skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 229302 Find in a Library
Title: Corporate Crime: DOJ Has Taken Steps to Better Track Its Use of Deferred and Non-Prosecution Agreements, but Should Evaluate Effectiveness
Corporate Author: US Government Accountability Office
United States of America
Date Published: December 2009
Page Count: 47
Sponsoring Agency: Azimuth Inc.
Fairmont, WV 26554
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
US Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
Publication Number: GAO-10-110
Sale Source: Azimuth Inc.
1000 Technology Drive, Suite 3120
Fairmont, WV 26554
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF|PDF
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report presents findings on the U.S. Department of Justice's use and oversight of deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements (DPAs and NPAs) as they relate to cases of corporate crime.
Abstract: The report found the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) lacked performance measures to assess how deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements (DPAs and NPAs) contribute its efforts to combat corporate crime. DOJ agreed with the recommendation to develop performance measures to evaluate the contribution of DPAs and NPAs toward achieving its strategic objective of combating public and corporate corruption, and recognizes the value of appropriate performance measures in this area. Two possible measures of DPA and NPA effectiveness could be 1) whether the company repeats the criminal behavior either during or after its agreement; or 2) whether the company successfully implements the terms of the agreement. In DOJ's need to appropriately punish and deter corporate crime, DOJ has made more use of DPAs and NPAs, in which prosecutors may require company reform, as well as other things in exchange for deferring prosecution. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) examined the extent to which DOJ has used DPAs and NPAs to address corporate misconduct, tracking the use of these agreements, the extent to which DOJ measures the effectiveness of NPAs and DPAs, and the role of the court in the DPA and NPA process. GAO examined 152 DPAs and NPAs negotiated from 1993 through September 2009 and analyzed DOJ data on corporate prosecutions in fiscal years 2004 through 2009. They also interviewed DOJ officials, prosecutors, company representatives, monitors who oversee company compliance, and Federal judges. Figures and tables
Main Term(s): Corporate crimes
Index Term(s): Alternative court procedures; Court procedures; Court reform; Deferred prosecution programs; Prosecution; Prosecutorial discretion
Note: Downloaded January 12, 2010
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.