Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:11 pm
Time: 8:11 pm
Results for criminal justice administration
25 results foundAuthor: Troutman, David R. Title: Prosecutor's Comprehensive Gang Response Model Summary: The comprehensive gang response model is designed to help prosecutors and allied professionals design and implement gang initiatives that focus on the specific needs to individual jurisdictions. Drawing on the experiences of experts from various disciplines across the country and available research on what works in gang prevention, intervention, and suppression. Details: Alexandria, VA: National District Attorneys Association, American Prosecutors Research Institute, 2007 Source: Interest Resource: Accessed May 30, 2018 at: https://www.ndaa.org/pdf/pub_prosecutors_comprehensive_gang_response_model_07.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: https://www.ndaa.org/pdf/pub_prosecutors_comprehensive_gang_response_model_07.pdf Shelf Number: 116667 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationGang PreventionGang SuppressionGangsProsecutors |
Author: Enyimu, Joseph Title: A Review of the Uganda Police Force Budget and Its Effect on Crime Management Summary: This is a study on the impact of police funding on crime management and citizen safety in Uganda and is part of a broader study on budgetary allocations of the three police forces of East Africa (Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda). The study examines trends in the Government of Uganda’s (GoU) budgetary allocations over the period 1999/2000 to 2003/2004 at the global, sector and sub-sector or programme levels. The study compares and analyses the priority implications of the relationships of budget allocation over the financial period 1999/00 to 2003/04 between: The Justice, Law and Order (JLO) Sector and other sectors; The Uganda Police Force (UPF) sub-sector and other sub-sectors under the JLO sector; The different programmes under the UPF; The UPF and other government security agencies. Based on the above analysis, the study makes conclusions on: The relative priority ranking of the JLO sector budget within GoU’s overall budget and its impact on crime management and citizen safety; UPF’s funding priorities and the implications for crime management and citizen safety. Details: New Delhi: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, 2006. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 22, 2010 at: http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/police/uganda_report.pdf Year: 2006 Country: Uganda URL: http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/police/uganda_report.pdf Shelf Number: 119264 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationPolicing |
Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: The Use of Consultants by the Criminal Justice System Summary: The use of external consultants is an important source of expertise and experience for the public sector. Effective use of consultants can provide innovative thinking, professional insight and technical skills beyond what is available in many public sector organisations. This can assist with the delivery of complex assignments to time and to established budgets, providing value for the organisations who engage them and ultimately, the end user of the services provided. The best consultancy firms invest heavily in training and the development of their staff. It is right and appropriate that the public sector utilise this experience to the benefit of service delivery. The past decade has been a period of significant change within the criminal justice system, most particularly in terms of the modernisation of the police and the establishment of the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland (PPS). All organisations have experienced the challenge of change to some degree. This has entailed the use of consultants including the greater use of external support under job/staff substitution arrangements. This is only to be expected. It is important that staff substitution continues to be monitored along side spending on consultancy. Consultants are expensive resources and there is a responsibility on agencies to maximise the contribution made by consultancy support and the benefits it provides. There is a need to ensure that their use is planned for and appropriately procured, to ensure value for money. There should be a targeted use of consultancy support based on business need. Their assignments should be managed appropriately and the quality of what they deliver - as with any supplier of goods and services to the public sector - should be rigorously examined. This inspection examined the use of consultants across the criminal justice sector in Northern Ireland. Our inspection found that in general, the use of consultants followed practices similar to those which existed elsewhere in the public sector. Indeed, many of our recommendations repeat the findings of similar reviews undertaken by the Audit offices in Scotland, England andWales and Northern Ireland. While we did not find any major areas of concern around the overall process of procurement, there were some issues around the letting of individual contracts and the need to sharpen practice as a consequence. We did find the need to strengthen the planning and management of consultancy support. In particular, there is a need to widen the pool of suppliers for the justice system as there was evidence of dependence on a relatively small number of key suppliers and barriers to access to new suppliers. We also found the need to strengthen the post-benefit review stage that assesses the value of the support provided. Clarity of information and transparency on the processes followed, would also improve the overall management of consultancy support. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2010. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 15, 2011 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/aa/aa38053b-44bb-4d7e-a72a-166110447208.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/aa/aa38053b-44bb-4d7e-a72a-166110447208.pdf Shelf Number: 121363 Keywords: ConsultantsCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Systems (Northern Ireland) |
Author: United Nations. Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Title: United Nations Rule of Law Indicators - Implementation Guide and Project Tools Summary: Building and strengthening the “rule of law” in developing nations, particularly countries in transition or emerging from a period of armed conflict, has become a central focus of the work of the United Nations. As a result, there is growing demand throughout the United Nations system to better understand the delivery of justice in conflict and post-conflict situations and the impact of developments in this area. The United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), in cooperation with other United Nations departments, agencies, funds and programmes, have developed an instrument to monitor changes in the performance and fundamental characteristics of criminal justice institutions in conflict and post-conflict situations. The instrument consists of a set of indicators, the United Nations Rule of Law Indicators. This Guide describes how to implement this instrument and measure these indicators. The United Nations Rule of Law Indicators and this Guide are part of an emerging body of empirically based approaches to measuring the strengths and effectiveness of law enforcement, judicial and correctional institutions. The instrument, in contrast to some other measurement tools, is designed to highlight apparent successes and shortcomings within institutions and to monitor changes over time within countries. It is not meant to support direct comparisons between countries or rank them. The instrument refers, as it should, to all relevant international human rights and criminal justice norms and standards, but is not designed to assess compliance with such norms and standards. Nor is the instrument a substitute for a detailed assessment of the capacity or performance of criminal justice institutions, including for programmatic purposes. The instrument is to be implemented in collaboration with national Governments and potentially adopted by them as an ongoing monitoring mechanism. Participating countries will find this instrument very useful for monitoring their own progress in developing their criminal justice institutions and strengthening the rule of law. The instrument will also provide and summarize accurate information which the United Nations, donors and development partners will be able to use to plan and monitor the impact of their efforts to build the capacity of criminal justice institutions and, more generally, strengthen the rule of law. Additionally, the process of implementing the indicators will strengthen relationships between the United Nations and participating national Governments, relationships that are crucial to the Organization’s objectives of promoting peace and security in conflict and post-conflict situations and building sustainable criminal justice institutions that provide equal access to justice for all individuals. The Guide provides step-by-step instructions on how to implement the instrument, with United Nations support, in a conflict or post-conflict setting. It is meant for first-time users of the instrument who have a general knowledge of the United Nations system, previous experience working in such situations, a good knowledge of criminal justice institutions and a familiarity with social sciences research methods. Details: New York: United Nations, 2011. 