Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:25 pm
Time: 8:25 pm
Results for evidence-based practices
94 results foundAuthor: Pierce-Danford, Kristy Title: Commonwealth of Virginia: Roadmap for Evidence-Based Practices in Community Corrections Summary: In recent years, community corrections agencies across Virginia have been modifying their practices to be consistent with evidence-based practices. The Department of Criminal Justice Services and the Virginia Community Criminal Justice Association have worked assiduously toward the goal of having all local probation and pretrial agencies become evidence-based and contribute to improved public safety in Virginia. This roadmap is a guide for the sustainable implementation and replication of evidence-based practices in pretrial and local probation agencies across the states. Details: Boston: Crime and Justice Institute, Community Resources for Justice, 2010. 131p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118829 Keywords: Community Based Corrections (Virginia)Evidence-Based PracticesPretrial Agencies (Virginia)Probation (Virginia) |
Author: Welsh, Brandon C. Title: Effects of Closed Circuit Television Surveillance on Crime Summary: Closed circuit television (CCTV) surveillance cameras serve many functions and are used in both public and private settings. The prevention of personal and property crime is among the primary objectives in public space, which is the main focus of this review. CCTV is viewed as a technique of “formal surveillance” and in this regard it is seen to enhance or take the place of security personnel. Results of this review indicate that CCTV has a modest but significant desirable effect on crime, is most effective in reducing crime in car parks, is most effective when targeted at vehicle crimes (largely a function of the successful car park schemes), and is more effective in reducing crime in the United Kingdom than in other countries. These results lend support for the continued use of CCTV to prevent crime in public space, but suggest that it be more narrowly targeted than its present use would indicate. Future CCTV schemes should employ high-quality evaluation designs with long follow-up periods. Details: Oslo: Cambell Collaboration, 2008. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2008: 17: Accessed September 8, 2010 at: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/243/ Year: 2008 Country: International URL: http://campbellcollaboration.org/lib/download/243/ Shelf Number: 119767 Keywords: Closed-Circuit TelevisionElectronic SurveillanceEvidence-Based PracticesPunishmentRecidivismRisk AssessmentSentencing (U.S.)Situational Crime Prevention |
Author: Fox, Aubrey Title: Daring to Fail: First-person Stories of Criminal Justice Reform Summary: Talk of “best practices” and “evidence-based programs” has dominated the field of criminal justice in recent years. By and large this has been a positive development – and a natural corrective to policymaking based on anecdote and emotion. But simply spreading evidence-based practices is not enough to solve the pressing public safety problems that continue to plague our country. For one thing, there simply aren’t enough evidence-based programs: the vast majority of the initiatives undertaken by police, courts, probation, pre-trial services and other criminal justice agencies in recent years have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation. That doesn’t mean that they don’t work, of course, just that we don’t have enough data to declare them “evidence-based.” The other problem with spreading evidence-based programs is that they are by definition today’s solutions to yesterday’s problems. New challenges are emerging all of the time within criminal justice. The context is constantly changing. If we hope to keep up, if we hope to respond quickly and effectively to tomorrow’s problems, we must continue to innovate. Recognizing this, the Center for Court Innovation and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance have launched a multi-faceted initiative designed to promote innovation at the grassroots level by encouraging criminal justice agencies to engage in a process of trial and error – much the way a scientist would. A large part of this effort has been devoted to studying criminal justice reform efforts – both successes and failures – in an effort to identify lessons for the innovators of tomorrow. By fostering a more open and honest public discussion of failures in particular, the project seeks to encourage self-reflection, transparency and thoughtful risk-taking among criminal justice agencies. One of the hallmarks of the Trial and Error initiative has been first-person interviews with leading criminal justice scholars, practitioners and policymakers. Over the past three years, staff from the Center for Court Innovation have conducted nearly 100 such interviews with leaders in a variety of fields – prosecution, policing, community corrections, indigent defense and others. This book includes a representative sample of these interviews. While each interview is unique – questions were tailored to each individual’s expertise – in general the interviewees were asked to reflect candidly on challenges from their own professional career and lessons they have learned along the way. Taken together, the interviews offer vivid testimony that even the most successful and well-regarded leaders in the field of criminal justice have experienced their share of setbacks. Almost everyone who appears in this volume has been involved in a program that failed to achieve its stated goals or fell short of expectations in some way. While disappointing, in no case were these failures professionally fatal, in large part because the individuals involved took pains to learn from their mistakes before moving on. In addition to underlining the importance of self-reflection, the interviews that follow also make it clear just how difficult it is to achieve change within the criminal justice system. The obstacles, after all, are enormous. In many places, the volume of work is crushing. Technology is often outmoded. Facilities are often antiquated. Pertinent data is often missing. And this litany doesn’t even include the problems that arrestees, probationers, inmates and parolees bring with them to the criminal justice system, including addiction, mental illness, homelessness and histories of abuse and dysfunction. In this context, it is difficult for many judges, probation officers and prosecutors to simply get through each work day, let alone find time and space to be analytical and creative. This volume also offers clear and compelling evidence that despite long odds, frontline criminal justice practitioners over the past generation have fashioned a number of remarkable innovations that have made a significant difference on the ground and in the streets. Drug courts, CompStat, Ceasefire, problem-oriented policing… the list goes on and on. But this book is not meant to be an exhaustive review of the criminal justice reforms of the past few decades. Rather, it is an effort to tell the stories of dozens of remarkable leaders who have successfully navigated difficult challenges to make change happen within the criminal justice system. The interviews have been lightly edited for clarity and length, but otherwise are verbatim transcripts. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2010. 177p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2011 at: http://www.courtinnovation.org/_uploads/documents/Daring_2_Fail.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtinnovation.org/_uploads/documents/Daring_2_Fail.pdf Shelf Number: 120699 Keywords: Criminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Mayfield, Jim Title: Multisystemic Therapy Outcomes in an Evidence-Based Practice Pilot Summary: In 2007, the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services established the Thurston-Mason Children’s Mental Health Evidence-Based Practice Pilot Project (Pilot) to provide mental health services to children. The first evidence-based practice selected by the Pilot was Multisystemic Therapy (MST), an intensive family- and community-based treatment program for youth. Over a one-year follow-up period, the Institute examined criminal convictions of youth enrolled in the Pilot’s MST program. Compared to youth with similar criminal histories and demographic characteristics, MST youth were convicted of fewer crimes on average. Due to sample size, statistical significance was not attained in this evaluation of MST outcomes. The effect sizes observed, however, are within the expected range for MST according to other rigorous studies of that intervention and would likely return a net economic benefit to tax payers and crime victims. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2011 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/pub.asp?docid=11-04-3901 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/pub.asp?docid=11-04-3901 Shelf Number: 121680 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Offenders (Washington State)Mental Health ServicesMultisystemic Therapy |
Author: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Title: Criteria for the Design and Evaluation of Juvenile Justice Reform Programmes Summary: Evidence-based programming requires that programme outcomes be monitored and evaluated in order to determine whether the programme’s objectives have been achieved. It also requires that evaluation findings be reviewed and integrated into future programming and that good practices and lessons learned through the conduct of previous programmes be identified and taken into account in designing future interventions. In order to carry out all those steps, sound measuring techniques and processes and clear criteria for measuring programme outcomes are required. The main objective of the present publication is to provide a conceptual framework for the design of juvenile justice reform programmes and a general approach for evaluating the impact of those programmes on children and their rights and on crime and public safety. This involves, initially, identifying the general criteria upon which to base such evaluations. The evaluations should make it possible to identify good practices that can be replicated at the national, regional or international level. The criteria must reflect the dual roles of juvenile justice reforms: to protect children and their rights and to protect society by preventing crime and repeat offending. The present publication is based on a review of evaluations conducted by member organizations of the Interagency Panel on Juvenile Justice and consultations with staff and representatives of Panel member agencies about their programme evaluation objectives and their past experience in attempting to evaluate juvenile justice programmes and identify good practices. Programming should be based on the good practices identified thus far and on lessons learned from past programming initiatives undertaken in various contexts. In identifying good practices, one must rely greatly on the findings of past evaluations. The object of the present exercise, of course, is also forward-looking, as it attempts to specify how Panel members can ensure that evaluations are more rigorous and that more useful information is collected in order to guide programming practices in the area of juvenile justice reform. Details: Vienna: UNODC, 2011. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 1, 2011 at: http://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/crimeprevention/Criteria_E_book.pdf Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/crimeprevention/Criteria_E_book.pdf Shelf Number: 121933 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Center for Effective Public Policy Title: A Framework for Evidence-Based Decision Making in Local Criminal Justice Systems. A Work in Progress, Third Edition. Summary: The Framework identifies the key structural elements of a system informed by evidence. It defines a vision of safer communities. It puts forward the belief that risk and harm reduction are fundamental goals of the justice system, and that these can be achieved without sacrificing offender accountability or other important justice system outcomes. It both explicates the premises and values that underlie our justice system and puts forward a proposed set of principles to guide evidence-based decision making at the local level—principles that are, themselves, evidence-based. The Framework also highlights some of the most groundbreaking of the research — evidence that clearly demonstrates that we can reduce pretrial misconduct and offender recidivism. It identifies the key stakeholders who must be actively engaged in a collaborative partnership if an evidence-based system of justice is to be achieved. It also sets out to begin to outline some of the most difficult challenges we will face as we seek to deliberately and systematically implement such an approach in local communities. Details: Silver Spring, MD: Center for Effective Public Policy, 2010. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2011 at: http://www.cepp.com/documents/EBDM%20Framework.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.cepp.com/documents/EBDM%20Framework.pdf Shelf Number: 122448 Keywords: Correctional Administration (U.S.)Evidence-Based PracticesPretrial ReleasePrisoner ReentryRecidivism |
Author: Carter, Madeline Title: Evidence-Based Policy, Practice, and Decisionmaking Implications for Paroling Authorities Summary: Governments around the world are moving to align their programs and services with what is known as evidence-based policy and practices (EBP). EBP, which originated in the medical profession three decades ago, asserts that public policy and practice must be based on the best available scientific evidence to be effective in the achievement of its goals and to be efficient in the use of taxpayers’ dollars. To be evidence-based is to implement practices, both at the individual and the organizational levels, that are guided by sound, empirical research.The result is more efficient and effective outcomes — outcomes that make better use of public resources and, ultimately, reduce future crime. This paper presents the key research findings that make these goals possible and the implications of these findings for paroling authorities. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2011. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Parole Essentials: Practical Guides for Parole Leaders No. 2: Accessed October 20, 2011 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/024198.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/024198.pdf Shelf Number: 123061 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesParole (U.S.)Parole OfficersParolees |
Author: Pew Center on the States Title: 2011 Kentucky Reforms Cut Recidivism, Costs Broad Bill Enacts Evidence-Based Strategies Summary: Problem: Kentucky had one of the fastest growing prison populations in the nation over the decade ending in 2009, rising by 45 percent, compared to 13 percent growth for all states. Consequences: Corrections spending jumped 214 percent over the two decades ending in FY 2010, to $440 million. Meanwhile, recidivism rates remained above levels seen in the 1990s, despite slight improvement in recent years. Drivers: Data showed an increase in overall arrests and court cases, as well as rising incarceration rates for technical parole violators. Analysis also showed offenders in Kentucky were far more likely to be sentenced to prison than the national average and an increase in the percentage of all admissions who were drug offenders. Reforms: With technical assistance from the Pew Center on the States, the Task Force on the Penal Code and Controlled Substances Act produced a set of reforms leading to the Public Safety and Offender Accountability Act of 2011. Passed unanimously in the Senate and with just one dissenting vote in the House, the law concentrates expensive prison beds on serious offenders, reduces recidivism by strengthening probation and parole, and establishes mechanisms for measuring government progress over time. Impact: The legislation is expected to enhance public safety and improve the performance of Kentucky’s correctional system on multiple levels. The state estimates the reforms will save $422 million over 10 years, allowing increased investment in programs to reduce recidivism with residual funds available for state budget relief. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States, 2011. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/2011_Kentucky_Reforms_Cut_Recidivism.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/2011_Kentucky_Reforms_Cut_Recidivism.pdf Shelf Number: 123199 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformEvidence-Based PracticesRecidivism (Kentucky) |
Author: McLeod, Jeffrey S. Title: State Efforts in Sentencing and Corrections Reform Summary: States continue to struggle during what is the most difficult fiscal environment since the Great Depression. Projections are that the economic recovery will be slow, forcing states to think longterm about how to do more with less. Full economic recovery may not happen until the end of the decade. With corrections among states’ largest expenditures, many are rethinking their approaches to sentencing and corrections practices as they seek to constrain spending. Between 2009 and 2010, at least 40 states made cuts to general fund expenditures for corrections. They are reducing staff salaries, benefits, or overtime, eliminating prison programs, and making food-service changes. Furthermore, states have been increasingly focused on finding ways to decrease overall prison populations. Given that the average prison bed now costs $29,000 a year, they are looking for ways to reduce the number of nonviolent and low-risk individuals going to prison, to move offenders who can be safely managed in the community out of prison sooner, and to keep ex-offenders out of prison through improved prisoner reentry practices. Ultimately, states aim to reduce prison populations enough to allow them to close prisons. States are accomplishing reductions through sentencing reform, efforts to reduce offender recidivism, and parole and probation reform. For example: South Carolina approved a sentencing reform package in 2010 that the state estimates will reduce the need to build and operate new prison beds by 1,786, saving up to $241 million by reducing incarceration of nonviolent offenders and more closely supervising released inmates to reduce recidivism; Nevada saved $38 million in operating expenditures by FY 2009 and avoided $1.2 billion in new prison construction by making key sentencing reforms, including expanding the number of credits inmates could earn for “good time” and the number of credits those on community supervision could earn for complying with conditions; and Kentucky passed legislation expected to save the state $422 million over the next decade by diverting certain drug offenders into treatment rather than prison and reserving prison space for violent and career criminals. The challenge to states is to make cuts in corrections spending while maintaining public safety. Fortunately, there now exists a significant body of research about which sentencing and corrections practices work and which do not. Research shows that implementation of evidence-based practices leads to an average decrease in crime of between 10 percent and 20 percent. Programs that are not evidence-based, on the other hand, tend to see no decrease or even a slight increase in crime. States can use that knowledge to make more informed decisions about which policies and programs to support as they seek to reduce spending on corrections. This Issue Brief provides an overview of the cost drivers behind corrections expenditures and identifies critical decision-points for states to consider as they take action to reduce costs. It also examines challenges to enacting reforms and makes recommendations for states looking to improve public safety with fewer resources. Those recommendations include: Pursue an approach to reform that involves coordination and collaboration among state executive, legislative, and judicial branches; Adopt evidence-based practices proven to reduce recidivism and eliminate programs shown to be ineffective or harmful; Target high-risk offenders and tailor sentencing, treatment, and release decisions to individual risk factors; Support mandatory supervision and treatment in the community; and Use real-time data and information for decision-making. Details: Washington, DC: NGA Center for Best Practices, 2011. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2011 at: http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/1110SENTENCINGREFORM.PDF Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/1110SENTENCINGREFORM.PDF Shelf Number: 123315 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeEvidence-Based PracticesExpenditures in Criminal JusticeSentencing (U.S.)Sentencing Reform |
Author: Clawson, Elyse Title: Putting the Pieces Together: Practical Strategies for Implementing Evidence-Based Practices Summary: This manual describes a generalized process for adopting and implementing principles that underlie evidence-based practice. The evidence-based policies and practices discussed in this manual are derived from high-quality research and have been embraced by criminologists, other social scientists and respected practitioners. The research and the theoretical underpinnings of EBP are described in a companion document, Implementing Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Community Corrections. This manual is intended to offer a practical guide to their application. The principles and the activities for implementation described in this manual are not intended to squelch creative thinking, enthusiasm or innovation. Your innovations will inspire the hypotheses that lead to further research, more effective implementation strategies and perhaps even additional principles. EBP is an evolving body of knowledge and practice. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2010. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2011 at: http://nicic.gov/Library/024394 Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://nicic.gov/Library/024394 Shelf Number: 123317 Keywords: Community CorrectionsCorrectional AdministrationEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Rubin, Mark Title: Implementing Evidence-Based Principles in Community Corrections: A Cast Study of Successes and Challenges in Maine Summary: The integration of evidence-based principles, organizational development, and collaboration is investigated. Sections of this report are: introduction; background; literature review; methodology; document review; key informant interviews; interviews with probation officers (observations of current climate); quantitative analysis of intermediate measures; and findings. “The research on evidence-based principles in Maine … suggests that this concurrent model may not be a realistic strategy given its insistence on an integrated focus on evidence-based principles, organizational development, and collaboration” (p. 30).” Details: Maine: University of Southern Maine, 2011 Source: Internet Resource: Project Technical Report for the National Institute of Corrections: Accessed on December 7, 2011 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/025242.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/025242.pdf Shelf Number: 123500 Keywords: Community Corrections (Maine)Evidence-Based Practices |
Author: Drake, E.K. Title: "What Works" In Community Supervision - Interim Report Summary: The Department of Corrections contracted with the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to examine effective community supervision practices of offenders. The specific research tasks, to be completed by July 2012, include: Task 1: Evaluate DOC’s use of sanctions, including confinement, for offenders who violate the terms of their community custody. Task 2: Review evidence-based practices for offenders on community supervision. Task 3: Examine DOC’s use of evidence-based programming and practices of offenders on community supervision. In this interim report, we provide background information on community supervision as it is delivered in Washington. We also summarize our findings to date on our systematic review of the literature regarding “what works” for community supervision. The Institute has previously published findings on two types of supervision for adult offenders: intensive supervision focused on increased surveillance, and intensive supervision coupled with treatment. We review these findings in this interim report. We also summarize our research results of an emerging literature on supervision using the “Risk Need Responsivity” approach—focusing on the risk, treatment, and supervision by the Community Corrections Officer. Our findings indicate that intensive supervision focused on surveillance achieves no reduction in recidivism; intensive supervision coupled with treatment achieves about a 10 percent reduction in recidivism; and supervision focused on the Risk Need and Responsivity approach achieves a 16 percent reduction in recidivism. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2011. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 21, 2012 at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/11-12-1201.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/11-12-1201.pdf Shelf Number: 123710 Keywords: Adult OffendersCommunity Supervision (Washington)Evidence-Based PracticesRecidivism |
Author: Lum, Cynthia Title: Translating Police Research into Practice Summary: Eleven years ago, in one of the first Ideas in American Policing lectures, Lawrence Sherman advocated for evidence-based policing, that is, “. . . police practices should be based on scientific evidence about what works best” (1998, 2). Like other police researchers and innovative police practitioners at the time, Sherman believed that information generated from systematic or scientific research, as well as rigorous in-house crime analysis, should be regularly used by the police to make both strategic and tactical decisions. The idea of evidence-based policing seemed logical and advantageous. Why wouldn’t police tactics be based on what we know are effective strategies that reduce or prevent crime? A number of benefits could be reaped from such a rational approach. Strategies and tactics that are generated from information and based in scientific knowledge about effectiveness are more likely to reduce crime when they are employed. Similarly, if interventions have been shown to have harmful effects, police policies might explicitly discourage their deployment. Evidence-based policing also seems more justifiable in supporting police practices than other, much less scientific methods, such as best-guessing, emotional hunches, or anecdotal reflections on single cases. In turn, information-based decision making can provide legitimacy, transparency, and structure to police-citizen communications and interactions, all of which are important requirements for effective policing in modern democracies. Perhaps less obvious but equally important benefits could include advancing police information and management systems that improve efficiency. Evidence-based approaches rely on the consistent and speedy collection, management, analysis, recording, and turnaround of crime data. This reliance can force improvements in police information technology systems, which, in turn, have the potential of strengthening and making more tangible accountability systems that facilitate managerial practices, of which information is a central component. These include innovations such as Compstat, problem-oriented policing, and intelligence-led policing (see Ratcliffe 2008). Such a system seems more promising than what police leaders have previously relied upon to establish accountability—amorphous cultural norms of quasi-military hierarchy or adherence to a reactive standard operating procedures manual. Evidence-based policing could also have a broader impact on transforming cultural forces that strongly influence a reactive approach to police operations, which oftentimes paralyzes crime prevention efforts and change. Although its conceptualization and implementation seem scientific or academic, evidence-based policing could increase the motivation of patrol officers and supervisors in their daily activities. Reducing crime by using strategies more likely to be effective can reduce workload and make efforts more rational. Information-based approaches can also be problem oriented and require a team effort, giving further meaning, logic, and motivation to everyday routines. Evidence-based policing requires police to look outward for information as well, opening officers and command staff to different ideas and worldviews, and providing new challenges, interactions, and relationships that could make any workplace more interesting. Police culture has generally resisted change and external influence (O’Neill, Marks, and Singh 2008), and an evidence-based paradigm might aid in mollifying this resistance. Thus, at least in theory, evidence-based policing holds much promise. Indeed, by the time of Sherman’s Ideas lecture, a number of innovations that reflected its principles had already been implemented or were being considered (see generally, Weisburd and Braga 2006). Examples include the diffusion of crime analysis and computerized mapping in medium to larger police agencies (Weisburd and Lum 2005); the acceptance and use of some principles of Compstat by a number of agencies (Weisburd, Mastrofski, McNally, Greenspan, and Willis 2003; Willis, Mastrofski, and Weisburd 2003; Willis, Mastrofski, and Weisburd 2007); and at least an interest and sporadic efforts in conducting problem-oriented policing and hot-spot patrol. Additionally, by the time of Sherman’s lecture, Sherman, Weisburd, Mazerolle, and others had already evaluated hot-spot patrol using randomized controlled experiments (see Sherman and Rogan 1995a, 1995b; Sherman and Weisburd 1995; Weisburd and Green 1995), showing its clear advantage over existing methods of random, preventive, beat-based, reactive patrol (a conclusion recently reached by a 2004 National Research Council report). More than policing paradigms of the past, evidence-based policing and its associated tactics and tools have shown the promise of both intuitive appeal and scientific credibility. Details: Washington, DC: Police Foundation, 2009. 16p. Source: Ideas in American Policing, No. 11: Internet Resource: Accesed February 14, 2012 at http://www.policefoundation.org/pdf/Ideas_Lum.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.policefoundation.org/pdf/Ideas_Lum.pdf Shelf Number: 124142 Keywords: Crime AnalysisEvidence-Based PracticesPolice OperationsPolicing |
Author: Hirschfield, Alex Title: National Evaluation of New Deal for Communities, Scoping Report: Review of Major Policy Developments and Evidence Base: Crime Domain Summary: The evidence base review for the Crime Domain examined some of the leading theories used to explain the manifestation of crime (i.e. what makes some neighbourhoods and places more vulnerable to crime than others), presented information on levels of reported and unreported crime and discussed current policy initiatives aimed at preventing and reducing crime. Particular attention was paid to developments relevant to Area Based Initiatives (ABIs). The extent of the evidence base on ‘what works’ in crime prevention was then examined. Variations in the quality and robustness of the evidence base was discussed and examples of best practice were identified drawing upon the Home Office’s ‘Toolkits’ for crime prevention and a comprehensive review of crime prevention evaluation studies carried out for the US National Institute of Justice. The latter identified crime prevention strategies that work, those that are promising and those that demonstrably do not work (Sherman et al 1998). Current and forthcoming evaluations of crime prevention initiatives that NDC Partnerships might draw lessons from were identified and efforts to build a comprehensive evidence base on effective crime prevention measures (the Campbell Collaboration – www.campbell.gse.upenn.edu) were outlined. Lessons were identified for the NDC evaluation teams in terms of known problems and pitfalls in conducting crime prevention evaluations and in obtaining consistent crime data. Lessons for partnerships were also defined, particularly, in relation to project management, maximising the positive impacts of crime prevention interventions and partnership working. Where feasible and appropriate, the review also sought to identify the extent to which local authority areas with NDC programmes had been successful in securing funds through the Home Office’s Crime Reduction Programme. Particular attention was paid to the Reducing Burglary Initiative, Targeted Policing and the CCTV programme. Details: Sheffield, UK: New Deal for Communities Evaluation, Sheffield Hallam University, 2001. 125p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 29, 2012 at http://extra.shu.ac.uk/ndc/downloads/reports/Crime%20Review%20of%20Evidence.pdf Year: 2001 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://extra.shu.ac.uk/ndc/downloads/reports/Crime%20Review%20of%20Evidence.pdf Shelf Number: 124324 Keywords: Crime PreventionCrime Reduction (U.K.)Evaluative StudiesEvidence-Based PracticesNeighborhoods and Crime |
Author: Maier, Elizabeth Title: Evidence-Based Initiatives to Reduce Recidivism Summary: This report was commissioned by the Vermont Legislature pursuant to Act 41 during the 2011-2012 Legislative Session. The study involved two parts: 1) a literature review of “innovative programs and initiatives, including local programs and prison-based initiatives, best practices, and contemporary research regarding assessments of programmatic alternatives and pilot projects relating to reducing recidivism in the criminal justice system;” (Act 41, Section 10); and 2) a survey of Vermont criminal justice service providers to identify innovative programs and assess the level of evidenced-based programming in the state. Although this report is not an exhaustive analysis of evidence-based initiatives which reduce recidivism it does suggest an effective strategy for the future collection and dissemination of information regarding evidence-based programs and practices at both the national and state level. Details: Northfield Falls, VT: Vermont Center for Justice Research, 2011. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2012 at: http://www.vcjr.org/reports/reportscrimjust/reports/ebiredrecid_files/DOCRR%20LitRev%20Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.vcjr.org/reports/reportscrimjust/reports/ebiredrecid_files/DOCRR%20LitRev%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 125145 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesOffender RehabilitationRecidivism |
Author: Schatz, Eberhard Title: The Dutch treatment and social support system for drug users: Recent developments and the example of Amsterdam Summary: This paper, written in collaboration with the Correlation Network, briefly describes the history and the basic elements of the Dutch drug dependence treatment policy, including recent trends in drug use and the current drug treatment system implemented in the four largest cities in the Netherlands. Building on more than 30 years’ experience, the Dutch approach focuses on an integrated treatment system, which provides comprehensive support and services to the most vulnerable groups, including homeless people, problematic drug users and chronic psychiatric patients. At the same time, a strong emphasis is given to public order and crime reduction. The paper describes the law enforcement and community involvement elements of the strategy, and provides available data on the results achieved so far. Although the current policy has shown positive results for individuals and society as a whole, the system is at risk of losing its balanced approach. The approach of public health-based regulation may have reached its limits and is lose focus in over-medicalization and over-regulation. The policy may have been under pressure from surrounding countries in the 1980s and 1990s, but nowadays, the biggest threat for turning back the clock is coming from inside the country. There is a growing concern among service providers and drug using communities that the new government will be redrafting the policy agenda away from the primary interest of drug policy: increasing the quality of life of people who use drugs. Details: International Drug Policy Consortium, 2011. 15p. Source: IDPC Briefing Paper: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2012 at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64663568/library/IDPC-briefing-paper-dutch-treatment-systems.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Netherlands URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64663568/library/IDPC-briefing-paper-dutch-treatment-systems.pdf Shelf Number: 125216 Keywords: Crime ReductionDrug Policy (Netherlands)Drug Treatment (Netherlands)Evidence-Based Practices |
