JRSA - State analysts turning data into policy Spacer Contact Us Sitemap
   
banner spacer
Home SACs Publications Resources Projects Members Only Join JRSA
spacing banner
 

SAC Publication Digest

Volume XXVII

July to December, 2017

The SAC Publication Digest is a comprehensive collection of abstracts of state Statistical Analysis Center (SAC) reports, including reports produced for the SACs by outside authors or organizations. The Digest briefly describes the research, data collection, evaluation, and analysis projects and programs of each SAC during this period, and covers a wide array of justice topics and analysis approaches not available from any other source. The Digest is a resource for anyone concerned with understanding the current major justice issues as well as the administration of justice in the states.

The SACs are units or agencies at the state government level that collect and analyze information from all components of the justice system to contribute to the development of sound public policies and assess their impact. The Justice Research and Statistics Association, whose core members are the SACs, prepared this Digest.

Print Current Issue


Administrative/Strategic Planning Law Enforcement
Corrections Other
Courts Policy Analysis
Crime Statistics Probation/Parole
Criminal History Records Recidivism
Domestic Violence Sentencing
Evaluation Sexual Assault
Firearms Substance Abuse
Hate Crimes Victimization
Juvenile Justice

Administrative/Strategic Planning

Colorado
Colorado Commission on Criminal & Juvenile Justice ANNUAL REPORT 2017
Office of Research and Statistics
December 2017, 134 pp.

This report documents the Commission's tenth year of activities and accomplishments. It describes the Commission's activities between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017. During Fiscal Year 2017, the Commission's work focused on the continuity of care for juveniles involved in the justice and child welfare systems, pretrial release, re-entry, community corrections and issues related to the mental health of individuals from point-of-contact with law enforcement through release from jail. The Commission also explored issues regarding Colorado's crisis response system, marijuana legalization and the housing crisis faced by justice involved individuals. Commissioners received an in-depth data presentation on the impact of Senate Bill 13-250, a years-long Commission initiative that resulted in a new sentencing grid for individuals convicted of drug crimes. Additionally, the Commission was keenly interested in the findings from the Community Law Enforcement Action Reporting Act, or the CLEAR Act, which analyzes decisions made at multiple points in the justice system process by race, ethnicity and gender.

Indiana
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute 2016 Annual Report
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
September 2017, 29 pp.

The Indiana Criminal Justice Institute (ICJI) serves as the state's planning agency for criminal justice, juvenile justice, traffic safety, and victim services. Priorities for the agency are set by the board of trustees, with guidance from the executive team, and carried out by staff. ICJI develops long-range strategies for the effective administration of Indiana's criminal and juvenile justice systems and administers federal and state funds to carry out these strategies. Through the use of evidence-based decision making, ICJI works to improve the efficiency of criminal justice system, from call for service through post-conviction. The agency accomplishes this by bringing together key leaders from the criminal justice system at the state, local, and national levels to identify critical issues facing Indiana. This report details ICJI activities carried out during 2016.

Iowa
2017 Iowa Criminal and Juvenile Justice Annual Plan Update
Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal & Juvenile Justice Planning & Statistical Analysis Center
December 2017, 14 pp.

Iowa Code requires the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) to submit a long-range plan for Iowa's justice system to the Governor and General Assembly every five years. CJJP's most recent long-range plan was submitted in December 2015. This code also requires CJJP to annually submit a five-year plan for criminal and juvenile justice programs. The following report is considered the one-year update to CJJP's long-range and five-year plan identifying current initiatives and projects helping to achieve criminal and juvenile justice system goals.

The following report provides a brief review of the criminal and juvenile justice system's long-range and five-year goals established by CJJP, as well as an overview of current initiatives helping to achieve these goals which occurred during 2017. It is important to note that there is some variation in the timeline of reported information within this report; some based upon state or federal fiscal year, while others are referenced by calendar year.

