LEAD advocates spent more than a decade overstating the results of the program's initial evaluation, helping persuade lawmakers to change policy.
minute read
A criminal justice diversion program that was created in Seattle received nearly $100 million in federal funding after lawmakers were repeatedly given inflated claims about its effectiveness at reducing crime.
According to the Washington Policy Center, the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion program (LEAD) began in Seattle in 2011 as an alternative to arrest and prosecution for certain offenses, directing people who use drugs and commit crimes toward social services instead of jail. It has since spread to communities across more than 20 states.
Washington Policy Center (WPC) Director of Public Safety Solutions Eric Zimmerman alleges LEAD advocates spent more than a decade overstating the results of the program's initial evaluation, helping persuade lawmakers to change policy and direct millions of taxpayer dollars toward the model.
Since 2015, LEAD supporters have frequently claimed the program reduced recidivism or arrests by 58 percent. Zimmerman argues the underlying research did not establish a 58 percent reduction in the actual number of arrests.
"The initial LEAD study exaggerates its benefits and reveals that non-warrant arrests and total charges showed no statistically significant differences for the LEAD and non-LEAD groups," Zimmerman said.
According to WPC, inflated representations of LEAD's effectiveness reached Congress as early as 2015. At a July House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, a district attorney allied with the program reportedly told lawmakers Seattle's pilot produced an 80 percent reduction in criminal reoffending, roughly four times the reduction WPC says can reasonably be derived from the study.
LEAD subsequently gained bipartisan support on Capitol Hill. Washington Democratic Rep. Suzan DelBene advocated for the model during consideration of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA) in 2016, telling lawmakers that "LEAD successfully reduces recidivism by as much as 60 percent." Republicans repeated the figure during debate and supported her amendment allowing governments to implement community-based diversion programs such as LEAD.
By 2018, Congress was funding LEAD by name. WPC calculated that federal appropriations for the model eventually approached $100 million, in addition to millions more in state and local funding.
The findings build on Zimmerman's previous examination of LEAD's underlying results.
LEAD had also been promoted with claims that felony charges declined 39 percent, participants were 46 percent more likely to move along the "employment continuum," and were 89 percent more likely to obtain permanent housing. Zimmerman's analysis reached substantially different conclusions, including that 91 percent of 176 LEAD participants remained unemployed.
Questions about the data date back years. In 2019, this reporter met with LEAD architect Lisa Daugaard and members of her organization as they promoted the program's successes. When asked to provide the underlying data supporting those claims, they could not do so.
Even Daugaard has since acknowledged a problem with how LEAD's signature statistic was presented. "It's not a 58% reduction in the absolute number of arrests for the LEAD participants," Daugaard told The Center Square in August, explaining that the research instead concerned the likelihood of arrest compared with a control group. "But WPC is not wrong," she added. "It should not be sort of flattened or further simplified as a 58% reduction in the number of arrests. That is the mistake."
Daugaard disputes Zimmerman's broader criticism of LEAD, arguing that the program spread because police, prosecutors, businesses, service providers and participants found it useful, rather than because of a misstated statistic.
Researchers behind the original evaluation have also defended their work. The University of Washington's HaRRT Center said its statistical findings, published in peer-reviewed articles and reports, "still stand," while supporting corrections when results are inaccurately described.
The dispute has attracted national attention, with the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board highlighting WPC's criticism of the Seattle program.
LEAD remains part of Seattle's approach to drug crime and addiction. Earlier this year, Seattle police were directed to divert drug possession and drug-use charges away from prosecution and into LEAD.
Zimmerman is calling for Congress to immediately scrutinize LEAD funding and redirect future taxpayer dollars toward programs that can demonstrate reductions in criminal behavior and successful addiction treatment.
According to the Washington Policy Center, the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion program (LEAD) began in Seattle in 2011 as an alternative to arrest and prosecution for certain offenses, directing people who use drugs and commit crimes toward social services instead of jail. It has since spread to communities across more than 20 states.
Washington Policy Center (WPC) Director of Public Safety Solutions Eric Zimmerman alleges LEAD advocates spent more than a decade overstating the results of the program's initial evaluation, helping persuade lawmakers to change policy and direct millions of taxpayer dollars toward the model.
Since 2015, LEAD supporters have frequently claimed the program reduced recidivism or arrests by 58 percent. Zimmerman argues the underlying research did not establish a 58 percent reduction in the actual number of arrests.
"The initial LEAD study exaggerates its benefits and reveals that non-warrant arrests and total charges showed no statistically significant differences for the LEAD and non-LEAD groups," Zimmerman said.
According to WPC, inflated representations of LEAD's effectiveness reached Congress as early as 2015. At a July House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, a district attorney allied with the program reportedly told lawmakers Seattle's pilot produced an 80 percent reduction in criminal reoffending, roughly four times the reduction WPC says can reasonably be derived from the study.
LEAD subsequently gained bipartisan support on Capitol Hill. Washington Democratic Rep. Suzan DelBene advocated for the model during consideration of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA) in 2016, telling lawmakers that "LEAD successfully reduces recidivism by as much as 60 percent." Republicans repeated the figure during debate and supported her amendment allowing governments to implement community-based diversion programs such as LEAD.
By 2018, Congress was funding LEAD by name. WPC calculated that federal appropriations for the model eventually approached $100 million, in addition to millions more in state and local funding.
The findings build on Zimmerman's previous examination of LEAD's underlying results.
LEAD had also been promoted with claims that felony charges declined 39 percent, participants were 46 percent more likely to move along the "employment continuum," and were 89 percent more likely to obtain permanent housing. Zimmerman's analysis reached substantially different conclusions, including that 91 percent of 176 LEAD participants remained unemployed.
Questions about the data date back years. In 2019, this reporter met with LEAD architect Lisa Daugaard and members of her organization as they promoted the program's successes. When asked to provide the underlying data supporting those claims, they could not do so.
Even Daugaard has since acknowledged a problem with how LEAD's signature statistic was presented. "It's not a 58% reduction in the absolute number of arrests for the LEAD participants," Daugaard told The Center Square in August, explaining that the research instead concerned the likelihood of arrest compared with a control group. "But WPC is not wrong," she added. "It should not be sort of flattened or further simplified as a 58% reduction in the number of arrests. That is the mistake."
Daugaard disputes Zimmerman's broader criticism of LEAD, arguing that the program spread because police, prosecutors, businesses, service providers and participants found it useful, rather than because of a misstated statistic.
Researchers behind the original evaluation have also defended their work. The University of Washington's HaRRT Center said its statistical findings, published in peer-reviewed articles and reports, "still stand," while supporting corrections when results are inaccurately described.
The dispute has attracted national attention, with the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board highlighting WPC's criticism of the Seattle program.
LEAD remains part of Seattle's approach to drug crime and addiction. Earlier this year, Seattle police were directed to divert drug possession and drug-use charges away from prosecution and into LEAD.
Zimmerman is calling for Congress to immediately scrutinize LEAD funding and redirect future taxpayer dollars toward programs that can demonstrate reductions in criminal behavior and successful addiction treatment.
Sign in to comment
Powered by The Post Millennial CMS™ Comments
Join and support independent free thinkers!
We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.
Remind me next month
To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy
Comments