Author: Gabor, Thomas Title: Evidence-Based Crime Prevention Programs: A Literature Review Summary: The current fiscal crisis has led governments at all levels to reflect on their approaches to fighting crime. A decline in the revenues of local governments compels them to prioritize programs on the basis of their efficacy and cost effectiveness. A recent editorial in the Palm Beach Post (August 24th) stated that the pressure is on the Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) to demonstrate that cherished programs, such as the youth empowerment centers, are effective in reducing crime. Research and evaluation allow funding to proceed by demonstrating program effectiveness. They also contribute to a more impartial and transparent way of arriving at funding decisions. The present project involved a structured, scholarly literature review that was designed to achieve two objectives: 1) to assess the evidence underlying the key crime prevention programs and initiatives currently being funded by Palm Beach County; and, 2) to identify exemplary or promising programs that might be considered for implementation in the County. The ultimate goal was to provide evidence-based information that would inform crime policy, improve the operation of the criminal justice system, and reduce crime. Decisions taken on the project, including the selection of programs to be covered by the literature review, were made collaboratively with the Research and Planning Unit of the CJC. In short, this review aimed to answer the question of “what works” in crime prevention and what is likely to work in Palm Beach County. This paper describes the methodology used in the structured literature review as the aim was to minimize the bias that frequently intrudes in literature reviews. The selection of materials for literature reviews, the material extracted from each work, and the methods used to assess the literature as a whole can easily be influenced by one’s prior expectations and beliefs. Therefore, a systematic approach is taken in the present 2 Thomas Gabor, LLC Literature Review of Crime Prevention Programs review. A critical aspect of this review is to distinguish between evaluations on the basis of their methodological rigor. While some program evaluations are true experiments with randomization (also known as randomized control trials), the vast majority use less rigorous methods. The more rigorous a study, the more reliable will be the conclusions of the evaluation. Hence, the greater the confidence will be that the program will be effective if implemented elsewhere. Thus, the weight given to the conclusion of an evaluation study must take into account the methodology applied. Methods for rating evaluation studies and for drawing conclusions across studies are presented below. The ultimate goal of the review is to facilitate the implementation of politically neutral and evidence-based crime prevention programming in Palm Beach County. Details: West Palm Beach, FL: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners and Criminal Justice Commission, 2011. 204p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 13, 2012 at: http://www.pbcgov.com/criminaljustice/youth/pdf/FinalReportStructuredLiteratureReview.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pbcgov.com/criminaljustice/youth/pdf/FinalReportStructuredLiteratureReview.pdf Shelf Number: 125616 Keywords: Crime PreventionCrime Prevention ProgramsEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Crime and Justice Institute Title: Interventions for High-Risk Youth: Applying Evidence-Based Theory and Practice to the Work of Roca Summary: Roca is a values-based, outcomes-oriented, youth and young adult development organization in Chelsea, Revere, and East Boston, Massachusetts. The agency’s mission is to “promote justice through creating opportunities for young people to lead happy and healthy lives.” Roca chooses to pursue this mission with some of the most marginalized youth in the community, and works with those youth to achieve self-sufficiency and live out of harm’s way. After nearly two decades of experience serving this population, Roca is undergoing a thoughtful restructuring to clearly define and measure the work that they do, and ultimately to institutionalize practices that fulfill the agency’s mission and goals. As part of this transition to evidence-based practice, Roca is reviewing existing theory and practice that are applicable to its work. This document is a component of that effort. This literature review focuses on research in criminal and juvenile justice, delinquency prevention, and behavior change. Roca has previously engaged in a review of relevant literature in the field of youth development; this review will expand upon previous work by viewing Roca through the lens of another discipline. This research is appropriate to apply to Roca because many of its participants are either involved with the court, or at risk of becoming court-involved. The disengaged and disenfranchised youth with whom Roca works possess several of the characteristics that put youth in contact with the criminal justice system, including dysfunctional family relations, alcohol and drug problems, and anti-social companions. The criminal and juvenile justice fields have developed effective, evidence-based practices that can inform Roca’s work and provide support for Roca’s Theory of Change. Cited works include theoretical and practical research in delinquency prevention and intervention, and pro-social skill building for high-risk youth. Consistent with Roca’s model, the review considers not only programming, but the engagement of individuals and institutions in the change process. Of note, Roca identifies itself as a youth development organization, not as a clinical service provider. Therefore, this review does not offer a review of the clinical practices that have proven successful with court-involved and high-risk youth, as these practices are outside the scope of Roca’s services. Details: Boston: Crime & Justice Institute, 2006. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 5, 2012 at: http://www.rocainc.org/pdf/resources/external/InterventionsforHighRiskYouth.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.rocainc.org/pdf/resources/external/InterventionsforHighRiskYouth.pdf Shelf Number: 126263 Keywords: At-risk YouthDelinquency PreventionEvidence-Based PracticesInterventions |
Author: Christensen, Gary Title: The Role of Screening and Assessment in Jail Reentry Summary: In 2007, the National Institute of Corrections partnered with the Urban Institute to develop and test the Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) model for effective jail-to-community transition. The TJC model and initiative advance systems change and local reentry through collaborative, coordinated jail-community partnerships. This brief details the two-stage screening and assessment process to determine risk and need levels in the jail population. It describes the importance of screening and assessment in an evidence-based jail transition strategy, including: selecting screening and assessment instruments; implementing a screening and assessment process; and integrating risk and need information into comprehensive jail intervention strategies. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 11p. Source: Transition from Jail to Community Initiative Practice Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2012 at Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 126576 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJailsPrisoner ReentryReentryRisk Assessment |
Author: Denman, Kristine Title: New Mexico's Transition from Prison to Community Initiative: A Gaps Analysis Summary: In March 2008, Governor Richardson convened a Task Force to review current practices and make recommendations for prison reform in New Mexico, with the goal of improving reentry success among those released from correctional supervision and thereby ensuring community safety. In June 2008, Governor Richardson‟s Task Force on Prison Reform produced the first of two reports identifying the needs of the State‟s prisons and offering recommendations to improve reentry success among the State‟s prisoners. As a result of the recommendations, The New Mexico Corrections Department (NMCD) created a Reentry and Prison Reform Division, tasked with carrying out reform efforts within the NMCD. The Task Force and the Reentry and Prison Reform Division modeled its prison reform efforts after the national Transition from Prisons to Community Initiative (TPCI). The primary purpose of the current report is to highlight the strengths and gaps in NMCD‟s progress towards the implementation of TPCI in the institutional setting. The gaps analysis is not meant to be an indictment of the system, but rather a useful guide for where the system is currently and where it can improve as it moves towards full implementation of an evidence-based reentry model. While we touch on issues related to community supervision, the primary focus in this report is on the prison system. We introduce the project in the first chapter and describe the methods we used to assess progress and gaps in the TPCI implementation. The second and third chapters describe the key process goals (Chapter 2) and infrastructure goals (Chapter 3) defined in the TPCI model and identify the gaps in the implementation of these goals. At the end of each section within Chapters 2 and 3, we provide a summary table, which highlights the goals of the TPCI model and New Mexico Task Force recommendations (the ideal), describes current progress towards implementation of these goals, and summarizes the significant gaps in implementation. These summary tables are meant to provide the reader with a snapshot of the key points for each section. However, we encourage the reader to also read the accompanying text since this provides much richer detail and information beyond the table summaries. We present a basic logic model for TPCI implementation and evaluation within NM Correctional facilities in Chapter 4. This logic model is not meant as a complete guide for implementation and evaluation of the model, but rather as a baseline from which NMCD can build a full-scale logic model for the implementation and evaluation of the TPCI program for New Mexico. In the final chapter, we summarize the results of the gaps analysis, and offer some suggestions for moving the reentry initiative forward. Details: Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico, Statistical Analysis Center, 2011. 122p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 17, 2013 at: http://www.jrsa.org/awards/judging/research_policy_analysis/NM_Final_Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.jrsa.org/awards/judging/research_policy_analysis/NM_Final_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 127345 Keywords: CorrectionsEvidence-Based PracticesPrison ReformPrisoner Reentry (New Mexico) |
Author: Braithwaite, Helen Title: Parole Agent and Supervisor Feedback from the Pilot Implementation of the California Parole Supervision and Reintegration Model (CPSRM) Summary: Parole reform commenced at four pilot parole units in August, 2010. These four units implemented the California Parole Supervision and Reintegration Model (CPSRM) into their supervision practices. Caseloads decreased significantly and agents adopted new evidence-based practices that were aimed at front-loading supervision services, engaging the parolee in the supervision process, and more effectively targeting and addressing a parolee’s criminogenic needs that increased their risk of reoffending. The Center for Evidence-Based Corrections at UC Irvine was tasked with conducting a process evaluation of the pilot implementation. We used a mixed-methods approach that used document analysis, surveys, interviews, and behavioral observation to evaluate how effectively the new policies were put into practice, and also measured the impact of parole reform on the attitudes and behavior of parole agents – that is, to see whether their style of supervision actually changed after reform was introduced. This report presents findings from interviews with front-line parole agents (PA1s), Assistant Unit Supervisors (PA2s) and Unit Supervisors (PA3s) from the four pilot sites. All interviews were conducted in January and February, 2011, at which time parole reform had been ongoing for 5-6 months. All supervisory staff from all four pilot units were interviewed (N=8); in addition, fifteen PA1 agents were randomly selected from across the four pilot sites equally, to give a total sample size of twenty-three. The purpose of the interviews was to obtain in-depth, anonymous feedback from pilot site staff concerning their experiences of parole reform part-way through its implementation. We adopted an Action Research approach for the interview component of the process evaluation, with the aim of applying the knowledge gained via interviews to further evolve the implementation of parole reform. The policies contained in the parole reform package have been refined during the pilot as they have been put into practice in the field. While other aspects of the UC Irvine process evaluation have employed a quasi-experimental research design to provide a level of scientific control (for example, by collecting baseline data for comparison purposes) the interviews gave the research team an opportunity to get detailed information on the experiences of parole reform that would (a) assist in the interpretation of findings from other research methodologies, and (b) provide DAPO leadership with ‘food for thought’ that would enable further reflection and refinement of the reform model. The goal of an Action Research approach is for researchers and practitioners to better understand the nature of the problem in order to take further action. As such, the ‘findings’ presented here are not an outcome in themselves, but merely part of the ongoing process of parole reform in California. The first thing to note from the interviews was that the implementation process itself was successful, in that all components of the parole reform package were put into practice at all pilot sites. Supervisory staff at all pilot sites ensured that their agents adopted the new procedures, without ‘cutting corners’ or paying lip service to policies but ignoring them in practice. No interviewee could think of an area of parole reform that had not been fully implemented at their unit. The DAPO parole reform team provided comprehensive follow-up support to assist the implementation process. While many suggestions were made to improve training sessions, the ongoing support provided as a follow-up to training (via email, internet, phone calls, site visits) gave pilot site staff the opportunity to clarify issues that arose and provide feedback that led to the refinement of procedures (e.g., reduced redundancy in forms). The interviews provided anecdotal evidence that the new parole model was achieving aims relating to the front-loading of services, a better understanding of the risk factors (or criminogenic needs) that may contribute to reoffending, and perceived improvement in public safety. Approximately half the agents interviewed reported an increase in face-to-face time with parolees, attributed to procedures such as the comprehensive interview, resource contacts, contacts with family members, and more time spent at the residence. While agents were reluctant to report that they had changed the way they spoke to parolees (believing that they always showed the parolee decency and respect and therefore their personal style had not changed over time), it was the perception of supervisors that agents had improved the way they spoke with parolees. Many supervisors said that, in their opinion, the quality of agent-parolee contacts had improved. Most agents and supervisors thought that parole reform would be shown to have a positive impact on public safety. Many agents could thus see the potential benefits of parole reform – reduced caseloads resulted in a perceived improvement in the quality of contacts, enabled agents to work closer with parolees, and provided agents with more information on parolees. The new forms and procedures (like the comprehensive interview and residence verification) front-loaded services and increased standardization across the department. The other 50% or so of agents showed some resistance to change. Paperwork was seen as the biggest obstacle, even though steps had been taken to reduce the amount of paperwork overall and, in particular, decrease redundancy in forms. Many agents perceived that the additional paperwork introduced as part of parole reform had reduced the time they were able to spend in the field. It is likely that the continual ‘tweaking’ of paperwork based on agent feedback caused an additional level of agent effort – agents had to keep track of these changes, print new forms, and in some cases agents were redoing their paperwork to replace ‘old’ versions of the forms with the ‘newer’ versions, in order to keep their files up to date. It could be that this process of refining the documentation requirements added to the perceived workload for some agents, and made them feel like the paperwork was too much. It appeared that, all things being equal, the new caseload size of 48 was achievable, especially since some redundancy in paperwork was being reduced. However, workload was seen as problematic when anomalous circumstances arose – for example, when agents had to carry additional cases due to other agents within their unit being out, or carry additional cases of a higher supervision category (Transition Phase, Category A or B). If caseloads were to increase and some aspect of workload had to be cut to compensate, agents commonly nominated two areas that could be scaled back – goals reports (particularly for ‘old-timer’ parolees) and Case Conference Reviews. An interesting theme to arise from the interviews was that unit leadership was important in overcoming potential staff resistance. A common finding in the literature is that staff with longer length of service within the organization may be more resistant to change. We did not collect background information on agent age, time at unit etc (to encourage interviewees to speak freely under conditions of anonymity) but certain pilot units, due to their geographical location, were more inclined to have veteran employees close to retirement. Agents from these units, however, were not uniformly more negative in their views toward parole reform than agents from other units. It seems likely that organizational factors (such as strong leadership and supervisor ‘buy in’) will be just as important as agent background in the acceptance of parole reform during a rollout. The pilot implementation subjected pilot units to the scrutiny of audits and a rigorous quality assurance process to make sure that agents were ‘meeting specs’ and that any performance issues were detected and rectified promptly. Staff commonly reported feeling under pressure and micromanaged as they adjusted to parole reform, which may have contributed to their negative impressions of reform overall. The final observation worth noting from the interviews is that, when implementing organizational change, it may be beneficial for supervisors to be provided some leeway in extenuating circumstances to enable staff to adjust to the new system over time. The feedback from pilot site staff gathered during the interview process provides DAPO leadership with valuable information that will assist in the further refinement of CPSRM. As noted previously, these experiences should be considered in terms of providing insight, rather than being considered ‘research findings’ themselves. The CPSRM pilot is ongoing, and further interviews may be conducted as DAPO proceeds down the path of reforming California’s parole system. Details: Irvine, CA: University of California at Irvine, Center for Evidence-Based Corrections, 2011. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper: Accessed January 24, 2013 at: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/Parole%20agent%20and%20supervisor%20feedback%20from%20the%20pilot%20implementation%20of%20the%20CPSRM.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/Parole%20agent%20and%20supervisor%20feedback%20from%20the%20pilot%20implementation%20of%20the%20CPSRM.pdf Shelf Number: 127396 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesParole OfficersParole ReformParole Supervision(California)Parolees |
Author: Louden, Jennifer Eno Title: Parolees with Mental Disorder: Toward Evidence-Based Practice Summary: In the U.S., the rate of such serious mental disorders as major depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia is about two times higher among incarcerated men and three times higher in incarcerated women than in the general population (Teplin, 1994; Teplin, Abram, & McClelland, 1996). Estimates suggest that approximately 14.5% of prison inmates have a serious mental disorder (Diamond, Wang, Holzer, Thomas, & Cruzer, 2001; Fazel & Danesh, 2002; Steadman, Osher, Robbins, Case, & Samuels, 2009). As the number of persons supervised by the criminal justice system in the United States grows—it is now at an all-time high of 7.2 million (Glaze & Bonczar, 2007)—so will the number of offenders with serious mental disorder. Although the criminal justice system was not designed to meet the needs of offenders with mental disorder, it has become an integral component of the “de facto” mental health care system. For example, Los Angeles County jail, Riker’s Island jail in New York, and Cook County jail in Chicago each hold more people with mental illness than the largest psychiatric inpatient facilities in the United States (Torrey, 1995). As noted by the Council of State Governments (2002), “the current situation not only exacts a significant toll on the lives of people with mental illness, their families, and the community in general, it also threatens to overwhelm the criminal justice system” (p. 6). Community supervision is a crucial context for beginning to address this problem. Most offenders are supervised in the community on probation or parole1 rather than being incarcerated in 1 Probation and parole are both mechanisms for community supervision, but differ in a meaningful way: probation is a sentence in itself (in lieu of jail), whereas parole is a period of supervision that occurs after a prison term (Abadinsky, 2000). Thus, parolees are generally more serious offenders than probationers. prisons or jails (Glaze & Bonczar, 2007). Compared to their relatively healthy counterparts, probationers and parolees with mental disorders (PMDs) are more likely to have their community term revoked, often for committing a technical violation (breaking of the rules of community supervision, such as associating with known criminals; Cloyes, Wong, Latimer, & Abarca, 2010; Porporino & Motiuk, 1995). This deepens their involvement in the criminal justice system. Understanding parole and mental health is particularly important in California. First, California has the largest parole population in the nation (Petersilia, 2006), in part because every individual released from prison in the state serves at least one year of parole. Second, California’s rate of return to prison for parolees is notoriously high (Grattet, Petersilia, & Lin, 2008). Third, California has long had a system in place for addressing the needs of parolees with mental disorder. The Mental Health Services Continuum Program (MHSCP) is a prison “in-reach” program designed to identify the most seriously ill parolees and refer them to Parole Outpatient Clinics (POCs) for mental health treatment. MHSCP social workers conduct pre-release needs assessments of paroling inmates with mental disorder, assist with applications for social service assistance, and refer them to the outpatient clinics. The focus is on two classes of inmates with major mental disorders identified in the prison: (a) Correctional Clinical Case Management System (CCCMS) inmates who are determined to be stable and have minimal treatment needs, and (b) Enhanced Outpatient Program (EOP) who are characterized by active psychotic symptoms and substantial treatment needs. The most recent available evaluation of the MHSCP program suggests that it has strengths and weaknesses: parolees who receive the evaluation are more likely to receive psychiatric services, but many eligible parolees do not receive the services intended and many return to prison (Farabee, Bennett, Garcia, Warda, & Yang, 2006). Even with these enhanced services, a detailed analysis of all California parolees reported that EOP and CCCMS parolees were at 36% higher risk of committing a new offense than non-disordered parolees, and had an even higher rate of technical violations (70% higher risk; Grattet et al., 2008). To effect change in the recidivism rate of California’s PMDs, this group must be better understood so that recommendations can be tailored to meet their unique needs. Details: Irvine, CA: UC Invine, Center for Evidence-Based Corrections, 2011. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: The Bulletin, 7(1): Accessed January 30, 2013 at: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/Parolees%20with%20Mental%20Disorder.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/sites/ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/Parolees%20with%20Mental%20Disorder.pdf Shelf Number: 127449 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesMental Health ServicesMentally Ill OffendersParolees (California, U.S.) |
Author: Greenwood, Peter W. Title: Implementing Proven Programs for Juvenile Offenders: Assessing State Progress Summary: Evidence-based practice involves the use of scientific principles to assess the available evidence on program effectiveness and develop principles for best practice in any particular field. In delinquency prevention or intervention this includes: assessment of community and individual client needs; review and assessment of programs that could meet those needs; development and/or implementation of new programs; assignment of youth to particular programs; and monitoring of program fidelity and outcomes. For more than 10 years a number of reliable agencies have been publishing well-scrubbed lists of programs that have been proven to produce substantial reductions in recidivism and crime, while saving taxpayers more than $10 in future correctional costs for every dollar expended. There is a long history, stretching from Copernicus and Galileo in the 16th century to professional baseball managers in present day, of practitioners taking a very long time before accepting the practical implications of scientific discoveries. Juvenile justice fits right into this pattern. Although there are sufficient resources currently invested in juvenile justice programs to provide a program that has been proven effective for every youth who could use one, less than 10 percent of youths in need actually receive these programs. Given this state of affairs, one might expect that most states would be in the process of revising their programs and case disposition processes to increase the participation of youth in programs that have been proven effective. In fact, a few states have responded to this knowledge by taking explicit steps to facilitate the implementation of these proven programs, often as alternatives or replacements for their more traditional programming. Some of these states have set up special resource centers to provide technical assistance to local providers and to monitor their progress in implementing these programs. Some have established local “compacts” for sharing the expected savings in state prison costs with counties who cut their admission rates through the use of evidence-based programs (EBPs). Others have established special funding streams to support the launch of new EBPs. Yet, many others have not taken any but the most rudimentary steps toward embracing this new opportunity in the field of delinquency prevention. The present study was undertaken to assess how well individual states are doing in providing the best of these EBPs, and whether there are any commonalities between those who were doing the best. The measure of performance we chose for this analysis was the number of “therapist teams” from “proven programs” divided by the total population. Details: Downington, PA: Association for the Advancement of Evidence-Based Practice, 2012. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2013 at: http://www.advancingebp.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/AEBP-assessment.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.advancingebp.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/AEBP-assessment.pdf Shelf Number: 127532 Keywords: Delinquency PreventionEvidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Offenders (U.S.)Treatment Programs |
Author: Whitbeck, Barbara Title: Gangs and Youth Violence Interventions: A Review of Research and Literature Addressing Evidence‐Based and Promising Practices for Gang‐Affiliated and Violent Youth in Juvenile Institutions and Detention Centers Summary: This report reviews current research and literature to determine which evidence-based and promising practices work best for gang‐affiliated and violent youth in juvenile institutions and other detention settings, and what factors need to be considered when implementing best practices. It also notes evidence‐based practices currently used by Washington’s DSHS Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration (JRA), and practices JRA may consider for future implementation. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, 2010. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Report 2.23: Accessed February 27, 2013 at: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/graphics/Main/jra/VIP%20Literature%20review.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/graphics/Main/jra/VIP%20Literature%20review.pdf Shelf Number: 127735 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesGang PreventionGang ViolenceGangsJuvenile DetentionJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Celeste, Gabriella Title: The Bridge to Somewhere: How Research Made Its Way into Juvenile Justice Reform in Ohio Summary: In December 2010, Supreme Court of Ohio Justices Stratton and McGee Brown convened a group of stakeholders interested in supporting effective juvenile justice reform to meet with a team of political strategists and experts dedicated to achieving meaningful policy change in the upcoming legislative budget session. The following June, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed House Bill 86 (HB 86) and the state budget, House Bill 153 (HB 153), both of which included substantial, evidence-based policy reforms for young people in the juvenile justice system. This case study describes the partners, collaborative model and key elements in achieving this major policy change. This collaborative policy change model involved several overarching elements: leveraging the current “policy window” that creates an opportunity for reform; defining juvenile justice as a compelling social problem; setting a research-informed policy agenda and framing solutions; strategically aligning existing spheres of influence with a core campaign team; and ultimately, adopting policy change through legislation. Details: Cleveland, OH: The Schubert Center for Child Studies at Case Western Reserve University, 2012. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2013 at: http://schubertcenter.case.edu/research_policy_briefs.aspx Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://schubertcenter.case.edu/research_policy_briefs.aspx Shelf Number: 127900 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems (Ohio, U.S.)Juvenile Offenders |
Author: Celeste, Gabriella Title: The Bridge to Somewhere: How Research Made its Way into Legislative Juvenile Justice Reform in Ohio: A Case Study Summary: In 2011, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed House Bill 86, landmark legislation that established juvenile justice reforms based on evidence-based practices and adolescent development research. This legislative achievement, which includes significant cost savings, was the result of a collaborative policy change model that relied upon critical engagement among experts, practitioners, key stakeholders, advocates, and policymakers. The case study, “The Bridge to Somewhere: How Research Made its Way into Legislative Juvenile Justice Reform in Ohio,” explores what led to passage of House Bill 86. On January 14, the Schubert Center published this case study describing the partners, the collaborative model, and key elements in achieving this major policy change. The case study is meant to be a learning tool for those interested in understanding a collaborative approach to policy change and potentially pursuing similar efforts in the future. The intended audience includes scholars and students in the areas of public policy and political science, researchers, practitioners, philanthropic organizations, public agencies, advocates, lobbyists, and policymakers. The center hopes its partners and colleagues will find the case study useful when considering strategies to promote compelling, research-based, cost-effective policy change with positive outcomes for young people, families, and communities. Details: Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve University, Schubert Center for Child Studies, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2013 at: http://schubert.case.edu/Case_Study_Release.aspx Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://schubert.case.edu/Case_Study_Release.aspx Shelf Number: 128014 Keywords: CollaborationEvidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems (Ohio, U.S.)Partnerships |
Author: Mathematica Policy Research Title: Advancing the Self-Sufficiency and Well-Being of At-Risk Youth: A Conceptual Framework Summary: How can programs advance the self-sufficiency and well-being of at-risk youth? This report attempts to answer this important question by presenting a research-based framework for efforts to help at-risk youth enter a career workforce trajectory and prepare to become well-functioning, self-sufficient adults. The framework presented is particularly relevant for youth who are or could be served by ACF programs—especially homeless youth, youth in the foster care system, and teen parents—but it may also apply to other programs. The framework suggests the possibility of using evidence-informed interventions to address two primary areas: youths’ resilience and human capital development. It suggests finding tailored solutions grounded in a trusting relationship between youth and program staff to help move youth toward both healthy functioning and economic self-sufficiency as they transition to adulthood. This report was written as part of the Youth Demonstration Development project being conducted by Mathematica Policy Research and Chapin Hall Center for Children. Details: Washington, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2013. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: OPRDE Report # 2013-13: Accessed May 9, 2013 at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/ydd_final_report_3_22_13.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/ydd_final_report_3_22_13.pdf Shelf Number: 128686 Keywords: At-Risk Youth (U.S.)Delinquency PreventionEmployment TrainingEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Young, N.K. Title: Guidance to States: Recommendations for Developing Family Drug Court Guidelines Summary: As States, courts and service providers strive to use evidence‐based or evidence‐informed practices in their services, determining which practices are best can be challenging. Children and Family Futures produced this document with the National Drug Court Institute and with Federal, State, and other stakeholders to offer guidelines to help states and programs create systems changes that will have a lasting impact on FDCs, the policies of courts and child welfare and treatment service systems, and community‐based organizations serving parents, children, and families. The document provides guidance for implementing an FDC, including the development of FDC partnerships and a common vocabulary for describing FDC components, with a focus on improving services to families who are involved with the child welfare system and are affected by substance use disorders. The authors hope that this document will help jurisdictions select and improve practices and, ultimately, outcomes for children and families. After the introduction, the next two sections of this document describe the methods used to develop the 10 recommendations in the document and how to use the document. Each of the following 10 sections focuses on one of the 10 recommendations. These sections explain each recommendation, summarize the research supporting it and list Effective Strategies (practices that States can use to assess their progress). Asterisks identify Effective Strategies that are supported by research conducted in FDCs. The 10 recommendations are: 1. Create a shared mission and vision 2. Develop interagency partnerships 3. Create effective communication protocols for sharing information 4. Ensure cross‐system knowledge 5. Develop a process for early identification and assessment 6. Address the needs of parents 7. Address the needs of children 8. Garner community support 9. Implement funding and sustainability strategies 10. Evaluate shared outcomes and accountability. Details: Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Programs, 2013. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 3, 2013 at: http://www.cffutures.org/files/publications/FDC-Guidelines.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.cffutures.org/files/publications/FDC-Guidelines.pdf Shelf Number: 129249 Keywords: Child WelfareEvidence-Based PracticesFamily Drug Courts (U.S.)Problem-Solving Courts |