2016 Public Safety Advisory Board Annual Report: Legislative Recommendations to the General Assembly
Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal & Juvenile Justice Planning & Statistical Analysis Center
December 2017, 4 pp.

The Iowa General Assembly, during its 2010 legislative session, created a new body, the Public Safety Advisory Board (PSAB). The purpose of the Board is to provide the General Assembly with an analysis of current and proposed criminal code provisions. The mission of this Board is to provide research, evaluation, and data to the General Assembly to facilitate improvement in the criminal justice system in Iowa in terms of public safety, improved outcomes, and appropriate use of public resources. The following report is a compilation of the PSAB's deliberations for submittal to the General Assembly as required.

Corrections

Illinois
Article: An Examination of Traumatic Experiences and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Among a Sample of Illinois Prisoners
Sharyn Adams, Lily Gleicher, Jessica Reichert, Kaitlyn Konefal, and Dustin Cantrell, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
July 2017

Research has found nearly all prisoners have experienced a traumatic event in their life and a high proportion suffer from PTSD. Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority and WestCare Foundation (Illinois) researchers surveyed 573 Illinois prisoners to understand the trauma they experienced and explore the relationship between trauma and substance misuse. Researchers found 89 percent of those surveyed had both experienced and witnessed more than one traumatic event during their lifetime. Almost one-fourth of the sample was identified as being symptomatic for PTSD (24 percent). In addition, researchers found a relationship found between greater PTSD symptoms and higher drug use. This article describes survey findings and provides implications for police and practice in correctional facilities.

Article: Trauma-Informed and Evidence-Based Practices and Programs to Address Trauma in Correctional Settings
Sharyn Adams, Jaclyn Houston-Kolnik, and Jessica Reichert, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
July 2017

The prevalence of trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is higher among individuals in prison and jail than in the general population. Research has shown a connection between trauma and criminality due in part to the coping mechanisms of aggression and substance misuse after a traumatic event. While the corrections environment itself may cause or exacerbate PTSD symptoms in some individuals, facilities can implement trauma-informed practices to minimize re-traumatization and reduce PTSD symptoms. This article documents the prevalence of trauma and PTSD within this population, and discusses how correctional facilities can implement trauma-informed practices and evidence-based approaches to assist individuals with trauma histories.

Iowa
The Correctional Policy Project: Iowa Prison Population Forecast FY 2017-FY 2027
Sarah Fineran, Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal & Juvenile Justice Planning & Statistical Analysis Center
December 2017, 38 pp.

This is the 26th Iowa Prison Population Forecast prepared by the Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP). This report has been developed to assist the executive and legislative branches of government in annually assessing the impact of current criminal justice policy on Iowa's prison population. The purpose of Iowa's Prison Forecast is to provide an estimate regarding the number of inmates who are projected to be incarcerated at some point in the future if current justice system trends, policies, and practices continue.

Short-term projections suggest the prison population is expected to remain stable through the end of FY 2018, with a population of approximately 8,611 inmates. Long-term projections suggest Iowa's prison population is projected to increase from 8,371 inmates on June 30, 2017 to an estimated 10,396 inmates on June 30, 2027, or by nearly 24% over the ten-year period (Appendix I, Table 1).

Kansas
Fiscal Year 2018 Adult Inmate Prison Population Projections
Kansas Sentencing Commission
September 2017, 50 pp.

In FY 2017 the Kansas prison population increased by 140 inmates or 1.4% when compared with that of FY 2016. A review of the ten-year prison population trend revealed that the FY 2017 prison population indicated the second largest increase since FY 2008. In FY 2017, 9,803 inmates were incarcerated in state prison compared to the 1,165 inmates in FY 2008. A comparison of offender groups incarcerated in prison between FY 2016 and FY 2017 revealed the largest increase was among drug offenders, which increased by 7.6% or 104 inmates.