137p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 7, 2011 at: http://www.unrol.org/files/United%20Nations%20Rule%20of%20Law%20Indicators%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.unrol.org/files/United%20Nations%20Rule%20of%20Law%20Indicators%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 121995 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice SystemsRule of Law |
Author: Lawrence, Alison Title: Principles of Effective State Sentencing and Corrections Policy A Report of the NCSL Sentencing and Corrections Work Group Summary: The NCSL Sentencing and Corrections Work Group project was developed under an NCSL partnership with the Public Safety Performance Project (PSPP) of the Pew Center on the States. The NCSL project responds to the challenges faced by states as they consider corrections and sentencing policies that both manage state spending and protect the public. The Pew PSPP was launched in 2006 to help states advance fiscally sound, data-driven policies and practices in sentencing and corrections. Pew’s work has included research, technical assistance, and funding and overseeing a variety of efforts both in states and nationally to support strategies that protect public safety, hold offenders accountable and control corrections costs. The NCSL Criminal Justice Program assembled the Sentencing and Corrections Work Group in 2010. The bipartisan, 18-member group includes officers of NCSL’s Law and Criminal Justice Committee and other legislators who are recognized as leaders on these issues. The group had a one-year work plan to discuss and identify overarching principles for effective state sentencing and corrections policy and to identify key issues and approaches that explain and illustrate the recommendations. The issues addressed by the NCSL work group reflect the important role of state legislatures in enacting policies that manage prison populations and costs, address offender and community needs, and contribute to the safe and fair administration of criminal justice. The discussions took place during a difficult, recessionary budget climate. A major interest of the work group was how to have an immediate effect on state public safety dollars while also ensuring that the public safety is protected into the future. Many concepts addressed in the Principles reflect recent advances in resource-sensitive policies that actually reduce risk and recidivism. Mindful that sentencing and corrections policies reach into various levels and branches of government, the Principles also reflect the value that lawmakers place on stakeholders throughout criminal justice systems in policy development and discussions. Apparent throughout the Principles is the importance of interbranch and intergovernmental collaboration, information exchange and evaluation in working toward effective sentencing and corrections policies. It is the intent of NCSL and this work group that the Principles and examples presented here will help guide and inform many aspects of state sentencing and corrections policy now and well into the future. Details: Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures, 2011. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 25, 2011 at: http://www.ncsl.org/documents/cj/pew/WGprinciplesreport.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncsl.org/documents/cj/pew/WGprinciplesreport.pdf Shelf Number: 123141 Keywords: Corrections AdministrationCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Policy (U.S.)Sentencing |
Author: Social Development, Republic of South Africa Title: Integrated Social Crime Prevention Strategy Summary: Preventing crime has been a priority for all government departments and culminated in the launching of the NCPS in 1996. The NCPS emphasises the prevention of crime, rather than entirely relying on the criminal justice process to arrest and convict offenders. It is also based on the idea that the South African Police Service (SAPS) alone cannot reduce crime. Communities, NGOs, CBOs, FBOs and the respective government departments are equally responsible for reducing crime. The NCPS has laid a foundation that provides regulations to various relevant departments to develop strategies that are aligned to existing approaches so as to avoid duplication of services. In dealing with crime, more emphasis is placed on an inter-sectoral and comprehensive approach. The NCPS also provides guidance to individual stakeholders on different programmes, as it is the result of an extensive process of research and analysis, and has drawn on international experiences. The role and responsibilities of government departments is, however to deal with difficult conditions facing children, youth, men and women, specifically those that relate to criminal activity. Concerted efforts need to be directed at addressing the underlying causes of delinquency, violence and crime, rather than reacting to symptoms and emergency needs. The provision of services, such as basic education, healthcare, job opportunities and recreation in rural and urban areas will contribute to children’s early growth, development, functioning and progress in society. There is, therefore, a dire need to provide integrated and coordinated programmes through the guidance of the Integrated Social Crime Prevention Strategy. The rationale for developing and implementing the Integrated Social Crime Prevention Strategy is to enable the government departments to respond to crime-related issues in a coordinated and focused manner, specifically looking at issues causing crime. The strategy will also promote joint efforts for creating a common understanding and vision on how to combat crime, bringing together concerted interventions within government departments as crucial initiatives for social crime prevention. Details: South Africa: Social Development Department, 2011. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 29, 2012 at http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=156928 Year: 2011 Country: South Africa URL: http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=156928 Shelf Number: 123867 Keywords: Crime Prevention (South Africa)Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Policy |
Author: Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers Title: International Police Standards - The European Code of Police Ethics Summary: Legislating for the security sector is a complex and difficult task. Many lawmakers thus find it tempting to copy legislation from other countries. This expedites the drafting process, especially when the texts are available in the language of the lawmaker, but more often than not, the result is poor legislation. Even after being amended, the copied laws are often out of date before coming into effect. They may no longer be in line with international standards or they may not fully respond to the requirements of the local political and societal context. Copied laws are sometimes inconsistent with the national legislation in place. In some cases, there is simply no model law available in the region for the type of legislation that is needed. This has been the case in the Arab region, where the security sector has only slowly begun to be publicly debated. It is thus difficult to find good model laws for democratic policing or for parliamentary oversight of intelligence services. It is therefore not surprising that many Arab lawmakers have felt frustrated, confused, and overwhelmed by the task of drafting legislation for the security sector. They found it difficult to access international norms and standards because little or no resources were available in Arabic. Many of them did not know where to search for model laws and several were about to give up. Some eventually turned to DCAF for assistance. The idea of a practical toolkit for legislators in the Arab region came when practitioners began looking for a selection of standards, norms and model laws in Arabic that would help them draft new legislation. Experts from the Arab region and DCAF thus decided to work together and develop some practical tools. This toolkit is primarily addressed to all those who intend to create new or develop existing security sector legislation. This includes parliamentarians, civil servants, legal experts and nongovernmental organisations. The toolkit may also be helpful to security officials and, as a reference tool, to researchers and students interested in security sector legislation. Details: Geneva, Switzerland: Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), 2009. 