Share of Seattle LEAD and control participants arrested, before and after entry

What this chart asks

How did arrest rates change for LEAD participants compared with similar people who were booked and prosecuted as usual?

Why it is shown this way

• Bars show each group's share before and after entry side by side, so the drop for LEAD and the small rise for controls are both visible.
• The y axis starts at zero so bar heights are proportional to the shares.

Data and accessibility

Download chart data · Open accessible table · Download PNG · Download SVG

Dataset lead-seattle-arrest-evaluation, analysis arrest-rates-whole

Sources

This chart draws on the sources of the dataset versions it visualizes.

Seattle LEAD evaluation: arrest rates, reported odds and federal set-asides

1. Collins, Lonczak and Clifasefi, Evaluation and Program Planning 64 (2017) 49-56 Peer-reviewed paper reporting LEAD versus control arrest and charge outcomes, odds ratios and Figure 2 arrest percentages. Free copy

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Copyright Elsevier; figures quoted for commentary. Values quoted with attribution; the paper itself is not redistributed.

   Reliability: Peer-reviewed study. Has a stake in this finding. Written by the University of Washington team that evaluated LEAD, funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. The authors declared no conflicts; LEAD program staff sat on the evaluation advisory committee.

2. UW LEAD Evaluation Team, LEAD Program Evaluation: Recidivism Report (March 27, 2015) Full evaluation report, including the analyses with and without warrant arrests (Figure 4, Table 4) that the 2017 paper does not show.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public report; figures quoted for commentary. Values quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Academic. Has a stake in this finding. The same UW evaluators' report to LEAD's policy group, before peer review. Copy hosted by IssueLab (Candid).

3. LEAD press release and UW evaluation summary (April 8, 2015) Press release by LEAD's coalition (contacts at the ACLU of Washington and Public Defender Association) with the evaluators' one-page summary attached.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public press release. Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Party to the dispute. Has a stake in this finding. Issued by the program's backers to announce the evaluation; hosted on the UW evaluators' lab website.

4. Seattle Police Department, SPD Blotter (April 8, 2015) The police department's announcement of the evaluation, still online.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public government web page. Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Government. Has a stake in this finding. SPD is a LEAD partner and sits on its policy coordinating group.

5. LEAD Seattle-King County evaluation page, archived April 29, 2026 The program's own website wording before the 2026 dispute.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public web page (Internet Archive copy). Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Party to the dispute. Has a stake in this finding. Website of the LEAD program run by Purpose Dignity Action (formerly the Public Defender Association).

6. LEAD Seattle-King County evaluation page (current) The same page after the program revised its wording.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public web page. Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Party to the dispute. Has a stake in this finding. Website of the LEAD program; the page changed between April and November 2026.

7. LEAD presentation, Seattle City Council Public Safety Committee (April 28, 2026) Slides titled 'Diversion & LEAD utilization since Seattle drug ordinance adoption' in the committee's agenda materials.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public record. Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Party to the dispute. Has a stake in this finding. Presented by LEAD's operator, Purpose Dignity Action, while the council considered LEAD funding and expansion.

8. Washington Policy Center, National Retraction Brief, Part 1 (version 1.3, August 16, 2026) The critique of LEAD's evidence claims by Eric Zimmerman.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public document. Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: Advocacy group. Has a stake in this finding. Free-market think tank; the brief recommends pausing LEAD expansion and restoring arrest and jail for drug crimes.

9. MyNorthwest / KIRO Newsradio, The John Curley Show (August 12, 2026) Radio interview article quoting Eric Zimmerman.

   Retrieved November 3, 2026. News article; quoted for commentary. Quoted with attribution.

   Reliability: News report. Talk-radio station article reporting Zimmerman's on-air remarks.

10. The Center Square, 'Creator defends drug diversion program amid conflicting success claims' (August 12, 2026), as republished by News-Shield Interview with LEAD co-creator Lisa Daugaard.

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. News article; quoted for commentary. Quoted with attribution.

    Reliability: News report. Wire story by Carleen Johnson of The Center Square, a nonprofit news service, republished by a member paper.

11. Congressional Record, May 12, 2016, p. H2307 (Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Reduction Act, DelBene amendment) Floor statement by Rep. Suzan DelBene citing LEAD's results.

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public domain (U.S. government work). Public domain.

    Reliability: Government. Official record of House floor proceedings, published by the Government Publishing Office.

12. Washington Policy Center, LEAD brief Part 2 web summary (September 9, 2026) WPC's claim about federal LEAD funding.

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public web page. Quoted with attribution.

    Reliability: Advocacy group. Has a stake in this finding. Summary by David Boze of Part 2 of the WPC brief; the linked PDF lists set-asides by year but shows no total.

13. Explanatory statement, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (Congressional Record, Feb. 13, 2019, p. H1811) Enacted 2019 LEAD set-aside ($5 million).

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public domain (U.S. government work). Public domain.

    Reliability: Government. Joint explanatory statement accompanying the enacted appropriations law.

14. Explanatory statement, Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (Congressional Record, Dec. 17, 2019, p. H10966) Enacted 2020 LEAD set-aside ($10 million).

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public domain (U.S. government work). Public domain.

    Reliability: Government. Joint explanatory statement accompanying the enacted appropriations law.

15. Senate Report 119-44, Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations, 2026 2026 LEAD set-aside ($11 million), made binding by the enacted explanatory statement.

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public domain (U.S. government work). Public domain.

    Reliability: Government. Senate Appropriations Committee report; the January 2026 explanatory statement gives it the same weight as its own text.

16. Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025 (Public Law 119-4) Shows the 2025 budget year ran on a full-year continuing resolution, with no new LEAD directive.

    Retrieved November 3, 2026. Public domain (U.S. government work). Public domain.

    Reliability: Government. Enacted public law, published by the Government Publishing Office.

Limitations

• Unadjusted shares; the evaluators' models also adjust for group differences and time in the evaluation.
• Not randomized: LEAD and control participants came from different shifts and neighborhoods.
• Periods before and after entry differ in length by person.