Author: Roguski, Michael Title: He Pūrongo Arotake 2: Hard to Reach Youth (CART) Evaluation Report 2: Hard to Reach Youth (CART) Summary: In 2006 the government launched its Effective Interventions (EI) policy package. The package was established to identify and support options for reducing offending and the prison population, thereby reducing the costs and impacts of crime on New Zealand society. An important component of the EI package was the need to enhance justice sector responsiveness to Māori. As such, Te Puni Kōkiri (TPK) and the Ministry of Justice developed and Programme of Action for Māori (later known as the Justice Policy Project with the change of government) which comprised the following three elements: ongoing engagement with Māori communities; supporting learning from promising and innovative providers; and enhancing information gathering and analysis across the sector about effectiveness for Māori. Under the Justice Policy Project, Te Puni Kōkiri invested in a small number of interventions (up to June 2008) that were designed, developed and delivered by Māori providers and test facilitators of success for Māori in the justice sector. This work has contributed to an initial platform for developing an empirical evidence base about „what works‟ for Māori, while agencies develop options for sustainable funding streams. At the direction of the Minister of Māori Affairs, several providers were selected as candidates whose programmes have potential to impact on Māori rates of offending, re-offending and imprisonment. This project aims to gather detailed information on two of the six initiatives. The objectives of this evaluation are to: gather quantitative information to augment the process evaluations undertaken after one year of operation; document in narrative form, at least two of the six intervention initiatives, providing at least two examples of successful transition from involvement in crime and the criminal justice sector into pro-social living and a life without offending, utilising networks gained through the first evaluations; and to go beyond documenting problems and gaps, towards providing examples of Māori succeeding as Māori. The key questions that this evaluation aimed to answer were: What has Te Puni Kōkiri learnt from Māori designed, developed and delivered initiatives within the criminal justice sector? What are the facilitators of success for Māori in the justice sector? Details: Wellington, NZ: Te Puni Kökiri, 2011. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 3, 2013 at: http://www.tpk.govt.nz/en/in-print/our-publications/publications/addressing-the-drivers-of-crime-for-maori/download/tpk-evaluation-report-2-hard-to-reach-youth.pdf Year: 2011 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.tpk.govt.nz/en/in-print/our-publications/publications/addressing-the-drivers-of-crime-for-maori/download/tpk-evaluation-report-2-hard-to-reach-youth.pdf Shelf Number: 129257 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationEvidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Offenders (New Zealand)Prisoner ReentryRecidivismRehabilitationTreatment Programs |
Author: Aos, S. Title: Prison, Police, and Programs: Evidence-Based Options that Reduce Crime and Save Money Summary: Since the 1990s, the Washington State legislature has directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to identify policies with an "evidence-based" track record of improving certain public policy outcomes. Outcomes of interest have included, among others, education, child welfare, crime, and mental health. This report updates and extends WSIPP's list of well-researched policies that reduce crime. We display our current tabulation of evidence-based prevention, juvenile justice, and adult corrections programs, and we include our initial reviews of prison sentencing and policing. As with our previous lists, we find that a number of public policies can reduce crime and are likely to have benefits that exceed costs. We also find credible evidence that some policies do not reduce crime and are likely to have costs that exceed benefits. The legislature has previously used this type of information to craft policy and budget bills. This updated list is designed to help with subsequent budgets and policy legislation. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: (Doc. No. 13-11-1901): Accessed March 12, 2014 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1396/Wsipp_Prison-Police-and-Programs-Evidence-Based-Options-that-Reduce-Crime-and-Save-Money_Full-Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1396/Wsipp_Prison-Police-and-Programs-Evidence-Based-Options-that-Reduce-Crime-and-Save-Money_Full-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 131886 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeEvidence-Based PracticesPolicing PrisonsSentencing |
Author: Boller, Kimberly Title: Making Replication Work: Building Infrastructure to Implement, Scale-up, and Sustain Evidence-Based Early Childhood Home Visiting Programs with Fidelity Summary: In fiscal year 2011, child protective services agencies received 3.4 million referrals of alleged acts of maltreatment involving 6.2 million children. An estimated 677,000 children were victims of substantiated maltreatment, which is a rate of 9.1 victims per 1,000 children in the population (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2012). Despite declines in the number of substantiated cases of neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse (Finkelhor 2007; Finkelhor and Jones 2006), children younger than age 1 continue to demonstrate victimization rates two to three times the rate of children in other age categories. All these findings underscore the need for strategies to prevent child maltreatment to improve outcomes for families and communities. Home visiting to prevent child maltreatment. Home visiting is one strategy that shows promise for reducing rates of self-reported and substantiated child maltreatment and use of emergency rooms to treat child injuries (Avellar and Supplee 2013; Lowell et al. 2011; Fergussen et al. 2005; Olds et al. 1986, 1997; Silovsky et al. 2011). In addition, well-designed and well-implemented home visiting program models may also improve important short- and longer-term outcomes related to womens prenatal health; parenting behaviors and skills; childrens health and health care coverage and use; childrens development and school readiness, and family economic self-sufficiency, although programs may not achieve positive impacts in all outcome areas or across all participants (Avellar and Supplee 2013; Filene et al. 2013; Peacock et al. 2013; Howard and Brooks-Gunn 2009). The need for fidelity to evidence-based models. Increasingly, federal and state policymakers are asking for evidence of effectiveness as they decide which programs to fund and at what levels. Investing in direct service programs that have been found effective in rigorous experimental studies offers policymakers a way to focus investments and increase their confidence in the possibility of replicating outcomes to extend program benefits to more of the target population. However, this hypothesis depends on ensuring that sites replicating a model maintain fidelity to its original design and intent. Faithfully replicating these programs is believed to provide a higher likelihood of achieving desired outcomes than replicating efforts that lack a strong evidentiary base (Fixsen et al. 2005). The need for systems to support implementation, scale-up, and sustainability of home visiting programs with fidelity. Furthermore, for home visiting interventions to have the greatest effects possible, it is believed that the systems in which home visiting programs operate must be integrated, supportive to staff and families, and conducive to service delivery. However, limited knowledge exists about how to build the infrastructure and service systems necessary to implement and sustain evidence-based home visiting programs with fidelity to their models, and how to scale up these programs and adapt them for new target populations. An initiative to support evidence-based home visiting. To address this knowledge gap, in 2008, the Childrens Bureau (CB) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) entered into cooperative agreements with 17 organizations in 15 states to support the implementation of home visiting programs that have potential to prevent child maltreatment. Each organization funded through the Supporting Evidence-Based Home Visiting to Prevent Child Maltreatment (EBHV) initiative selected one or more home visiting models to implement for the first time in its state or community or to enhance, adapt for a new target population, or expand. CBs vision for the EBHV initiative was that, through system change activities, grantees would build infrastructure necessary to accomplish three overarching goals: 1. Support implementation with fidelity to the home visiting program models 2. Support scale-up of the home visiting modelsreplicating the program model in a new service area, adapting the model for a new target population, or increasing the enrollment capacity in an existing service area 3. Support sustainability of the home visiting model beyond the end of the grant period The EBHV initiative was funded for five years, with the first year devoted to planning and the other four years focused on implementation. EBHV funds were not intended to cover the full cost of direct home visiting services. Rather, subcontractors were to use primarily other funding sources to operate their selected home visiting models. Therefore, subcontractors partnered or coordinated with ongoing home visiting programs or sought other public or private funds for new or expanded home visiting operations. In addition, each subcontractor was required to conduct process, outcome, and economic evaluations. The context of evidence-based programs, and evidence-based home visiting in particular, has changed dramatically with the inclusion of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV) in the Affordable Care Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-148). MIECHV represents a significant investment in home visiting programs for low-income families, an investment the Obama Administration seeks to expand during its second term. With the passage of MIECHV, primary oversight for the State Formula grant program is provided by the Health Resources and Services Administration at DHHS, the federal agency charged with implementing MIECHV in partnership with ACF, and the EBHV grantees are now supported through subcontracts from their states (and are therefore subsequently referred to in this report as subcontractors). With increased investments in home visiting also comes increased scrutiny of the return on investment. Policymakers and the public want to know whether the promise of home visiting programs demonstrated in the research literature holds true in a large-scale investment. The national evaluation. Mathematica Policy Research and its partner, Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, conducted a national cross-site evaluation of the EBHV initiative. Using a mixed-methods approach, the national cross-site evaluation was designed to (1) examine the degree to which system change occurred, (2) document the fidelity with which the program models were implemented, and (3) identify implementation strategies and challenges (Koball et al. 2009). Ultimately, the evaluation examined the degree to which building infrastructure capacity influenced whether the EBHV subcontractors were able to achieve their EBHV goals related to implementation with fidelity, scale-up, and sustainability. The evaluation also examined whether progress achieving these goals was influenced by the quality of the collaboration among partners, the extent to which partners worked together, and the degree to which partners respective goals were in alignment. This final evaluation report brings together findings from all years of the EBHV initiative, drawing on interim reports and briefings and updating results with analyses of data collected through the initiatives first four years of implementation (fall 2009 through spring 2013). Throughout the initiative, the national cross-site evaluation gathered data from many sources, including reviews of the subcontractors applications and progress reports, several rounds of telephone interviews and two rounds of site visits with the EBHV subcontractors, baseline and follow-up surveys of the EBHV subcontractors and their partners, and data on staff and participant characteristics and service delivery from the implementing agencies (IAs) identified by the subcontractors. The primary data sources for this report include: (1) site visits conducted to the 17 EBHV subcontractors between February and April 2012; (2) data on staff and participant characteristics and service delivery from October 1, 2009, through June 30, 2012; and (3) a web-based survey of key partners fielded in February 2013. Details: Washington, DC: Childrens Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2014. 214p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 23, 2014 at: http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/documents/EBHV_MakingReplication_Final.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/documents/EBHV_MakingReplication_Final.pdf Shelf Number: 132134 Keywords: Child Abuse and Neglect Child Protection Evidence-Based PracticesHome Visitation Programs Parenting |
Author: Mak, Jodi Title: Prevention and Combat Child Abuse and Neglect. International Report of Workstream 2. Experiences of Parents and Professionals: What Works? Summary: A partnership of six institutions from five European countries has been granted a two-year project (2011 - 2012) within the framework of the Daphne III programme: preventing and combating violence against children, young people and women and protecting victims and groups at risk. This project is called Prevent and Combat Child Abuse: What works? An overview of regional approaches, exchange and research. The aim of the project is to generate relevant knowledge on current strategies for the prevention of child abuse and neglect (CAN) in Europe. It will focus on interventions and strategies that target the prevention and treatment of child abuse and neglect. It will compare five European countries: Germany, Hungary, Portugal, Sweden and the Netherlands. The final output of the project will be a manual with data on what works in the prevention and treatment of child abuse. The project is coordinated by the Netherlands Youth Institute and has been carried out in collaboration with the Swedish Orebro regional council, the Hungarian Family Child Youth Association, the German Youth Institute, CESIS from Portugal and the Verwey-Jonker Institute from the Netherlands. The aim of this research was to generate information about the experiences of parents and professionals concerning the prevention and combating of child abuse and neglect: what are the successful elements of an effective approach? Knowledge about these elements gives the opportunity to improve both the policy and practice of combating child abuse and neglect. Therefore the research had to provide an answer to the following question: Do national prevention strategies and actions against child abuse and neglect correspond to what works in practice, as experienced by parents and professionals? We chose a combination of research methods, applied through two phases. The first phase involved a total of ten interviews with parents. The second phase consisted of (a) focus group meeting(s) with professionals. The goal of this mixed method was to obtain inside information about the subject matter, which is hard to achieve solely through in-depth interviews. Furthermore, by using this mixed methodology, we have a greater sense of validity when it comes to adequately portraying and representing each target group. All five countries made a national report on the results. Based on these reports and the discussion about the results during the international meetings, the Verwey-Jonker Institute wrote this international report. Details: Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Institute, 2012. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2014 at: http://www.youthpolicy.nl/yp/downloadsyp/Daphne-final-report-workstream-2.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Europe URL: http://www.youthpolicy.nl/yp/downloadsyp/Daphne-final-report-workstream-2.pdf Shelf Number: 132316 Keywords: Child Abuse and Neglect (Europe)Child ProtectionEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Burwick, Andrew Title: Costs of Early Childhood Home Visiting: An Analysis of Programs Implemented in the Supporting Evidence-Based Home Visiting to Prevention Child Maltreatment Initiative Summary: Home visiting programs offer a promising method for delivering support services to at-risk families and children and preventing child maltreatment. As interest grows in scaling up home visiting programs as a strategy to promote parent and child well-being and prevent child maltreatment, program implementers and policymakers are seeking more information about the costs of implementing these programs. The Cost Study of Evidence-Based Home Visiting Programs applied a uniform approach and common time frame to analyze costs among agencies implementing five different home visiting program models. The study assessed (1) the total cost of providing home visiting programs during a year of steady-state operation, (2) the allocation of annual costs among cost categories and program activities or components, (3) the cost to serve a participating family, and (4) variation in average costs across program models and other agency characteristics. Mathematica Policy Research and Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago conducted the study with support from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and in collaboration with Casey Family Programs. It included agencies that participated in the Supporting Evidence-Based Home Visiting to Prevent Child Maltreatment (EBHV) initiative, a five-year grant program launched in 2008 by the Children's Bureau of the Administration for Children and Families at HHS. In 2011, the EBHV grant program was formally incorporated into the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV) State Formula Grant Program administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration of HHS. The cost study sample includes 25 implementing agencies (IA) that delivered home visiting services in 13 states.3 The IAs offered one of five home visiting program models: (1) Healthy Families America (HFA, 7 IAs), (2) the Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP, 10 IAs), (3) Parents as Teachers (PAT, 3 IAs), (4) SafeCare (SC, 4 IAs), and (5) the Positive Parenting Program (Triple P, one IA). Most of the IAs (15 agencies) were private nonprofit organizations. Seven were state or county government agencies, and 3 were hospitals or medical centers. IAs located in urban areas (16 agencies) were more common than those located in suburban or rural areas (5 and 4 agencies, respectively). We analyzed program costs from the implementing agency's perspective. Costs include all resources used by an agency to deliver a program during a one-year period of "steady-state" operation (July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2012), and cost estimates provide an indication of the resources that an agency would need in order to replicate a program at a similar scale in a similar context. To conduct the study, we collected three types of data from IAs: (1) data on resources used for program operations, to estimate total costs; (2) data on staff time use, to allocate costs among program components; and (3) data on the number of families served and their receipt of home visiting services, to estimate costs per family. The cost analysis was conducted using the "ingredient" or resource cost method, which involved itemizing the types of resources (or ingredients) needed to provide services, gathering information on the types and value of resources used by each agency during the study period, and aggregating costs to estimate total program costs (Levin and McEwan 2001). To represent more accurately the total resources required to implement a program, we incorporated costs not typically captured by budgets or accounting records, including donated resources such as volunteer time and in-kind contributions of services or materials, as well as the value of staff time spent on the program beyond normal working hours (and not reflected in salaries or fringe benefits). Details: Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, 2014. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2014 at: http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/documents/Costs%20of%20EC%20Home%20Visiting.Final%20Report.January%2030%202014.2.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/documents/Costs%20of%20EC%20Home%20Visiting.Final%20Report.January%2030%202014.2.pdf Shelf Number: 132494 Keywords: Child Abuse and NeglectChild MaltreatmentCost-Benefit AnalysisCosts of Criminal JusticeCrime Prevention ProgramsEvidence-Based PracticesHome Visiting Programs |
Author: Breckenridge, Jan Title: Traversing the Maze of 'Evidence' and 'Best Practice' in Domestic and Family Violence Service Provision in Australia Summary: This paper considers how 'evidence' is constructed and translated into 'best practice'. It contends that the experience and understanding of practitioners within domestic and family violence (DFV) services constitute important contributing knowledge for the evidence-base. However, practice wisdom alone is not sufficient, since other forms of knowledge also play an important role in optimising outcomes. Ultimately this paper promotes the engagement of DFV practitioners in formal research and evaluation, not only to substantially inform the evidence but also to critically examine the effects of their interventions against all manner of valid evidence, in a recursive process of knowledge translation. It is suggested that a critical, reflexive engagement with formal evidence is ultimately the defining feature of 'best practice' in the continuous drive towards an effective response to violence against women. Details: Sydney: Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse, 2014. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Issues Paper 26: Accessed July 7, 2014 at: http://anrows.org.au/sites/default/files/page-attachments/IssuesPaper26-May2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://anrows.org.au/sites/default/files/page-attachments/IssuesPaper26-May2014.pdf Shelf Number: 132738 Keywords: Domestic Violence (Australia)Evidence-Based PracticesFamily ViolenceVictim ServicesVictims of Family ViolenceViolence Against Women |
Author: Shepherd, Jonathan Title: How to Achieve More Effective Services: The Evidence Ecosystem Summary: The creation and adoption of effective policies, programmes and interventions depends on a functional evidence ecosystem. In whichever policy or service area it serves, the purpose of this system is to sustain continuous evidence generation, synthesis and evidence-informed action. As in all efficient systems, form follows function. Not only must each stage be operational but also stages must be connected and the flow of evidence and its translation into "what works" needs to be maintained. This means that at each stage, demand and supply of quality-assured evidence are needed, together with demand for the products of the system by commissioners and end users. The What Works Centres are an essential part of this ecosystem and need to be concerned not just with evidence synthesis and adoption but with the whole system in their sector so that faults can be identified and put right. This strategic perspective is important if the What Works Centres are to achieve and increase behaviour change. The generic recommendations listed below, and those specific to each What Works sector, are therefore designed to address both structural and functional problems that were identified in a series of interviews. For some Centres there are major capacity shortfalls, especially for evidence generation; for others there are disconnects, for example, between academics and front line services, and between commissioners in the same sector; for others still, the workforce needs to be categorised and professionalised so that target groups for training and training sources can be identified. Raw and synthesised evidence in the forms in which it is currently published is generally unusable by many practitioners - and sometimes does more harm than good. Changing course in all sectors on the basis of evidence depends on implementing a range of interventions that motivate practitioners, their managers, commissioners and policy makers to do this. A series of recommendations based on an evidence review is therefore a central part of this report. Details: Cardiff: Cardiff University, What Works Network, 2014. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 23, 2014 at: http://www.vrg.cf.ac.uk/Files/2014_JPS_What_Works.pdf Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://www.vrg.cf.ac.uk/Files/2014_JPS_What_Works.pdf Shelf Number: 132741 Keywords: Crime PreventionEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Byrne, James M. Title: Drunk Driving: An Assessment of 'What Works' in the Areas of Classification, Treatment, Prevention and Control Summary: The purpose of the following review is to identify promising solutions to the drunk driving problem in this country, focusing on four broad areas of inquiry: (1) Can effective treatment programs for drunk drivers be identified? (2) Can effective prevention strategies for drunk drivers be identified? (3) Can effective identification strategies for drunk drivers (utilizing classification and prediction techniques) be identified? (4) Can effective control strategies for drunk drivers (utilizing administrative and/or criminal Justice interventions) be identified? To complete this analysis, we conducted a review of all the available published research on drunk driving released since 1990. Each of the articles we identify in our review is included in the "what works" compendium accompanying this report. Not surprisingly, the quality of the empirical research published during our review period (1990-2002) is generally weak, with few experimental studies conducted on this important problem. To make sense of this body of research, we have adopted a strategy recommended by Welsh and Farrington (2003) in their recent article, "Toward an Evidence-Based Approach to Preventing Crime". First, we have ranked the "quality" of each of the research studies included in this review on a scale of 1 (weakest) to 5 (highest), utilizing the same scaling criteria used in the recent research reviews completed for the National Institute of Justice by the Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group (see Appendix A for a description of review criteria). Next, we used these rankings to organize our assessment of what works, what does not work, what is promising, and what is unknown in the area of drunk driving (see Appendix A for a definition of key review terminology). Finally, we have attempted to examine the State of Maryland's drunk driving strategy by providing a critical review of MADD's "Rating the States 2002" report on drunk driving, which includes an overall grade for Maryland's drunk driving strategy (C) along with a breakdown of grading in each of the following areas: (1) state political leadership, (2) statistics and records, (3) law enforcement, (4) administrative measures/criminal sanctions, (5) regulatory control/availability, (6) youth legislation, prevention, and education, (7) victim issues, (8) laws, and (9) fatality trends. (Note: the full text of the MADD report, along with a breakdown of what each state in the country is currently doing to address the drunk driving problem, is included in our "what works" compendium). Utilizing the results of our review of "what works" in the areas of treatment, classification, prevention, and control, we offer our recommendations for changes in MADD's grading criteria and then discuss the implications of our findings for drunk driver policies and practices in Maryland. Details: s.l.: Maryland Council of Productivity and Management, 2003. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://faculty.uml.edu/jbyrne/ Year: 2003 Country: United States URL: http://faculty.uml.edu/jbyrne/ Shelf Number: 132798 Keywords: Driving Under the InfluenceDrunk Driving (U.S.)Evidence-Based Practices |
Author: Drake, Elizabeth Title: Inventory of Evidence-Based and Research-Based Programs for Adult Corrections Summary: A series of recent public policy reforms has moved Washington State toward the use of 'evidence-based' programs. The central concept behind these reforms is to identify and implement strategies shown through rigorous research to improve statewide outcomes (e.g., crime rates or high school graduation rates) cost-effectively. The 2013 Legislature passed a bill to facilitate the use of evidence-based programs in adult corrections. The legislation directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) to: - Develop terms to define evidence-based and research-based programs; - Create an inventory of adult correctional programs and classify those programs as evidence-based or research-based; and - Conduct additional systematic reviews where research evidence currently lacks. The legislation also directs the Department of Corrections (DOC) to determine if the programs it delivers are evidence-based or research-based according to the inventory developed by WSIPP. DOC is required to develop a plan to phase-out ineffective programs and implement evidence-based programs by 2015. This legislative assignment parallels another project approved by WSIPP's Board of Directors requiring WSIPP to expand its benefit-cost model into new topic areas (Medicaid, aging, homelessness, public health, and employment/workforce training). In addition to expanding our benefit-cost model, we will continue to update adult corrections programs and policies relevant to Washington State until the project ends in 2015. Section I of this report contains definitions for evidence-based and research-based programs. Updated systematic reviews are found in Section II. The adult corrections inventory is located in Section III of this report. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2013. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 30, 2014 at: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1542/Wsipp_Inventory-of-Evidence-Based-and-Research-Based-Programs-for-Adult-Corrections_Final-Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1542/Wsipp_Inventory-of-Evidence-Based-and-Research-Based-Programs-for-Adult-Corrections_Final-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 132843 Keywords: Correctional ProgramsCost-Benefit AnalysisEvidence-Based PracticesPrisonsTreatment Programs |
Author: Pousadela, Ines M. Title: What Works in the Criminal Justice System (And What Doesn't): A 2000-11 Update on Policing, Courts, and Corrections Summary: As crime has become a serious cause of concern in most of Latin America, the "nothing works" era in criminal justice has given way to a shift towards evidence-based crime prevention in North America and Europe. The program evaluations conducted so far have yielded growing knowledge about what works, what does not work and what is promising, especially regarding recidivism outcomes. However, policymaking in Latin America remains ignorant to the available evidence, and most crime prevention policies, practices and programs are still being based on tradition, opinions, ideology, trends and anecdotal evidence rather than scientifically validated studies. On the basis of a review of the current literature on evidence-based crime prevention and an extensive search, analysis and systematization of the most recent program evaluations in policing, courts and corrections, this paper summarizes a series of lessons for Latin America and proposes a research and policy agenda for the region. Details: Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank, 2014. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: IDB Policy Brief No. 227: Accessed August 4, 2014 at: http://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/6544/ICS%20PB%20What%20Works%20in%20the%20Criminal%20Justice%20System.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2014 Country: Latin America URL: http://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/6544/ICS%20PB%20What%20Works%20in%20the%20Criminal%20Justice%20System.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 132897 Keywords: Crime (Latin America) Crime Prevention Evidence-Based Practices |
Author: Early, Kristin Parsons Title: Validity and Reliability of the Florida PACT Risk and Needs Assessment Instrument: A Three-Phase Evaluation Summary: The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (Department) began efforts in 2005 to develop a comprehensive, evidence-based system of assessing the risks and needs of youth referred to the juvenile justice system. A system change of this magnitude was not easily accomplished and required strong collaboration within the Department, as well as with juvenile justice stakeholders and community partners. The Department followed a long-range plan for developing and implementing its new risk and needs assessment instrument referred to as the Positive Achievement Change Tool (PACT). This process included pilot testing of the assessment and a Pre-Validation Study to norm the instrument to Florida's delinquency population and examine its initial validity in predicting offender risk to re-offend. The current evaluation examined the validity and reliability of the PACT in three phases: Phase I assessed the validity of the PACT risk and needs assessment in accurately predicting recidivism; Phase II involved confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses of all PACT assessment data to assess the utility and parsimony of PACT scoring; and Phase III examined consistency in PACT scoring through assessment of inter-rater reliability. The Justice Research Center (JRC) performed the analyses reported here under contract (Contract P2085) with the Department following a competitive procurement process. Details: Tallahassee: Justice Research Center, 2012. 125p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 13, 2014 at: http://www.djj.state.fl.us/docs/probation-policy-memos/jrc-comprehensive-pact-validity-and-reliability-study-report-2012.pdf?Status=Master&sfvrsn=2 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.djj.state.fl.us/docs/probation-policy-memos/jrc-comprehensive-pact-validity-and-reliability-study-report-2012.pdf?Status=Master&sfvrsn=2 Shelf Number: 133042 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Offenders (Florida)PredictionRecidivismRisk Assessment |
Author: Lucenko, Barbara Title: Effects of Functional Family Parole on Re-Arrest and Employment for Youth in Washington State Summary: The Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration implemented a new model of juvenile parole services in 2003, Functional Family Therapy. This new model of parole, Functional Family Parole (FFP), is intended to make families the unit of intervention-not just the youth-and uses family therapy-based approaches to enhance case management outcomes. The new parole model was implemented with several other evidence-based changes in the JRA residential program, collectively called the Integrated Treatment Model. Recent budget reductions led to the elimination of parole for all JRA offenders except high-risk, auto theft offenders, and sex offenders, creating a "natural experiment" allowing us to test of the impacts of Functional Family Parole upon youth in the period following their release. We found that "FFP Youth" were less likely to be arrested and had fewer total arrests during the 9 months following release than those released during the period without the enhanced parole services. "FFP Youth" were also more likely to be employed and earned more on average during the year following release than "No FFP Youth." Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, 2011. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2014 at: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ms/rda/research/2/24.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ms/rda/research/2/24.pdf Shelf Number: 133067 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesFamily InterventionsJuvenile Offenders (Washington State)Juvenile ParoleJuvenile RehabilitationTreatment Programs |
