Bail Studies: The Six Most Significant Surety Bail Studies Ever Conducted

The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth

Over the last 30 years, there have been six key pretrial release studies that have not only supported the effectiveness of secured release over unsecured release, but that have been accepted as the leading studies on the subject. If you are someone who operates within the criminal justice system, then you should absolutely know about all six of these groundbreaking bail studies and their findings. They include the following:

1. Cohen & Reaves (2007) – Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), “Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts, 1990–2004” The most comprehensive national study, analyzing felony cases from the 75 largest U.S. counties over 15 years. Financially secured surety bonds had the lowest FTA rate at 18%, compared to 26% for release on recognizance (ROR) and 30% for unsecured releases through pretrial services agencies. Surety bonds also showed the highest fugitive recovery rates (only 3% remained at large after one year vs. 8–10% for others).
2. Helland & Tabarrok (2004) – “The Fugitive: Evidence on Public Versus Private Law Enforcement from Bail Jumping,” Journal of Law & Economics A highly regarded peer-reviewed economic analysis using national data and controls for defendant characteristics. Defendants released on surety bonds were 28% less likely to fail to appear than similar defendants released on their own recognizance. If they did FTA, they were 53% less likely to remain at large for extended periods, highlighting the private enforcement incentives (bondsmen and bounty hunters).
3. Morris (2013/2014) / Clipper, Morris & Russell-Kaplan (2017) – Dallas County, Texas Pretrial Release Study (published in PLOS ONE) Analysis of all ~22,000–29,000 pretrial releases in Dallas County in 2008, using propensity score matching to compare similar defendants across bond types. Commercial surety bonds had significantly lower FTA/forfeiture rates than cash bonds, attorney bonds, and pretrial services releases. For felonies, defendants on bail bonds were estimated to be 39–56% more likely to appear in court. The study also quantified taxpayer savings from reduced court inefficiencies.
4. Block (2005) – “The Effectiveness and Cost of Secured and Unsecured Pretrial Release in California’s Large Urban Counties: 1990–2000” Examination of BJS data from major California counties. Surety bonds produced a 20.1% FTA rate, compared to 31.8% for combined ROR/conditional release. The author estimated that shifting a modest percentage of cases to surety bonds could substantially reduce FTAs and associated costs.
5. Kennedy & Henry (1996) – “Commercial Surety Bail: Assessing Its Role in the Pretrial Release and Detention Decision” (Pretrial Services Resource Center/NIJ-supported) A key comparative review showing pretrial services agency releases had substantially higher FTA rates (often 19–30% range in various datasets) than commercial surety bonds (around 14–15% in matched periods). It positioned surety bail as more effective than taxpayer-funded pretrial supervision programs for court appearance.
6. Reisig / Yolo County District Attorney’s Office (2023) – “Zero Bail vs. Posted Bail Study” (Yolo County District Attorney’s Office) A key comparative analysis of matched random samples of 100 arrestees each showing that individuals released on zero bail had substantially higher recidivism rates (78% vs. 46% re-arrest rate over 18 months) and committed 163% more total new crimes—including 200% more violent offenses—than those released after posting traditional bail. It positioned posted bail as significantly more effective than zero-bail policies for reducing reoffending and protecting public safety.

All of these studies conclude that the financial incentives for defendants, bondsmen, and sureties are the key driver of higher appearance rates and better fugitive recovery. They draw on large-scale government data (e.g., BJS), peer-reviewed analysis with statistical controls like propensity score matching, and jurisdiction-specific datasets. They generally report lower raw or adjusted FTA rates and better fugitive recapture for surety bonds.

Additionally, these six studies are also the most frequently cited as demonstrating that pretrial release on a financially secured surety/commercial bail bond is the most effective at ensuring defendants appear in court (i.e., lowest failure-to-appear or FTA rates), compared to own recognizance (OR/ROR), unsecured bonds, cash bonds, attorney bonds, or pretrial services agency releases.

Over the next 2-3 weeks we will post a 5-part series on these fact filled and authoritative studies. Each article in the series will highlight one single study and discuss its key findings and importance.

Bail Studies Series

Intro: The Six Most Significant Surety Bail Studies Ever Conducted

The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth

Over the last 30 years, there have been six key pretrial release studies that have not only supported the effectiveness of secured release over unsecured release.

PART 1: The Cohen & Reaves Study

The Most Comprehensive Pretrial Release Analysis Ever Conducted and Why Its Findings Remain Unrivaled

In November 2007, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) statisticians Thomas H. Cohen, Ph.D., and Brian A. Reaves, Ph.D., published what remains the definitive national study on pretrial release: Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts, 1990–2004.