Washington courts want to expand bail alternatives but face difficulties in doing so, audit finds

Several courts in Washington are interested in expanding alternatives to bail, but they appear to use such pretrial services infrequently today and face barriers to doing more, a new performance audit found.  

The Office of the Washington State Auditor previously found pretrial services, such as requiring defendants to routinely check in with supervisory staff until the charges against them are resolved, to be comparable to requiring money bail in maintaining public safety. In the past two state budgets, the Legislature provided funding for a pilot program to expand pretrial services statewide.  

This audit examined 14 municipal, district and superior courts to understand their use of pretrial services and what barriers exist to expanding them. Auditors also closely reviewed three courts currently using pretrial services in Spokane and Yakima.  

Among the report’s findings for the three courts using pretrial services: 

• The courts released fewer than a third of their defendants through pretrial services instead of requiring them to post bail. 

• Hispanic defendants may have been less likely to receive pretrial services than those identified as non-Hispanic.  

• However, differences in releases based on race were inconsistent, with groups appearing more or less likely to receive pretrial services depending on the court. 

• A defendant’s history with the courts and perceived severity of the charges against them may have also been factors in who was offered pretrial services. 

More broadly, the audit found: 

• During the 2023-25 biennium, the Administrative Office of the Courts used about half of the $1.4 million provided by the Legislature to pilot a pretrial services program. 

• Several of the 14 courts reviewed offered some form of pretrial services, but few provided all the services that leading practices recommend.  

• Although most of the courts would like to expand the use of pretrial services, three primary barriers affect courts’ ability to use them – funding, resources and public safety concerns. 

• The quality data needed to assess the effectiveness of pretrial services is limited by several factors, including the lack of a uniform definition of what should be considered pretrial services.  

“This report offers important insights into the experiences of individual jurisdictions and the barriers they face,” said State Auditor Pat McCarthy. “In my view, sharing success stories is also important to the expansion of pretrial services. No matter whether you work in law enforcement, as a corrections officer, a prosecutor or as a judge, it’s important to be familiar with what Washington courts have accomplished using effective pretrial services.” 

The audit identified strategies local courts could use to design, manage and fund pretrial services programs. The full report, including detailed results and the full list of courts reviewed, can be found on the State Auditor’s Office website at Expanding the Use of Pretrial Services in Washington.

 Media questions: Assistant Director of Communications Adam Wilson, Adam.Wilson@sao.wa.gov, 564-999-0799.