Author: Heil, Peggy Title: Prison Sex Offender Treatment: Recommendations for Program Implementation Summary: Sexual offenses cause tremendous harm to the lives of victims, the victims' families and our communities. We recommend that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation implement the "containment approach" for managing sex offenders in prison and on parole. The containment approach is a comprehensive strategy that prioritizes victim protection and community safety. Prison treatment for sex offenders can be an effective component of the containment approach. Intense prison treatment can reduce recidivism and enhance community safety. It can also reduce the substantial costs (emotional and financial) associated with recidivism. Miller, Cohen and Wiersema (1996)1 estimated that child sexual abuse crimes costs victims and society $99,000 per victimization, and estimated $87,000 per rape/sexual assault victimization. These costs are estimated to be $140,531 and $123,497 in 2007 dollars. Ninety-percent of the costs are associated with significant reduction in the quality of life for victims of these crimes. Quantifying the costs of sexual victimization seems to trivialize it nonetheless. As Miller et al. (1996:14) state, "pain, suffering, and reduced quality of life do not have a market price and cannot be bought and sold." Certainly victims would pay dearly to avoid them, as would their families and members of the community. The following report details a prison sex offender treatment program plan that is designed to reduce recidivism and avoid the costs and immeasurable harm of sex crime victimization. It provides evidence-based sex offender treatment and management recommendations to increase community safety and decrease new sex crimes by known offenders. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) requested a document that describes an empirically based prison sex offender treatment program and provides recommendations for the development and implementation of such a program in the California prison system. Program recommendations are drawn from research and clinical experience. Where possible, materials from other programs are included in appendices to facilitate implementation. Details: Sacramento: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 2007. 567p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 23, 2014 at: http://www.casomb.org/docs/PSOT_CDCR_Report.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.casomb.org/docs/PSOT_CDCR_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 131049 Keywords: Cost-Benefit AnalysisEvidence-Based PracticesEvidence-Based ProgramsInmatesPrison ProgramsPrisonersSex Offender TreatmentSex OffendersTreatment Programs |
Author: Canada. Public Safety Canada Title: Public Safety Canada 2012-2013 Evaluation of the Crime Prevention Program: Final Report Summary: Evaluation supports accountability to Parliament and Canadians by helping the Government of Canada to credibly report on the results achieved with resources invested in programs. Evaluation supports deputy heads in managing for results by informing them about whether their programs are producing the outcomes that they were designed to achieve, at an affordable cost; and, supports policy and program improvements by helping to identify lessons learned and best practices. What we examined Public Safety Canada's Crime Prevention Program (CPP) includes all activities managed by the National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC). The Centre provides national leadership on effective and cost-effective ways to prevent and reduce crime by intervening on the risk factors before crime happens with two core activities: providing contribution funding to support evidence-based targeted interventions; and developing and disseminating knowledge products, tools and resources related to effective crime prevention. The scope of the evaluation includes, starting April 1, 2008, the knowledge transfer activities of NCPC related to crime prevention and the administration of the following contribution funds: - Crime Prevention Action Fund (CPAF) - Northern and Aboriginal Crime Prevention Fund (NACPF) - Youth Gang Prevention Fund (YGPF) - Communities at Risk: Security Infrastructure Program (SIP)2 Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2013. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 29, 2014 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2013-vltn-crm-prvntn-prgrm/2013-vltn-crm-prvntn-prgrm-eng.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2013-vltn-crm-prvntn-prgrm/2013-vltn-crm-prvntn-prgrm-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 133468 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeCrime Prevention (Canada)Delinquency PreventionEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Ziedenberg, Jason Title: Case Study: New York City Department of Probation's Federal Partnership Efforts Summary: The New York City Department of Probation (DOP) - the second largest probation department in the country - is advancing a process to infuse evidence-based policies and practices (EBPP) throughout the organization. Building on a solid organizational foundation as well as on advances in the field over the past decade, the staff and leadership are driving initiatives to use better tools to design supervision strategies, utilize communications more effectively, and improve staff development through customized training so that senior leadership through line staff are invested in the new approach. They are also engaging community partners to build capacity so that DOP's clients can thrive in the communities where they live. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2014. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 12, 2014 at: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/FVTC-NYCDOP.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/FVTC-NYCDOP.pdf Shelf Number: 134022 Keywords: Criminal Justice PoliciesEvidence-Based PracticesPartnershipsProbation (New York City)Probation Officers |
Author: Downey, P. Mitchell Title: Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Guide for Drug Courts and other Criminal Justice Programs Summary: Policymakers and practitioners face difficult decisions when they allocate resources. As resource constraints have tightened, the role of researchers in informing evidence-based and cost-effective decisions about the use of funds, labor, materials and equipment - and even the skills of workers - has increased. We believe research that can inform decisions about resource allocation will be a central focus of criminal justice research in the years to come, with cost-benefit analysis (CBA) among the key tools. This report about the use of CBA is aimed at not only researchers but also practitioners and policymakers who use research to make choices about how to use limited resources. Although we include NIJ's Multi-site Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE) as an example of CBA in practice, this report is not just about using CBA in drug courts. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2014. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: National Institute of Justice Research in Brief: Accessed November 25, 2014 at: https://ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/246769.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/246769.pdf Shelf Number: 134243 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis (U.S.)Costs of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice PolicyDrug CourtsEvidence-Based PracticesProblem-Solving Courts |
Author: Matthies, Carl F. Title: Evidence-Based Approaches to Law Enforcement Recruitment and Hiring Summary: Recruiting diverse, qualified candidates is a continual challenge for law enforcement. With the downturn in the economy came a flood of applicants, but also, eventually, slashed funding for recruitment and hiring. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has felt the recession keenly: Its advertising budget was cut by 60 percent in fiscal year 2009, and, in 2011, the Los Angeles City Council approved a three-month hiring freeze. The LAPD, and law enforcement in general, can clearly benefit from evidence-based approaches to evaluating recruitment programs and streamlining the application process. Using LAPD and city administrative data from fiscal years 2007 and 2008, the author estimates impacts - in terms of applicant numbers - for LAPD's recruitment efforts and proposes a revised model for prioritizing applicants. While the results of these analyses may be of particular interest to LAPD, the methods employed, as well as those recommended for future studies, are applicable to any law enforcement agency interested in attracting and identifying high-quality applicants more efficiently. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2011. 161p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed February 23, 2015 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSD281.html Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSD281.html Shelf Number: 134666 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesLaw EnforcementPolice Recruitment and SelectionPolicing (U.S.) |
Author: Savignac, Julie Title: Guide on the Implementation of Evidence-Based Programs: What Do We Know So Far? Summary: Through its National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC), Public Safety Canada fosters the development and implementation of evidence-based crime prevention interventions in Canada. To this end, the NCPC supports the implementation and evaluation of community-based initiatives to identify what works, how it works, and what it costs. The question of "how" has often been overshadowed in favour of the demonstration of program impacts. Yet the quality of the implementation of prevention programs is a key factor in their success. For example, an effective implementation of a promising program has a greater chance of producing positive results than a less rigorous implementation of a model program. Program results that demonstrate little effectiveness may not be caused by a lack of sound treatment and intervention, but by weaknesses in the program's implementation. Practitioners and researchers in crime prevention increasingly face a common challenge: the successful, effective implementation of evidence-based practices. The emergence of this interest in implementation-related issues coincides with the realization that merely selecting an effective program is not enough and that, even with the development of best practice guides, various experiences in the field have shown that effective programs have not delivered the expected results. An effective program, combined with a high-quality implementation, increases the likelihood of achieving positive results among the clients served. Emphasis should be placed not only on program selection, but also on the identification of effective conditions for implementation. Presently, the literature confirms that some aspects of implementation are generalizable, particularly with regard to the stages and key components. Whether it is a crime prevention program or a program in a related field, for example in the education or health and social services sector, implementation is based on the same general core principles. However, certain conditions in the implementation of crime prevention programs suggest that there may be certain elements, even particular challenges and facilitative strategies that are specific to this sector. The fact that these programs target a population with multiple risks, sometimes even clients with a criminal record; the identification of young people with the right profile to participate in the program and their recruitment; the use of retention strategies to maintain participation in the program; the sometimes limited involvement of families; and the dual role of certain partners are just a few instances illustrating that the implementation of prevention programs requires strategies adapted to these conditions. An approach including empirical studies specific to the implementation of crime prevention programs must be pursued in order to shed light on these questions. This guide on the implementation of evidence-based programs outlines current knowledge on key elements, proposes implementation planning tools and provides examples from various case studies. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, National Crime Prevention Centre, 2014. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report: 2014-01: Accessed March 4, 2015 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/gd-mplmnttn-vdnc-prgrms/gd-mplmnttn-vdnc-prgrms-en.pdf Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/gd-mplmnttn-vdnc-prgrms/gd-mplmnttn-vdnc-prgrms-en.pdf Shelf Number: 134739 Keywords: Crime Prevention ProgramsEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: World Health Organization Title: Improving efforts to prevent children's exposure to violence: a handbook for defining programme theory and planning for evaluation in the new evidence-based culture Summary: As part of a global movement to direct greater attention and resources to child protection, programmes aimed at reducing children's exposure to violence are being implemented with increasing frequency across the world. These programmes are diverse and range from raising public awareness of the issues to widening and strengthening government policies and protective structures, improving children's and families' access to medical, therapeutic and legal support, and increasing children's and parents' protective skills. Over the last several decades a substantial body of research has accumulated, providing much needed information about the experience of violence in childhood. We now know that child abuse, neglect, peer violence, sexual victimization and exposure to domestic and community violence are suffered by very large numbers of children. We understand much more about the serious negative consequences of violence exposure on children's physical and mental health, effects that can carry through from generation to generation. In addition, we have come to appreciate that children's health and safety concerns often cluster together, and that children and families with the fewest resources often suffer from disproportionate levels of exposure to violence. Evaluation research has also helped us to identify which prevention and intervention strategies work well and make the biggest difference to children's well-being. What is needed now is a global movement to build on this knowledge in order to channel programme efforts in increasingly effective ways. Given the seriousness of the problem of children's exposure to violence and the scarcity of resources with which to tackle it, our focus should be to ensure that: - new programmes and initiatives are grounded in research knowledge; - programmes are routinely evaluated so that we continue to learn more about what works and what does not. It is only by sharing, using and growing the evidence base that we will hasten our positive impact on the lives and well-being of children worldwide. This handbook is intended to help implementing agencies (e.g. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), development/foreign aid agencies, community-based organizations, not-for-profit agencies) make better use of existing research and plan for evaluation when designing and implementing child violence prevention programmes, and also to convey these intentions to potential funding organizations. Details: Geneva, SWIT: WHO, 2014. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 12, 2015 at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/144308/1/9789241507882_eng.pdf?ua=1 Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/144308/1/9789241507882_eng.pdf?ua=1 Shelf Number: 134911 Keywords: Child Abuse and NeglectChild MaltreatmentChild ProtectionEvidence-Based PracticesViolence Against Children |
Author: Hylton, John H. Title: Canadian Innovations in the Provision of Policing Services to Aboriginal Peoples Summary: An initial report on evidence-based practice in the provision of policing services to Aboriginal people was one of more than 20 research reports commissioned by the Ipperwash Inquiry for the purpose of assisting in the development of the Inquiry's "Part 2" recommendations. The Inquiry's recommendations will consider both "systemic" and "operational" matters relating to the Inquiry's mandate, and make comprehensive recommendations regarding the improvement of relations between the police and Aboriginal peoples. In preparing the first report, more than 15,000 pages of documentation were reviewed from previous inquiries, commissions, studies, reports, and evaluations of Aboriginal-police relations in Canada, Australia, and the United States. Unfortunately, however, the goal of identifying evidence-based best practices proved to be illusive; at least in terms of documentation, there was little evidence about what really worked. However, three significant themes, summarized later in this report, emerged as to what should work, and, in some cases, what appeared to be working. Although the initial report uncovered little documentation respecting best practices, experts advising the Inquiry were aware of many Canadian innovations that had been undertaken with the specific intent of improving Aboriginal-police relations. Since these experiences had not been uncovered in the review of documentation, it was considered important that the Inquiry take additional steps to identify and document these innovations. The Inquiry wanted to know what lessons had been learned from these experiences and how these lessons might assist the Inquiry in completing its mandate. The canvassing of key respondents within a number of police services was of value. However, like the earlier literature review, it fell short of providing a sound basis for the development of lessons and principles that could guide future policy and program development. Therefore, additional research was undertaken to examine other areas of Aboriginal human services and to identify lessons learned in those areas that might guide reforms in Aboriginal-police relations. Section 2 of this report highlights the results of the initial review of the literature on Aboriginal-police relations and summarizes the major findings. Section 3 reports the results of a survey of key respondents from police services across Canada that were identified as innovators in Aboriginal-police relations. Section 4 analyzes insights and lessons gained from other areas of Aboriginal human services. Finally, a concluding section draws on the work to date to propose a number of directions to guide the Inquiry's recommendations in the area of Aboriginal-police relations. Details: Toronto: Ipperwash Inquiry, 2005. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 19, 2015 at: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/inquiries/ipperwash/policy_part/research/pdf/John_Hylton_Canadian_Innovations.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Canada URL: http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/inquiries/ipperwash/policy_part/research/pdf/John_Hylton_Canadian_Innovations.pdf Shelf Number: 134981 Keywords: Aboriginals (Canada)Evidence-Based PracticesIndigenous PeoplesPolice-Community Relations |
Author: Bickle, Gayle Title: What Works? General Principles, Characteristics, and Examples of Effective Programs Summary: Currently, the ODRC and other departments of corrections around the nation are adopting the Reentry approach to offender treatment, which focuses on criminal justice programming and practices that promote criminal desistance (turning away from crime), family and community reintegration, and public safety. This holistic rehabilitative approach arose at a time when prison populations were soaring and researchers were identifying the characteristics of effective programs based on the research evidence (in other words, "evidence-based programming"). The purpose of this paper is to identify the major characteristics of effective offender programming as found in the research literature and provide a description of programs that work. The hope is that this document can assist administrative and treatment staff in the design and implementation of effective offender programming. The paper begins with a brief historical picture of the research that led to current efforts to identify effective programs and their characteristics. Then, a review of the characteristics of effective programs is provided. Finally, ineffective programming is briefly discussed, and evidence-based programs are identified for the major areas of criminogenic needs, which are "dynamic risk factors [for criminal behavior] that when reduced are followed by reduced reoffending and/or protective factors that when enhanced are followed by reduced reoffending." Details: Columbus, OH: Ohio Dept. of Rehabilitation and Correction. Bureau of Research and Evaluation, 2010. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 1, 2015 at: http://www.drc.ohio.gov/web/Reports/Effective%20programs.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.drc.ohio.gov/web/Reports/Effective%20programs.pdf Shelf Number: 135452 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesOffender TreatmentTreatment Programs |
Author: Rydberg, Jason Title: Flint DDACTS Pilot Evaluation Summary: In response to the public safety challenges posed by high levels of violent crime and local level law enforcement resource constraints, the Michigan State Police (MSP) have developed the "Secure Cities" initiative as part of its strategic plan. The Secure Cities initiative involves providing additional MSP enforcement resources to Detroit, Flint, Pontiac and Saginaw; using data-driven planning; and developing evidence-informed and evidence-based strategies for addressing high levels of violent crime. One specific strategy has been the implementation of the Data-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety (DDACTS) in Flint. The Flint DDACTS initiative began enforcement activities in January 2012. The current evaluation examined the program as it operated between January 2012 and March 2014. This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the Flint DDACTS program, describing both trends in program activities and the effect of DDACTS on violent crime. Key Findings - The DDACTS strategy targeted five hotspots for violent crime in Flint, later expanded to include two additional hotspot areas. - MSP collected very detailed activity data from the Troopers involved in DDACTS. This reflected exceptional performance output measures. - A significant level of patrol resources with associated activities occurred in these hotspot areas. Indeed, over 22,000 traffic stops occurred between January 1, 2012 and March 2014 as part of the DDACTS initiative. Nearly three-quarters of the traffic stops occurred in the targeted hotspots. This equated to significant enforcement presence in the hotspot areas with over 600 traffic stops occurring each month in the hotspot areas - For every 100 traffic stops, there were nearly 95 verbal warnings, 2 citations, 14 arrests for misdemeanor and felony charges, and 17 fugitive arrests. - The heavy use of verbal warnings appears to reflect concern with maintaining positive relationships with Flint residents. - The high number of arrests per traffic stop reflects a very high level of enforcement productivity. - The initial set of analyses focused on the trend in violent crime in the DDACTS hotspot target areas. Violent crime (homicide, aggravated assaults, robberies, criminal sexual conduct, weapons offenses) declined 19 percent in the hotspot areas. The declines were observed in 14 of the 27 months of the DDACTS initiative. The remainder of the city experienced a 7 percent decline in violent crime. - Robberies declined 30 percent in the hotspot areas. The remainder of the city experienced a 2 percent decline in robberies. - Several analyses were undertaken to test rival explanations for the decline in violent crime. Specifically, "synthetic" comparison areas consisting of block groups within the city that were not subject to the DDACTS initiative were compared to the trend in violent crime in the hotspot areas. The findings indicated that the comparison areas also experienced a decline in violent crime. Details: East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, 2014. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 16, 2015 at: http://cj.msu.edu/assets/DDACTS-Report-Expanded_BJS_2012_BJ_CX_K036-1-2-FINAL.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://cj.msu.edu/assets/DDACTS-Report-Expanded_BJS_2012_BJ_CX_K036-1-2-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 135656 Keywords: Crime AnalysisCrime HotspotsCrime PreventionEvidence-Based PracticesPolice PatrolStop and SearchViolent Crime |
Author: Jones, Nicholas A. Title: First Nations Policing: A Review of the Literature Summary: Although there are almost 70,000 police officers in Canada, fewer than 2,000 are directly engaged in Aboriginal policing (Burczycka, 2013). While representing a very small proportion of all Canadian officers and policing budgets, the manner in which First Nations communities are policed has profound long-term implications for the residents living there, especially given the high rates of crime and victimization in many of these places. The populations at risk of victimization are not isolated to the First Nations territories, and crimes often displace into other adjacent urban and rural communities. In addition, most Aboriginal Canadians live off-reserve and some of these individuals move between their home communities and urban areas. As a result, the after-effects of an offence may be felt in places far away from where they originated, making this an issue of importance to all Canadians. In order to better understand the challenges of Aboriginal policing, this review first presents a context that includes a review of Aboriginal population trends and the demographic characteristics of that population. The fact that the Aboriginal population is the fastest growing population group in Canada, and the youngest, has long-term implications for police services both on- and off-reserve. Consistent with other research, we found that rates of crime and victimization on many First Nations were very high. In addition to the impacts on victims, high crime rates have a corrosive effect on community relationships and especially opportunities that are lost. When responding to the after-effects of crimes that have already occurred and trying to prevent future offences consumes much of the creativity of a community, leaders lose opportunities to work toward job creation, promoting healthy lifestyles and relationships, helping youngsters succeed, or spending scarce resources on developing a community's infrastructure rather than repairing the damages caused by crime. Having established a context for this study, a historical overview of Aboriginal policing in Canada is presented. This is an important undertaking as academics, policymakers and practitioners often forget the lessons of history. As a result, crime prevention or reduction strategies that were unsuccessful in the past are sometimes re-introduced and unless there have been changes in the way that these 'recycled' interventions are delivered - or the context into The social phenomenon of First Nations peoples moving between the reserve and urban centers is called "churning." which they are delivered - we are often destined to repeat the mistakes of the past. An additional challenge of delivering police services in a nation as culturally, geographically and regionally diverse as Canada is that an intervention that is successful or promising in one jurisdiction might not be as successful in another province, community or First Nation. Consequently, by learning the lessons of history we are less likely to be confronted with unforeseen or unanticipated outcomes after new crime reduction strategies are introduced. It has been said that the past is prologue and our review of the historical context for Aboriginal policing revealed that many of the challenges that existed in the past are present today, such as a lack of resources for police services or the difficulty in engaging communities in the informal regulation of activities that bolster the social fabric and help reduce crime. The historical review is followed by an overview of the evolution of Aboriginal policing in Canada and in that section; the following policy-related areas where our knowledge is not fully developed were identified: - Resourcing / Funding - Administrative Capacity - Policing Arrangements - Aboriginal Policing as a Distinct Policing Model - Responding to Crime and Victimization The gap in our understanding of these five issues is due to a lack of timely and relevant research. In some cases, the answers to these questions might already exist, but researchers have not taken the time to collect and analyze this information and then report it back to police organizations. One of the challenges of policing research is that most of the studies that occur take place in urban areas, and this focus on 'big city' policing does not help us understand evidence-based practices or "what works" in responding to rural crime or best practices in Aboriginal policing. A second challenge is that policing research is also fragmented in Canada and there is a lack of coordination that reduces duplication and decreases efficiency. Our analyses revealed that there are three distinct types of agencies policing Aboriginal communities and peoples and that each type faces a different set of challenges that are shaped by their role and geographic location as well as organizational size and history: - Large networked police organizations, such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) and Surete du Quebec (SQ) of which we have a good understanding of their priorities and information about these agencies is generally available. The RCMP, specifically, provides enhanced police services to First Nations communities through Community Tripartite Agreements (CTA), i.e., agreements between the federal and provincial governments, and one or more First Nation communities. - Self administered Aboriginal police services (SA), that range from small stand-alone agencies such as the File Hills First Nations Police Service (under ten officers) to larger regional police services such as the Nishnawbe-Aski Police (NAPS), of which we have comparatively less understanding of their practices and their approaches to policing. - Specialized Aboriginal policing programs delivered by municipal or regional police services, such as the Aboriginal Peacekeeping Unit in Toronto and the Diversity and Aboriginal Policing Section in Vancouver, of which we have almost no understanding of their priorities, practices or inter-relationships with other Aboriginal policing services. Each of these police services is apt to respond to the challenges of crime in a different manner and it is likely that some of the crime reduction strategies developed by these organizations are very effective, although this information has not been consistently disseminated to the policing and academic communities. In respect to crime-reduction strategies, it is possible that responding to the knowledge gaps identified above can be addressed by better understanding best practices in other English-speaking common law nations, such as Australia, New Zealand and the United States as these countries also have large Aboriginal populations and legacies of British colonialism. Section V provides a brief overview of Aboriginal policing models in these nations. Again, we find that many strategies appear promising, but there is a lack of research-based information about whether these approaches are effective crime reduction strategies, and to a lesser extent, how to deliver these services in a cost-effective manner. Aboriginal policing is part of the larger Canadian policing environment - one that is evolving in ways that may have strong implications for police services overall (Murphy, 2007). Currently, Canadian policing is in a period of transition, due in large part to a global process in the adoption of private-sector managerial and organizational values and strategies in the hope of producing greater fiscal accountability, cost efficiency, return on policing investments and value for money (Ruddell & Jones, 2013). Given these larger social and political forces, the next few years will shape the future of Aboriginal policing. In March 2013, the federal government announced that federal funding for the First Nations Policing Program (FNPP) would be extended for the next five years, and this time-frame provides the funding stability for First Nations, Aboriginal stakeholder groups, federal and provincial policymakers and police leaders to chart the course for the future. Addressing the policy-related questions raised in this review of the literature provides these stakeholders a framework that will provide the evidence-based information needed to inform that undertaking. Details: Regina, SK: Collaborative Centre for Justice and Safety, University of Regina, 2014. 147p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 18, 2015 at: http://www.justiceandsafety.ca/rsu_docs/aboriginal-policing-literature-review-092014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Canada URL: http://www.justiceandsafety.ca/rsu_docs/aboriginal-policing-literature-review-092014.pdf Shelf Number: 135697 Keywords: AboriginalsEvidence-Based PracticesIndigenous PeoplesPolice AdministrationPolicingPolicing Minority Groups |
Author: Burke, Cynthia Title: Smart Probation: A Study of the San Diego County Probation Department's Application of Evidence-Based Practices Summary: The passage of Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109), also known as Public Safety Realignment California, shifted the supervision, housing, and rehabilitation of certain offenders (whose most recent conviction was for a nonviolent and non-serious offense) from state prison and parole to local jurisdictions. In response to this monumental change in the criminal justice system, San Diego County created a realignment plan that was structured around Evidence-Based Practices (EBP). In support of this commitment to EBP, the San Diego County Probation Department applied for, and was awarded, a Smart Probation grant from the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance in September 2012 to support continued implementation of evidence-based supervision to ensure fidelity to its EBP-based model. The grant funded a supervisor-level EBP peer coach and mentor to work with supervisors and line staff in the Post Release Offender (PRO) division. The following are the four primary project goals implemented through the Smart grant: 1. Support EBP leadership capacity in the PRO Division management team. 2. Implement a supervision model. 3. Provide access to appropriate intervention services. 4. Collaborate with justice partners to improve the criminal justice system. To assist Probation in measuring its adoption of EBP in the PRO Division, the Criminal Justice Research Division of SANDAG was contracted to evaluate how effectively and to what extent Probation implemented the four project goals. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS - Supervising Probation Officers (SPOs) and Deputy Probation Officers (DPOs) in Probation's PRO Division who participated in focus groups viewed Probation's EBP as the standard operating procedure, but noted that IBIS and EBP training have made it more formalized. - EBP was viewed by SPOs and DPOs as effective for supervising most offenders. Offenders with severe mental health issues or criminogenic traits were the exception. - A review of the COMPAS assessments revealed that almost nine in ten offenders had been assessed. On average, there were fewer than three discrepancies per case and even fewer discrepancies in more recent assessments. - An assessment of how well offender case plans were done indicated that information regarding the offender's greatest needs was included and offenders were generally included in the goal-setting process. - Incentives and sanctions most often included verbal accolades, revocation, and verbal warnings. Sixty percent of PRCS offenders received a flash incarceration, a one to ten day custody sanction for a probation violation. - Average ratings of DPO's use of IBIS during interactions with offenders suggest that POs are implementing these skills with proficiency. - Based on survey results, offenders reported positive feelings regarding the relationship with their DPO. Details: San Diego: SANDAG, 2015. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 3, 2015 at: http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_1951_19203.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_1951_19203.pdf Shelf Number: 134249 Keywords: Community CorrectionsEvidence-Based PracticesOffender SupervisionProbationProbation OfficersProbationersPublic Safety Realignment California |
