Poster #94 - Do Sexual Assault Kit Reforms Improve Case Outcomes? Evidence from a 50-State Quasi-Experimental Analysis

• In Event: Friday Poster Reception

Abstract

Since 2010, states have enacted sexual assault kit (SAK) reform legislation addressing inventories, backlog testing, tracking systems, survivor notification, and dedicated funding. These reforms were motivated by the discovery of large numbers of untested kits and supported by approximately $400 million in federal investment. Despite this policy emphasis, rigorous quasi-experimental evidence on whether SAK reforms improve downstream case outcomes remains limited. This study addresses that gap using a 50-state panel covering 2000–2024 to estimate the effects of reform adoption on sex crime reporting and clearance rates. I employ Bayesian dose–response models with state random effects as the primary framework, supplemented by heterogeneity-robust staggered difference-in-differences models with cohort-varying slopes and an event-study design to assess dynamic effects and pre-treatment trends. Reform exposure is operationalized as the cumulative number of six legislative pillars adopted by each state. Results show that each additional reform pillar is associated with an increase of approximately 1.2 reported rapes per 100,000 population, with posterior probability effectively equal to one. In contrast, clearance rates decline at higher reform doses, with reductions of approximately 2.6 to 3.4 percentage points in states adopting three to six pillars. Decomposition analyses indicate that this decline is not driven by reduced investigative effectiveness but by denominator growth. Specifically, reforms generate increased reporting without proportional increases in case clearances, resulting in a mechanical reduction in clearance rates. Supporting this interpretation, incident-level NIBRS data show no meaningful change in arrest clearance rates and largely null effects across exceptional clearance subtypes. Event-study estimates further support parallel pre-treatment trends and indicate that clearance rate declines deepen over time as reform exposure accumulates. These findings suggest that SAK reform legislation succeeds in increasing reporting but places additional strain on investigative and prosecutorial capacity. Absent corresponding investments in system capacity, reforms may expand case volume without improving case resolution.

Authors

• Jameka Donkor, University of South Carolina
  Presenting Author

• Scott M. Mourtgos, University of South Carolina
  Non-Presenting Co-Author