FY 2017 prison admissions increased by 5.4% or 333 admissions from last year and by 24.8% or 1,292 admissions when compared with that of FY 2013. An examination of the prison bed needs, by offender group, found the largest forecasted increase to be in the drug offender group. Over the ten-year forecast period this group is expected to increase by 437 inmates.

Ten Year KDOC Inmate Custody Classification Projections: FY 2018 through FY 2027
Kansas Sentencing Commission
September 2017, 5 pp.

This report provides a brief summary of the State's custody classification projections. The end of FY 2018 forecasts the total prison population to reach 10,130, including 9,212 males and 918 females. Of the male population, it is projected that 302 unclassified beds, 708 special management beds, 1,366 maximum beds, 1,540 medium high beds, 2,617 medium low beds and 2,679 minimum beds will be needed by the end of FY 2017. By the end of FY 2027, the male prison population is expected to reach 10,407. Of this population, it is projected that 341 unclassified beds, 800 special management beds, 1,544 maximum beds, 1,739 medium high beds, 2,956 medium low beds and 3,027 minimum beds will be needed.

Female prison population is projected to reach 918 inmates in FY 2017 and 1,048 inmates in FY 2027. Of this population, it is projected that 39 unclassified beds, 15 special management beds, 85 maximum beds, 87 medium high beds, 196 medium low beds and 496 minimum beds will be needed by the end of FY 2018. By the end of FY 2027, it is projected that 45 unclassified beds, 17 special management beds, 97 maximum beds, 99 medium high beds, 223 medium low beds and 567 minimum beds will be needed.

Courts

Illinois
Article: An Overview of Problem-Solving Courts and Implications for Practice
Erica Hughes and Jessica Reichert, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
December 2017

Problem-solving courts have operated as separate courts or dockets as an alternative to adjudication or incarceration for more than 20 years. These programs offer clients court accountability, intensive supervision, drug testing, and treatment for substance use disorders, mental health conditions, and other issues. Drug, mental health, domestic violence, and veteran's courts are the most common problem-solving models, with 3,000 in existence around the country. This article provides a state and national overview of problem-solving courts, components shown to reduce recidivism and increase public safety, and implications for policy and practice.

Crime Statistics

California
Crime in California 2016
Criminal Justice Statistics Center
August 2017, 78 pp.

Crime in California, 2016 presents an overview of the criminal justice system in California. Current year statistics are presented for reported crimes, arrests, dispositions of adult felony arrests, adult probation, criminal justice personnel, citizens' complaints against peace officers, domestic violence- related calls for assistance, and law enforcement officers killed or assaulted. In addition, statistics for preceding years are provided for historical context. The violent crime rate per 100,000 population increased 4.1 percent from 2015 to 2016, but the property crime rate decreased 2.9 percent.

Homicide in California 2016
Criminal Justice Statistics Center
August 2017, 58 pp.

Homicide in California, 2016 provides information about the crime of homicide and its victims. It including demographic data on victims, persons arrested for homicide, persons sentenced to death, peace officers feloniously killed in the line of duty, and justifiable homicides. This report focuses on data reported in 2016 with prior years included for context.

Delaware
Crime in Delaware 2012-2016
Eric Rager & Jim Salt, Statistical Analysis Center, Delaware Criminal Justice Council & the State Bureau of Identification
September 2017, 217 pp.

Crime in Delaware is the official report of serious crime known to Delaware law enforcement agencies. This report provides information about 24 Violent, Serious Property, Drug/Narcotic and Other Property and Social offenses reported in Delaware's implementation of the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) operated by the State Bureau of Identification of the Delaware State Police. Data for the years 2012 through 2016 are included in this report. Also, as appropriate, data for the years 2005 through 2011 are included to illustrate long term trends. The report includes a summary of data on serious offenses, clearances, adult and juvenile arrests, and crimes against law enforcement officers at the state and county levels, followed by a detailed data section organized by state and county. A more detailed summary is available in Crime in Delaware 2012 – 2016, Executive Brief.