Author: Rotter, Merrill Title: Reducing Criminal Recidivism for Justice-Involved Persons with Mental Illness: Risk/Needs/Responsivity and Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions Summary: Decreased criminal recidivism, particularly resulting from new crimes with new victims, is the measure most consistently desired by programs, policymakers, and funding agencies for justice-involved individuals with mental illness. This one measure captures both improved client stability and public safety, while providing support for the promised decreased jail-day cost savings required to sustain continued financial resources (Almquist, 2009; Milkman, 2007). Evidence-based practices (EBP) with track records of effectiveness in treating serious mental illness, co-occurring substance abuse, trauma, and motivational challenges have been utilized with some success in forensic populations (CMHS National GAINS Center, n.d.). However, recent reviews of offender-focused and jail diversion programs found that many EBPs, such as Assertive Community Treatment, may achieve symptom reduction but not decrease criminal recidivism (Morrissey, 2007; Case, 2009; Skeem, 2009). In fact, studies indicate that offenders with mental illness share diagnoses and treatment needs similar to those of individuals with mental illness who do not commit crimes. However, with reference to recurrent criminal behavior, offenders with mental illness share the same risk factors for offending as their non-mentally ill counterparts (Epperson, 2011). In this document, we review the leading offender recidivism - targeted intervention paradigm: Risk/Needs/Responsivity (RNR). RNR proposes that to address the community behavior of offenders: the intensity of treatment and supervision should match the "Risk" level for re-offense; the treatment provided should match the individual "Needs" most clearly associated with criminality; and the intervention modalities should match those to which the individual is most "Responsive" (Andrews, 2010). In particular, we focus on criminal thinking, one of the identified "needs," and structured cognitive-behavioral interventions from the worlds of criminal justice and mental health that were created or adapted to specifically target the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors associated with criminal recidivism. Details: Rockville, MD: SAMHSA's GAINS Center for Behavioral Health and Justice Transformation, 2013. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed June 3, 2015 at: http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/cms-assets/documents/141805-776469.cbt-fact-sheet---merrill-rotter.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://gainscenter.samhsa.gov/cms-assets/documents/141805-776469.cbt-fact-sheet---merrill-rotter.pdf Shelf Number: 135866 Keywords: Cognitive-Behavioral TreatmentEvidence-Based PracticesMentally Ill OffendersMentally Ill PersonsRecidivism |
Author: Duran, Le'Ann Title: Integrated Reentry and Employment Strategies: Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Job Readiness Summary: THIS WHITE PAPER is written for policymakers and practitioners engaged in the corrections and workforce development fields who recognize the need for the two systems to collaborate more closely to improve public safety and employment outcomes for people who have been incarcerated or are on probation or parole. It promotes close collaborations with reentry service providers and provides guidance on prioritizing scarce resources to more effectively reduce rates of reincarceration and joblessness. The paper also outlines principles that should drive both supervision and service decisions - decisions that can help ensure that front-line personnel's efforts are having the greatest positive effect. Employment providers are already serving large numbers of individuals released from correctional facilities or who are required to find jobs as conditions of their probation or parole. Yet the corrections, reentry, and workforce development fields have lacked an integrated tool that draws on the best thinking about reducing recidivism and improving job placement and retention to guide correctional supervision and the provision of community-based services. To address this gap, this white paper presents a tool that draws on evidence-based criminal justice practices and promising strategies for connecting hard-to-employ people to work. It calls for program design and practices to be tailored for adults with criminal histories based on their level of risk for future criminal activity. Some people question why limited resources should be focused on employing men and women who have been in prison, jail, or are on probation or parole when unemployment rates remain high across the nation for law-abiding individuals. With mounting research, it is clear there are significant benefits for our communities in working with this population. Successful reintegration into the workforce can make neighborhoods and families safer and more stable. Linking individuals who have been involved with the corrections system to jobs and helping them succeed can reduce the staggering costs to taxpayers for reincarceration and increases contributions to the tax base for community services. If releasees and supervisees are working, their time is being spent in constructive ways and they are then less likely to engage in crime and disorder in their neighborhoods. They also are more likely to develop prosocial relationships when their time is structured with work and they are able to help care and provide for their families. Employment is a point at which the goals of the criminal justice, workforce development, family services, health and human services, and social services systems can converge. With budget cuts to all these systems, resources must be focused on the right individuals (i.e., people who would benefit the most from interventions), using the right strategies that are delivered at the right time. Improved outcomes for individuals returning to their communities, for their families, and for each system's investments can be realized by better coordinating the correctional supervision, treatment, supports, and other services being delivered at that point of intersection to individuals who have been incarcerated or are on probation or parole. This white paper is meant to facilitate discussions across systems by introducing a tool that can help put such a framework for coordination in place. Details: New York: Council of State Governments, Justice Center, 2013. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 9, 2015 at: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CSG-Reentry-and-Employment.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CSG-Reentry-and-Employment.pdf Shelf Number: 130032 Keywords: EmploymentEvidence-Based PracticesEx-Offender EmploymentJobsPrisoner ReentryRecidivismReintegration |
Author: Braithwaite, Helen Title: Impact of the California Parole Supervision and Reintegration Model (CPSRM) on parolee perceptions of supervision Summary: In 2009, the California Division of Adult Parole Operations (DAPO) convened a Parole Reform Task Force (PRTF) to recommend new supervision policies and procedures in light of recent evidence-based research findings and supervision methods being introduced in jurisdictions across the country. The Task Force developed a package of parole reforms called the California Parole Supervision and Reintegration Model (CPSRM). CPSRM represented a significant change to the way that DAPO supervised offenders. Caseloads were reduced from a funding ratio of 70:1 down to 48:1. With fewer parolees to supervise, agents would have more time to get to know the particular needs of parolees and be able to manage these needs more effectively. Agents were given extensive training over a 6-month period in evidence-based practices and the new procedures relating to pre-release planning, case management, quality of supervision, programming, and parolee rewards and incentives. The goal was to shift parole from a 'surveillance' or a 'contact-driven' model of supervision toward an approach that emphasized case management, with parole agents spending more time both understanding the criminogenic risk factors of parolees, and addressing these needs through referrals to programming. Supervision under a CPSRM model was quite different from routine parole supervision. For example, agents conducted an in-depth interview with parolees at the time of their release from prison and arrival into the parole system to gather detailed information about issues such as their relationships with their family and friends, triggers that caused them to get into trouble, their drug and alcohol use, participation in programs, their perceived challenges in reentering the community, and their plans or goals. Parolees collaborated in developing an individualized case plan and were invited to attend a periodic review of this case plan in a Case Conference Review. Parolees worked with their agents to develop monthly goals, specifying the small steps they agreed to work on in the coming month toward a bigger goal (for example, spending 20 hours looking for a job and attending school for 100 hours). These monthly goals were a tool for the parolee to receive the 'dosage' (i.e. number of hours) required to impact their criminogenic risk factors, and were also a mechanism for the parolee to be part of their supervision rather than supervision being something that happened to them. Working towards achieving these goals provided evidence of progress that could be used by the parolee during the discharge consideration process. Agents were trained in the use of Motivational Interviewing techniques to improve the quality of the relationship with the parolee and to recognize the importance of the parolee's willingness to change. Taken together, these and the other policy changes implemented with CPSRM represented a dramatic change in the way that DAPO supervised offenders. CPSRM was introduced at four pilot parole units across the state - one in each of the four parole regions - in August, 2010. Since early 2010, the Center for Evidence-Based Corrections (CEBC) at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) has been involved in evaluating CPSRM implementation. This CEBC process evaluation has used a variety of methods - including surveys, interviews, and a behavioral study - to examine agent perceptions of CPSRM, and change in agent attitudes or behavior brought about by parole reform policies. CEBC has disseminated several reports presenting the findings from these studies. In addition to the process evaluation, CEBC is conducting an outcome evaluation to examine the impact of CPSRM on parolee recidivism. This outcome evaluation will compare the rates of parole violations, arrests, convictions and return to custody of parolees supervised at the four CPSRM pilot sites with (a) a control group of parolees supervised under routine parole supervision at four comparable non-CPSRM parole units, and (b) parolees supervised at the four CPSRM pilot sites prior to the introduction of CPSRM. Details: Irvine, CA: Center for Evidence-Based Corrections, University of California, Irvine, 2012. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2015 at: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/2014/08/Impact-of-the-California-Parole-Supervision-and-Reintegration-Model-CPSRM-on-parolee-perceptions-of-supervision.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/2014/08/Impact-of-the-California-Parole-Supervision-and-Reintegration-Model-CPSRM-on-parolee-perceptions-of-supervision.pdf Shelf Number: 136843 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationEvidence-Based PracticesOffender SupervisionParoleParolees |
Author: McLean, Fiona Title: Factors associated with serious or persistent violent offending: Findings from a rapid evidence assessment Summary: Identification of serially violent individuals by the police could allow forces to be aware of and, where possible develop strategies to manage the risk to the public. This paper presents findings from a Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) designed to explore the evidence base on factors associated with, or predictive of, known serious or persistent violent offending excluding domestic or sexual violence. The REA is based on 53 studies from a systematic search of 7 databases using a strictly applied set of search and assessment criteria and recommended sources by academic experts. The factors identified and discussed in this report have been found by some research studies to be predictive of repeat violent behaviour. The characteristics identified are associated with an increased relative risk of repeat violent offending - that is that offenders with these characteristics are more likely to commit a further offence compared with other offenders. An increased relative risk does not mean that all offenders with that characteristic will go on to commit further offences. Key findings from the REA The range of factors identified by the evidence reviewed as being associated with persistent violent offending is presented in the full report. Those factors identified through studies graded with the highest quality and most likely to be of use to police analysts are listed below. The evidence on factors associated with serial violent offending in women is limited; therefore the factors primarily apply to male offenders: - An offending career that begins before the age of 14 is highly predictive of later violent offending and a longer criminal career (reported in 9 studies of which 4 were graded 1). - Individuals with a long criminal career are more likely to commit violent crimes (reported in 7 studies of which 5 were graded 1). - Individuals with a history of violence are more likely to commit further violent crimes (reported in 10 studies of which 5 were graded 1). There were also several other factors where there is some evidence that suggests it may be associated with violent reoffending but that evidence is not as strong. These may be worth considering when refining the prioritisation of those identified as high risk. These factors include drug use in adolescence (4 studies), gang membership (5 studies) and antisocial behaviour at a young age or anti-social personality traits in adults (4 studies). In addition, there is some limited evidence that previous convictions for certain specific offences such as kidnapping and blackmail are associated with an increased relative risk of committing further serious offences such as homicide and rape (3 studies). A number of 'protective factors' were identified which could be used to filter any high risk population identified. These factors include: marriage, particularly a cohesive or 'good' marriage before the age of 25 (6 studies) and employment (5 studies). The REA also identified literature on many existing violent risk assessment tools that have been developed to try and predict the risk of reoffending, typically in prisons or forensic psychiatric units. Most of the tools identified use a combination of clinical and actuarial measures. Clinical data such as the offender's response to questionnaires and behavioural indicators would not be readily available to the police and so such tools have been excluded from the REA. Where the tools use actuarial data - such as age - that would be available, the factors included in the tools have been examined and found to be largely consistent with those identified separately in the REA. These tools have been discussed within the report. Details: National Policing Improvement Agency, 2012. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 24, 2015 at: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/Research/Documents/REA_violent_reoffending.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/Research/Documents/REA_violent_reoffending.pdf Shelf Number: 136853 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesSexual ViolenceViolenceViolence PreventionViolent CrimeViolent Offenders |
Author: White, Michael D. Title: Challenges in Implementation and Impact: Lessons from the Cincinnati, Joliet, and Lansing Smart Policing Initiatives Summary: Since 2009, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) has provided more than $14.4 million to 35 local, county, and state law enforcement agencies conducting 38 Smart Policing Initiative (SPI) projects. Though many SPI sites have documented significant crime decreases in the targeted areas with sound research methodologies, others have been less successful. The reasons why some SPI sites have struggled are varied and include implementation problems, data analysis issues, and leadership turnover. Other sites have implemented evidence-based strategies and evaluated those strategies with rigorous research methodologies; but in the end, crime reductions were not realized. We consider such initiatives successful because they identify strategies, practices, and lessons that other jurisdictions can learn from, and they are evidence-based because of the strong research designs they employed. This SPI spotlight reviews the experiences of three sites - Cincinnati (OH), Joliet (IL), and Lansing (MI) - that fall into this last category. All three sites were led by police officials and criminal justice scholars who were well-versed in evidence-based practices and researcher/practitioner partnerships. Each site engaged in intensive data analysis to examine the underlying conditions and causes of the targeted crime problem (robbery in Cincinnati, drug dealing in Lansing, and gun violence in Joliet). Each site implemented a comprehensive, collaborative data-driven strategy to address their respective crime problems, from interventions based on the problem analysis triangle in Cincinnati and hot spots in Joliet, to focused deterrence and offender call-ins in Lansing. Each project was evaluated using rigorous quasi-experimental research designs. Despite these ingredients for success, none of the three sites experienced statistically significant crime declines that could be tied to their SPI. This spotlight identifies a number of common challenges to implementation and impact that were experienced by the three sites, including: lapses in continuous, real-time problem analysis; insufficient program dosage; stakeholder limitations; and tension between operational decision-making and research design integrity. In Cincinnati, for example, geographic analysis of the robbery problem led the SPI team to increase the size of the original target area, which necessarily weakened the intensity of the intervention. In Joliet, probation and parole officers were active participants in the SPI, but restrictions on their authority limited the team's ability to conduct compliance checks and to initiate revocation proceedings. In Lansing, the nature of drug dealing shifted from a traditional turf-based model to mobile transactions coordinated through cell phones, which forced the SPI team to alter their interventions "on the fly." These experiences (and others) in Cincinnati, Joliet, and Lansing highlight the importance of devising a strong process evaluation that allows for detailed documentation of implementation processes and challenges, and for a thorough understanding of why a program did or did not produce the intended crime reduction benefits. The Cincinnati, Joliet, and Lansing SPIs also underscore the importance of thinking broadly about program impact. Impact can be measured in terms of knowledge gained, organizational change, and new partnerships - developments that are not easily quantified in terms of statistical significance but represent positive change in a law enforcement agency. Details: Washington, DC: CNA Analysis and Solutions, 2015. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Spotlight Report: Accessed September 25, 2015 at: http://www.smartpolicinginitiative.com/sites/all/files/SPI%20Challenges%20Spotlight%202015%20Final.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.smartpolicinginitiative.com/sites/all/files/SPI%20Challenges%20Spotlight%202015%20Final.pdf Shelf Number: 136876 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesFocused Deterrence Hot SpotsPolice ReformSmart Policing Initiative |
Author: Higgins, Andy Title: Safe as Houses? Crime an Changing Tenure Patterns Summary: The Police Foundation's Police Effectiveness in a Changing World project seeks to identify how the police, working with other agencies and the public, can effectively tackle crime at a time when both the context in which it occurs, and the resources available to address it, are changing rapidly. Working in Luton and Slough - two English towns that have felt the local impacts of global change acutely - the project aims to develop locally-tailored, evidence-based solutions to persistent crime problems, which are responsive to the local effects of socio-economic, technological and geo-political change. In doing so, it seeks to better understand the impacts these changes are having on public services tasked with tackling crime and associated social problems. The project has taken a problem-oriented approach. A preliminary scanning phase focused attention on two challenging neighbourhoods in each town and on the most relevant crime problems - violence in Slough and burglary in Luton - before a multi-method research and analysis phase sought out new insights and perspectives on these local issues, to inform new ways of responding to them. In both towns, analysis suggested that housing factors, particularly the prevalence of lower quality, privately rented accommodation, were relevant to understanding the contemporary drivers of the crime problems being faced. In Luton, higher rates of private renting were found to be associated with local area burglary rates. Although the predictive value is modest, over the longer term, the amount of private renting accounted for more of the variance in neighbourhood burglary rates than deprivation, employment, social renting or any of the other socio-demographic Census variables available for analysis. As well as deprivation and overcrowding, neighbourhood burglary rates were also found to correlate with population growth, the proportion of residents born outside of the UK and (negatively) with the proportion of households comprising families. These findings led us to consider whether there were deficits of home security at the lower-cost end of the local private rented sector and whether these transient areas with 'churning' tenant populations might lack the community resources to resist criminal predation. In Slough, analysis drew attention to the sizable proportion of violent crime that, although not domestic violence, occurred within residential dwellings. In one neighbourhood this was found to be associated, in part, with the proliferation of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs), leading to the hypothesis that the particular stresses and insecurities of living in low-quality, crowded accommodation, with shared facilities and little or no choice of co-habitees, may increase the risk that incidents of violent crime occur. These considerations prompted a number of questions as the project turned to designing new crime reduction initiatives; how could Luton's private landlords be encouraged to invest in proper home security for their properties? Could anything be done to persuade landlords to value longer-term tenancies so that tenants stay in an area for longer and communities might establish firmer roots and become more resilient? How could 'tinder-box' conditions inside Slough's HMOs be defused and landlords encouraged to take more interest in - and responsibility for - what goes on within their properties and the local neighbourhood? The lack of encouraging answers, and the paucity of options available to local community safety partners faced with the task of mitigating the harmful by-products of some elements of the private rented sector (PRS), provide the 'jumping off point' for this paper. Details: London: The Police Foundation, 2015. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Police Effectiveness in a Changing World Project: Accessed September 30, 2015 at: http://www.police-foundation.org.uk/uploads/holding/projects/housing_and_crime_final.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.police-foundation.org.uk/uploads/holding/projects/housing_and_crime_final.pdf Shelf Number: 136896 Keywords: Crime PreventionEvidence-Based PracticesHousing and CrimeNeighborhoods and CrimePolice EffectivenessProblem-Oriented PolicingSocioeconomic Conditions and Crime |
Author: Scott, Elizabeth S. Title: The Supreme Court and the Transformation of Juvenile Sentencing Summary: In the past decade, the Supreme Court has transformed the constitutional landscape of juvenile crime regulation. In three strongly worded opinions, the Court held that imposing harsh criminal sentences on juvenile offenders violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. In combination, these cases create a special status for juveniles under Eighth Amendment doctrine as a category of offenders whose culpability is mitigated by their youth and immaturity, even for the most serious offenses. The Court also emphasized that juveniles are more likely to reform than adult offenders, and that most should be given a meaningful opportunity to demonstrate that they have done so. In short, because of young offenders developmental immaturity, harsh sentences that may be suitable for adult criminals are seldom appropriate for juveniles. These opinions announce a powerful constitutional principlethat children are different for purposes of criminal punishment. In articulating this principle, the Supreme Court has also provided general guidance to courts sentencing juveniles and to lawmakers charged with implementing the rulings. At the same time, the Court did not directly address the specifics of implementation and it left many questions unanswered about the implications of the opinions for juvenile sentencing regulation. In the years since Roper, Graham, and Miller, courts and legislatures have struggled to interpret the opinions and to create procedures and policies that are compatible with constitutional principles and doctrine. This report addresses the key issues facing courts and legislatures under this new constitutional regime, and provides guidance based on the Supreme Courts Eighth Amendment analysis and on the principles the Court has articulated. Part I begins with the constitutional sentencing framework, grounded in the opinions and embodying the key elements of the Courts analysis. It then explains the underlying developmental knowledge that supports the constitutional framework and the children are different principle. Part II Part II examines how courts and legislatures have responded to the Eighth Amendment opinions, through reforms of state laws regulating juvenile life without parole (JLWOP). While some state lawmakers appear to ignore or subvert the Supreme Courts holdings, others have responded in ways that clearly embody the principles underlying Miller and Graham. Part III translates Millers directive that specific factors be considered in making individualized sentencing decisions. The report's aim is to guide courts and clinicians in structuring sentencing hearings that incorporate sound developmental research and other evidence supporting or negating mitigation, without going beyond the limits of science. Part IV explores the broader implications of the Supreme Courts developmental framework for juvenile sentencing and parole, implications that have already sparked law reforms beyond the relatively narrow holdings of Graham and Miller. Finally, the paper ends on a cautionary note, pointing to evidence that constitutionally sound, developmentally-based policies may be vulnerable to political and other pressures. Aside from mandates in the holdings themselves, reforms can be dismantled or discounted if conditions change. Measures to sustain the current trend in law reform are discussed. Details: New York: Columbia University, 2015. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 5, 2015 at: http://modelsforchange.net/publications/778?utm_source=%2ftransformation&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=redirect Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://modelsforchange.net/publications/778?utm_source=%2ftransformation&utm_medium=web&utm_campaign=redirect Shelf Number: 136947 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile OffendersJuvenile Sentencing |
Author: Sherman, Lawrence W. Title: Developing and Evaluating Citizen Security Programs in Latin America. A Protocol for Evidence-Based Crime Prevention Summary: This protocol is designed mainly for people working to reduce crime and improve justice in Latin America, but it discusses principles that can be used anywhere in the world. Those principles can be summarized as evidence-based crime prevention, a process by which good evidence on the facts of crime and its prevention is at the heart of theories and programs for promoting citizen security. "Evidence" in this sense is broadly defined as systematic factual observations of all kinds, not just as the forensic details of a criminal case. Evidence is the data developed by scientific methods to observe and predict any kind of truth, including facts about health, education, crime, and justice. A few key principles of evidence-based crime prevention are the following: crime must be measured reliably and precisely by well-audited systems; crime should be classified in whatever way supports crime prevention; and crime should be analyzed in multiple units or categories, including offenders, criminal networks, victims, micro-places (hot spots), communities, times, days of the week, and other categories Details: Inter-American Development Bank, 2012. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: IDB-TN-436: Accessed October 5, 2015 at: https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/5504/Developing%20and%20Evaluating%20Citizen%20Security%20Programs%20in%20Latin%20America.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2012 Country: Latin America URL: https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/5504/Developing%20and%20Evaluating%20Citizen%20Security%20Programs%20in%20Latin%20America.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 136957 Keywords: Citizen Security Crime Prevention Evidence-Based Practices |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) Title: Sex Offender Management Assessment and Planning Initiative Summary: Sex offenders have received considerable attention in recent years from both policymakers and the public. This is due to the profound impact that sex crimes have on victims and the larger community and also due to the increased identification and apprehension of sex offenders. Perpetrators of sex crimes have come to be viewed by policymakers, practitioners, and the public as a unique group of offenders in need of special management practices. As a result, a number of laws and policies focusing specifically on sex offenders have been implemented across the country in recent years, often with extensive public support. There also has been a growing recognition in the criminal justice community that crime control and prevention strategies-including those targeting sex offenders-are far more likely to be effective and cost-beneficial when they are based on scientific evidence about what works. Indeed, crime control policy and program development processes are increasingly being informed by scientific evidence; in addition, many practices in policing, corrections, and other areas have been and continue to be shaped by evidence generated through research. Incentives and mandates for evidence-based programming are now frequently used by funding sources, and the demand for trustworthy, research-generated evidence about what works is rapidly increasing (Przybylski, 2012). Recognizing the important role scientific evidence plays in the development and implementation of effective policies and practices, including those focused on sex offenders, the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) and OJP's Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART Office) began to identify and disseminate information from state-of-the-art research on central and emerging issues in sex offender management to inform policy and practice in the field. Since 1996, OJP has worked to promote advances in the field of sex offender management. In the 1980s and 1990s, several high-profile sex crimes led to the enactment of state and federal legislation directed toward tracking and controlling sex offenders. These laws were passed without the benefit of strong research to support particular approaches to managing sex offenders. In response to this flurry of legislative activity and heightened public concern, OJP convened a national summit in 1996 that brought together nearly 200 practitioners, academic researchers, and other experts to discuss the most effective management strategies for this offender population. During the summit, OJP received recommendations about the needs of the field regarding sex offender management training and technical assistance. In response to these recommendations, OJP initiated research projects on sex offender management, developed sex offender-specific grant programs, and supported the Center for Sex Offender Management's training and technical assistance to the field. In the ensuing years, OJP sponsored more than 100 research projects, publications, and training curricula related to sexual assault and sex offender management. Grant programs provided funds to approximately 200 state, local, and tribal jurisdictions to enhance and improve the management of sex offenders in their communities. These jurisdictions have created standards for the treatment and supervision of adults and juveniles, employed sex offender-specific assessment and truth-verification tools, enhanced victim advocacy and support, developed specialized sex offender courts, and improved information sharing and collaboration within and across disciplines and jurisdictions. In 2006, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (AWA) authorized the establishment of the SMART Office-the first federal office devoted solely to sex offender management-related activities. The office is responsible for helping to implement the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (Title I of AWA) and also for providing assistance to criminal justice professionals and the public about the entire spectrum of sex offender management activities needed to ensure public safety. Building on OJP's efforts, the SMART Office began work in 2011 on the Sex Offender Management Assessment and Planning Initiative (SOMAPI), a project designed to assess the state of research and practice in sex offender management and to inform OJP's research and grant-making efforts in this area. As part of this effort, the office gathered information about research and practice in the field and enlisted practitioners to (1) provide details about sex offender management programs and practices that are promising or effective, and (2) identify the needs of the various disciplines involved. The SMART Office contracted with the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA) and a team of subject-matter experts to review the scholarly literature on sexual offending and sex offender management and to develop annotated summaries of the research for dissemination to the field. To gain insight into emerging issues, promising practices, and pressing needs in the sex offender management field at the state and local levels, NCJA conducted an informal national inventory of sex offender management professionals in 2011. Finally, the SMART Office hosted the Sex Offender Management Research and Practice Discussion Forum (SOMAPI forum) in February 2012. At this event, national experts-both researchers and practitioners-gathered in the District of Columbia to discuss the research summaries and inventory results in order to further refine what is known about the current state of sex offender management, gaps in research and practice, and the needs of the different disciplines involved in this work. Recommendations from the SOMAPI forum informed this report and will help guide OJP's sex offender management research, policy, and grant-making efforts in the future and provide direction to the field on how best to protect the public from sexual violence. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2014. 189p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 8, 2015 at: http://www.smart.gov/SOMAPI/pdfs/SOMAPI_Full%20Report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.smart.gov/SOMAPI/pdfs/SOMAPI_Full%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 136967 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Sex OffendersSex OffendersSexual ViolenceYouthful Sex Offenders |