45p. Source: Toolkit - Legislating for the Security Sector (2): Internet Resource: Accessed February 4, 2012 at http://se2.dcaf.ch/serviceengine/Files/DCAF09/95671/ipublicationdocument_singledocument/b7d10cd7-b7a4-4c46-a333-34de98cd832e/en/CoE.pdf Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://se2.dcaf.ch/serviceengine/Files/DCAF09/95671/ipublicationdocument_singledocument/b7d10cd7-b7a4-4c46-a333-34de98cd832e/en/CoE.pdf Shelf Number: 123958 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationLegislationPolice Ethics |
Author: Canada. Institute for the Prevention of Crime, University of Ottawa. Title: Making Cities Safer: Canadian Strategies and Practices Summary: Municipalities have a key role to play in reducing crime and enhancing community safety. This report examines themes and challenges facing 14 municipalities in Canada in their efforts to implement and sustain evidence-based community safety and crime prevention initiatives. It also identifies guiding principles for all orders of government that will assist municipalities in these efforts. In 2006, the Institute for the Prevention of Crime (IPC) at the University of Ottawa invited the mayors of 14 municipalities to delegate a representative to join the Municipal Network on Crime Prevention. The Network currently includes Vancouver, Surrey, Edmonton, Calgary, Saskatoon, Regina, Winnipeg, Waterloo Region, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, Saint John, and Halifax. The Municipal Network exists to share knowledge and experience that will help strengthen the capacity of Canadian municipalities to reduce crime and enhance community safety. It is one component of Harnessing Knowledge for Crime Prevention, a project funded through the National Crime Prevention Centre at the Ministry of Public Safety Canada. In order to better understand municipal involvement in community safety and crime prevention in Canadian cities, IPC conducted in-depth consultations with members of the Municipal Network within the following framework: past involvement of the municipality in crime prevention initiatives/programs; current problems and challenges related to delinquency, violence, and safety in the municipality; strategic importance of safety and crime prevention within the municipality; current municipal safety and crime prevention initiatives and programs; and, challenges for the future. Based on an analysis of the information gathered through the consultations as well as the examination of municipally-based crime prevention initiatives at the international level, the Municipal Network has identified a set of guiding principles that will enhance efforts to reduce crime and victimization and improve community safety. A major challenge to implementing and sustaining coordinated initiatives that was identified in this review is the lack of coordination among levels of government in setting priorities and funding programs that target root causes of crime. Details: Ottawa, Canada: Institute for the Prevention of Crime, University of Ottawa, 2008. 71p. Source: Number 2: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2012 at http://www.sciencessociales.uottawa.ca/ipc/eng/documents/IPC_MR2-Eng.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Canada URL: http://www.sciencessociales.uottawa.ca/ipc/eng/documents/IPC_MR2-Eng.pdf Shelf Number: 124166 Keywords: Community Safety (Canada)Crime Prevention ProgramsCriminal Justice Administration |
Author: Pretrial Justice Institute (PJI) Title: National Symposium on Pretrial Justice - Convened by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs and the Pretrial Justice Institute - Summary Report of Proceedings Summary: The 2011 National Symposium on Pretrial Justice convened by the Office of Justice Programs of the U.S. Department of Justice, together with the Pretrial Justice Institute (PJI), highlighted the major shortcomings in current pretrial release decision-making practices and showcased efforts to improve those practices. The Symposium brought together representatives of associations from a broad array of stakeholder groups, including law enforcement, judges, prosecutors, public defenders, jails, and victims, as well as county, state, and federal legislative and executive branch officials, and private funders. The Summary of Proceedings provides a summary of the Symposium and recommendations for improving pretrial justice for all. Details: Washington, DC: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2011. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 18, 2012 at http://pretrial.org/NSPJ%20Report%202011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://pretrial.org/NSPJ%20Report%202011.pdf Shelf Number: 124172 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationPretrial AgenciesPretrial Services |
Author: Justice Center, The Council of State Governments Title: Justice Reinvestment in Oklahoma - Analysis and Policy Framework Summary: IN JANUARY 2011, GOVERNOR MARY FALLIN, Speaker of the House Kris Steele, Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bingman, and Supreme Court Justice James Edmondson expressed interest in employing a justice reinvestment strategy, which is a data-driven approach to contain corrections spending and reinvest a portion of the savings generated in strategies that will increase public safety. These state leaders wrote to the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), a division of the U.S. Department of Justice, and the Pew Center on the States (Pew) seeking intensive technical assistance, which was approved by BJA and Pew in May 2011. As a result, the Council of State Governments Justice Center (CSG Justice Center) - the technical assistance provider working in partnership with BJA and Pew - launched a comprehensive analysis of the state's criminal justice system. This report summarizes the CSG Justice Center's work to address key issues that emerged from the quantitative and qualitative analyses. Policy options are organized around three strategies: 1) reducing violent crime, 2) improving supervision of people on probation, and 3) containing state spending on prisons. Details: New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2012. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 19, 2012 at http://justicereinvestment.org/files/JR_OK_Analysis_Policy_Framework.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://justicereinvestment.org/files/JR_OK_Analysis_Policy_Framework.pdf Shelf Number: 124185 Keywords: Corrections (Oklahoma)Criminal Justice AdministrationProbation SupervisionViolent Crime |
