Sections
Start — Introduction — Research Methods — Development of the Program — Participants and Program Components — Program Effects — Discussion and Conclusion — References
Introduction
In September 2022, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), an office within the U.S. Department of Justice, provided funding to the John Jay College Research and Evaluation Center (JohnJayREC) to evaluate the Bronx Osborne Gun Accountability and Prevention (BOGAP) initiative. BOGAP is a community-based diversion program developed by the Osborne Association in partnership with the Bronx District Attorney’s Office (Bronx DA). The goal of the program is to provide personal support for young adults facing their first firearm-related possession charge. Services include therapeutic programming and conflict resolution training delivered by credible mentors. Participants who complete the program successfully may have their charges reduced or dismissed, thus avoiding felony convictions and possible incarceration.
The JohnJayREC evaluation, conducted from 2022 to 2026, was designed to measure the effectiveness of BOGAP in advancing public safety by fostering positive life changes among participants and preventing their return to criminality, while avoiding the legal complexities and social cost of felony prosecution. Researchers found that everyone involved in BOGAP (participants, staff, and the Bronx DA) believed the program effectively helped participants to change their gun-related behaviors and attitudes. Individuals referred to BOGAP even had slightly lower rearrest rates than defendants in similar cases processed in more standard ways. Small sample sizes limited the study’s overall statistical power, but BOGAP appeared to be a promising program posing no additional risk to public safety.
Addressing Social Harms Related to Firearms
Gun violence and crimes related to firearm possession are persistent threats in communities across the United States, including New York City. In a 2023 survey of U.S. adults, approximately 40 percent reported living in a household with at least one gun owner (Schaeffer 2024). In the same survey, 61 percent believed it was “too easy” for Americans to obtain firearms, even legally. In urban areas, the “too easy” figure was 72 percent. In a 2019 nationally representative sample of handgun owners, 30 percent reported carrying a firearm in public at least monthly (Rowhani-Rahbar 2022).
The main harms of firearm possession, of course, are the injuries and deaths suffered by shooting victims. New York City has seen steep declines in gun violence in recent years, but firearms continue to bring serious harm to neighborhoods across the city (DOHMH 2024). The 2023 rate of firearm-related hospitalizations for residents ages 15-34 in the Bronx was 40 per 100,000, which was more than twice the rate observed in the two next highest areas of the city: Brooklyn (16) and Manhattan (8).
Beyond the immediate physical toll on shooting victims, the misuse of firearms inflicts lasting harm on communities and the well-being of neighborhoods. The consequences of gun violence include psychological trauma, reduced economic opportunity, deteriorated social cohesion, and increased healthcare costs. Public officials in New York City link high rates of firearm violence to elevated unemployment, poverty, and mental distress in ways that reinforce violence (New York City Public Advocate 2022). Ripple effects extend to families, friends, neighbors, and bystanders. Survivors, witnesses, and bereaved relatives experience grief, PTSD, and diminished quality of life long after individual shooting incidents.
The harm caused by firearms requires an effective response from lawmakers and public officials. The key question is: which actions are effective and just? A conventional response would be to rely on the criminal justice system to hold gun users accountable by enacting laws governing the possession and use of firearms, relying on law enforcement to arrest violators, and using the courts to prosecute and penalize them. Pursuing the most severe actions in every instance, however, comes with unintended consequences and harmful collateral damage.
Felony convictions do not simply end when an offender completes a court-ordered sentence. The consequences may be lifelong. Civil penalties, disabilities, and disqualifications may flow automatically from felony records. Many domains of daily life are potentially affected, including employment, housing, education, and even voting (Uggen et al. 2024). Employment barriers are among the most economically devastating collateral consequences. Federal and state laws often prohibit individuals with felony convictions from working in licensed professions, including healthcare, law, education, and financial services (Rodriguez and Emsellem 2011). Employers are permitted — and in some sectors required — to conduct criminal background checks, leading to widespread informal discrimination in hiring.