Crime in Delaware: 2012-2016 Wilmington Supplement
Eric Rager & Jim Salt, Statistical Analysis Center, Delaware Criminal Justice Council & the State Bureau of Identification
September 2017, 23 pp.

Crime in Delaware: 2012 – 2016 is the official report of serious crimes known to law enforcement from 2012 through 2016. The report provides extensive data about crime at the state and county levels. This supplement continues to reflect an evolving effort within the Crime in Delaware reporting process to provide extensive crime data about the City of Wilmington.

The methods used to prepare and analyze Wilmington's data are the same as those described in the main Crime in Delaware report, with one exception: data for Wilmington's two enforcement agencies—the Wilmington Police Department and the Wilmington Fire Marshall—were first merged before analyzing the city's data.

In this supplement, tables and figures with summary level data about offenses, clearances, and arrests are presented first. These are followed by detailed data tables with counts of offenses, clearances, and adult and juvenile arrests (Tables 3 – 6). Summaries of key findings from each level of data are also included and precede the two sections.

Crime in Delaware: Geographic Displays of 2016 Offenses
Eric Rager & Jim Salt, Statistical Analysis Center, Delaware Criminal Justice Council & the State Bureau of Identification
September 2017, 56 pp.

Crime in Delaware: 2012 – 2016 is the official report of serious crimes known to law enforcement from 2012 through 2016. The report provides extensive data about crime at the state and county levels. Since the Crime in Delaware: 2007-2011 report, this supplement continues a reintroduction of a geographic representation of crime data throughout the State of Delaware. Previous mapping products were discontinued after the Crime in Delaware: 2007-2011 report was published after the SAC's mapping expertise was lost due to a retirement. This supplement/insert represents a continued effort to re-introduce mapping into our Crime in Delaware reports.

Missouri
Crime in Missouri 2016 Executive Summary
Statistical Analysis Center, Missouri State Highway Patrol
July 2017, 9 pp.

This Executive Summary of Crime in Missouri is produced by the Missouri State Highway Patrol, Statistical Analysis Center. It is intended to present and provide a basic analysis of Missouri's crime statistics. The Missouri Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program was established in 2001. The functions of the program include collecting, maintaining, and ensuring the integrity of Missouri's UCR crime statistics. In addition, the Missouri UCR Program is responsible for reporting monthly crime statistics to the National Uniform Crime Reporting Program, Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crime in Missouri is an overview of the activity reported to this program. The full Crime in Missouri 2016 is available at http://www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/MSHPWeb/SAC/CIM/CrimeInMissouri.html

Montana
Crime in Montana 2016
Kathy Wilkins, Montana Board of Crime Control
September 2017, 115 pp.

Montana is one of 16 states that submit 100% NIBRS data, beginning the conversion from UCR to NIBRS in 1990.This report is based primarily on data from the MTIBRS. The amount of information collected in the MTIBRS cannot be wholly analyzed in a publication of this size. However, it provides the means to measure the level of crimes known to law enforcement in Montana and showcases the level of detail the data provides.

Nebraska
Crime in Nebraska 2016
Nebraska Crime Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice
July 2017, 5 pp.

This brief publication reports the number of Index Offenses in Nebraska for 2016. Overall, the number of crimes reported to Nebraska law enforcement agencies decreased 2% in 2016 compared to 2015. There were 47,560 crimes reported during January through December of 2016, compared to 46,632 reported during the same period of 2015, an increase of 928 crimes. These numbers include only the crimes of Murder-Manslaughter, Forcible Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Larceny-Theft, Motor Vehicle Theft, and Arson which serve as the Crime Index used to measure crime statewide. Violent increased 8.4%. There were 5,193 violent crimes reported in 2016 compared to 4,791 reported in 2015, an increase of 402 crimes. Property crimes increased 1.3%. There were 42,367 property crimes reported in 2016 compared to 41,841 reported in 2015, an increase of 526 crimes.

New York
Crime in New York State 2016 Final Data
Office of Justice Research and Performance
September 2017, 14 pp.

