Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pretrial Data topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Certified pretrial agencies report high appearance rates, low violent reoffending; commissioners raise funding and equity concerns
Summary
Data presented from 32 certified pretrial agencies shows low-risk defendants appear for court at roughly 93% and new violent arrests during pretrial are rare; commissioners discussed funding cuts, local resource differences and risks that a preventive-detention regime could increase jail populations without expanded pretrial capacity.
Officials from the Indiana Office of Court Services and local judges presented outcome data from certified pretrial agencies and urged the commission to consider funding and equity implications as it considers statutory language for preventive detention.
Chris Bean, director of the Justice Services Division at the Indiana Office of Court Services, said the office has tracked more than 17,000 completed pretrial cases in certified counties and that appearance and public-safety outcomes are strong in participating jurisdictions. "Low-risk people are showing up for court at a 93% rate," Bean said; moderate-risk defendants appeared at about 86% and high-risk defendants at roughly 75% for the completed-case sample. He added that, in the certified-county sample, new violent arrests during the pretrial period were extremely rare (the dashboard showed roughly 99% of released defendants did not commit a new violent offense while pending case resolution).
Judge Mark Spitzer, who helped counties adopt evidence-based pretrial practices, said those results reflect a combination of a quick assessment tool (IRA‑PAT), local risk matrices that combine offense and risk score, and supervision where appropriate. He and Chris Bean noted that supervised release (text notifications, check‑ins, electronic monitoring where used locally, and referrals to treatment) outperformed unsupervised releases.
Funding emerged as a central concern. Bean said the Office had been distributing approximately $4 million annually to certified pretrial agencies; recent reallocation cuts of about $1.2 million forced at least one county (Marion County) to withdraw from certification. Commissioners discussed whether the state should fund expansion of certified pretrial programs to all counties and whether counties that adopt evidence-based programs should be treated differently under any statewide bail schedule.
Several members raised equity concerns about condition-based release that impose costs on defendants (for example, electronic-monitoring fees). Representative Matt Pierce noted the risk that low-income defendants could be disadvantaged if diversion to monitored releases requires fees they cannot afford. Commissioners asked staff to analyze cost models and the tradeoffs between state funding for pretrial services and local costs associated with holding additional defendants in county jails.
What happens next: The Office of Court Services will share its dashboard screenshots and the commission requested written proposals on funding and statutory mechanisms ahead of the Oct. 29 meeting.
