Research

Publications

Cultural Responsiveness and the Courts

Cultural Responsiveness and the Courts

For a justice system to be truly just, it must be accessible to all individuals. However, litigants may face challenges when courts are not responsive to their cultural identity. For survivors of domestic violence, these challenges present additional barriers towards accessing justice and obtaining fair outcomes. This viewers' guide serves as a companion to the short video Building a Culture of Justice, which explains how justice-system staff and stakeholders can serve litigant needs by implementing culturally responsive practices in courts handling domestic violence cases.

Video

Building a Culture of Justice: How Courts are Improving Access and Understanding in Domestic Violence Cases

Building a Culture of Justice: How Courts are Improving Access and Understanding in Domestic Violence Cases

For a justice system to be truly just, it must be accessible to all individuals. However, litigants may face challenges when courts are not responsive to their cultural identity. For survivors of domestic violence, these challenges present additional barriers towards accessing justice and obtaining fair outcomes. Watch Building a Culture of Justice and read the viewers' guide to learn how justice-system staff and stakeholders can serve litigant needs by implementing culturally responsive practices in courts handling domestic violence cases.

Publications

Understanding the Civil Legal Needs of Crown Heights Residents: A Community Survey in Brooklyn

Understanding the Civil Legal Needs of Crown Heights Residents: A Community Survey in Brooklyn

By Warren A. Reich, Elise Jensen, Michael Diller, Ignacio Jaureguilorda and Lauren Speigel

Undertaken to inform the work of the Center for Court Innovation’s Legal Hand project, this street-intercept study in Crown Heights, Brooklyn documents the most common civil legal needs facing the community, and how, if at all, community members address these needs. The study found the most common needs involved housing and employment. Very few respondents mentioned seeking assistance from an attorney. Indeed, many did not know how or where to find legal assistance. These results suggest a need for “one-stop shop” services that can assist clients with a range of complex legal problems.

Publications

Evidence-Based Risk Assessment in a Mental Health Court: A Validation Study of the COMPAS Risk Assessment

Evidence-Based Risk Assessment in a Mental Health Court: A Validation Study of the COMPAS Risk Assessment

By Warren A. Reich, Sarah Picard-Fritsche, Virginia Barber Rioja and Merrill Rotter

This study examines the validity of the COMPAS with offenders who have a serious mental illness. A widely used risk-needs assessment tool, the COMPAS was found to be a good predictor of re-arrest with this population, although it was more effective in distinguishing low-risk offenders from all others than in identifying those who pose a medium as opposed to a high risk of re-arrest. Overall, approximately two-thirds of study-participants were classified as low risk. At the same time, more than half of the sample scored in the high range on the important needs domains of substance abuse, criminal personality, and criminal thinking. The study discusses potential implications for using the COMPAS with mentally ill individuals.

Publications

Creating Off-Ramps: A National Review of Police-Led Diversion Programs

Creating Off-Ramps: A National Review of Police-Led Diversion Programs

By Jennifer A. Tallon, Melissa Labriola and Joseph Spadafore

This study maps the current landscape of police-led pretrial diversion programs. It presents the results from a survey on diversion given to a representative sample of law enforcement agencies nationwide along with case studies of eight promising police-led programs, including programs targeting mentally-ill individuals, juveniles, and low-level or first-time adult defendants. Funded by the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office of the Department of Justice, this report explores why these programs were created, how they work, and how they differ.

Contact
  • New York
  • 520 8th Avenue
  • 18th Floor
  • New York, NY 10018
  • phone: 646.386.3100
  • Syracuse
  • 601 Tully Street
  • Syracuse, NY 13204
  • phone: 315.266.4330
  • London
  • Canterbury Court
    1-3 Brixton Road
  • London, SW9 6DE
  • phone: +44 2076.329.060