King County felony juvenile diversion program is paused

A King County program intended to help juvenile criminal offenders has been put on hold due to a lack of effectiveness.

Following results that show over half of juveniles referred to King County’s Restorative Community Pathways diversion program for a first-time felony are accused of committing another crime within two years, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office decided to pause referrals to the program.

In pursuit of an objective evaluation of how successful the Restorative Community Pathways (RCP) diversion program is, a study showed that 53.2% of juveniles with low-level felony charges referred to the program reoffend within two years, according to a July 17 memo to the King County Council. According to the prosecutor’s office memo, following the evaluation’s results, felony referrals will be paused pending the results of a second study in the next few months that will outline the success of the RCP program versus traditional prosecution.

Referrals for misdemeanors will continue, and there are still some court-based diversion programs for a limited number of non-violent felonies, according to the prosecutor’s office.

RCP is King County’s community-based diversion program developed in 2020 for youth who have been referred to the prosecutor’s office for a misdemeanor or first-time low-level felony. Once a youth consents to participate in the RCP program, the office considers the diversion complete and closes the case.

According to the evaluation report, youth in the RCP program receive community-based mentorship and navigation services, which include accountability, restorative justice, basic needs support, goal setting and social connection. Support and engagement with the youth often continues for many months, with the duration of services varying based on individual needs.

RCP navigators also provide support, restitution and opportunities for restorative dialogue to any victims associated with the youth’s referral. According to prosecutor’s office spokesperson Casey McNerthney, this aspect is one unique part of the RCP program because it is the only diversion program that serves the victim of the crime.

According to McNerthney, the RCP program is not a prosecutor’s office program, but the office is one part of the program. McNerthney said the program is managed and operated by the King County Department of Community and Human Services (DCHS).

McNerthney said there is often a misconception that the RCP program exclusively handles felony crimes, but the majority of the cases referred are misdemeanor cases. McNerthney said 70% to 75% of the referred cases were misdemeanors, and only non-violent and non-sex offense felony crimes were referred and then reviewed by a senior deputy prosecutor.

McNerthney said some of the first-time felony cases that were referred include car prowls, possession of a stolen vehicle and fights between juveniles with no weapons involved.

“A more concrete example of a felony case that might have been considered for RCP is a teen who mimics a TikTok challenge to steal a car,” McNerthney said. “If there was no injury, the youth confessed, and had no prior contact with law enforcement, the case might have been referred to RCP after careful review by a senior deputy prosecutor. In such a case, the victim would also receive services through RCP.”

McNerthney said that the prosecutor’s office decided to conduct an objective analysis of the RCP program because when the King County Council unanimously funds a program – and where the program and contract is managed exclusively by DCHS – getting objective and accurate data is the first important step to thoughtful discussions.

“Everyone deserves diversion programs that demonstrate positive results and improve public safety,” McNerthney said. “Our youth deserve opportunities to succeed. Harmed parties deserve opportunities to heal. Taxpayers deserve cost-effective programs that create meaningful improvements.”

McNerthney said that for each diversion program that the prosecutor’s office is part of, it wants to ensure that the program is:

•Transparent and accountable

•Helps lower recidivism

•Helps decrease racial disproportionality

•Helps both harmed parties and those accused of causing harm

•Produces meaningful and measurable outcomes

•Independently evaluated to determine effectiveness

•Cost-effective

Despite the prosecutor’s office only being one part of the program and not running it, McNerthney said that as a good partner, the office should do an analysis of the program. McNerthney said, subsequently, the prosecutor’s office found someone who decided to donate their time to conduct an analysis, not costing taxpayers.

According to the memo, Claus C. Pörtner, Professor of Economics at the Department of Economics, Seattle University, and External Research Affiliate, Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology, University of Washington, conducted the independent evaluation of the RCP program. The evaluation tracked subsequent contact with the criminal justice system for juveniles referred to the program.

Data

Felonies referred to the RCP program with a new criminal justice contact.

•After six months: 30.5% with new contact.

•After 12 months: 41.3% with new contact.

•After 24 months: 53.2% with new contact.

Misdemeanors referred to the RCP program with a new criminal justice contact.

•After six months: 14.5% with new contact.

•After 12 months: 23.65% with new contact.

•After 24 months: 37.31% with new contact.

Of those referred, 62% were male, 37% were female and 1% were unknown or nonbinary. Regarding race and ethnicity, 35% were Black, 27% were white, 16% were Hispanic or Latino, 12% were unknown, 10% were Asian or Pacific Islander and 1% were Native American.

According to the evaluation, RCP is predominantly a pre-filing diversion program, meaning that the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office does not file charges against juveniles who are referred. 841 of the referrals were for juveniles who would have had a gross misdemeanor charge, 162 would have had a class B felony charge, 142 would have had a class C felony charge and 54 would have had a misdemeanor charge.