Author: Nicholson, Linda Title: Keeping Scotland Safe and Strong - A Consultation on Reforming Police and Fire and Rescue Services in Scotland: Analysis of Consultation Responses Summary: The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that the police and fire and rescue services in Scotland deliver against several of the National Outcomes by focusing on the frontline. Progress has been good in recent years with recorded crime at its lowest level in 35 years and the number of fire related deaths and injuries steadily reducing. Severe financial challenges facing the public sector along with new threats to safety have led to debate over how to secure such frontline policing and fire and rescue services in a financially sustainable way. Two written consultation exercises were run by the Scottish Government between February and May 2011 which proposed options for reform. These were followed by extensive engagement with stakeholders across Scotland about the future of the Scottish Police and Fire and Rescue Services. The Government has introduced legislation which will create a single Scottish Police Service and a single Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. To inform the development of the legislation, a further written consultation paper, “Keeping Scotland Safe and Strong: A Consultation on Reforming Police and Fire and Rescue Services in Scotland”, was published on 8 September 2011 which set out proposals for how best to establish these single services. Comments were invited by 2 November 2011 to help shape the final proposals and related legislation. 145 written responses to the consultation were submitted. These responses have been made publicly available on the Scottish Government website unless the respondent has specifically requested otherwise. The consultation document was divided into 2 parts. Part 1 focused on police service reform and posed 12 questions on this topic; Part 2 focused on fire and rescue service reform, asking another 14 questions. Views were also invited on the partial Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) and the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA) undertaken as part of the proposals for reform. 145 responses to the consultation were submitted and analysed. Whilst responses from police bodies (e.g. police forces, Police Authorities/Joint Boards) and fire bodies (e.g. Fire and Rescue Services, Fire and Rescue Authorities/Joint Boards) tended to address the questions relating to police or fire respectively, local authorities and many individual respondents addressed topics on both police and fire and rescue issues. The presentation of the analysis of the comments submitted to the consultation follows the order of the questions set out in the consultation document. Details: Scotland: Scottish Government Social Research, 2012. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 19, 2012 at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00387506.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00387506.pdf Shelf Number: 124207 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice ReformEmergency Services (Scotland) |
Author: Levin, Marc A. Title: Work Release: Con Job or Big Payoff for Texas? Summary: This publication explains how the “promise of work release, as it provides a means for individuals whose criminal activity has imposed costs on victims and taxpayers [effectively acts] to off set some of those expenses while at the same time advancing their own reentry into society as productive taxpayers who support their families” (p. 1). Sections following a summary of recommendations include: introduction; what work release is; how work release is employed in Texas in community corrections facilities, in transitional treatment centers, and other Texas work release-related programs past and present; work release delivers positive results—the Texas experience and the national experience; recommendations in detail; and conclusion. The use of transitional treatment centers saves $15.40 in costs per inmate per day or about $5,600 per inmate per year. Details: Austin, TX: Center for Effective Justice, Texas Public Policy Foundation, 2008. 16p. Source: Policy Perspective: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2012 at http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-04-PP11-workrelease-ml.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-04-PP11-workrelease-ml.pdf Shelf Number: 124230 Keywords: Community CorrectionsCriminal Justice AdministrationWork Release (Texas) |
Author: Orr, Kate Skellington Title: Summary Justice Reform: Undertakings Evaluation Summary: In December 2009, the Scottish Government commissioned an independent evaluation of reforms to undertakings, the findings of which are presented here. The research is part of a wider package of work to evaluate summary justice reform (SJR) in Scotland, and sits alongside five other evaluations of individual areas of reform, namely direct measures; criminal legal assistance and disclosure; fines enforcement; and lay justice. An evaluation of the impact of the whole package of reforms on the experiences and perceptions of victims and witnesses, and the perceptions of the general public was also commissioned. The reforms to undertakings were evaluated in tandem with a number of changes to bail which, although were part of the same Act, and occurred at roughly the same time (i.e. December 2007), were not directly part of SJR. The evaluation of the reforms to bail are the subject of a separate report with this report focusing solely on the reforms to undertakings. The main aim of the research was to evaluate how far the reforms to undertakings had met both the overarching aims and objectives of SJR, as well as a number of specific policy objectives. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Social Research, 2012. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 2, 2012 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00388998.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00388998.pdf Shelf Number: 124343 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformsCriminal Justice Systems (Scotland) |
Author: Hakim, Peter Title: Rethinking US Drug Policy Summary: Most Americans believe that their country’s forty-year “war on drugs” has failed. Yet, instead of a serious national discussion of how to reform US drug control strategies, there remains a silent tolerance of ineffective, socially harmful laws, institutions, and policies. What is most needed now is a farreaching debate on alternative approaches that could reduce the risks and damage from the trafficking and abuse of illegal drugs. That was also the conclusion of a highly-regarded report prepared by a distinguished group of Latin American presidents and other leaders. This Inter-American Dialogue report proposes six US government initiatives that would set the stage for a thorough rethinking of US drug policy. Details: Washington, DC: Inter-American Dialogue, The Beckley Foundation, 2011. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2012 at http://www.seguridadcondemocracia.org/administrador_de_carpetas/OCO-IM/pdf/Rethinking_US_Drug_Policy_feb2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.seguridadcondemocracia.org/administrador_de_carpetas/OCO-IM/pdf/Rethinking_US_Drug_Policy_feb2011.pdf Shelf Number: 125206 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice PolicyDrug AbuseDrug Policy (U.S.)Drug TraffickingLegislation |
Author: Archer, Justin Title: Improving Strategic Planning through Collaborative Bodies Summary: Justice reinvestment is a systemwide process of data analysis and collaborative decisionmaking used to identify drivers of criminal justice costs and reinvest resources to yield a more cost-beneficial impact on public safety. It is not a single decision, project, or strategy, but rather a multistaged, ongoing process involving the collaboration of local stakeholders across city, county, and state systems. It is therefore critical that, at the onset of engaging in this process, sites establish a strategic planning entity whose primary mission is to direct efforts and ensure that goals are met. Beyond directing efforts and tracking goals, this type of collaborative body can also ensure that the right decisionmakers are involved in reinvestment efforts and that no critical stakeholders are excluded. This brief will first discuss the importance of strategic planning entities within criminal justice systems and explain why a jurisdiction may want to pursue the formation of a strategic planning body. The discussion should help localities examine the collaborative efforts among its agencies and determine if the formation of an organized planning body is appropriate. The brief will then outline how these bodies are structured and operated, giving guidance for those who wish to form such a collaboration. Finally, a case study from one local justice reinvestment site, Allegheny County, is presented to highlight how a successful collaborative body can conduct a case review to identify systemic issues and develop solutions. Details: Washington, DC: Justice Policy Center, Urban Institute, 2012. 10p. Source: Justice Reinvestment at the Local Level Brief 3: Internet Resource: Accessed November 12, 2012 at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412542-Improving-Strategic-Planning-through-Collaborative-Bodies.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412542-Improving-Strategic-Planning-through-Collaborative-Bodies.pdf Shelf Number: 126918 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeCrime Prevention ProgramsCriminal Justice AdministrationJustice Reinvestment |
