Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
HOW IS RESTORATIVE JUSTICE DIVERSION DIFFERENT?
The traditional system of punishment asks these questions:
What wrongdoing was done?
Who committed the wrongdoing?
What consequences should be given?
Restorative Justice asks a different set of questions:
Who was harmed?
What are the needs of all affected?
Whose obligation is it to meet those needs?
The Results
Crime Survivors
Did meeting with the youth help reduce any fear or concern that they would commit another crime?
92% Reduction of Fear or Concern
Did the RJD process satisfy your sense of justice?
98% Sense of Justice
Compared to results from the Crime Survivors Speak - Survey of Victims’ Views on Safety and Justice:
- Only 1 in 4 victims found the justice system helpful in providing information about recovering from crime or referrals for support services.
- 87% of victims did not receive financial or economic assistance to help recover.
- 74% of victims did not receive counseling or other mental health support to help recover.
- Roughly 80% of victims received help from friends or family or the health care system while roughly 20% received help from the justice system.
Recidivism - the tendency to reoffend.
16% - 3 years after restorative program completion.
8% - 1 year after restorative program completion.
Compared to traditional trends found in the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice Report of Recidivism, which found 50% of youth recidivated at the 3-year mark in 2014 and 53% in 2017 after completing traditional juvenile justice programming.
Community Satisfaction
Community Satisfaction
Community Satisfaction
Did the conference process seem fair?
99% Fairness
Was the conference meaningful to you?
99% Meaningful
Taxpayer Savings
Community Satisfaction
Community Satisfaction
Taxpayers save thousands of dollars per referral to restorative programs. Approximately 16 million dollars was saved during the pilot phase of the Restorative Justice program in San Diego, California.