Author: World Health Organization Title: Preventing Youth Violence: An Overview of the Evidence Summary: Each year an estimated 200 000 young people aged 10-29 years are murdered, making homicide the fourth leading cause of death for this age group. Millions more sustain violence-related injuries that require emergency medical treatment, and countless others go on to develop mental health problems and adopt high-risk behaviours such as smoking and alcohol and drug abuse as a result the violence they experience. Produced with the financial support of the Jacobs Foundation, German International Cooperation, and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Preventing youth violence: an overview of the evidence aims to help policy-makers and planners - particularly in settings with limited human and financial resources - to address youth violence using an evidence-informed approach. Twenty-one strategies to prevent youth violence are reviewed, including programmes relating to parenting, early childhood development, and social skills development, as well as policies related to the harmful use of alcohol, problem oriented policing, and urban upgrading. Details: Geneva, SWIT: World Health Organization, 2015. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 19, 2015 at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/181008/1/9789241509251_eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1 Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/181008/1/9789241509251_eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1 Shelf Number: 137011 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesFamily InterventionsJuvenile DelinquencyViolenceViolence PreventionViolent CrimeYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Curtis, Irene Title: The use of targets in policing Summary: Policing needs to change to respond to the challenges of the future, including the changing nature of crime, the increasing range and complexity of demand, continued financial constraints and the rapid pace of technological change. As forces adapt to changing circumstances, performance frameworks will also need to adapt to help the police make decisions to meet these challenges - and to understand whether or not they are succeeding. Numeric targets have seen extensive use in policing for many years, as part of both local and national police performance frameworks. The Public Service Agreements (PSAs) of the 1990s in particular created a slew of national targets in policing and across the public sector more widely. Since then, problems associated with targets such as 'gaming' and 'perverse incentives' have been well documented and targets have gradually been dropped by many forces. The last of the national targets in policing (for increasing public confidence and targets for response times, included in the policing pledge) were removed by the Home Secretary in 2010. This review aims in the first instance to understand the extent to which targets - and their associated behaviours - persist and has involved desk research, interviews, force visits and a survey of police officers and staff. Over 6,000 people completed the survey and, while methodological limitations mean the results needs to be interpreted with caution, the fact that so many officers and staff took the time to respond is telling of how strongly many feel about this subject. Details: London: Home Office, 2015. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/466058/Review_Targets_2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/466058/Review_Targets_2015.pdf Shelf Number: 137802 Keywords: Crime StatisticsDecision-MakingEvidence-Based PracticesPolice LegitimacyPolice PerformancePolice Problem-SolvingPolice ReformPolicing |
Author: Hunter, Gillian Title: An Evaluation of the 'What Works Centre for Crime Reduction': Year 1: Baseline Summary: This evaluation forms part of a three-year programme of work funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), in collaboration with the College of Policing, as part of the What Works Centre for Crime Reduction (WWCCR). This report covers the first year of the evaluation, which sought to establish a baseline from which to measure change over the three-year programme in the understanding, use and application of research evidence in crime reduction. The emphasis throughout is on understanding not simply what works, but how it works. Aims of the evaluation The overall aims of the evaluation are to: - Assess the impact of the WWCCR which is hosted by the College of Policing to determine whether it has appropriately engaged key stakeholders, produced tools and guidance that stakeholders find clear and easy to use, and improved stakeholder understanding and application of research evidence to inform practice and decision-making; - Chart outputs, modes of dissemination and user reactions about the WWCCR over the course of the evaluation; - Identify changes over time in the use of research evidence by key stakeholders, especially in strategic decision-making and resource allocation; - Use an action research model to provide feedback to the College of Policing and the academic partners over the course of the project. Details: London: Institute for Criminal Policy Research; University of London, 2015. 94p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 2, 2016 at: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/About/Documents/WWCEvaluation_Year_1.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://whatworks.college.police.uk/About/Documents/WWCEvaluation_Year_1.pdf Shelf Number: 138027 Keywords: Crime PreventionEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Jaitman, Laura Title: Closing Knowledge Gaps: Toward Evidence-Based Crime Prevention Policies in Latin America and the Caribbean Summary: This publication identifies the main areas of research that the Citizen Security and Justice Cluster of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) will undertake in the next four years. The Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region is the most violent region in the world. Crime and violence are the population's key concerns. Crime, however, has been a consistently understudied field in the region. While most of the knowledge originates from the United Kingdom and the United States, the issues that arise in LAC compels the research community to produce evidence on the cause of the high prevalence of crime in the region and on what models are effective to reduce and prevent crime. For more than 15 years, the IDB has been a major partner to the region's countries, providing technical and financial support for crime prevention interventions. The expertise of the IDB and its presence in most LAC countries are comparative advantages to advocate a comprehensive research agenda. Details: Inter-American Development Bank, 2015. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Technical Note No. IDB-TN-848: Accessed March 22, 2016 at: https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/7240/ICS_TN_Closing_Knowledge_Gaps.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2015 Country: Latin America URL: https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/7240/ICS_TN_Closing_Knowledge_Gaps.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 138384 Keywords: Citizen SecurityCrime PreventionEvidence-Based PracticesPublic Security |
Author: Thomas, Douglas Title: Evidence-Based Policies, Programs, and Practices in Juvenile Justice: Three States Achieving High Standards Through State Support Centers Summary: Evidence-Based Policies, Programs and Practices in Juvenile Justice provides case studies of three jurisdictions achieving high standards through state support centers. The jurisdictions were selected based on a 50-state survey of efforts to support evidence-based policies, programs and practices (EBPs) and selects examples that reflect an evolution toward greater sophistication and support for EBPs Details: Pittsburgh: National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2016. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Case Study: Accessed April 16, 2016 at: http://www.ncjj.org/pdf/EBP%20Report/EBPinJJ%20Final%20032016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncjj.org/pdf/EBP%20Report/EBPinJJ%20Final%20032016.pdf Shelf Number: 138688 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice Policies Juvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Campbell, Liz Title: Looking Back, Moving Forward: The History and Current State of Evidence-based Intervention in Pennsylvania Summary: Nearly two decades ago, the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) began a deliberate effort to bring effective violence prevention programs to communities across the Commonwealth. Through a variety of efforts Pennsylvania has created an infrastructure intended to support the adoption, implementation, and success of select evidence-based programs where they are needed. This infrastructure includes a cross-system Resource Center for Evidence-based Prevention and Intervention Programs and Practices. In 2008, with funding from PCCD and the Office of Children, Youth, and Families (OCYF), the Penn State EPISCenter was established, with the primary goal of advancing high quality implementation, impact assessment, and sustainability of a menu of evidence-based programs identified by the Resource Center, in order to maximize the positive impact for youth, families, and communities. Evidence-based intervention programs (EBIs) play an important role in the state's initiative to reduce dependency, delinquency, youth violence, and substance abuse. Programs such as Functional Family Therapy (FFT), Multisystemic Therapy (MST), and Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) provide effective intervention for youth who exhibit behaviors bringing them in contact with the juvenile justice and child welfare systems. In FY 2011/2012, a total of 3,650 Pennsylvania youth were served by EBIs. The vast majority of these youth were referred by the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, and 60% were at imminent risk of placement, according to the providers who served them. With the support of EBIs, 88% of these youth remained in their communities and 87% had no new offenses at the time of discharge. It is estimated that the state saw an immediate savings of over $16 million related to diversion from placement across the three programs and will experience an economic benefit of $71.4 million resulting from crime reduction due to the use of these programs. While Pennsylvania has seen a strong return on its investment in EBIs, providers report immediate threats to sustainability that are resulting in significant financial losses for many programs. If left unaddressed, the inevitable result will be program closures and fewer evidence-based options for serving high-risk Pennsylvania youth. Current challenges include underutilization of services, delays in the start of services, administrative requirements that draw from providers' limited resources, and difficulty accessing adequate funding to cover all aspects of the service. These challenges are interrelated in complex ways and would be most effectively addressed through collaboration between state leaders, counties, and providers to identify creative and systemic solutions. Policies and regulations that provide a comprehensive approach to supporting the sustainability of EBIs statewide are needed. Details: State College, PA: EPIS Center, Pennsylvania State University, 2012. 31p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 25, 2016 at: http://www.episcenter.psu.edu/sites/default/files/resources/EBIs%20in%20PA%20-%20Looking%20Back%20Moving%20Forward.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.episcenter.psu.edu/sites/default/files/resources/EBIs%20in%20PA%20-%20Looking%20Back%20Moving%20Forward.pdf Shelf Number: 129796 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Offender TreatmentJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Engel, Robin S. Title: Cincinnati Police Department 15-Minute Hotspot Policing Experiment Summary: Hotspot policing is an intensified, intermittent patrol in specified crime clusters. This approach is not a constant, security guard-style presence, but rather approximates a crackdown-backoff approach where police are present at a hotspot for an intermittent yet brief period of time; typically fifteen minutes every two hours (see Koper, 1995 for more detail). Importantly, a sizable body of experimental research on hotspots policing led the National Research Council (NRC) Committee to Review Research on Police Policy and Practices (2004, p. 250) to conclude that studies of "focused police resources on crime hotspots provided the strongest collective evidence of police effectiveness that is now available." In an effort to promote evidence based practices to address specific types of crime problems, the Cincinnati Police Department (CPD) partnered with researchers from the Institute of Crime Sciences (ICS) at the University of Cincinnati. The CPD has been using crime analysis for deployment purposes to address serious, violent, and persistent street crimes since 2007. The purpose of the CPD's 15-Minute Hotspot Patrol Experiment was to further reduce the likelihood of victimization associated in high-risk areas throughout the city. The CPD was interested in implementing a hotspot policing experiment as a way to police more efficiently and to potentially build upon data-driven policing approaches already being used in the department (e.g., Statistical and Tactical Analytic Review for Solutions (STARS) is an oversight mechanism used to enhance strategic deployment for crime reduction). Of particular interest to CPD administrators was the ability to determine whether different types of policing practices within hotspot locations could lead to discernible differences in crime incidents. To identify Cincinnati's crime hotspots, Uniform Crime Report (UCR) Part I crime data collected by the CPD, ranging from November 2010 - November 2012 (N=48,568) were geocoded in ArcGIS and merged with Cincinnati street segments (N=13,550). This data merger provided information regarding how many serious crimes were committed on individual street segments within the city. Recent studies have indicated that it is important to focus on crime trends at micro-units of analysis due to street-to-street variability in crime patterns (Groff, Weisburd, & Yang, 2010). As a result, the most recent hotspot experiments focus police efforts at these micro-places, including individual street segments, to address patterns in crime variability by place and focus police resources more efficiently (Telep et al., 2012). To be consistent with these most recent research developments, the Cincinnati strategy focused police attention at specific street segments. Given the CPD's focus on reducing violence, a weighting system was designed where violent crimes were weighted proportionally more than property crimes based on their level of seriousness. Using this weighting system, crime counts for each street segment were calculated. When determining whether a street segment was considered "hot," both persistent and emerging crime trends were identified. A persistent hotspot was one identified based on reported crimes over the past three years, while an emerging hotspot was one identified based only on reported crimes over the last 12 months (Jan 1 - Dec 31, 2012). After determining hot street segments based on the process above, CPD District Commanders were consulted to verify if the selected street segments were appropriate hotspots based on their direct experiences. Ultimately, 54 individual street segments were identified for inclusion in the experiment. Each identified hot street segment was then individually paired with another hot street segment (with a similar amount and type of crime), creating 27 matched hotspot pairs. These 27 matched hotspot pairs were then randomly assigned to either treatment or control conditions. Note, that a street was considered a "treated street segment" if it received additional patrols. A "non-treated street segment" was a street that was matched to a treated street segment but did not receive additional patrols. Those assigned to treatment were further randomly assigned to one of three types of treatments: 1) stationary - sit in parked patrol car, 2) stationary with lights - sit in parked patrol car with emergency lights activated, or 3) proactive - park car and walk. Each crime hotspot selected for treatment received an additional "dose" of directed patrol seven times per day. Specifically, these treatment conditions were applied on the same streets for 15 minutes every two hours, during the hours of 12:00 pm - 2:00 am for a 5-month period. The matched control street segments were patrolled as they normally would be, absent the experiment. In the most general terms, we determine the impact of the additional patrols in three ways. Analysis 1 compares the treated street segments directly to their non-treated matched street segments during the intervention period (Feb 1- Jun 30, 2013). Analysis 2 compares the crimes that occurred on the treated street segments during the intervention period to the average number of crimes occurring during the seasonal pre-intervention period on those same treated street segments. Then the crimes that occurred on the non-treated street segments during the intervention period are compared to the number of crimes on those same non-treated street segments during the seasonal pre-intervention period. These differences are ultimately compared to one another to determine an overall effect. Analysis 3 compares the differences within the treated street segments by the type of treatment: stationary, lights, or foot. Details: Cincinnati: Institute of Crime Science, University of Cincinnati, 2014. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 11, 2016 at: https://ext.dps.state.oh.us/OCCS/Pages/Public/Reports/ICS_CPD%2015%20Minute%20Hotspot%20Policing%20Experiment_FINAL.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://ext.dps.state.oh.us/OCCS/Pages/Public/Reports/ICS_CPD%2015%20Minute%20Hotspot%20Policing%20Experiment_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 139391 Keywords: Crime AnalysisCrime ClustersEvidence-Based PracticesHotspot PolicingPolice Patrol |
Author: McGarrell, Edmund F. Title: Smart Policing and the Michigan State Police: Final Report Summary: Description of the Project: The Michigan State Police (MSP) has made a commitment to the adoption of data-driven processes, evidence-based practice (EBP), and the use of strategic planning and metrics, in order to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of service delivery to the citizens of the state. To facilitate the adoption of these principles and practices, MSP applied for and was awarded a Smart Policing Initiative (SPI) grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. MSP used this grant to engage in a systematic planning process, to support implementation of various practices consistent with SPI principles, and to assess progress of the organizational change process. Summary of Outcomes: This report documents extensive activities that have been undertaken in planning and implementation of data-driven processes. The key findings are that initial planning led to a new MSP Strategic Plan that clearly endorsed the principles of data-driven processes, EBP, and metrics; that significant training has been conducted to facilitate the adoption of these principles and practices; that new technology systems have been developed and are being utilized to support this organizational change; and that evidence of data-driven processes exists in numerous divisions and units throughout MSP. Lessons Learned: Consistent with prior research on policing and public bureaucracies generally, broad organizational change is difficult and requires the type of systematic and multiple level change process embarked upon by MSP. Leadership's consistent and firm commitment to the goals, principles, and processes at the core of the organizational change, as is apparent in this effort by MSP, is critical to sustaining the change process. Having said this, leadership commitment is essential but not sufficient. Training at all levels of the organization is essential to develop commitment to these new goals, principles, and processes and to provide the knowledge and skills to carry out these new processes throughout the organization. Similarly, providing the necessary resources, in this case a new sophisticated information system as well as an intelligence center, is critical for organizational change. The findings of this research provide clear evidence of these critical change components: leadership commitment; training; and technological resource development. The organizational change process is ongoing. The clearest evidence of change is at the executive and middle-management levels and throughout various divisions and units across the organization. There is also evidence of change at the line level of trooper. However, the line-level training occurred at the end of this research project without adequate time to accurately measure the actual impact on day-to-day line-level operations. Implications: Significant organizational change takes time. MSP's processes that included extensive planning- a new strategic plan; widespread training; and support resources (technology and intelligence center); provide a model for necessary ingredients of major organizational change. This type of organizational change process is ongoing and will need continual commitment and training. Sustaining the research partnership to provide ongoing assessment of change and feedback could support MSP's internal metrics and provide ongoing measures of the transformation to data-driven processes, EBP, and the use of metrics of effectiveness and efficiency in service delivery. Details: East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, 2015. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 26, 2016 at: http://cj.msu.edu/assets/SPI-Final-Report_MSP_Dec2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://cj.msu.edu/assets/SPI-Final-Report_MSP_Dec2015.pdf Shelf Number: 140050 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesPolice Education and TrainingPolice ReformProblem Oriented PolicingSmart Policing |
Author: Washington State Center for Court Research Title: Aggression Replacement Training in a Probation Setting: Outcomes for Youths Starting Treatment January 2010 - September 2012 Summary: In 2004 the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) and Robert Barnoski published an evaluation of several therapeutic programs for juveniles. This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the Community Juvenile Accountability Act (CJAA) passed by the Washington State Legislature in 1997. The central objective of the CJAA was to promote effective approaches to reducing law violating behavior among Washington youth probation supervision and establish which juvenile justice programs demonstrated reductions in recidivism on a cost-effective basis and could earn the label "research-based" or "evidence-based". This process, established by the CJAA, results in the list of evidence-based programs (EBPs), which is updated as new evidence becomes available. Details: Olympia, WA: The Center, 2016. 13p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 22, 2016 at: https://www.courts.wa.gov/wsccr/docs/ART_Outcomes_2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.courts.wa.gov/wsccr/docs/ART_Outcomes_2016.pdf Shelf Number: 146055 Keywords: Aggression Replacement TrainingEvidence-Based PracticesJuvenile OffendersJuvenile ProbationTreatment Programs |
Author: Lum, Cynthia Title: An Evidence-Assessment of the Recommendations of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing — Implementation and Research Priorities. Summary: The Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing is one of the most significant documents for law enforcement in modern history. The Task Force was charged by President Obama in 20142 to "examine ways of fostering strong, collaborative relationships between local law enforcement and the communities they protect and to make recommendations to the President on the ways policing practices can promote effective crime reduction while building public trust". Within six pillars—building trust and legitimacy, policy and oversight, technology and social media, community policing and crime reduction, training and education, and officer wellness and safety—the Task Force presented 156 recommendations and action items to law enforcement agencies and the federal government with the goal of strengthening democratic policing in a complex and diverse society. Of these 156 recommendations, approximately 63 were directed toward federal agency implementation, while 87 were relevant for state and local law enforcement agencies. Another six recommendations and action items were relevant to both the federal government and to state and local agencies. Where should law enforcement agencies begin in implementing these recommendations? Which recommendations should be prioritized for action, for policy implementation, or for more research? With a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Institute for Community-Police Relations of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)3 has collaborated with researchers from George Mason University’s (GMU) Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy4 to create an evidence-based Blueprint for 21st Century Policing. The research team was charged with reviewing existing research knowledge about those Task Force recommendations relevant to state and local law enforcement, highlighting promising efforts based on research knowledge, and identifying issues that need more research and testing. Including research in the conversation about law enforcement policy and practice—an idea known as evidence-based policing—has become an important value of law enforcement. Evidence-based policing is based on the idea that research knowledge is an essential part of police decision-making and can provide expertise and an objective perspective for a complex profession. Toward those ends, the goal of this assessment of the research knowledge behind the Task Force recommendations is to provide information about what we know from research about those recommendations and what more needs to be learned through police-research partnerships to advance them. Details: Fairfax, VA: Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, George Mason University. Alexandria, VA: International Association of Chiefs of Police, 2016. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 10, 2016 at: http://cebcp.org/wp-content/evidence-based-policing/IACP-GMU-Evidence-Assessment-Task-Force-FINAL.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://cebcp.org/wp-content/evidence-based-policing/IACP-GMU-Evidence-Assessment-Task-Force-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 141088 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesPolice Legitimacy Police Reform Police-Citizen Interactions Police-Community RelationsPolicing |
Author: Carneiro, Roberto, ed. Title: Youth, Offense and Well-Being. Can Science Enlighten Policy? Summary: Contemporary societies are confronted with numerous difficult decisions, and complex choices, concerning the plethora of social services expected by their taxpayers. When it comes to Young Offenders however, rather than rendering a rehabilitative service to this minority group of citizens, the trend in most western countries is to treat them punitively. This policy preference goes very much in line with a late modernity tendency for all offenders, regardless of age, gender, social condition or ethnic group to be held accountable for their acts. An increased accountability as an integral part of the enhanced responsibility inherent to the fundamental duties and obligations of citizenship is laudable or is beyond criticism. However, in the majority of our societies, we are speaking of an age group 12-16, which is over-represented in terms of high-risk criminogenic youths: ethnic minorities, poverty stricken households, single parent and/or dysfunctional families, youth gangs proximity, substance abuse practices, and early school dropouts. In other words, we are speaking of heavily victimised – socially handicapped – segments of our younger population, a reality that opposes the oversimplified picture of early criminals with reproachable behaviours, one that is as we see in the cliché portrait often depicted in the popular media. As with any other human being, a rehabilitation programme guided toward young offenders, especially when condemned into custodial internship, requires a caring environment to be effective. The bricolage involved in the delicate reconstruction of a deeply wounded personality demands the achievement of sustainable levels of well-being; achieving this minimum level of well-being is a sine qua non precondition that lies at the heart of the re-acquisition of self-esteem, self-control, and self-confidence thresholds, which are enablers of a new and fresh start. Indeed,unless a minimum state of well-being, both exogenous and endogenous, can be attained, it is impossible for such a young person to overcome a feeling both of personal frustration and social exclusion. Moreover, a negative sense of self-worth is a critical barrier to the restoration of engines of right choices, namely those concerning the formation of a free and responsible will, in order to be able to undertake a regenerative route: nurturing a new dream and forging a constructive purpose in life. This is the business of this book: to elicit evidence from emerging research and new knowledge, which is most relevant for both policy and decision making, on the apparently contradictory trilogy – and research question – that forms our point of departure, Offense, (Re)Integration and Well-Being. It is our firm belief, having researched over years the difficult dialogue between research and policy, that a new era is now in the making, to which this book bears witness. Never before, has so much rhetoric been assigned to evidence-based policies. We see this banner equally heralded by international organisations, schools of public policy and public management gurus, whose voices have nurtured an increasing awareness toward the urgency of building robust bridges between these two worlds: the universe of researchers and that of politicians/policy makers/administrators of public goods. Hence, the context seems favourable for producing a flagship publication that aims at collecting the mainstream state of the art on the subject under consideration: Youth, Offense, and Well-Being: Can Science Enlighten Policy? Details: Lisbon: CENTRO DE ESTUDOS DOS POVOS E CULTURAS DE EXPRESSÃO PORTUGUESA, 2015. 460p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 25, 2017 at: http://www.fch.lisboa.ucp.pt/resources/Documentos/CEPCEP/Youth_VERSAO%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://www.fch.lisboa.ucp.pt/resources/Documentos/CEPCEP/Youth_VERSAO%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 140669 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Offenders Self-Esteem Young Adult Offenders Youthful Offenders |
Author: Police Foundation Title: Reducing Violent Crime in American Cities: An Opportunity to Lead. Summary: On the national level, crime remains historically low. However, this national aggregate paints a deceiving picture of crime in many major cities. Individual cities experienced grim spikes in violent crime from 2014 to 2015 and through 2016 as well. As such, defining violent crime levels based solely on the national aggregates and distributing federal resources accordingly does not address local realities. The national statistics do not depict the suffering endured by families and individuals living in communities plagued by violence, nor do they depict the frustration felt by local law enforcement leaders who often are seen as responsible officials in their communities. Unfortunately for these leaders and the communities they serve, the federal support actually received to help combat violent crime is often calculated based on national statistics and the perspective of decision-makers in Washington, D.C. At the federal level, law enforcement agencies are tasked with a variety of missions and often cannot or do not prioritize localized violent crime over enforcing other laws and addressing other priorities. The mixture of varied prioritization, flat or reduced funding, traditional approaches, and limited authorities stifles an effective federal response despite the best intentions, hard work, and bravery of federal special agents, investigators, professional staff, and their agencies. Chapter 1 of this report provides a contextual overview and supporting data on the spike in localized violent crime in major cities, a review of the major drivers of crime, and an assertion that federal support is critical. Because collection and aggregation of crime data is disparate in police departments across the country, the extent of the increase in violent crime is difficult to specify. However, one important indicator is that the 2015 Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) data1 show an increase in all violent crime types from 2014 to 2015. In addition, a survey of major city police chiefs ranked gang violence (87.8%), drug-related disputes (79.6%), and access to illegal firearms (71.4%) as the top drivers of violent crime. The chapter asserts that despite the generally low levels of crime throughout the nation, the federal government must continue to prioritize violent crime and public safety concerns and focus its attention on local public safety crises, as a number of jurisdictions across the country live in a constant state of fear. What is required from federal agencies, is leadership in propelling an agenda in which violent crime is both a budgetary and policy priority and in addressing problems with evidence-based solutions. Chapter 2 reviews broad federal law enforcement priorities, roles, resources, and accountability in the context of the nation’s fight against violent crime. A Police Foundation study found that while local law enforcement receives federal resources, many of these resources are allocated according to factors other than what is affecting local communities. For example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) characterizes violent crime as its eighth priority, well behind its number one priority of fighting terrorism. Moreover, no federal agency prioritizes violent crime as its most important issue. Accordingly, the new Administration and Congress must make violent crime, and the federal government’s interest in violent crime, a top priority and be willing to dedicate the resources needed to assist in places where public safety is jeopardized. Major city chiefs interviewed stressed the need for better partnerships in combatting violent crime. Federal policy leaders must work with local law enforcement to improve federal support to fight violent crime. Using the latest crime data, federal, state, and local partnerships, based on shared decision-making and coproduction of public safety, is critical. Chapter 3 provides a detailed examination of the tools that federal law enforcement agencies provide to support those on the state and local levels to address violent crime. The data presented provides an overview of federal initiatives, tools, and roles that have shown evidence of sustainable success in reducing violent crime. Major city police chiefs provided information on federal law enforcement agencies, programs, and tools that have assisted them and stated that the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) show the most interest in prioritizing violent crime. They also found federal support through the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network (NIBIN) and the National Tracing Center (NTC) to be the most useful tools. Chapter 4 reviews the importance of U.S. Attorneys in fighting violent crime. It provides information indicating that police chiefs consider the support of U.S. Attorneys to be critical in fighting localized violent crime. Acting as the chief federal law enforcement officer in each judicial district, U.S. Attorneys must act as chief conveners to lead strategic collaborations that build strong federal cases that will impact localized violent crime. This chapter also stresses that the fight against violent crime and criminal justice reform are not mutually exclusive. Chapter 5 provides a detailed review of the impact of firearms availability on violent crime in the U.S. Law enforcement executives expressed their concerns that the most significant threat to the Second Amendment is the misuse of firearms and the ability of criminals to access them. Gun trafficking, illegal gun markets, theft, and illegal diversion are important issues that have not been addressed sufficiently. Legislation and federal tools available to regulate illegal gun markets and keep guns out of the hands of those looking to cause harm are inadequate. Background checks, for example, should be retooled and strengthened, and laws that restrict the effectiveness of federal law enforcement in enforcing them should be eliminated. This report is not intended as a criticism of any previous Presidential Administration, its leaders or appointees, or of the hardworking, professional men and women in federal law enforcement agencies, many of whom began their careers as state or local law enforcement officers. Instead, this report looks toward the new Administration, which has an opportunity to leverage the lessons of the past and lead a legacy of change for the future. In doing so, it will have the opportunity to set forth a new strategy to keep national crime rates at historically low levels while reducing disparate impacts in our major cities and elsewhere. The recommendations in this report create an overarching, new strategy to understand and address violence in today’s cities. They include prioritization and non-traditional approaches, openness and sharing of data, expansion of available technologies, and calls for immediate Congressional and Executive Branch action. The recommendations presented in this report echo similar concerns expressed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors where New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu presented information regarding a forthcoming report, entitled Securing America, to the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) at its October 2016 meeting. The MCCA members expressed substantial concurrence with the forthcoming report. Details: Washington, DC: Police Foundation, 2017. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 27, 2017 at: https://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/PF-MCCA_Reducing-Violent-Crime-in-American-Cities_FullReport_RGB.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/PF-MCCA_Reducing-Violent-Crime-in-American-Cities_FullReport_RGB.pdf Shelf Number: 144883 Keywords: Crime PreventionEvidence-Based PracticesGun-Related ViolenceIntelligence GatheringViolenceViolence PreventionViolent Crime |
