Evidence-based policy and youth justice outcomes A NSW pilot project of the Washington State approach to policy making From Evidence to Practice: the Australasian Youth Justice Conference Brisbane September 2016.

Overview Outline of Washington State approach Youth justice outcomes Can the Washington State evidence based policy approach be applied locally? Outline of Washington State approach Youth justice outcomes The NSW pilot project Potential and challenges for adoption locally

Part 1. Outline of Washington State approach The Washington State Institute of Public Policy (WSIPP) Policy impact assessment tool calculates costs and benefits to determine what works in criminal justice implemented in ~25 jurisdictions (US) and the UK Readily adaptable Facilitates transparency and public scrutiny of policy performance Introduces evidence to policy making displacing power of unfounded rhetoric Allows resources to be reinvested in ‘what works’ Public value is increased by: improving outcomes and quality of life generating a higher return on investment to the community.

Part 1. The Washington State Approach The PIAT produces a league table that ranks alternative policies by cost benefit ‘Consumer reports’: Focus on Return on Investment Peer-reviewed Transparent Published Sample league table used to inform policy selection – Washington State Criminal Justice Interventions

Part 2 Youth Justice Outcomes Outcomes in Washington State – reduction in juvenile arrest rates Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy and The Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative

Part 3: the NSW pilot project Methods Model Inputs Marginal costs of detection, conviction and custodial care Victim impacts (direct and indirect), resource use and costs Recidivism rates, resource use rates, offending base rates Incapacitation, simultaneity and elasticity metrics Policing and prison population headcounts Earned income by single year of age and educational attainment Evidence library: effect sizes of intervention outcomes

Part 3: the NSW pilot project Achievements and Results Collected and aggregated NSW criminal justice cost data Estimated MC for NSW criminal justice Crime victim costs calculated for NSW Returns from education to lifecycle earnings calculated for NSW Proof of concept established Implementation Pathway ✔ ✔ Obtain the PIAT Treasury acquired the tool through the Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative Validate the PIAT The pilot project has shown that the tool can be used successfully for the NSW justice cluster Implement for Justice It is recommended to implement the model initially within the justice cluster Possible expansion Further pilots could explore opportunities to expand use of the model into other policy areas Requires developing and maintaining technical expertise

Part 3: the NSW pilot project Limitations Technical and methodological Data limitations and fidelity Pilot findings of limited validity- applicable only to Justice Wide confidence intervals for marginal cost Precision of victim costs could be improved Scarcity of outcome evaluations (model inputs) Limitations of validity Capability retention and development Implementation and Governance Institutional framework Transparency Links to decision-making process

Part 4: Potential in Australia Meeting the challenges Collaborate Develop capability Grow transparency Inform public Displace rhetoric with evidence Increase public value - reduce costs Evidence- informed policy Policy with impact Improve standard of living

Summary The Washington State model is a proven approach to applying evidence to policy setting The outcomes for youth justice have been pronounced The NSW pilot project has demonstrated it can be applied in the NSW justice cluster A clear set of opportunities and challenges for: adaptation to broader Australian context

Thankyou Questions and discussion Ophelia Cowell Director Economic Evaluation NSW Treasury Ophelia.cowell@treasury.nsw.gov.au

The model and inputs Inputs Process Outputs Effect Size Library Macroeconomic Data Agency Resource Use NSW demographics GDP deflator Health costs NSW marginal costs NSW recidivism rates Program costs Quality adjusted International evidence Process Program impacts Investment NPV, ROI and cashflow Risk-return metric analysis of defined interventions Investment portfolio analysis Inventory of policy options Outputs Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy

A worked example - Functional Family Therapy Effect Size -0.341 Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) 14% Base rate of juvenile reoffending 60.9% Expected number lifetime felony convictions (w/out FFT) 3.39 FFT cost $3300 pp Cost to crime victims averted $48 392 Cost of CJ resources averted $12 982 NPV = [.14 * 3.39 * ($48,392 + $12,982)] - $3300 = $25,828 pp Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy

Part 2. the NSW pilot project Rationale