This report details final index crime statistics for New York State in 2016 and satisfies the reporting requirement found in Section 837 (4)(c) of the Executive Law. Annual historical crime data from 2007 through 2016 for New York State as a whole and its two regions - New York City (Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens and Richmond counties) and Non-New York City (the 57 remaining counties in the state) - also are presented, as is an index crime summary by county for 2015 vs. 2016. Reported crime reached an all-time low in 2016. A total of 376,676 Index crimes were reported, the fewest since statewide reporting began in 1975. That milestone, combined with the state's population increasing by 450,000 residents over the past 10 years, resulted in the state's Index crime rate declining by 20 percent when comparing 2007 vs. 2016.

New York
Crime in New York State 2016 Final Data
Office of Justice Research and Performance
November 2017, 21 pp.

Chapter 481 of the Laws of 1978 substantially revised New York State's penal, criminal procedure and executive laws. The law created Penal Law §70.02, which specified certain Class B through Class E felonies as "violent felony offenses" (VFO). As a result of the legislation, persons convicted of VFOs were sentenced based on laws that were different from the laws that controlled the sentencing of persons who were convicted of other (non-VFO) felonies. This law also required the Division of Criminal Justice Services to report on the processing and disposition of persons charged with VFOs.

This report complies with the original reporting requirement by providing information regarding arrests for VFOs, prosecutions in superior court for persons charged with a violent felony offense in an indictment or superior court information (SCI), and for the disposition of superior court cases for 2012 to 2016.

In addition to presenting statewide data, the report includes summary information for three regional categories: New York City, Large Counties and Small Counties. New York City includes the five boroughs: Bronx, Kings, Queens, New York and Richmond. The Large Counties category includes the counties that collectively report 85 percent of the violent crime in the state outside of New York City: Albany, Broome, Chautauqua, Dutchess, Erie, Monroe, Nassau, Niagara, Oneida, Onondaga, Orange, Rensselaer, Rockland, Schenectady, Suffolk, Ulster and Westchester. The state’s remaining counties make up the Small Counties category.

North Dakota
Crime in North Dakota 2016
Colleen Weltz, Bureau of Criminal Investigation, Office of the Attorney General
September 2017, 115 pp.

The North Dakota Incident-Based Reporting (IBR) program involves the collection, compilation, and analysis of crime and arrest statistics reported by the various local law enforcement agencies throughout the state. Fifty-three sheriffs' departments, 54 police departments, 10 Task Forces and the ND Highway Patrol reported to the ND IBR program in 2016.

The 2016 Crime in North Dakota is based solely upon incident data. Data submitted by ND IBR to the FBI is converted from incident based statistics to the summary system of reporting. In the FBI data, only the most serious of the eight Index crimes are reported. The number of victims is counted in the most serious offenses of homicide, assault, kidnapping or rape. We strongly discourage attempting to compare the ND IBR data to any previously UCR Summary data released by North Dakota or the FBI in the Crime in the United States publications. The data sets are not comparable due to the number of types of crimes reported and that all offenses in the incident are reported in ND IBR.

Homicide in North Dakota 2016
Colleen Weltz, Bureau of Criminal Investigation, Office of the Attorney General
July 2017, 20 pp.

The term "homicide," for purposes of this report, includes the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) offenses of murder and non-negligent manslaughter. Homicide refers to the "willful killing of one human being by another." It does not include attempts to kill, assaults to kill, suicides, accidental deaths, justifiable homicides or deaths caused by gross negligence. This report includes information on the victim's gender and age, weapon type, assailant's gender and age, and whether the incident was related to domestic violence.

Ohio
OCJS Research Brief, Volume 6, Number 2
Ohio Statistical Analysis Center, Office of Criminal Justice Services, Ohio Department of Public Safety
November 2017, 11 pp.

