Program Profile: The Bronx Defenders Holistic Defense Model (New York)

This is a program that uses an interdisciplinary team to address factors contributing to clients’ contact with the court. The program is rated Promising. Participants experienced a reduction in average sentence length and were more likely to be released on recognizance, compared with those who received traditional legal services. These differences were statistically significant. However, there was no statistically significant impact on conviction or on future arrest rates.

A Promising rating implies that implementing the program may result in the intended outcome(s).

Program Goals/Target Population

The Bronx Defenders Holistic Defense Model enlists an interdisciplinary team of attorneys, social workers, and advocates to address immediate and long-term factors and needs (such as substance abuse, mental illness, and family or housing stability),which have contributed to their client’s current or potential contact with the court. Founded in 1997, the Bronx Defenders model was designed to provide legal services (for criminal, family, and civil cases), immigration representation, social work support, and advocacy to indigent community members in the Bronx, New York.

Services Provided

The holistic defense model emerged in the 1990s as an alternative approach to defending indigent clients. While the definition of holistic defense varies across different public defender organizations, there are several common elements. The holistic defense philosophy views the criminal defense attorney as having a responsibility to not only provide clients with defense in their current court cases, but also to address the broader needs and circumstances that led their clients to court (Anderson, Buenaventura, and Heaton 2019).

The holistic defense model is based on four fundamental elements: 1) access to legal and nonlegal services that meet client needs; 2) dynamic, interdisciplinary communication; 3) advocates with an interdisciplinary skill set; and 4) a robust understanding of, and connection to, the community served (Steinberg 2013). Community relations are especially important to holistic defense organizations in that the holistic model is dependent on community organizations to assist clients with nonlegal needs such as access to religious institutions, food pantries, shelters, and healthcare. Therefore, all community members regardless of court contact, are able to get assistance with food stamps, healthcare, employment, and housing through the Bronx Defenders’ community intake center.

As opposed to the traditional public defense model, which only offers criminal representation, the Bronx Defenders Holistic Defense Model enlists the help of a multidisciplinary team in regular daily communication, allows for efficient referrals, and is individualized according to the clients’ needs. Criminal court defendants are assessed at arraignment to identify the circumstances leading to their criminal behavior and the consequences of court involvement. This includes, but is not limited to, the client’s employment, housing, mental health, family, immigration status, and other areas of potential impact. Social workers conduct assessments, recommend treatments for substance abuse or mental health, and collect information to explain the behavior leading to the criminal involvement.

Key Personnel

The interdisciplinary team consists of criminal defense attorneys, family defense attorneys, civil generalist attorneys, immigration attorneys, impact litigation attorneys, social workers, benefits specialists, investigators, community organizers, team administrators, civic advocates, immigration advocates, reentry advocates, and parent advocates. All personnel work out of the same office in an open floor plan to facilitate referrals, advice seeking, and daily face-to-face interactions that allow them to triage cases continuously and develop integrated case strategies. Teams are led by one or more advocates outside of the criminal defense practice who are not attorneys (e.g., social workers or parent advocates). Team leaders and practice area supervisors monitor team members to see if they are communicating effectively and identifying appropriate needs. They also collect reports on the referrals from each team member.

Study 1

Anderson, Buenaventura, and Heaton (2019) conducted a 10-year quasi-experimental evaluation of the Bronx Defenders Holistic Defense Model on case outcomes and future offending with defendants in the Bronx, New York. Participants were determined to be indigent by the judge at their arraignment and were assigned to public defenders using the Bronx Criminal Court counsel assignment system. Because the counsel assignment system is based on rotating arraignment shifts, the Bronx Defenders and the Legal Aid Society of New York (Legal Aid) handle assignments on different days of the week. However, exceptions to these assignments may occur. First, if the primary organization assigned has a conflict, then the secondary organization would be assigned. Second, if there are two codefendants, the primary organization would represent one defendant, and the secondary organization would represent the other defendant. However, if a particular codefendant had been previously represented by either organization, then that organization would continue to represent the codefendant.

The final study sample included 587,487 individual defendant/case pairings initiated in the Bronx between 2000–2007 and 2012–2014. Treatment group participants (n = 114,856) were assigned to the Bronx Defenders organization, which uses the holistic defense model. The average treatment group participant was 31.9 years old, male (81.4 percent), and had a current misdemeanor (73.5 percent) or felony (26.5 percent) charge. Treatment group participants were Hispanic (48.6 percent) or Black (45.8 percent); the race/ethnicity of the other 5.6 percent was not specified. The comparison group participants (n = 376,393) were assigned to Legal Aid, which offers traditional criminal legal services. The average comparison group participant was 32.0 years old, male (83.4 percent), and had a current misdemeanor (75.5 percent) or felony (24.5 percent) charge. Comparison group participants were Hispanic (48.0 percent) or Black (46.5 percent); the race/ethnicity of the other 5.5. percent was not specified. Statistically significant differences were found at baseline for several characteristics (such as gender, race/ethnicity, current charge, and criminal history). The treatment group participants showed a statistically significant greater likelihood of facing felony charges, charges for violent offenses, or weapons charges but a lower likelihood of facing drug charges, compared with the comparison group participants. These differences were controlled for in the analysis.

The outcomes of interest included conviction rates, likelihood of future arrest, likelihood of being released on recognizance, and sentence length (in days). Case-level data were obtained from the New York Division of Criminal Justice Services and the New York City Office of Court Administration. The probability of conviction and the expected sentence length were predicted using a probit model type of regression, in which the outcome was the dummy variable for conviction, and 269 explanatory variables captured demographics (i.e., age, gender, race, ethnicity), case characteristics (i.e., top charge, number of charges, arrest location), and prior criminal history. A Poisson model was used to build prediction for the expected sentence length (including zero). Effects were measured with an estimated linear instrumental variables regression model via two-stage least squares, and the unit of observation was the defendant in a particular case.

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

These sources were used in the development of the program profile: