September 2026

by Kathleen A. Tomberg, Rebecca Balletto, Gina Moreno, Sheyla A. Delgado, Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill, Patricia Cobar and Jeffrey A. Butts

Conducted with funding from the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice

Sections
Introduction — Research Methods — Development of the Program — Participants and Program Components — Program Effects — Discussion and Conclusion — References

The John Jay College Research and Evaluation Center evaluated the Bronx Osborne Gun Accountability and Prevention (BOGAP) program, a firearm possession diversion program developed by the Osborne Association of New York City in partnership with the Bronx District Attorney’s Office. The evaluation measured the effectiveness of BOGAP in advancing public safety by preventing additional crime while avoiding the legal complexities and social costs of felony prosecution and possible incarceration. Researchers assembled a wide array of data, including interviews with program participants and their loved ones, BOGAP program staff, and staff from the Bronx District Attorney’s Office. The team observed court hearings to gain insight into the legal experiences of BOGAP participants, the structure and dynamics of court proceedings, and the procedural context of the program. Researchers also conducted a series of online surveys with BOGAP participants to measure their attitudes and perceptions of guns, violence, conflict resolution, mental health, social support, and community connections. Finally, the research team analyzed several sources of administrative data, including program records from the Osborne Association, case-level data from the Bronx District Attorney’s Office, and New York State criminal history records. The study found that BOGAP helped participants change gun-related behaviors and attitudes in positive and pro-social ways. Participation in the program did not pose a greater risk to public safety than business-as-usual prosecutions. Individuals diverted to BOGAP even had lower rearrest rates than two comparison groups developed using two different methodologies.

The research team at the John Jay Research and Evaluation Center appreciates the time and input of all BOGAP participants who shared their views and experiences with us. The project would not have been possible without the input and support of past and current staff members at the Osborne Association, including Michelle Portlock, Heidi Andrianos, Bruce Simpson, Maurice deFrietas, and the entire BOGAP team.

The research team sincerely appreciates the support of the Office of the Bronx District Attorney and all DA staff involved in the BOGAP initiative, especially past and present members from the Bronx DA research office, including Cindy Redcross, Mia Krause, Dr. Sydney (Hsin) Jaw, and Dr. Sean Houlihan.

The project would also not have been possible without data from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS). The authors appreciate the efforts and guidance of Leigh Bates, Colin Gruner, Michael Morgan, and everyone from DCJS’s Research Request Team.

The authors are very grateful for support from the Office for the Advancement of Research and the Office of Sponsored Programs at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, as well as all current and former colleagues from the Research and Evaluation Center who contributed to the project, specifically Dr. Maureen Allwood, Dr. Alessandra Early, and Danilo Diaz Garcia. Dr. Allwood and Dr. Early brought considerable qualitative research expertise to this project by helping to shape the survey and interview instruments and conducting the staff interviews. The team would also like to thank our project consultant and co-author, Dr. Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill. His expertise was key to conducting and analyzing interviews with BOGAP participants and their loved ones.

Finally, the authors thank the program team at the National Institute of Justice for their guidance and assistance during the development and execution of this project.

Criminal records data used in this study were provided by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS). All opinions, findings, and conclusions in the report are those of the authors and not those of DCJS. Neither New York State nor DCJS assumes liability for its contents or use thereof.

Sections
Introduction — Research Methods — Development of the Program — Participants and Program Components — Program Effects — Discussion and Conclusion — References