Author: Taylor, Mac Title: California's Criminal Justice System: A Primer Summary: In January 2007, our office released the first edition of California’s Criminal Justice System: A Primer to provide the public, media, and policymakers some basic information on the state’s criminal justice system, caseloads, costs, trends, and outcomes. This publication provides more up-to-date data, generally through 2011. Updating this information for policymakers is particularly important in light of major criminal justice law changes implemented in 2011 that shifted—or “realigned”—significant responsibilities from state corrections agencies to county governments. Such data gives policymakers a picture of the state’s criminal justice system prior to the full implementation of the 2011 realignment, against which they can evaluate how the system changed following the realignment (such as in terms of crime rates, court caseloads, and correctional populations). This primer is organized into different sections that seek to answer key questions about the criminal justice system in California. Chapter 1 provides a general overview of the state’s criminal justice system, including information on the respective roles of different state and local agencies. Chapters 2 through 5 provide a series of charts and tables on each of the four major stages of the criminal justice system: (1) the commission of crimes, (2) arrest by law enforcement agencies, (3) prosecution in the trial courts, and (4) state and local corrections. Chapter 6 discusses some of the recent significant policy changes in California criminal justice, as well as some of the major criminal justice policy challenges facing policymakers in the next few years. Details: Sacramento: Legislative Analyst’s Office, 2013. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 25, 2013 at: http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2013/crim/criminal-justice-primer/criminal-justice-primer-011713.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2013/crim/criminal-justice-primer/criminal-justice-primer-011713.pdf Shelf Number: 128115 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice Systems (California, U.S.) |
Author: Labriola, Melissa Title: Innovation in the Criminal Justice System: A National Survey of Criminal Justice Leaders Summary: Innovation in the Criminal Justice System: A National Survey of Criminal Justice Leaders is part of a multi-faceted inquiry concerning innovation and criminal justice reform conducted by the Center for Court Innovation in partnership with the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the U.S. Department of Justice. The questionnaire was administered from June to August 2012 among a nationwide sample of 1,000 professionals: 300 community corrections officials; 300 leaders from prosecutors’ offices; 300 police chiefs and sheriffs; and all 102 chief judges and chief court administrators from the 50 states and the District of Columbia. There was an overall response rate of 62%, and the final sample included responses from 624 individual criminal justice leaders. On average, respondents had over 26 years of experience in the criminal justice system. Weighting techniques were utilized to assign each of the four criminal justice segments (community corrections, prosecution, law enforcement, and court administration) equal influence over the reported totals. The questionnaire was designed to provide a snapshot of the current state of innovation in the field of criminal justice: Is innovation a priority? Are criminal justice leaders aware of emerging research, and do they use research to inform policymaking? What obstacles stand in the way of innovation in the field? Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2013. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 6, 2013 at: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CCI-InnovationSurveyReport.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CCI-InnovationSurveyReport.pdf Shelf Number: 129552 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice Systems (U.S.) |
Author: Aharoni, Eyal Title: An Assessment of Program Sustainability in Three Bureau of Justice Assistance Criminal Justice Domains Summary: The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) aims to improve community safety through effective programming throughout the United States. To maximize the impact of its investments, BJA has an interest in supporting programs that will be sustained beyond initial federal funding. This notion of program sustainability is becoming increasingly important as programs have been challenged to operate with increasingly scarce resources. RAND Corporation researchers aimed to better understand the characteristics and environments of programs that are likely to persist beyond federal seed funding and to delineate strategies that will enable BJA to assist programs that it funds in their efforts to sustain themselves. Using archival documentation and survey methods, they assessed 231 BJA grantee programs spanning three BJA funding domains - drug courts, human trafficking, and mental health - to identify characteristics associated with sustainability. They found evidence of program sustainment in most BJA grantees studied, particularly in sustained funding. They also examined the association between organizational and contextual factors and sustained operations and sustained funding. Finally, they recommend a plan for ongoing measurement of sustainability. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2014. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 14, 2014 at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR500/RR550/RAND_RR550.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR500/RR550/RAND_RR550.pdf Shelf Number: 132344 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice ExpendituresCriminal Justice ProgramsCriminal Justice Research |
Author: Great Britain. Criminal Justice Joint Inspection Title: Delivering Justice in a Digital Age. A Joint Inspection of Digital Case Preparation and Presentation in the Criminal Justice System Summary: Historically, files were transferred between the police, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the courts and the defence on paper. This resulted in delays and substantial storage costs. Information was regularly duplicated, and there was a risk of information being lost or disclosed to the wrong people. Digitisation of the processes is essential if the criminal justice system (CJS) is to be effective in today's environment. The CPS and the other CJS agencies embarked on this process a few years ago. Her Majesty's Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) and Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) have jointly inspected progress towards digitisation of processes in and between the police, CPS, the courts and the defence. Inspectors visited six police forces and the aligned CPS Areas between July and September 2015. They also carried out court observations in magistrates' and Crown Courts, and interviewed representatives of the police, CPS, HM Courts and Tribunal Service, the Ministry of Justice and the Home Office. Inspectors found that the criminal justice agencies are clearly committed to making improvements using digitisation. Substantial incremental progress has been made, for example: - An online charging facility which allows the police and CPS to prioritise and even out workloads - Almost all magistrates' courts casework is transferred digitally between the police and the CPS - CPS Areas can work together to save costs, with some work being done outside the Area to which the case relates - Prosecutors present magistrates' court cases from laptops and update their case records in real time using a 'prosecutor app' - Where Wi-Fi exists in court, information can be accessed without needing to adjourn or put back cases There remains significant progress to be made however. For example: - Agencies still rely on the manual input of some paper documents. Victim and witness statements are generally handwritten by the police then scanned in, which often makes the documents hard to read - Agencies' computer systems still do not directly 'talk' to each other - There is no single, national police IT system so information is transferred to the CPS in different ways, and each police force visited during the inspection has bought a different body worn video camera solution with little consideration of linking such projects together and maximising value for money - There is no reliable way of sharing CCTV, interview and 999 recordings, photos and body worn video footage digitally, so discs still have to be sent from the police to the CPS, leading to an increased risk of the misplacing of these discs - Although the CPS can send information to the defence digitally, many defence representatives do not use the necessary secure email system so the CPS has to print off a paper copy and courier it to the court - The HMCTS Court Store system was slowing down the court dramatically in cases involving multiple defendants, as the updating of more than one defendant's record at the same time wasn't possible, even if the same update applies to more than one defendant Progress has clearly been made, but the vision in the CJS Digital Business Model of a digital end-to-end CJS is still some way from becoming a reality. Details: London: NAO, 2016. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 29, 2016 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/04/CJJI_DIG_Apr16_rpt.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/04/CJJI_DIG_Apr16_rpt.pdf Shelf Number: 138843 Keywords: Case RecordsCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice RecordsRecord Keeping |