The National Inventory of the Collateral Consequences of Conviction recorded more than 44,000 such provisions across federal and state law, underscoring the extraordinary breadth of post-conviction burdens placed on those with felony records. When collateral consequences result in widespread opposition to law, they may even undermine the legitimacy of the legal system and impair a society’s ability to hold citizens accountable for harmful behavior (Poama and Tripkovic 2024). The enduring harms associated with felony convictions can also reduce defendants’ incentives to accept plea agreements, leading to court delays and higher prosecution and sentencing costs (Lee and Jaynes 2024). Understanding the varied uses and risks of collateral consequences is essential for any serious conversation about public safety, deterrence, recidivism, and social reintegration. For at least these reasons, the Bronx District Attorney enlisted the help of nonprofit partners in New York City to launch and operate diversion alternatives for first-time gun possession defendants who were willing to avoid felony convictions by participating in an intensive program of services and supports.
The fundamental question for policymakers and Bronx residents is whether implementing BOGAP was a good decision from a public safety perspective. Does it risk the safety and well-being of Bronx neighborhoods to offer less severe legal consequences for gun possession in exchange for a defendant’s cooperation with a preventive services program? Does a reduction in legal penalties make offenders more likely to reoffend? Do they go on to commit future crimes more often than they would have if the District Attorney had refused the diversion option and instead used the power of the prosecutor’s office to secure convictions and impose severe sentences?
Felony prosecution and criminal sentencing for gun possession charges would likely take more time, risk more public resources, and impose potentially lifelong consequences on defendants, but is it worth it otherwise? Do defendants going through the traditional legal process and facing the possibility of felony prosecution have less recidivism and fewer criminal arrests in the future? Or can the legal system achieve the goals of public safety and offender redemption just as well with lower social costs by leveraging a prosecution diversion program like BOGAP? These are the questions investigated by the research team at John Jay College’s Research and Evaluation Center.
The NIJ Evaluation
The JohnJayREC research team used a comprehensive multimethod approach to evaluate the BOGAP program, combining qualitative and quantitative analyses to assess its design and performance, document its implementation, and identify necessary adaptations. The project included interviews of participants, program staff, individuals close to participants, and staff from the Bronx District Attorney’s Office. The team observed participant court hearings to gain insight into their legal experiences, the structure and dynamics of court proceedings, and the procedural context of the program. Researchers conducted a series of online surveys with active BOGAP participants to measure changes in their attitudes and perceptions of guns, violence, conflict resolution, mental health, social supports, and community connections. The team also analyzed administrative data, including program engagement records from the Osborne Association, case-level data from the Bronx DA, and criminal history records from New York State’s Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS). The multifaceted approach allowed researchers to gain a thorough understanding of how BOGAP operated and its potential effects on participants. Administrative and survey data measured participant outcomes, including changes in their attitudes and beliefs, as well as post-intervention recidivism.
The evaluation plan evolved somewhat during the project. Researchers originally intended to measure attitudes among a well-structured comparison group, but this was not feasible. The team updated the evaluation plan to accommodate this and other changes, in part by including additional participant interviews and observations to add deeper insight into program dynamics and elements. Changes to the mixed-methods study preserved the evaluation’s ability to create a clear picture of the program.
The research team analyzed these data sources to examine the effects of BOGAP and identify outcomes associated with participants’ successful program completion. Successful completion was defined as the Bronx DA’s office clearing the charges facing a participant. For this to happen, participants were required to complete: 1) specialized program components, including basic and advanced “Alternatives to Violence Prevention,” “Job Readiness Training,” and “Dialectical Behavioral Therapy,” 2) standard components, including “Interactive Journaling”/”Cognitive Behavioral Therapy” and “Motivational Interviewing,” and 3) a 90-day post-programming follow-up period without any new arrests.
Research Questions
The JohnJayREC evaluation team designed the study to answer three research questions:
1. Is the successful completion of BOGAP associated with public safety via improvements in conflict resolution skills, mental health, resilience, social support, and community connection among participants?
- The research team examined whether BOGAP participants showed changes in conflict resolution skills, mental health and resilience, social support, and community connections. These outcomes were measured using participant surveys collected throughout the evaluation.
2. Is the successful completion of BOGAP associated with successful disengagement from criminal behavior and decreased recidivism?
- Researchers assessed whether BOGAP participants had fewer rearrests and reconvictions than similar individuals who did not participate in the program. The team analyzed criminal justice involvement (i.e., DCJS charge records) among BOGAP participants and a matched pool of non-participants.
3. Does successful completion of BOGAP appear to result in lasting and positive changes in attitudes?
- Researchers drew upon iterative participant surveys to examine whether BOGAP participants demonstrated changes in attitudes related to mental health, social support, violence and guns, conflict resolution, and job skills and employment.
NEXT SECTION: RESEARCH METHODS