Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:55 am
Time: 11:55 am
Results for community justice centers
4 results foundAuthor: Youth Justice Board (New York City) Title: Looking Forward: Youth Perspectives on Reducing Crime in Brownsville and Beyond Summary: This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Youth Justice Board, a group of New York City teenagers who study public policy issues that affect young people. Since August 2010, the Youth Justice Board has focused on reducing youth crime in New York City using the neighborhood of Brownsville, Brooklyn as a case study. This report presents ideas about how to reduce incidences of youth crime in Brownsville and neighborhoods that face similar challenges. In 2011-12, the Board will work to implement many of the ideas contained in this report in conjunction with the development of a new community justice center in Brownsville. The Board’s ultimate goal is to make Brownsville a safe, supportive neighborhood for young people that provides for their social, emotional, and educational needs. Over five months, the Youth Justice Board conducted interviews with over 30 individuals involved in the city justice system and the Brownsville community. The Board visited four community justice centers and conducted three focus groups with young people involved in the justice system to learn about the experiences and perspectives of youths. The Youth Justice Board developed 10 recommendations designed to reduce youth crime in Brownsville and make the community a safer, more supportive place for youths to grow up. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2011. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 2, 2012 at: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/report%20for%20website.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/report%20for%20website.pdf Shelf Number: 124789 Keywords: Community Justice CentersDelinquency Prevention (New York City)Neighborhoods and Crime |
Author: Kilmer, Beau Title: Does San Francisco's Community Justice Center Reduce Criminal Recidivism? Summary: In 2009, San Francisco opened a community court, the Community Justice Center (CJC), to serve the Tenderloin and adjacent neighborhoods, a traditionally high-crime area. Community courts are expressly oriented toward improving outcomes for offenders by addressing factors often linked to criminal behavior (by incorporating access to treatment and services within the criminal case management process); they also emphasize ties to a specific neighborhood. This report examines whether the CJC reduces the risk of rearrest when compared to more traditional approaches for addressing arrestees. Using a differences-in-differences (DD) design that exploits temporal and geographic variation in CJC eligibility, a RAND research team examined one-year rearrest rates among those arrested for eligible offenses within the four police districts that include a part of the CJC catchment area, including offenses inside and outside the catchment area both before and after the CJC opened. After controlling for a number of arrestee-level factors (including criminal history), as well as month- and police district-level fixed effects, the DD estimator from our preferred models ranges from -8.2 to -7.1 percentage points, which corresponds to an 8.9 percent to 10.3 percent reduction in the probability of being rearrested within one year. These findings support the hypothesis that the CJC reduces criminal recidivism and are robust to a number of sensitivity analyses. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2014. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 13, 2014 at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR700/RR735/RAND_RR735.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR700/RR735/RAND_RR735.pdf Shelf Number: 133648 Keywords: Alternatives to CorrectionsCommunity Courts (U.S.)Community Justice CentersRecidivism |
Author: Ross, Stuart Title: Evaluating neighbourhood justice: Measuring and attributing outcomes for a community justice program Summary: One of the most important recent developments in criminal justice has been that of 'neighbourhood' or 'community' justice. Community justice recognises the important role that local communities play in responding to crime and provides a way to engage the community in identifying crime problems and solutions (Karp & Clear 2000). Dealing with crime under a community justice model involves extending the role of the justice system to help build community resilience in relation to the problems that make crime possible or more likely. The first court established on a 'community justice' model was the Midtown Community Court, located in the Times Square district, New York, in 1993. Since then, the idea of community justice has gained wide acceptance and support. The Center for Court Innovation (New York) reports that more than 30 community court programs have been established in various jurisdictions in the United States. The first UK community court was established in Liverpool in 2005, followed by a further 12 courts around the United Kingdom in 2008. There are now community or neighbourhood courts in South Africa, Canada, Scotland, Singapore and Australia, with more scheduled to follow. As with any new justice program, the establishment of new community courts involves the investment of substantial amounts of public funds. It is therefore critical that governments understand whether these programs provide benefits commensurate with the funds invested in them. However, the evaluation of community and neighbourhood courts, and the calculation of cost-benefit measures pose a number of significant challenges. These include the complexity of the program model and in particular, its reliance on engagement with community service providers, the relatively small scale of many programs and the difficulty in attributing outcomes to a single cause. This Trends & Issues paper examines data from the first comprehensive Australian community justice initiative- the Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) in the City of Yarra, Melbourne - and suggests a number of strategies to improve understanding of how programs like this contribute to improved justice and community outcomes. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 499: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi499.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi499.pdf Shelf Number: 137324 Keywords: Citizen ParticipationCommunity Justice CentersNeighborhood Justice Centers |
Author: Morgan, Anthony Title: Estimating the costs associated with community justice Summary: In recent years, governments at all levels have been faced with increasingly tight budgets and limited resources, placing greater pressure on service providers - including those involved in crime prevention and criminal justice - to demonstrate value for money. This has resulted in a growing interest in economic analysis as a tool to assess the cost-efficiency and cost-effectiveness of programs and help inform decision-making. This is reflected in the evaluation guides that have been produced by treasury departments to encourage the robust economic analysis of government funded programs (eg Department of Treasury and Finance 2013). Established in 2007 to address high rates of crime and disadvantage, the Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) provides a range of local justice and social services to the City of Yarra community in Victoria. A major challenge for the NJC is dealing with questions regarding value for money and responding to the criticism that they are an expensive alternative to traditional responses to crime and offending. The development and implementation of new and innovative programs often involves a significant financial investment by government and, in the case of the NJC, the concentration of these resources in one location. Recent examples, such as the abolition of several specialist court models in Queensland, have shown that, even where there is evidence of positive outcomes, an inability to demonstrate cost-efficiency and effectiveness in financial terms can weaken the argument in favour of ongoing funding and support - even where this is not the principal reason for the decision. The purpose of this paper is to address one dimension of the value for money debate and compare the operating costs of NJC court and client services with similar mainstream programs operating within the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. Following a brief overview of the NJC and evidence from previous economic studies of community justice models, the methodology used to estimate the costs associated with NJC court and client services is described, along with the results of a cost comparison of the NJC and the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. Directions for further economic analysis for the NJC and other similar programs are proposed. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2015. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice, No. 507: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi507.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi507.pdf Shelf Number: 137325 Keywords: Citizen ParticipationCommunity Justice Centers Costs of Criminal JusticeNeighborhood Justice Centers |