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: 77448 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Court Employment Project Evaluation
Corporate Author: Vera Institute of Justice
United States of America
Project Director: S H Baker
Date Published: Unknown
Page Count: 433
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Vera Institute of Justice
New York, NY 10279
Grant Number: 76-NI-99-0040
Dataset: DATASET 1
Type: Program/Project Evaluation
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: In 1975, with the cooperation of New York City prosecutors, judges, and the Legal Aid Society, the Vera Institute initiated an experimental evaluation of the Court Employment Project (CEP), one of the first pretrial diversion programs in the United States.
Abstract: The research was a continuation of previous efforts to assess the impact of pretrial diversion. Prominent researchers who had conducted the early program evaluations uniformly concluded that research using an experimental design and a randomly selected comparison population was essential if policy and program development were to progress in the pretrial field. Thus, this research entailed an experimental design with these major characteristics: concurrent and random assignment of defendants eligible for pretrial diversion to experimental and control groups; the creation of a large research population to permit adequate impact analysis (666 subjects were chosen over a 10-month period); a followup period of a year; and the development of an extensive data base, including material from several personal interviews with each subject and from official records. The most important finding was that clients' participation in educational, vocational, and other social activities was not significantly affected by their association with CEP. Moreover, the experimental group was not subsequently arrested for any fewer or less serious crimes than the control group during the study period. In response to these evaluation results, CEP determined that, although its services were basically appropriate for its clients, the mechanics of client selection needed changing. As of 1979, CEP accepted referrals from any court source, but participation in CEP was no longer a precondition for pretrial diversion from prosecution. In addition, the project began issuing reports to the referring source only with the voluntary agreement of the client. Also discussed are the diversion concept and rationale, their development over the 1970's, and the background and history of CEP. Appendixes provide study data and instruments, a description of the methodology, and a bibliography of approximately 125 references.
Index Term(s): Deferred prosecution programs; Diversion programs; Evaluation; Judicial diversion; New York; Program evaluation; Prosecutorial diversion; Services effectiveness
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.