Author: Oklahoma Justice Reform Task Force Title: Final Report Summary: Since 2010, 31 states across the country have decreased imprisonment rates while reducing crime rates. Yet Oklahoma's prison population has grown by nine percent in the last five years, reaching 28,580 inmates as of June 2016. As a result of the large and growing inmate population, Oklahoma has the second highest imprisonment rate in the country, 78 percent higher than the national average in 2015. More concerning, since 1991, Oklahoma has had the highest female imprisonment rate in the country. These trends have burdened state taxpayers with extraordinary costs, with Oklahoma spending over half a billion dollars on corrections in FY2015. At this rate, Oklahoma's prison population is projected to grow 25 percent or 7,218 inmates by 2026. One-quarter of this overall growth will be driven by increases in the female prison population, which is projected to grow by 60 percent over the next ten years. The projected prison population growth is estimated to cost the state at least $1.2 billion in capital expenditures to build or lease three new prisons and an additional $700 million in operating costs over ten years. Seeking a better public safety return on corrections spending, state leaders from all three branches of government joined together in May of 2016 to request technical assistance through the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, a public-private partnership between the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, and The Pew Charitable Trusts (Pew), to be provided by the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI). Governor Fallin issued Executive Order 2016-24 in July of 2016, establishing the bi-partisan, inter-branch Oklahoma Justice Reform Task Force (Task Force) and charging it with "developing" comprehensive criminal justice and corrections reform policy recommendations designed to alleviate prison overcrowding and reduce Oklahoma's incarceration rate while improving public safety. Over a six-month period, the Task Force analyzed the state's sentencing, corrections, and community supervision data and reviewed the latest research on reducing recidivism and improving public safety. The Task Force found that: Seventy-five percent of people admitted to prison were sentenced for nonviolent crimes; over half of individuals sentenced to prison for nonviolent offenses have one or no prior felony convictions, and 80 percent have no history of violent crimes. Research demonstrates that incarceration is no more effective at reducing recidivism than alternatives to prison and can actually increase the recidivism rates of lower-level individuals. Despite the risk of increasing recidivism for lower-level, non-violent offences, Oklahoma uses prison over alternatives more often than other states and has focused many of its prison beds on those sentenced for nonviolent crimes with limited criminal history. Sentences for nonviolent offenders in Oklahoma are longer compared to other states, and release options are underutilized and/or delayed. Despite research demonstrating that longer prison terms do not reduce recidivism more than shorter prison terms, less than 10 percent of the individuals released from prison are paroled, and drug and property offenders are released on average nine months past their parole eligibility date. Based on this analysis and the directive from Governor Fallin, the Task Force developed a comprehensive, data-driven, evidence-based package of 27 policy recommendations, supported by a substantial majority of Task Force members, and specifically aimed at improving public safety by holding offenders accountable and reducing recidivism. These policies, if signed into law, would avert all of the projected prison population growth, and ultimately reduce the current prison population by seven percent, saving $1.9 billion in prison costs over the next ten years. Details: Oklahoma City: The Task Force, 2017. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 13, 2017 at: http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/OJRTFFinalReport%20(1).pdf?embeddedLinkType=document Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/OJRTFFinalReport%20(1).pdf?embeddedLinkType=document Shelf Number: 145119 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ReformCriminal Justice SystemsEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Rossman, Shelli B. Title: Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects, Evidence-Based Practices: Screening & Assessment Summary: This report is one in a series from the Cross-Site Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance FY 2011 Second Chance Act (SCA) Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (AORDPs). This report describes the use of screening and assessment for criminogenic risks and needs by seven grantees who implemented adult reentry programs using SCA funding. Findings are based on information collected in 2014 through semi-structured interviews with AORDP staff and organizational partners, as well as through a Web-based survey administered in spring 2014 to key reentry stakeholders at each site. to identify eligible participants, inform reentry/transition planning, and guide service delivery; five of the seven sites had screening and risk/needs assessment practices in place before their demonstration projects began. Many sites use widely recognized, validated tools, such as the Level of Service Inventory-Revised, although some sites developed and validated local tools specific to their target populations. Jail-based reentry sites, for example, were more likely to use "name brand" tools, whereas prison-based reentry sites used systems-pecific tools, such as the Department of Correction's Treatment and Programs Assessment Inventory screener in Connecticut and the Minnesota Screening Tool Assessing Recidivism Risk in Minnesota. Sites’ assessment practices largely align with core correctional principles, with the exception of reassessment. The research literature recommends regular reassessment of criminogenic risk and needs to measure progress and realign service goals, but few sites reported routine reassessment of such factors. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2016. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250469.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250469.pdf Shelf Number: 141145 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesNeeds Assessment Prisoner Reentry Risk Assessment Second Chance Act |
Author: Rossman, Shelli B. Title: Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects, Evidence-Based Practices: Case Management Summary: This report from RTI International and the Urban Institute is one in a series from the Cross-Site Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance fiscal year 2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (AORDPs). The report describes the use of case-management practices among seven grantees that implemented adult reentry programs using Second Chance Act funding. Findings are based on information collected in 2014 through semi-structured interviews with AORDP staff and organizational partners, as well as through a web-based survey administered in spring 2014 to key reentry stakeholders at each site. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2016. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250470.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250470.pdf Shelf Number: 141146 Keywords: Case ManagementEvidence-Based PracticesPrisoner ReentrySecond Chance Act |
Author: Loeffler-Cobia, Jennifer Title: Utah Department of Corrections Evidence-Based Practice Adherence Summary Report Summary: According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2013, Utah released 94% of its prison population back into the community, meaning that these previous offenders are back working and living in society. With the majority of offenders returning to their communities, politicians, policy makers, program administrators, researchers, and government officials often ask "are our programs working to reduce recidivism?" That is, we want to know "is the money that we allocate to our prison and jail treatment programs providing the skills offenders need to be productive members of society and yielding positive results?" So how do correction programs provide effective interventions to decrease recidivism? Current research points to eight principles that, when reflected in the system policies, procedures, and day-to-day work of community corrections agencies, increase the likelihood of offender risk reduction (Smith, Gendreau & Swartz, 2009). The eight principles are (see Figure 1. National Institute of Correction's Eight Principles of Effective Intervention): 1. Assess Actuarial Risk/Needs; 2. Enhance Intrinsic Motivation; Target Interventions Risk Principle: Prioritize supervision and treatment resources for higher risk offenders. Need Principle: Target interventions to criminogenic (correlated to crime) needs. Responsivity Principle: Be responsive to temperament, learning style, motivation, culture, and gender when assigning programs. Dosage: Structure 40-70% of high-risk offenders' time for three to nine months. Treatment Principle: Integrate treatment into the full sentence/sanction requirements. 3. Skill Train with Directed Practice (e.g., use cognitive behavioral treatment methods); 4. Increase Positive Reinforcement; 5. Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities; 7. Measure Relevant Processes/Practices; and 8. Provide Measurement Feedback However, building an evidence-based criminal justice system requires more than just having an understanding of the research that constructed these eight principles. It requires a commitment to fundamentally changing the way criminal justice organizations operate and the way that policy makers, funders, providers and other stakeholders work together. To invest criminal justice reform and make the commitment required, in 2014, Governor Gary Herbert introduced the Utah Justice Reinvestment Initiative (UJRI) that called for a review of the current criminal justice system and will guide a strategic plan to decrease recidivism. As part of the UJRI review, the Utah Criminal Justice Center (UCJC) at the University of Utah was asked to evaluate prison and jail treatment programs on their adherence to these evidence-based practices (EBP) and provided technical assistance surrounding improving treatment practices. The Utah Department of Corrections (UDC) has worked assiduously toward the goal of having their treatment programs become evidence-based and contribute to the criminal justice reform efforts and overall improve public safety in Utah. To this end, 5 prison and 3 jail treatment programs were selected to participate in a program evaluation and quality improvement process with UCJC to enhance their service delivery to be more consistent with EBP. This report is a summary of the eight program evaluations and results of a focus group conducted with program directors. This evaluation provides valuable information on where not only correction treatment programs can improve their practice, but where the Utah criminal justice system can improve as well. The recommendations provided in this report will act as a roadmap for sustainable implementation and replication of EBP in Utah and to develop a just, effective, and evidence-based system. Details: Salt Lake City: Utah Criminal Justice Center, University of Utah, 2015. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 11, 2017 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015-CCJJ_UDC-EBP-Adherence-Summary-ReportFinal-for-Distribution.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015-CCJJ_UDC-EBP-Adherence-Summary-ReportFinal-for-Distribution.pdf Shelf Number: 144796 Keywords: Correctional ProgramsCorrectional Treatment ProgramsEvidence-Based PracticesRecidivismRehabilitation Programs |
Author: Lipsey, Mark W. Title: Juvenile Justice System Improvement: Implementing an Evidence-Based Decision-Making Platform Summary: Over the past three decades, the juvenile justice system in the United States has benefited from the tremendous growth in knowledge about effective policy and practice. Since the mid-1990s, we have seen the development of the components of an evidence-based decision-making platform, consisting of validated risk and needs assessment tools, structured decision-making tools to assist in the better matching of the needs of youth involved in the juvenile justice system with the correct level of supervision and types of services, and evidence-based programs and services. Today, that knowledge is readily available to policy makers and practitioners, with the challenge being to support jurisdictions in incorporating the components holistically into the operation of their juvenile justice systems. This report draws on the experiences of jurisdictions that have worked to integrate these tools and practices into a platform for juvenile justice decision-making through two demonstration programs--the Juvenile Justice Systems Improvement Project (JJSIP) and the Juvenile Justice Reform and Reinvestment Initiative (JJRRI). These jurisdictions have made significant progress in bringing the tenets of JJSIP and JJRRI to life in their communities and juvenile justice systems. It is our hope that the implementation experiences this report captures will help others to follow in their footsteps. It is our belief that the core tenets of JJSIP and JJRRI are at the heart of what juvenile justice systems across the country will look like in the future - and that the youth and families they serve will be better off as a result. The report, therefore, is organized to help the reader understand the background of the initiatives and their essential elements. It draws on site experiences to depict key principles and implementation issues that can inform any effort by a jurisdiction to create an evidence-based decision-making platform. It demonstrates that successful implementation of an evidence-based platform requires an array of systems supports, including strong leadership, workforce development, data collection and analysis, partnership, communication, cooperation, and ongoing attention to quality assurance. In that regard, it should serve as a guide for agency leaders contemplating aligning their system improvement efforts with both JJSIP and JJRRI. In short, it is our hope that this report will provide foundational information about what a system leader needs to consider related to readiness for this type of system improvement effort. Details: Washington, DC: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, Georgetown University, 2017. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 6, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/250443.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/grants/250443.pdf Shelf Number: 145332 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: How States Engage in Evidence-Based Policymaking: A National Assessment Summary: Evidence-based policymaking is the systematic use of findings from program evaluations and outcome analyses ("evidence") to guide government policy and funding decisions. By focusing limited resources on public services and programs that have been shown to produce positive results, governments can expand their investments in more cost-effective options, consider reducing funding for ineffective programs, and improve the outcomes of services funded by taxpayer dollars. While the term "evidence-based policymaking" is growing in popularity in state capitols, there is limited information about the extent to which states employ the approach. This report seeks to address this gap by: 1) identifying six distinct actions that states can use to incorporate research findings into their decisions, 2) assessing the prevalence and level of these actions within four human service policy areas across 50 states and the District of Columbia, and 3) categorizing each state based on the final results. The study finds: - Five states lead the way in evidence-based policymaking. - Washington, Utah, Minnesota, Connecticut, and Oregon are leading in evidence-based policymaking by developing processes and tools that use evidence to inform policy and budget decisions across the areas examined. - 11 states show established levels of evidence-based policymaking by pursuing more actions than most states but either not as frequently or in as advanced a manner as the leading states. - 27 states and the District of Columbia demonstrate modest engagement in this work, pursuing actions less frequently and in less advanced ways. - Seven states are trailing, taking very few evidence-based policymaking actions. - Most states have taken some evidence-based policymaking actions in at least one human service policy area, but advanced application is less common. - Defining levels of evidence can allow state leaders to distinguish proven programs from those that have not been evaluated. Thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia have defined at least one level of evidence, such as "evidence-based"; 23 of the 40 have created an advanced definition that distinguishes multiple levels of rigor, such as "evidence-based" and "promising." - Inventorying state programs can help governments to manage available resources strategically. Fortynine states and the District have produced an inventory of state-funded programs; 29 of the 50 have created an advanced inventory that classifies programs by evidence of effectiveness. - Comparing program costs and benefits would allow policymakers to weigh the costs of public programs against the outcomes and economic returns they deliver. Seventeen states have conducted cost-benefit analyses; 16 of the 17 have created an advanced analysis that monetizes benefits to calculate return on investment. - Reporting outcomes and program effectiveness can help policymakers identify which investments are generating positive results and use this information to better prioritize and direct funds. Forty-one states and the District reported or required key outcome data during the fiscal year 2013-17 budget cycles; 13 of the 42 have created advanced budget materials that include findings from program evaluations. - Targeting funding to evidence-based programs, such as through a grant or contract, can help states implement and expand these proven approaches. Forty-nine states and the District of Columbia have such a funding mechanism; five of the 50 have created advanced mechanisms to dedicate at least 50 percent of program funds for a specific policy area toward these initiatives. - Requiring action through state law, which includes administrative codes, executive orders, and statutes, can help states sustain support for evidence-based policymaking. Thirty-three states and the District have developed a framework of laws to support one or more of the five advanced actions listed above in at least one policy area; 11 of the 34 states have created an advanced framework of laws to support two or more advanced actions. Details: Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2017. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2017 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2017/01/how_states_engage_in_evidence_based_policymaking.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2017/01/how_states_engage_in_evidence_based_policymaking.pdf Shelf Number: 145349 Keywords: Criminal Justice PolicyCriminal Justice ReformEvidence-Based PoliciesEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: U.S. National Institute of Corrections Title: A Framework for Pretrial Justice: Essential Elements of an Effective Pretrial System and Agency Summary: This document highlights the commitment of the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) to define and support evidence-based practices that improve decision-making at the pretrial stage of our criminal justice system, enhancing the safety of America's communities and fostering the fair administration of pretrial release and detention. With the release of A Framework for Pretrial Justice: Essential Elements of an Effective Pretrial System and Agency, NIC and its Pretrial Executive Network helps inform the discussion on bail reform and pretrial justice by presenting and defining the fundamentals of an effective pretrial system and the essential elements of a high functioning pretrial services agency. This publication presents and describes these essential elements - as well as the components of an evidence-based framework for improving pretrial outcomes nationwide. Bail determination is one of the most important decisions in criminal justice. Courts that make evidence-based decisions set the following as goals: (1) Protecting community safety; (2) Ensuring a defendant's return to court; (3) Basing release and detention decisions on an individual defendant's risk and the community's norms for liberty; [and] (4) Providing judicial officers with clear, legal options for appropriate pretrial release and detention decisions. A Framework for Pretrial Justice: Essential Elements of an Effective Pretrial System and Agency should serve as a guide for jurisdictions interested in improving their current pretrial systems. By presenting a framework of evidence-based and best practices, NIC supports the equally important concepts of pretrial justice and enhanced public safety in all of America's courts. Details: Washington, DC; NIC, 2017. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 14, 2017 at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/032831.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/032831.pdf Shelf Number: 146178 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesPretrial DetentionPretrial DiversionPretrial JusticePretrial ReleaseRisk Needs Assessment |
Author: Hussemann, Jeanette Title: Implementing Evidence-Based Juvenile Justice Reforms Demonstration Sites in OJJDP's Juvenile Justice Reform and Reinvestment Initiative Summary: At the end of 2012, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) launched the Juvenile Justice Reform and Reinvestment Initiative (JJRRI) in three demonstration sites in Delaware, Iowa, and Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. The goal of JJRRI was to bring evidence and best practices to bear on juvenile justice operations. This was done through the use of empirically based risk and needs assessment, the development of dispositional matrices that provide evidence-based recommendations concerning dispositional options, and the implementation of the Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol (SPEP) rating system to assess and guide improvements in the programs delivered to juvenile justice youth. Together, these tools were intended to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the use of juvenile justice resources. Concurrent with the implementation of JJRRI, the Urban Institute conducted a process and outcome evaluation of the initiative. The goals of the evaluation included understanding how the implementation of JJRRI improved the quality and effectiveness of juvenile justice programming at demonstration sites. Two prior reports focused specifically on the implementation and attempt to validate the SPEP system for rating program effectiveness, which was a major component of JJRRI (Liberman and Hussemann 2016, 2017). This report provides an overview of JJRRI and implementation components at the three demonstration sites, including progress made, challenges encountered, and the sustainability of reforms. Findings are based on data collected between 2012 and 2015. Data collection included annual visits to each site with technical assistance (TA) providers, observation of on-site trainings, and in-depth telephone interviews with stakeholders to monitor progress and assess stakeholder perspectives. Interviews were conducted with a diverse set of juvenile justice stakeholders at each site, including administrators, program providers, court workers, contractors, data managers, and JJRRI program managers and support staff. Additional information was collected via a review of written reports and narratives provided by the JJRRI sites, as well as participation in regular calls with the sites, funders, and TA providers. This report describes the implementation of JJRRI at the three demonstration sites. The first section briefly discusses key components of JJRRI, and the second section discusses how implementation of the components proceeded in the JJRRI demonstration sites. The third section concludes with a discussion of the overall challenges and benefits to the initiative. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2017. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 26, 2017 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/90381/implementing_evidence-based-juvenile-justice-reforms.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/90381/implementing_evidence-based-juvenile-justice-reforms.pdf Shelf Number: 146383 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesEvidence-Based ProgramsJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice Systems |
Author: Baldwin, Molly Title: From Evidence-Based Practices to a Comprehensive Intervention Model for High-Risk Young Men: The Story of Roca Summary: Researchers of criminal behavior are taking a more data-driven approach to community corrections. Rather than focusing solely on professional experience or anecdotal successes - key factors that often drive public policy in social services - they are identifying evidence-based practices that rely on empirical research and produce measurable outcomes. The challenge for providers is to bridge the gap between theoretical best practices and practicable intervention models that reduce recidivism rates and keep communities safe. One organization that is finding success in bridging this gap is Massachusetts-based Roca, Inc. Established in 1988, Roca has worked with high-risk young people in various communities across Massachusetts. Roca has served thousands of young men and women facing multiple challenges, including young parents, immigrants, youth involved in gangs, and other at-risk young people. Along the way, though, Roca witnessed a troubling reality: Despite its commitment to help youth stay out of harm's way, and the fact that individuals were attending programming in large numbers and the organization was thriving, the same individuals were in trouble again days, weeks, or months later. As a result, Roca leadership grew less confident that it was doing more good than harm. It started searching for a different path. Around this time, meta-analysis of practices in the field, conducted by the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) at Community Resources for Justice and the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) in 2002, identified a set of eight methods proven successful in reducing recidivism. Roca found the move toward evidence-based practices (EBP) refreshing: These practices were based on specific principles that had been proven successful based on data, rather than anecdotes, and the idea that some interventions work significantly better than others was appealing. The challenge, though, was to develop a comprehensive intervention model based on these practices and to transform the organizational culture into one that embraces data and evidence. Over more than a decade, Roca has undergone tremendous changes. The organization has rigorously examined its practices, collected and analyzed data, changed its interactions with other institutions, and incorporated only those practices that were proven effective. The result of these efforts is Roca's High-Risk Young Men Intervention Model - a four-year, non-mandated model dedicated to serving 17- to 24-year-old men at the highest risk of future incarceration. The Model was implemented in 2011 and now operates in four sites, serving 21 communities across Massachusetts. Roca's rigorous data track ing allows the organization to measure its success in reducing recidivism and increasing employment among high-risk young men. Roca's baseline is the existing criminal justice system outcomes pertaining to young adults: In Massachusetts, 76 percent of the 18- to 24-year-olds released from Houses of Corrections are rearraigned within three years (Mosehauer et al., 2016), and nationally, 78 percent of those released from state or federal prison at the ages of 18 to 24 are rearrested within three years (Schiraldi, Western, and Bradner, 2015). Roca's outcomes are dramatically different. Roca retains 84 percent of participants annually, despite the fact that these are high-risk young people who are not ready, willing, or able to participate in programming. After completing the first two years of the program, participants significantly reduce their criminal behaviors: 93 percent are not rearrested, 95 percent are not reincarcerated, and 88 percent of those on probation comply with their conditions. In addition, graduates demonstrate significant employment gains: Although 83 percent of participants come to Roca with no employment history, 84 percent of those enrolled longer than 21 months are placed in a job; 92 percent of them keep the job longer than three months, and 87 percent keep it for six months or more. This paper focuses on the gap between research- and theory-based practices and a fully functioning intervention model, and how Roca has worked to bridge this gap and achieve the above-mentioned outcomes. Part I reviews the eight evidence-based practices in community corrections as identified by CJI and NIC. Part II explores how Roca learned of these principles and how it worked internally to integrate them and develop its Intervention Model. Part III explains Roca's Intervention Model and revisits the eight evidence-based practices, explaining how each one is implemented in the Model. The conclusion draws some lessons from Roca's work with evidence-based practices and suggests that Roca's Model is an alternative to traditional community corrections. Details: Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, 2017. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: New Thinking in Community Corrections: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/wiener/programs/pcj/files/NTCC_Evidence-based_practices_final_laser_8-28-17_508_v2.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/wiener/programs/pcj/files/NTCC_Evidence-based_practices_final_laser_8-28-17_508_v2.pdf Shelf Number: 147679 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationCommunity CorrectionsCriminal Justice PolicyEvidence-Based PracticesRecidivismYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Hawkins, Rayanne Title: Using Pay for Success in Criminal Justice Projects: Lessons Learned from PFS Project Stakeholders, Policy Analysis, and Landscape Analysis Summary: Federal, state, and local jurisdictions across the country are recognizing pay for success (PFS) as a potential tool to tackle criminal justice issues in their communities. Early PFS projects were in criminal justice, and many places are already working on PFS efforts in justice-related areas, such as workforce development for system-involved people, opioid misuse treatment, and child welfare. Although PFS offers benefits like forging new partnerships and shifting service delivery toward outcomes, there are also challenges associated with a PFS project. However, based on the state of the field, our analysis of PFS legislation, and stakeholder experiences, PFS holds promise for the criminal justice field. This brief is intended to help criminal justice policymakers and practitioners understand the PFS model; its content is informed both by independent research and stakeholder interviews. We first describe the PFS model, its benefits, and its challenges. We then provide a set of lessons learned for criminal justice PFS efforts from a review of PFS legislation, active efforts, and practitioner experiences. Interviewees and other contributors are listed in the acknowledgments. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2017. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 20, 2018 at: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/94736/using-pay-for-success-in-criminal-justice-projects_1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/94736/using-pay-for-success-in-criminal-justice-projects_1.pdf Shelf Number: 148891 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesSocial Impact Bonds |
Author: Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Title: Investing in Intervention: The Critical Role of State-Level Support in Breaking the Cycle of Urban Gun Violence Summary: Tens of thousands of people are shot each year on America's streets. These shootings are concentrated in cities and disproportionately impact underserved populations-but relief is within reach. A small handful of states are supporting affordable, proven solutions to address this epidemic, saving lives and millions in taxpayer dollars. States can do so much more to address the alarming rates of gun violence in our cities. Read the full report to learn how Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York are transforming communities with sustained investment in evidence-based violence reduction strategies. Details: San Francisco: The Center, 2017. 98p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 23, 2018 at: http://lawcenter.giffords.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Investing-in-Intervention-12.19.17.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://lawcenter.giffords.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Investing-in-Intervention-12.19.17.pdf Shelf Number: 148910 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesGun ViolenceGun-Related ViolenceUrban Areas |
Author: Clark, John Title: Upgrading North Carolina's Bail System: A Balances Approach to Pretrial Justice Using Legal and Evidence-Based Practices Summary: This report focuses on helping North Carolina officials work toward a balanced approach to achieving the three goals of the pretrial release decision-making process: to provide reasonable assurance of the safety of the community; to provide reasonable assurance of appearance in court; and to maximize pretrial release. It does so by focusing on legal and evidence-based practices-ones that fully comport with the law and that are driven by research. The use of such practices has been fully endorsed by all the key justice system stakeholder groups, including: the Conference of Chief Justices; the Conference of State Court Administrators; the International Association of Chiefs of Police; the National Sheriffs' Association; the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys; the National Legal Aid and Defenders Association; the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; the National Association of Counties; and the American Bar Association. And the use of such practices has been shown to produce excellent results. Except for very promising work being done in Mecklenburg County, legal and evidence-based pretrial justice practices are not in place in North Carolina. Magistrates and judges in the state place significant emphasis on an antiquated tool-bond guidelines-which several federal courts around the country have recently called unconstitutional. Courts also rely heavily on a release option-the secured bond-that was established in the 19th Century to address a problem that was unique to that time; the ability of a criminal defendant to flee into the vast wilderness of America's growing frontier and simply disappear, never to face prosecution. And only 40 of the state's 100 counties are served by pretrial services programs that can provide supervision of defendants released by the court with conditions of pretrial release. Many of these programs have very limited supervision capacity. The model for legal and evidence-based pretrial release practices in North Carolina includes the use of an empirically-derived pretrial risk assessment tool, the development of a decision matrix that would help magistrates and judges make pretrial release decisions, the implementation of risk management strategies aimed at matching risk levels with the most appropriate level of support or supervision, the expanded use of citation releases by law enforcement, the very early involvement of the prosecutor and defense, and the initiation of automatic bond reviews for in-custody misdemeanor defendants. Implementing such a model of legal and evidence-based practices in North Carolina would be greatly facilitated by changes in the state's laws. Current North Carolina law does not expressly provide for a right to actual pretrial release-it is crafted only in terms of setting or not setting conditions-nor does it articulate a procedure for preventive detention of high risk defendants. A right merely to have conditions set, coupled with the statutory provisions discussing those conditions as well as no decent process for risk-based detention, naturally moves North Carolina magistrates and judges toward using secured money conditions to address risk for both court appearance and public safety, and toward attempting to use unattainable money conditions to detain defendants posing extremely high pretrial risk. In addition, although the statute speaks of pretrial risk, it makes determinations of who is entitled to having release conditions set based primarily on charge as a proxy for risk, and subtly points judicial officials toward using the money condition to address risk. The better practice would be to set forth a right to release for all except extremely high-risk defendants (or defendants who are not as risky but who also face extremely serious charges, or both), provide for a lawful and transparent detention provision based on risk to allow pretrial detention with no conditions, and then create mechanisms so that persons released pretrial are released immediately. Details: Gaithersburg, MD: Pretrial Justice Institute, 2016. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2018 at: https://nccalj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Upgrading-NCs-Bail-System-PJI-2016-003.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://nccalj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Upgrading-NCs-Bail-System-PJI-2016-003.pdf Shelf Number: 150052 Keywords: BailEvidence-Based PracticesPretrial JusticePretrial ReleaseRisk Assessment |