Author: Perrin, Benjamin Title: Report Card on the Criminal Justice System: Evaluating Canada's Justice Deficit Summary: Canada is suffering from a "justice deficit" - a large and growing gap between the aspirations of the justice system and its actual performance. With few exceptions, our justice system is slow, inefficient, and costly. The Supreme Court sent this message loudly and clearly in its July 8, 2016 decision when it threw out drug trafficking charges from British Columbia; more than four years had elapsed from when the accused was charged to the conclusion of the trial. But until now, the extent of inefficiency and under-performance in the Canadian criminal justice system has never been fully assessed. The Macdonald-Laurier Institute Report Card on the Criminal Justice System aims to enhance accountability and transparency with a view towards its reform and ongoing improvement for the benefit of all Canadians. Using Statistics Canada data and quantitative statistical methods, we assess each province and territory's criminal justice system based on five major objectives: public safety, support for victims, costs and resources, fairness and access to justice, and efficiency. A few of the highlights from the report cards for each province and territory are: 1. The cost of public safety per person is lowest in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia, while it is highest in the territories, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. 2. The territories have disproportionately high per-capita crime rates - far exceeding any of the provinces. Among the provinces, violent crime rates per capita are highest in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Newfoundland & Labrador, while they are lowest in Ontario, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island. 3. Public perceptions of the police are generally higher in the Atlantic Provinces than in the Western Provinces. 4. There are serious issues with efficiency in Ontario's justice system. It has the worst record in Canada for the proportion of charges stayed or withdrawn (43.1 percent on average), compared with a mere 8.6 percent in neighbouring Quebec. At just 55.3 percent on average, Ontario is also a significant outlier for the percentage of accused persons found guilty. 5. British Columbia received a failing grade for its weighted clearance rate for violent crime (on average slightly over half of violent crimes were solved by police). 6. In terms of support for victims, restitution orders (where offenders are required to compensate their victims) are infrequent in Canada and ordered in less than 1.0 percent of cases in Quebec, Manitoba, and Nunavut. 7. Referrals to victim services per 1,000 crimes are highest in Ontario, Manitoba, and Alberta, while they are lowest in the territories, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. 8. The number of accused persons on remand (in jail awaiting trial) per 1,000 crimes is highest in Manitoba and Ontario, while it is lowest in Newfoundland & Labrador, Prince Edward Island, and Northwest Territories. Keeping large numbers of accused on remand is costly and suggests undue delays in case processing. 9. In terms of access to justice, legal aid expenditures on criminal matters per crime are highest in Ontario, Newfoundland & Labrador, and Nova Scotia, and lowest in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and the Northwest Territories. 10. Disproportionate levels of Aboriginal incarceration relative to the population are a problem in every jurisdiction in Canada, but are particularly acute in Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and British Columbia. Details: Ottawa: Macdonald-Laurier Institute, 2016. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2016 at: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/3111332/MLI-Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/3111332/MLI-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 145613 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Newark, Scott Title: Justice on Trial: Inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in the Canadian criminal justice system Summary: Canada's criminal justice system is a vast and complex machine with numerous players whose actions or inactions impact each other: the courts, the police, corrections, and legal professionals. For those Canadians who are exposed to it, whether as victims or accused, delay and inefficiency can cause real hardship. For taxpayers and those who care about effective public policy and public safety, inefficient and ineffective courts create excessive costs and stand in the way of the proper administration of justice. Good justice policy can only be informed by gathering and analysing the right data, but this has rarely been undertaken in Canada. This paper examines the data on crime rates, length of trials, administration of justice offences, and other measures to get a clear picture of a system that is too often beset with delay and inefficiency. The issues could not be timelier, with the Supreme Court of Canada's July 2016 ruling in the case of R. v. Jordan establishing time frames for reasonable lengths of trial. The accused in the case waited more than 49 months from the time of his arrest to his conviction on a drug offence, which the court found was reflective of a "culture of complacency towards delay". The data show that the police-reported adult crime rate is down 25 percent and youth crime is down 47 percent between 2004 and 2014 (although there was a marked increase in violent crime in 2015). Even so, in 2013/14, the median amount of time from an individual's first court appearance to the completion of their case was 123 days (around 4 months), a slight increase from the years prior. So the system overall has been facing fewer cases but taking longer to complete them. Also of note, offences against the "administration of justice" (violating court orders or bail conditions for example) decreased by 7 percent between 2004 and 2014, much less than the 34 percent decline in the overall crime rate, suggesting that the system is dealing with a smaller core of repeat offenders. Additionally, rates of those in jail awaiting trial (or on "remand") have been exacerbated by the practice of the Courts using judicial discretion to award extra credit due to the perceived less pleasant conditions for offenders. Ironically, a result of this approach is to actually reward repeat offenders at sentencing who are properly and lawfully denied bail, and it also creates an incentive for the accused to stay in jail, adding costs to the system. This paper recommends a Criminal Code amendment that permits pre-trial credit at sentencing but expressly precludes it where bail has been denied because of the past criminal conduct of the person charged. In 1990 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in the R. v. Askov case, ruling that unjustified delay could constitute a breach of Charter rights. Since then, some defence counsel insist on strict procedural compliance to delay proceedings in an effort to get charges dismissed. What was intended as a shield against abuse has now become a sword to avoid responsibility, and systemic delay is but one of the results. Exacerbating matters, the 1991 Stinchcombe case now mandates disclosure before a preliminary inquiry, which has led to significant delays and calls for its abolition, although this is not feasible