Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the LEAD Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supporters and critics spar over LEAD evidence as council adds reporting requirements
Summary
Public commenters and council members disagreed on the effectiveness of LEAD; critics challenged the program’s 58% recidivism claim while participants and LEAD advocates described life-changing outcomes. Committee adopted reporting provisions to improve transparency.
The Public Safety Committee heard sharply divided testimony about LEAD’s effectiveness during public comment and in committee debate. Eric Zimmerman of the Washington Policy Center challenged a commonly cited 58% reduction in recidivism, calling that figure a misinterpretation of statistical modeling. "The 58% reduction in recidivism cited in LEAD's own presentations and in your council packet is not factual," Zimmerman said.
Opposing views came from program participants and providers. A longtime participant, who identified himself as Devin, described more than a decade of contact with LEAD and said staff "kept showing up" and helped him find housing and work. Sam Wolf of Purpose, Dignity, Action urged continued investment and data transparency. Central staff and committee members responded by adding explicit reporting requirements in the ordinance: Greg Doss pointed to subsection j(4) requiring providers who work with SPD to collect and make available data on referrals, participation and outcomes so policymakers can assess effectiveness.
