skip to main content
Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Back Button

Day fines

Adult Criminal Justice
  Literature review updated February 2017.

In the criminal justice system, fines can be used as a sanction when a person commits a crime. Typically the magnitude of these fines is determined based solely on the gravity of the offense, and not on the person’s ability to pay the fine through legitimate means. To achieve equitable punishment, day fines are a method of calibrating fines based on both the gravity of the offense as well as the individual’s ability to pay. When day fines are assessed, a judge first determines the scale of punishment that is appropriate for the offense by calculating “punishment units.” A punishment unit equals a day’s pay. Thus, if a person is sanctioned to three punishment units (3 days’ pay), the total amount paid by the individual depends on the person’s income. This type of sanction is typically used for municipal violations or non-violent felonies.
 
ALL
META-ANALYSIS
CITATIONS

Meta-analysis is a statistical method to combine the results from separate studies on a program, policy, or topic to estimate its effect on an outcome. WSIPP systematically evaluates all credible evaluations we can locate on each topic. The outcomes measured are the program impacts measured in the research literature (for example, impacts on crime or educational attainment). Treatment N represents the total number of individuals or units in the treatment group across the included studies.

An effect size (ES) is a standard metric that summarizes the degree to which a program or policy affects a measured outcome. If the effect size is positive, the outcome increases. If the effect size is negative, the outcome decreases. See Estimating Program Effects Using Effect Sizes for additional information on how we estimate effect sizes.

The effect size may be adjusted from the unadjusted effect size estimated in the meta-analysis. Historically, WSIPP adjusted effect sizes to some programs based on the methodological characteristics of the study. For programs reviewed in 2024 or later, we do not make additional adjustments, and we use the unadjusted effect size whenever we run a benefit-cost analysis.

Research shows the magnitude of effects may change over time. For those effect sizes, we estimate outcome-based adjustments, which we apply between the first time ES is estimated and the second time ES is estimated. More details about these adjustments can be found in our Technical Documentation.

Meta-Analysis of Program Effects
Outcomes measured No. of effect sizes Treatment N Effect sizes (ES) and standard errors (SE) Unadjusted effect size (random effects model)
ES SE Age ES p-value
Payments/fines/restitution
Payments of fines or restitution to victims of crime.
 29 2 383 0.327 0.325 29 0.342 0.267
Crime
Any criminal conviction according to court records, sometimes measured through charges, arrests, incarceration, or self-report.
 29 1 191 -0.163 0.172 31 -0.163 0.343
Technical violations
Violations of the conditions of an individual’s terms of probation, parole, or supervision.
 29 1 191 -0.556 0.182 31 -0.556 0.002

Citations Used in the Meta-Analysis

McDonald, D.C., Greene, J., Worzella, C., & Abt Associates Inc 55 Wheeler Street Cambridge MA 02138. (1992). Day fines in American courts: The Staten Island and Milwaukee experiments. United States.

Turner, S. & Greene, J. (1999). The FARE probation experiment: implementation and outcomes of day fines for felony offenders in Maricopa County. The Justice System Journal, 21(1), 1-21.