because a preliminary inquiry is required by the Charter if the potential punishment is five years or more. But this applies to a wide range of less serious offenses, which have long maximum sentences that are never imposed, including residential break and entry, which has a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. This paper recommends that the Criminal Code should be amended to create select hybrid offences with an option for a sentence of five years less one day, to reduce significantly the number of cases requiring preliminary inquiry. In addition, part XVIII.1 of the Criminal Code regarding mandatory case resolution procedures should be reviewed by the provinces to ensure it is practically achieving the intended result of expediting case processing and resolution. Other promising measures for increasing justice system efficiency include: increasing the jurisdiction of Provincial Courts, simplifying judicial authorizations for evidence gathering and admissibility, changing Legal Aid service delivery models to increase full time salaried counsel and reduce private counsel who bill based on time spent, and more. There is no shortage of reforms to consider. Finally, this paper makes a series of recommendations intended to deal with repeat offenders and administration of justice offences: - Creation of the Criminal Code offence (s. 145) of breach of a condition of conditional release under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA); - authorize the Parole Board of Canada to order electronic monitoring of offenders on conditional release; - amend the CCRA to restrict statutory release eligibility to first time federal offenders and require earned parole for repeat federal custody offenders; and - amend the CCRA to expressly restrict parole for convicted non-citizens serving a federal sentence for the purpose of immediate removal from Canada. While the data collected for this report reveal a great deal, there is a wide range of potentially extremely useful data points that should be collected by Statcan or the relevant institutions. Because of the multiple players and processes in the Canadian criminal justice system it is extremely important to identify and track information. The Jordan ruling has articulated the importance of improving justice system efficiency and this paper offers some specific suggestions to achieve that goal. While there will no doubt be institutional resistance to this kind of analysis, the best way to design and implement effective public safety reforms is to gather the relevant information, ask the right questions, and make the appropriate choices. Canadians deserve nothing less. Details: Ottawa, ONT: Macdonald-Laurier Institute, 2016. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2016 at: http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_NewarkJusticegood.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Canada URL: http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_NewarkJusticegood.pdf Shelf Number: 144879 Keywords: Crime RatesCriminal CourtsCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsCriminal Trials |
Author: Kane-Berman, John Title: Going Off the Rails: The Slide Towards the Lawless South African State Summary: South Africa is widely recognised as a lawless country. It is also a country run by a government which has itself become increasingly lawless. This is so despite all the commitments to legality set out in the Constitution. Not only is the post-apartheid South Africa founded upon the principle of legality, but courts whose independence is guaranteed are vested with the power to ensure that these principles are upheld. Prosecuting authorities are enjoined to exercise their functions "without fear, favour, or prejudice". The same duty is laid upon other institutions established by the Constitution, among them the public protector and the auditor general. Everyone is endowed with the right to "equal protection and benefit of the law". We are all also entitled to "administrative action that is lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair". Unlike the old South Africa – no doubt because of it – the new Rechtsstaat was one where the rule of law would be supreme, power would be limited, and the courts would have the final say. This edifice, and these ideals, are under threat. Lawlessness on the part of the state and those who run it is on the increase. The culprits run from the president down to clerks of the court, from directors general to immigration officials, from municipal managers to prison warders, from police generals to police constables, from cabinet ministers to petty bureaucrats. Lawlessness ranges from protecting the criminal, to hounding the innocent, to crushing the poor. It runs from the unconstitutional to the outright criminal, from the brazen and defiant to the negligent or ignorant. It embraces slamming down the telephone on judges as well as victimising traffic policemen who flag down celebrities. It ranges from violations of parliamentary procedure, to breaches of the Public Finance Management Act, to outright skulduggery and corruption. Its victims include taxpayers who get fleeced, mining companies whose licence applications are unlawfully denied, suppliers who do not get paid for their services, and motorists who are forced off the road by reckless government drivers. The victims also include prisoners denied medical treatment, refugees forced to pay bribes, hawkers whose goods are unlawfully confiscated, and poor people unlawfully evicted from shacks which are then unlawfully demolished. Some people are unlawfully appointed, some unlawfully dismissed, some both. Others are unlawfully denied appointment or promotion. A criminal record is no bar to appointment or promotion, even in agencies designed to combat crime. Physical torture seems to be pervasive. Perpetrators of crime often get away with it. Some victims are able to seek redress in the courts, others suffer in silence. Many cases of lawlessness are reported in the newspapers, but they are probably the tip of quite a large iceberg. The courts are the ultimate guarantors of our rights and of legality but they are insulted, their orders are sometimes ignored, and their decisions are frequently taken on endless appeals. Sometimes instead of bowing to the courts and the law, the government seeks – unlawfully – to change the law. Statutory organisations designed to apply the law are deliberately undermined, while watchdogs and whistle-blowers seeking to uphold the law are subjected to intimidation. Lawlessness predates President Jacob Zuma's assumption of power in 2009, but it has intensified during his rule as more and more people and institutions follow his example and the examples of those who condone his behaviour. Details: Johannesburg: IRR (South African Institute of Race Relations), 2016. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Internet Resource: Accessed November 3, 2016 at: http://us-cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/attachments/65454_going_off_the_rails_02.11.2016_.pdf Year: 2016 Country: South Africa URL: http://us-cdn.creamermedia.co.za/assets/articles/attachments/65454_going_off_the_rails_02.11.2016_.pdf Shelf Number: 144997 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCorruptionCrimeCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice SystemsLawlessness |