The OCJS Research Brief is the bulletin of the Ohio Statistical Analysis Center. This issue highlights the works of the Combating Trafficking in Persons in Ohio (CTIPOhio) Program. This program was created to address the identification and referral to services of foreign national victims of human trafficking in Ohio. It also includes research summaries on Arrest-Related Deaths in Ohio 2016, Economic Crime in Ohio 2015, and an analysis of Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy (OPOTA) Job Tasks.

Criminal History Records

Criminal History Audit Final Report
Crime Research Group
September 2017, 7 pp.

Despite the heavy reliance on criminal histories in practice and in policy-making, Vermont criminal histories have not been audited since 1994. The current audit is based on data from the Vermont Court Adjudication Database maintained by CRG. In 2015 there were 24,842 charges disposed. Sixty charges from each of Vermont’s fourteen county superior courts were randomly selected for the audit, totaling 840 charges with a precision level +/-2.5%. However, not all dockets were available to be audited because some were missing, sealed or expunged, and some had also been moved to central storage. A total of 690 charges were audited bringing the precision level to about +/-3%.

The paper dockets of every county superior court were reviewed for accuracy from the charging paperwork, the mittimus, and other documents used to enter docket information into the court’s case management system. Researchers also examined Criminal histories of those arraigned in 2013 to assess whether felony arrests were being fingerprinted and submitted to VCIC as required by law. Finally, the data were audited for missing values and logical inconsistencies.

Overall, the discrepancy rate for this criminal history audit is very small. However, the audit did reveal that 36% of felony arrests had no evidence of being fingerprinted. CRG will consult VCIC on the results of this audit and provide the information needed to reduce the rate of missing data.

Domestic Violence

Nebraska
Domestic Violence Report, 2016
Nebraska Crime Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice
July 2017, 10 pp.

This brief publication presents data on incidents domestic violence in Nebraska. It includes summary data at the county level and by law enforcement agencies. It also includes reported incidents and arrests for both aggravated domestic assaults and simple domestic assaults. For the purposes of this report aggravated assault is defined as an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. Simple assault is defined as all assaults which do not involve the use of a firearm, knife, cutting instrument, or other dangerous weapon and in which the victim did not sustain serious or aggravated injuries. Domestic is defined as family or household members and includes: spouses or former spouses, children, persons who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past, persons who have a child in common whether they have been married or have lived together at any time, other persons who are related by consanguinity or affinity, and persons who are presently involved in a dating relationship with each other or who have been involved in a dating relationship with each other.

New York
Domestic Homicide in New York State 2016
Office of Justice Research and Performance
November 2017, 13 pp.

Domestic homicide is defined as a murder or non-negligent manslaughter in which the victim was known to have a domestic relationship with the offender, such as an intimate partner or another family member. This report presents a statistical account of domestic homicides reported by police departments and sheriffs' offices in 2016 to the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS)

Virginia
Biannual Lethality Assessment Program (LAP) Data Analysis January-June, 2017
Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services
December 2017, 9 pp.

The Lethality Assessment Program (LAP) is an innovative strategy being used to help identify victims of domestic violence who are at the highest risk of being seriously injured or killed by their intimate partners. LAP uses a standardized, evidence–based lethality assessment instrument to identify someone in high danger and immediately connect them to a local domestic violence service program. The nationally recognized LAP model was developed by the Maryland Network to End Domestic Violence in 2005 and has been used in Virginia since 2012 through collaboration between the Office of the Attorney General, the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS), and the Virginia Sexual and Domestic Violence Action Alliance.

Evaluation

Illinois
Article: Implementation Science in Criminal Justice: How Implementation of Evidence-based Programs and Practices Affects Outcomes
Lily Gleicher, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
October 2017

With increased attention on the criminal justice system's use of evidence-based practices, focus is needed on the quality of practice implementation and its impact on outcomes. This article defines evidence-based practices, discusses the importance of effective implementation, and outlines the drivers for organizational and operational change.

