovative gun diversion program to serve young men—most of them Black—arrested for unlawful gun possession. “Most of these men are just trying to protect themselves or their families,”

    And white men with guns aren’t just trying to protect themselves and their families? And why was the word ‘just’ necessary?

    “much more research and structural reform is needed.”

    Needed for what? You seem to have made up your mind already on how to proceed.

Leave a Comment