Author: Saunders, Jessica Title: Identifying the Needs and Challenges of Criminal Justice Agencies in Small, Rural, Tribal, and Border Areas Summary: Technology is important to improving the effectiveness, efficiency, and safety of the criminal justice system. The development of new technologies and new approaches for applying them has been and will likely continue to be an important catalyst for improvement in law enforcement, corrections, and the courts. However, use of technology in these sectors can be challenging, particularly for agencies located in small, rural, tribal, and border (SRTB) areas. SRTB justice systems account for three-quarters of all criminal justice agencies nationwide. Because these agencies are so geographically dispersed and have relatively few employees, they lack a centralized voice to influence the development of technologies and other solutions. To date, relatively little research has examined the needs of such agencies. The National Institute of Justice created the Justice Innovation Center (JIC) to provide current, rigorous, and actionable information on technology needs and priorities specific to SRTB agencies. JIC's purpose is to gather information on the challenges that SRTB agencies face, identify relevant technology solutions that can address those challenges, and assess these technology solutions as they are implemented in real-world situations. These activities will provide guidance to SRTB agencies for prioritizing, planning, and implementing technology. The JIC research team consists of staff from RAND Justice Policy and the Arizona State University Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety. This report summarizes JIC's research goals and efforts, which include a literature review, in-depth interviews with nearly 150 practitioners and topical experts, and focused discussions with an advisory panel of experts and practitioners. Key Findings Criminal Justice Agencies Face Challenges in Four Main Areas All types of criminal justice agencies deal with challenges in information technology (IT), agency operations, geography, and funding and resourcing. In IT, the most-common challenges are in interoperability and infrastructure. Other issues include difficulties adopting new technologies, wide dislike of available jail-management systems, lack of qualified vendors and IT support serving rural areas, and challenges providing remote data access. Each agency type has unique concerns related to agency operations: Law enforcement agencies find it difficult to support specialized positions and assignments, recruit and retain qualified personnel, and manage positive relationships with the communities they serve. Courts need help applying innovative tools to case processing and need to improve access to justice. Institutional corrections agencies are challenged to provide sufficient quality mental health and substance-use treatment training and have difficulty with staffing and turnover. Community corrections agencies see the biggest challenges in managing electronic files, conducting supervised substance-use testing, and effectively managing offices with limited personnel. All types of agencies report geographical challenges, including lack of key local resources and the effects that long distances have on such things as response and travel times, the ability to adequately supervise dispersed populations, the cost of transportation, and staff productivity lost because of transportation time. Resource challenges range from limited technology funding, difficulty in applying for federal funding, limited budgets, and revenues to lack of new or upgraded equipment, understaffing, facility maintenance and upgrades, and adequately providing health and other services to those who come into contact with the criminal justice system. Recommendations Law enforcement agencies should identify strategies to improve relationships with their communities, including improving transparency and public relations. They also need to improve data- and information-sharing with other agencies and jurisdictions; leverage common standards for data management and other IT resources, and address problems with IT management. Courts should address the surge in pro se litigants by exploring streamlined administrative processes and remote filing options for these litigants, improve security and resilience, and improve IT infrastructure — especially regarding the compatibility of systems with those of other agencies in the jurisdiction. Institutional corrections agencies should improve mental health service provision and increase the availability of other services for inmates, and provide professional development for corrections personnel. They also need to improve jail-management systems and information-sharing and prepare for funding shortfalls. Community corrections agencies should refocus on rehabilitation and positive behavioral change. They need to improve information-sharing, manage resources across geographically dispersed agencies and personnel, and prepare for funding shortfalls. All agencies should improve information-sharing between other agency and other governmental systems, work cooperatively to procure and manage IT systems, explore the use videoconferencing of to overcome distance barriers, seek help applying for various grants, and use nonstandard personnel to address staffing shortfalls when appropriate. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2016. 164p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2017 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1479.html Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1479.html Shelf Number: 145889 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice AgenciesInformation TechnologyRural Areas |
Author: Perrin, Benjamin Title: Report Card on the Criminal Justice System #2 Summary: Canada's criminal justice system is facing a litany of serious challenges, including significant underreporting of crime by victims, delays and inefficiencies, rising costs, and considerable overrepresentation of Indigenous people in prison. In 2016, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute issued its inaugural Report Card on the Criminal Justice System: Evaluating Canada's Justice Deficit, which brought these issues to light using quantitative data and a systematic approach to measuring the strengths and shortcomings of the criminal justice system in each province and territory. It spurred public commitments by several provincial and territorial governments to improve their criminal justice systems. In this second report card, we use recently collected data to update the performance of the criminal justice system in each province and territory and in Canada as a whole. Using Statistics Canada data and quantitative statistical methods, we assess each province and territorys criminal justice system based on five major objectives: public safety, support for victims, costs and resources, fairness and access to justice, and efficiency. Nationally, some trends stand out in the system's performance over the last five years. There have been notable improvements in crime rates, which have dropped, there are now fewer police officers required per capita, and there have been increases in per crime legal aid expenditures on criminal matters, a measure of access to justice. On the other hand, the weighted non-violent crime clearance rate has declined, meaning proportionately fewer cases are being solved, the incidents of breach of probation per 1,000 crimes have risen, and the cost of corrections per capita has also gone up. Furthermore, Indigenous people are greatly overrepresented as a proportion of those in prison. There were some notable changes in the provinces and territories between the 2016 and 2017 report cards, including improvements in Ontario (which was the most improved) and Nunavut, and declines in Quebec and British Columbia. Details: Ottawa: Macdonald Laurier Institute, 2018. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2018 at: https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_JusticeReportCard_Final_web2.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Canada URL: https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MLI_JusticeReportCard_Final_web2.pdf Shelf Number: 149463 Keywords: Administration of JusticeCriminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice Systems |
Author: Redgrave, Harvey Title: Examining the case for justice devolution Summary: What is meant by 'justice devolution'? Why is it needed and what difference will it actually make to people's lives? In a world of rising demand and shrinking budgets, justice devolution is firmly on the agenda and there is growing interest in and support for the idea of a more localised justice system. Harvey Redgrave's report for the think tank GovernUp argues that it no longer makes sense for government to continue tinkering around the edges, attempting top-down reform of individual criminal justice agencies from above. Instead, local leaders should be empowered to join up services from the bottom up - in order to deal with the root cause of crime - rather than managing its consequences and to ensure services can be built around the needs of victims. Details: London: Crest Advisory, 2016. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 20, 2018 at: http://crestadvisory.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/governup-harvey-redgrave-justice-devolution-report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://crestadvisory.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/governup-harvey-redgrave-justice-devolution-report.pdf Shelf Number: 151603 Keywords: Criminal Justice AdministrationCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemDecentralizationPolice AccountabilityPolice Performance |