Author: Fleming, Jennie Title: Can Experience Be Evidence? Summary: There is a vigorous debate in policing about the relative merits of evidence-based and experiential decision making. On the one hand we might consider that evidence based policing (EBP) that draws on 'what works' and puts police decision-making on a solid empirical basis is a 'no-brainer'. Who could object after all to a movement that allows police to use the best evidence to shape the best practice? Sherman observes (1998: 4), 'most police practice ... is still shaped by local custom, opinions, theories and subjective impressions'. Evidence based research, characterised by randomized experiments which reveal the generality and reliability of a particular intervention is used to guide practice and evaluate police activity. In Sherman's terms there is a strict dichotomy between experience, craft and scientific facts and evidence based research must be 'a systematic effort to parse out and codify unsystematic "experience" as the basis for police work, refining it by ongoing systematic testing of hypotheses' (Sherman 1998: 4). We demur from such sweeping judgements. Instead, we suggest as others have before us, that science takes many forms, it is not as Moore notes (2006: 324), restricted to random controlled experiments , 'it has always included many more different types of investigations to acquire and use knowledge' (see also Sparrow 2011; Fleming 2015a; Fyfe and Fleming 2015). We suggest that whatever the merits of evidence-based research it cannot confine itself to 'scientific facts' - there are far too many limits to such an approach: In summary, we argue: 1. EBP ignores the limits to social science knowledge, displaying a touching faith in given facts, naturalism, and observer neutrality. 2. Evidence, whether evidence-based or experiential, is constructed in an organisational and political context that selects the facts and their relevance. 3. Experience cannot only count as evidence but its use is also essential and inevitable given the limits to social science knowledge. 4. The discussion of experience is bedevilled by the demand for instrumental knowledge; for efficiency and reform. Experience is about sense-making in organisations; not how we do something but why we do it. To examine the debate beween evidence based and experiential policy making in the UK police, we start by examining the limits to social science knowledge, focusing on the informational and cognitive limits to such research and its relationship to policy making. We unpack the idea of 'experience' to show that it is not intuitively obvious. Briefly, we identify experience as: incrementalism; framing; institutional memory; craft; common sense; local knowledge; and occupational culture. We use these overlapping meanings to analyse focus groups composed of police officers drawn from two forces. We conclude that police officers draw on political knowledge and local knowledge as well as research-based knowledge in their everyday lives. All these sources of knowledge have their limits, including experience, and all are constructed in an organisational and political context that selects the facts and their relevance. We suggest that no one source of knowledge should be accorded priority. Rather, we need to weave them together and in this process local knowledge, or experience, can not only count as evidence but it is also essential and inevitable given the limits to social science knowledge. Details: Southampton, UK: Department of Sociology, Social Policy & Criminology, University of Southampton, 2016. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Paper to the Public Policy and Administration Specialist Group, Panel 2: Policy Design and Learning, PSA 66th Annual International Conference, 21-23 March 2016: Accessed May 7, 2018 at: https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2016/PSA%202016%20Experience.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2016/PSA%202016%20Experience.pdf Shelf Number: 150081 Keywords: Evidence-Based PoliciesEvidence-Based PolicingEvidence-Based Practices |
Author: Willis, Matthew Title: Justice reinvestment in Australia: A review of the literature Summary: Justice reinvestment (JR) is an emerging field in the Australian criminal justice landscape. It is a data-driven approach to reducing criminal justice system expenditure and improving criminal justice system outcomes through reductions in imprisonment and offending. JR is a comprehensive strategy that employs targeted, evidence-based interventions to achieve cost savings which can be reinvested into delivering further improvements in social and criminal justice outcomes. However, there is no single definition of JR, and the effective development and implementation of JR strategies involve an evidence-based understanding of the local contexts, circumstances and needs that impact on involvement in the criminal justice system. JR has gained a great deal of support in Australia, with a number of JR strategies in operation or under development. As it has emerged in Australia, JR has taken on a wider meaning than has been applied in the US. While the focus of JR in the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) has been about reducing the costs of incarceration, in Australia a broader application of JR is being developed, with states and territories also examining how to reduce crime and strengthen communities. In Australia, JR is being described as a way of addressing key justice problems including the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the justice system. As well as there being no single definition of JR, there have been a range of different approaches to its development and implementation. The criminal justice outcomes sought through JR can be achieved through approaches that include: - changes to policy and legislation that would otherwise tend to increase the likelihood of people being imprisoned; - improved treatment programs and models of supervision for individuals at the most risk of offending; - investing in neighbourhoods that house a disproportionately high number of offenders; - development of interventions based on locally identified needs and sound evidence; - improving drug addiction and mental health outcomes; and - engagement of interested and motivated supporters, including those providing financial and in-kind contributions for developing and implementing JR approaches. range of different financial approaches can be taken to facilitate JR strategies. Some models involve realizing savings from criminal justice interventions which are then reinvested to build and maintain those outcomes. Other approaches involve upfront investment from other sources, so that savings can be realized that are then used to finance a return on the initial investment. Under these approaches initial investment is procured through non-government sources like private companies or charitable institutions. Repayment of this initial investment by the government is linked to further investment, encouraging the use of strategies to achieve tangible benefits, such as demonstrated reductions in reoffending and prison population growth. JR has also contributed to the development of innovative approaches to financing; for example, social impact investment through mechanisms such as social impact bonds or Payment by Results arrangements. As a data-driven and evidence-based approach, JR relies on rigorous evaluation and monitoring of interventions and their outcomes. JR strategies must be underpinned by a framework of robust evaluation so that the impacts of interventions and resulting cost savings can be demonstrated and the results used to generate further savings and positive outcomes. In the US, JR has grown at a rapid rate since it was first conceived in the early 2000s, driven by the need to address the high incarceration and remand costs of the US criminal justice system. This has now grown into a large-scale body of funding, supported by the US Government as well as by large not-for-profit organisations. More than half of all US states now have JR programs in place, with many of these implemented in accordance with the frameworks established by the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, backed by the Bureau of Justice Administration. Reviews by key stakeholder organizations in the US give strong indications of JR having been successful in achieving actual or projected cost savings in several states (see Bureau of Justice Administration nd a; Council of State Governments Justice Center 2011b). Independent analysis has highlighted some issues with attribution of these savings to JR initiatives, but indicators of success remain and appear likely to continue to build over time. JR strategies adopted in the US have focused largely on reforms to criminal justice system practices and processes, backed by legislative change. Key areas for reform have included: - increased use of risk and needs assessment to more effectively match offenders with programs and services-particularly cognitive-behavioural and substance use treatment programs; - increasing the range of sentencing options available to courts; - improving the quality, extent and nature of supervision for offenders on probation and parole; and - changing responses to breached probation and parole conditions-for example, providing more non-custodial options and reducing the length of prison terms that can be imposed for breaches. The US adoption of JR has led to the creation of models, including financial models, to guide the stages of development and implementation. Development and implementation models have emphasised a number of crucial steps, including: - establishment of governance structures; - analysis and mapping; - development of options for cost savings through improved criminal justice and social outcomes; - quantification and reinvestment of savings; and - outcome and impact evaluations. JR has been positively received in Australia. The Commonwealth, as well as most if not all of the states and territories, have taken steps to explore the potential of JR strategies. In many cases these strategies have focused on the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the justice system, as well as changes to the youth justice system. In those jurisdictions that have generated greater progress in JR implementation, this has been achieved through the collaborative efforts of government, service providers, community representatives and academics. At the time of writing, separate community-led JR projects were well underway in the western New South Wales towns of Bourke and Cowra. The ACT had also taken substantial steps towards developing a JR strategy, including financial commitment through the Territory budget. JR is an emerging concept in Australia, and there remains considerable scope for the establishment of JR models and approaches that are adapted to Australian circumstances. In contrast to US models that have focused strongly on reforms within the criminal justice system, Australian approaches appear likely to include system reforms as well as a strong focus on localised social changes. As Australian iterations of JR emerge, they may well differ in some substantial ways from US models. While they are likely to retain the key principles of being data-driven, focused on cost savings and improved criminal justice outcomes, it also appears that the Australian application of JR aims for improved social outcomes. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2018. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Reports no. 9: Accessed May 14, 2018 at: https://aic.gov.au/publications/rr/rr09 Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://aic.gov.au/publications/rr/rr09 Shelf Number: 150171 Keywords: Cost-Benefit AnalysisCosts of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice ExpendituresEvidence-Based PracticesJustice Reinvestment |
Author: Council of Economic Advisors Title: Returns on Investments in Recidivism-reducing Programs Summary: Crime imposes a significant burden on Americans' well-being and tax-financed resources. These costs are amplified by a cycle of crime that results in re-arrest rates for released American prisoners in excess of 50 percent. Rigorous and evidence-based prison reforms are proposed to break the crime cycle, thereby reducing future crime and lowering incarceration expenditures by facilitating more successful re-entry to the workforce upon prison release. In this policy brief, CEA reviews the evidence on the underlying factors that determine the value of such prison programs and provides estimates on their rates of return. There are numerous programs that have been tried in one form or another over many decades. We do not aim to cover the entire scope of prison reform programs but focus instead on three main categories: programs that address mental health, substance abuse, or education and that are delivered inside correctional facilities. 2 We find that there is great variation in the effectiveness across programs such that reallocation of budgets from poorly to well performing programs may both lower spending and improve results. In addition, CEA finds evidence that certain individual programs can reduce crime as well as reduce spending by lowering long-run incarceration costs. Programs that save at least one dollar in crime and incarceration costs for every dollar spent are deemed cost effective. More specifically, with a focus on rigorous studies of the programs that have been previously implemented, CEA finds that, on average, programs that address the prisoner's mental health or substance abuse problems may reduce the cost of crime by about $0.92 to $3.31 per taxpayer dollar spent on prison reform and long-run incarceration costs by $0.55 to $1.96, for a total return of $1.47 to $5.27 per taxpayer dollar. Despite these positive returns, there are many programs-such as those in which the primary focus is education-for which the evidence base is inconsistent and rates of return more uncertain. Given this uncertainty, CEA estimates by how much rates of recidivism would have to be reduced in order for the programs to break even given their costs. We calculate that educational programming needs only to achieve a modest impact on recidivism rates (about a 2 percent reduction) in order to be cost effective. Overall, increased investment in better evidence is needed to guide future investments into programs to reduce recidivism. Many programs, even if they are found to be cost effective may have small sample sizes or unique characteristics that may be difficult to replicate or scale up, and some studies with high-quality research designs are too dated to provide needed insight. Carefully designed, broad-based national programs that target a wide variety of offenders in conjunction with carefully designed empirical evaluations would improve the ability of policymakers to allocate criminal justice funds to achieve the greatest possible social benefits. Details: Washington, DC: The Council, 2018. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2018 at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Returns-on-Investments-in-Recidivism-Reducing-Programs.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Returns-on-Investments-in-Recidivism-Reducing-Programs.pdf Shelf Number: 150338 Keywords: Correctional EducationCost-Benefit AnalysisEvidence-Based PracticesJustice ReinvestmentOffender RehabilitationRecidivism |
Author: Gluckman, Peter Title: Using evidence to build a better justice system: The challenge of rising prison costs Summary: 1. Crime, especially violent crime, hurts individuals and society. Both direct and indirect victims of crime may suffer untold consequences that can endure for years and can even affect next generations. Those who do not suffer personally may nonetheless acquire negative perceptions of people or places because of criminal activity. The net effect of such perceptions can change societal attitudes creating a more negative environment. This is a loss for everyone. These perceptions can be disproportionately magnified by advocacy groups, media and political agendas. 2. Policy responses are often viewed in binary terms: tough or soft on crime. This simplistic duality has long had political resonance, but its impact on our prison system is a major concern. The New Zealand prison population is increasing and is one of the highest in the OECD at a time when crime rates are actually decreasing. This can only be explained by the systemic and cumulative impact of successive policy decisions over time, often in response to public demand and political positioning. 3. Successive governments of different political orientations have supported a progressively retributive rather than a restorative approach to crime with unsupported claims that prisons can solve the problems of crime. As a result, the costs of prisons far exceed those justified by the need to protect the public. We keep imprisoning more people in response to dogma not data, responding to shifting policies and media panics, instead of evidence-based approaches to prevention, intervention, imprisonment and rehabilitation. This does not diminish the importance of incarceration for a subset of individuals so as to protect the public. 4. The strong evidence base related to what fuels the prison 'pipeline' suggests that prisons are extremely expensive training grounds for further offending, building offenders' criminal careers by teaching them criminal skills, damaging their employment, accommodation and family prospects, and compounding mental health and substance use issues. On release, even after a short period of imprisonment, for example on remand, offenders have been found to reintegrate poorly to the community. Furthermore, this does nothing to reassure victims that the risk of harm is being effectively managed by the justice system. 5. It is now well understood that prisons act as recruitment centres for gangs (especially for young offenders) and underpin the illegal drug trade. Imprisonment leaves those incarcerated with high rates of undiagnosed and untreated alcohol/drug addictions and mental illness. They have a negative impact on the next generation, given that a high percentage of people in prison are parents. These issues disproportionately affect Māori. 6. Other countries, such as Finland, have significantly reduced their incarceration rates without crime rates rising. There is strong scientific evidence for putting resources into crime prevention, early intervention (identifying and mitigating risk), and a smarter approach to rehabilitation and subsequent social inclusion for those already in the criminal-justice system - not for building more prisons. 7. To assist in such an approach, there must be adequate investment in piloting and evaluating early intervention and prevention initiatives. With leadership and knowledge, we can fundamentally transform the justice system, reduce victimisation and recidivism and make prisons only a part of a much more proactive and effective systemic response to a complex problem. Details: Auckland, NZ: Office of the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor, 2018. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 5, 2018 at: http://www.pmcsa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/Using-evidence-to-build-a-better-justice-system.pdf Year: 2018 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.pmcsa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/Using-evidence-to-build-a-better-justice-system.pdf Shelf Number: 150471 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsCosts of Criminal JusticeEarly InterventionEvidence-Based PracticesMass IncarcerationPrisons |
Author: Lindquist, Christine Title: Cross-Site Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice of Justice Assistance FY 2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects: Final Report Summary: The cross-site evaluation of the Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (AORDP) was a seven-site designed to 1) describe the implementation and sustainability of each AORDP project through a process evaluation, 2) determine the per capita program costs of each AORDP project through a cost study, and 3) determine the effectiveness of the programs through a multicomponent outcome study assessing the extent to which recidivism reductions were achieved in each site and program participation was associated with increased access to services and improvements in self-reported outcomes in several reentry domains across sites. The process evaluation found that grantees selected program interventions and services matched to the unique needs of their respective target populations, delivering a comprehensive mix of services. Numerous systems-level improvements were attributed to SCA funding, and prospects for sustaining at least some portions of the AORDP projects were promising in most sites. The cost study documented that the seven AORDP sites accessed a total of $37.7 million in federal and local resources and that case management comprised the sites' main spending priority (44% of program expenditures). Across the sites, the average per participant cost was $6,778. The prospective outcome study found that AORDP enrollment clearly increased access to services, with the greatest impact found for pre- as opposed to post-release services. However, the treatment group did not appear to have better rearrest or other reentry outcomes than the comparison group, although they had more positive trajectories over time for housing independence and employment. The site-specific recidivism analyses generally found null treatment effects for rearrest and reincarceration, with some scattered effects found - both positive and negative. No clear pattern of consistent positive effects were found in any site. Similarly, no site had consistently negative effects. The findings suggest that program developers should look for opportunities to provide long-term, post-release supports that are informed by reassessment results, as most grantees had relatively short post-release service periods and few participants received post-release services. In addition, policymakers must promote realistic expectations for incremental improvements among individuals reentering from jail and prison. Finally, researchers should examine multiple outcomes (beyond recidivism) consistent with reentry success, and explore service dosage (i.e., intensity of services delivered) in addition to service profiles (i.e., whether individuals received a particular type of service) to arrive at a better understanding of how the duration, intensity, sequencing and combination of services and programming contributes to reentry outcomes. Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International; Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2018. 512p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 12, 2018 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251703.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251703.pdf Shelf Number: 150522 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesPrisoner ReentryRecidivismSecond Chance Act |
Author: Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council Title: A Cost-Benefit Tool for Illinois Criminal Justice Policymakers Summary: In recent years, criminal justice research, including rigorous evaluation of existing programs and policies, has established that recidivism can be reduced through targeted interventions that address the drivers of a person's criminal behavior. These drivers are identified through risk and needs assessment and can be changed with proper programming and services. Programs that reduce the risk that individuals released from prison will commit additional crimes create measureable outcomes in terms of less victimization, lower government costs, and other economic benefits. The critical question for policymakers is: Do the benefits of a program outweigh the costs? Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) answers that question by quantifying and weighing both costs and benefits to determine programs that will produce a sufficient return to warrant the investment of tax dollars. For this report, the Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council (SPAC) used the Illinois Results First cost-benefit model which includes a database of 52 programs in the criminal justice sector that have successfully reduced recidivism over time in a variety of states. SPAC chose nine Illinois programs that are consistent with the programs in the database and for which cost data was available. The model incorporates Illinois-specific system costs incurred by state and local governments, crime trend and recidivism data, and victimization costs established by national research, including the costs to victims of medical expenses, property damage and losses, and lost wages. SPAC's model compares the money spent on programs with the social value of the outcomes produced by that spending to produce a "Consumer Reports" style guide that allows policymakers to do an apples-to-apples comparison of these nine programs. In sum, Illinois can get a better return on investment for taxpayers' dollars by focusing resources on programs with the most benefits and focusing cuts on those with the least benefits. The outcome measure used in the model is a reduction in recidivism. This report is intended to be solely descriptive of the expected outcomes of investing in evidence-based programs that are implemented with fidelity to the evaluated programs and are subject to evaluation. SPAC does not make recommendations, oppose, or support specific policy proposals. SPAC is a statutorily created, independent commission of criminal justice stakeholders that reports to all three branches of government. SPAC is mandated to provide system-wide fiscal impact analysis and provide research and analysis to support implementation of evidence-based practices. Cost-benefit analysis is one tool SPAC is using to weigh alternatives and potential outcomes as measured by lower recidivism rates. This is not a recommendation for specific programs but an informative report to facilitate planning and budgeting. Details: Springfield: SPAC, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 14, 2018 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/Illinois_Results_First_Consumer_Reports_072016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/spac/pdf/Illinois_Results_First_Consumer_Reports_072016.pdf Shelf Number: 150532 Keywords: Cost-Benefit AnalysisCosts of Criminal JusticeCriminal Justice PolicyEvidence-Based PracticesRehabilitation Programs |
Author: McVey, Catherine C. Title: Modernizing Parole Statutes: Guidance from Evidence-Based Practice Summary: Nearly one million people are released or supervised under conditions established by state paroling authorities each year. The appointed members of those paroling authorities determine whether and when individuals are released from prison, how they are supervised post-release, and the punishment (including reincarceration) they may face for violating the conditions of their supervision. The power over an individual's liberty exercised by paroling authorities is vast, in some respects as much as sitting felony sentencing judges, more in some jurisdictions. How paroling authorities carry out their responsibilities matters to those sentenced, their families and their victims at the individual case level, as well as in the aggregate through the collective impact these decisions have on the key goals of managing criminal justice system costs, reducing recidivism and increasing public safety. Research has grown on what works relative to evidence-based practice. Paroling authorities are increasingly working to apply this research to the policies and tools driving the parole release and supervision function. Their efforts have been supported and nurtured by such organizations as the National Institute of Corrections (NIC), the National Parole Resource Center (NPRC), the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), and The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center. Although states have made considerable progress in incorporating evidence-based practices in parole board decision making, many paroling authorities still operate under state laws that have not been amended in decades. Paroling authorities often find their new practices require that the statutory requirements need to be modernized, either because they directly conflict with evidence-based practices, or they do not support efforts to ensure parole decisions and supervision practices are rooted in what the research says works. This paper offers broadly crafted recommendations for legislation to serve as a starting place for those states and paroling authorities interested in modernizing parole laws around three core areas: the parole decisionmaking process, the terms and conditions of supervision post-release, and the administration of the paroling authority itself. The proposals are designed to support the continuing transition of paroling authorities to effective, evidence-based organizations. In several instances, sound or best practices formed the basis of the recommendations in this paper, drawing from published works and advocacy efforts undertaken by organizations committed to parole reform (see Appendix A: Key Resources for Releasing Authorities). Details: Minneapolis: Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 2018. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 30, 2018 at: https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/modernizing-parole-statutes-guidance-evidence-based-practice Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://robinainstitute.umn.edu/publications/modernizing-parole-statutes-guidance-evidence-based-practice Shelf Number: 151305 Keywords: Evidence-Based PracticesOffender SupervisionParoleParole BoardsParoling Authorities |
Author: White, Elise Title: Up and Out: Toward an Evidence-Based Response to Misdemeanors Summary: If not jail, then what? Jurisdictions across the country continue to grapple with this question, particularly in response to low-level criminal offending. In the absence of meaningful, legally-proportionate alternatives, many jurisdictions default to the use of short-term incarceration, which brings with it significant financial cost as well as negative outcomes for individuals and communities. Up & Out offers an alternative. It is a brief, non-custodial intervention designed for defendants with misdemeanor cases - i.e., a defendant population with serious treatment needs that cannot be sentenced to intensive long-term interventions (e.g., drug treatment) for reasons of proportionality. The Up & Out project unfolded in two phases. Phase 1 began with the creation and validation of a risk-needs assessment for defendants with misdemeanor cases in New York City, designed to determine key criminogenic needs of the misdemeanor target population (Picard-Fritsche et al. 2018). Based on preliminary Phase 1 findings, Phase 2 involved developing the Up & Out curriculum; piloting the brief intervention in two New York City sites; and conducting a process and impact evaluation of the pilot. The current report summarizes findings from Phase 2. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2018. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 13, 2018 at: https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2018/upout_misdemeanors.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2018/upout_misdemeanors.pdf Shelf Number: 152931 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationDiversionEvidence-Based PracticesMisdemeanorsProcedural JusticeRisk-Needs Assessment |
Author: Mock, Lynne Title: Illinois Integrated Protocol Initiative Training Evaluation Report 2015-2017 Summary: Domestic violence is almost ubiquitous in Illinois. Illinois law enforcement agencies reported 118,160 domestic-related crimes in 2016 (Illinois State Police, 2017). The Illinois Family Violence Coordinating Council (IFVCC) has received several federal grants to improve prosecution rates, use of orders of protection, and public safety. IFVCC developed and provided training for police and other criminal justice practitioners to improve knowledge about domestic violence and apply this knowledge to support evidence-based approaches to prosecution. Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) researchers worked with IFVCC Program Director and Evaluation Working Group members to develop evaluation tools for the Council's training protocols and mini-tool kits. Training evaluations from law enforcement, probation officers, emergency services personnel, and 911 telecommunicators were collected and analyzed to determine their confidence levels in processing these cases, perceptions of the trainer and the training, beliefs in supervisory and collegial support for using evidence-based arrest and prosecution approaches, and retention of key information imparted during the training immediately afterwards. Overall, training participants provided positive feedback about the quality of training provided. Most participants reported a significant increase in confidence after the training and positively rated the training and trainers. While some were uncertain about the relevance of the training to their work, most rated the training as applicable. Participants showed significant increases in knowledge in most pre- and post-assessments. A 70-percent correct response rate was set as the minimum score required to demonstrate adequate knowledge of the material from the training sessions. More than half of the domestic violence training for law enforcement and emergency medical services staff participants met this standard, at 58 percent and 53 percent, respectively. Almost half of the probation personnel participants met this standard, at 47 percent. Policy implications explored continuing these trainings and setting specific goals for them. In addition, it would be important to monitor the fidelity of the training provided to insure an increase in investigations, orders of protections and evidence-based arrests. And, work is needed beyond the in-class training and into the workplace, where supervisors can show support for the use of the evidence-based practices and adopt them as standard operating procedure in their departments. Expanding the training modality to online webinar formats with technical assistance outreach would allow more training participation with cost savings in travel and training locations. Future research could involve an evaluation of the predictive reliability of the evaluation tools to show the extent to which new knowledge was adopted and useful in evidence-based prosecutions. Also, a study comparing standard practice to evidence-based prosecutions stemming from IFVCC training protocols and mini-toolkits would measure the effectiveness of the tools to support domestic violence arrest and prosecution. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2018. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed Dec. 11, 2018 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/pdf/IFVCC/IIPI_Training_Evaluation_Report_IFVCC_101818.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/pdf/IFVCC/IIPI_Training_Evaluation_Report_IFVCC_101818.pdf Shelf Number: 153960 Keywords: Domestic ViolenceEvidence-Based PracticesFamily ViolencePolice and Domestic ViolencePolice Training |