The Fuzzy Math Behind Bail Reform

Why the Math Used by Bail Reform Proponents to Calculate Court Appearance Rates Is Very Misleading

In a recent article on the AIA Surety website, cashless bail and bail reform data and claims about the effectiveness of their policies and programs are called into question.  Supporters of these policies routinely highlight impressive court appearance rates for pretrial release, often claiming 85% to 95% success or higher, as evidence that releasing defendants without money bail or surety bonds is highly effective. These glowing statistics are used to argue that pretrial services, risk assessments, and non-monetary supervision can replace traditional financial accountability. What is rarely mentioned, however, is that much of this apparent success in pretrial release under cashless bail is the result of a misleading way of calculating failure-to-appear (FTA) rates. Bail research shows that the calculation method makes a dramatic difference in how results are presented.

The more accurate and practical way to measure FTA rates is the defendant-based approach used by courts, surety bail companies, and bail bond agents. In contrast, bail reform proponents and many pretrial services agencies rely on an aggregate or per-appearance method that systematically makes results look far better than they really are.  Below is an excerpt from the article as well as a link to the full article.

The Misleading Pretrial Numbers Game
How Cashless Bail Supporters Inflate Court Appearance Stats
By Eric Granof

In the heated debate over cashless bail policies, supporters routinely highlight impressive court appearance rates, often claiming 85% to 95% success or higher, as evidence that releasing defendants without money bail or surety bonds is highly effective. These glowing statistics are used to argue that pretrial services, risk assessments, and non-monetary supervision can replace traditional financial accountability. What is rarely mentioned, however, is that much of this apparent success is the result of a misleading way of calculating failure-to-appear (FTA) rates.

The more accurate and practical way to measure FTA rates is the defendant-based approach used by courts, surety bail companies, and bail bond agents. In contrast, bail reform proponents and many pretrial services agencies rely on an aggregate or per-appearance method that systematically makes results look far better than they really are. READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE>>>