Sentencing Advocacy Group · Research initiative
SAG Research
Federal Sentencing and Accountability Research
Studying how documented accountability, behavioral change and evidence of rehabilitation are evaluated in federal sentencing—and what that evidence can responsibly tell us.
The intellectual agenda
From assertions of change
to evidence that can be examined.
What distinguishes a statement of remorse from a documented pattern of accountability? How do courts describe sustained rehabilitation, restitution efforts, treatment and corrective action? When do judges credit those efforts, question them or conclude that other considerations carry greater weight?
These questions define SAG Research’s initial agenda. Its purpose is to develop a body of work that is useful to practitioners, researchers and people affected by the federal criminal justice system—including victims, defendants and families.
SAG’s advisory practice provides individualized client preparation. SAG Research develops public analysis and a research program. This is a functional distinction within the same commercial organization, not a claim of separate legal status or established institutional independence.
Research programs
Two initial agendas.
A deliberate path to a third.
Sentencing Evidence and Accountability
Judicial discussion of rehabilitation, personal accountability, Presentence Investigation Reports, corroborating documentation and sustained behavioral change.
Opening question: How do public sentencing opinions distinguish claimed change from evidence the court expressly credits?
Private Client and Family Enterprise Preparedness
Federal investigations, executive misconduct, organizational accountability and the lawful continuity of legitimate business and family responsibilities.
Opening question: What documentation and governance practices help families and enterprises prepare responsibly for disruption?
Future program · Not yet active
Institutional Continuity and Reentry
Organizational continuity, family stability, reintegration and measurable rehabilitation. Activation is contingent on completion of the first credible study and sufficient external review capacity.
Foundational study · Protocol in development
Documented Accountability in Public Federal Sentencing Opinions, 2022–2025
A proposed descriptive study of how federal district judges discuss accountability, rehabilitation, compliance and other mitigating evidence in publicly available written opinions concerning initial sentencing.
The research question
What does the court actually say?
The coding plan distinguishes an argument made by a party, the evidence described in the opinion and the court’s own evaluation. It includes unfavorable and mixed assessments, not only favorable examples.
The boundary
Written reasons are a selected record.
Public opinions are not a representative census of federal sentencing. This study will not estimate the causal effect of SAG’s services, assign success probabilities or produce judge rankings.
Publication architecture
A record designed to be cited.
Each released item will identify its author, publication date, version, sources, review status and publication number. Planned series below are a publishing roadmap, not a catalog of completed research.
| Series | Initial cadence | Purpose & status |
|---|---|---|
| Federal Sentencing and White Collar Outlook | Annual target | Flagship synthesis; first edition planned after sources and review capacity are established. |
| SAG Research Papers | One annually initially | Original research, methods and independent review. No completed paper yet. |
| SAG Research Notes | Up to four annually | Focused, sourced analysis with explicit review status. |
| Family Office Federal Crisis Playbook | Evergreen target | Planned public overview with detailed tools by request; not yet released. |
| Practitioner Perspectives | Selective | Interviews and professional analysis, clearly distinguished from empirical studies. |
| Advisor Roundtables | Limited | Proposed expert discussions; participants and dates announced only after confirmation. |
Existing published work
Joseph De Gregorio’s authored analyses, professional service and media appearances form the existing intellectual portfolio. Publisher-hosted articles retain their original authorship, dates and publication context.
Leadership & participation
A founder’s agenda.
Evidence open to challenge.
Joseph De Gregorio is the founder and president of Sentencing Advocacy Group and the founding lead of this research initiative. His practice experience informs the questions; it does not establish the answers.
The first study requires a designated research lead, a second coder, an independent legal reviewer and an independent methods reviewer. Those study appointments are pending. No outside scholar, institution or professional association is represented here as a research partner without a confirmed role.
Researchers and practitioners interested in the protocol may contact Joseph with their relevant expertise and potential conflicts. Please do not send confidential case material.
Individual advisory services
Preparing for a federal case?
For individualized sentencing preparation, prison preparation or release planning, use SAG’s private case review process. Research participation is separate from retaining advisory services.
Apply for a Private Case Review