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: 75404 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Pretrial Adult Diversion - A Study of Impact and Process
Author(s): J F Austin
Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency Research Ctr
United States of America
Date Published: Unknown
Page Count: 100
Sponsoring Agency: National Council on Crime and Delinquency Research Ctr
San Francisco, CA 94102
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
US Dept of Justice

US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 78-NI-AX-0124
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: The impact and process evaluation of the San Pablo Adult Diversion Project (SPAD) in California found that pretrial diversion successfully averted convictions but did not reduce recidivism or costs.
Abstract: The project was initiated in August 1975 to provide short-term (3 to 6 months) and intensive supervision of misdemeanor defendants and a brokerage-referral service delivery system. Its objectives included diverting 200 cases that would ordinarily result in filed complaints; reducing municipal court congestion and the time lag between arrest and the treatment process; and limiting the extent of penetration into the criminal justice system. In addition, a reduction in recidivism and the provision of opportunities for community involvement in the resocialization process of those referred to the project were desired. SPAD differed from other projects in that it guaranteed dismissal of criminal charges upon successful completion of the diversion supervision and that it actively involved police, district attorney, and community efforts. The evaluation examined the project's definition of diversion and its impact on recidivism, costs, and social control when compared to a control group of nondiverted offenders. The impact results showed that SPAD was unable to reduce recidivism and costs. For the 158 participants in the project's first year, the average cost per divertee was $598.50, adding $116,458 to the county's budget. However, SPAD was successful in protecting its clients from the stigma of conviction: 90 percent had their cases dismissed, compared to a 6.6 percent rate for the control group. After 36 months, divertees had a rearrest rate of 37.7 percent, compared to 44.3 percent for controls -- a statistically nonsignificant difference. Future directions for pretrial diversion are discussed. Flow charts, data tables, footnotes, and an 85-item reference list are included.
Index Term(s): California; Deferred prosecution programs; Diversion programs; Pretrial programs; Prosecutorial diversion
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.