Responding to Firearm Possession Charges in New York City

Initial Findings from the Multimethod Evaluation of the Bronx Osborne Gun Accountability and Prevention Program (BOGAP)

July 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

Abstract

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.