Evaluation of Illinois Multi-Jurisdictional Drug Task Forces
Jessica Reichert, Erin Sheridan, Matthew DeSalvo, and Sharyn Adams, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.
December 2017, 72 pp.

Researchers conducted an evaluation of 19 MEG/TFs federally funded by ICJIA in 2016. Prior research has been limited to output measures, such as total arrests, due to difficulties differentiating between the impact of MEG/TFs and other local and federal law enforcement efforts. Researchers used quantitative and qualitative methods in this study to measure MEG/TF processes and outcomes MEG/TF administrative data and state arrest records were analyzed. ICJIA researchers conducted focus groups with members of 18 MEG/TFs on resources, structure, guidance, operations, investigations, collaboration, and long-term goals. Researchers collected surveys from 75 MEG/TF staff to measure collaboration and adherence to critical elements of success. Finally, 19 MEG/TF policy board chairmen were surveyed to on proceedings of policy board meetings, how the policy board guides operations, and MEG/TF resources.

Police-Led Referrals to Treatment for Substance Use Disorders in Rural Illinois: An Examination of the Safe Passage Initiative
Jessica Reichert, Lily Gleicher, Lynne Mock, Sharyn Adams, and Kimberly Lopez, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.
October 2017, 39 pp.

Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (ICJIA) researchers conducted a process evaluation of Safe Passage Initiative, an initiative in which individuals get help from police in accessing substance use disorder treatment without fear of arrest. Researchers sought to understand how the initiative was developed and operated, as well as gain perspectives of those involved in the initiative—stakeholders, police officers, treatment providers, and clients. Researchers used a multi-method approach by gathering information from administrative intake data, a law enforcement staff survey, interviews with treatment provider and clients, and a focus group with stakeholders.

Michigan
Developing Performance Metrics for Drug Enforcement: Evaluating the Efficacy of the MJTF Team Using a Tiered and Priority Scoring System, a Continuation Study
Kylei Brown, Amanda Nguyen, and Edmund McGarrell, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University
July 2017, 92 pp.

This report observes twenty-two funded MJTF teams, along with two non-funded teams, to specifically look at the drug-related arrests made by the teams from fiscal year 2014 through fiscal year 2016. The drug categories reported include heroin, prescription opiates, methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana, prescription stimulants, prescription depressants, and synthetic drugs. The report also aims to prioritize drug arrests based on the estimated harm each specific drug could inflict. The data covered in this summary looks at the number of arrests made by the MJTF teams, rather than the arrest scores.

Vermont
Windsor County DUI Treatment Docket Preliminary Outcome Evaluation and Benefit – Cost Analysis Final Report
Robin Joy and Marcia L. Bellas, Crime Research Group
September 2017 (revised December 2017), 9 pp.

This report presents the preliminary findings from an outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis of the Windsor County DUI Treatment Docket (WCDTD). Established in 2012, the purpose of the DUI Treatment Docket is to hold repeat DUI offenders accountable and change their behavior through long-term treatment and other interventions. The analyses address the following questions:

  • How many participants were charged with a criminal offense prosecuted in the Vermont Superior Court Criminal Division during the time that they participated in the WCDTD and after they exited the program?
  • When did participants recidivate?
  • In what county or counties did recidivism occur?
  • What types of crimes were committed by those who recidivated?
  • What other factors contribute to success or failure in the program?

Firearms

Delaware
A Closer Look at Juvenile Shooting Victims: A Supplement to 2016 Delaware Statewide Shooting Report
Jim Salt, Delaware Statistical Analysis Center
December 2017, 11 pp.

This report is the sixth in a series examining criminal, non-accidental shooting incidents in Delaware that resulted in the injury or death of another person. This report focuses on victims injured as a result of, and suspects involved in shooting incidents that occurred in 2016.

The shooting incident-related data included in this report were obtained from Delaware's Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS). Complaint records filed by law enforcement agencies were downloaded from CJIS for 2016 then filtered, reviewed, and triangulated against a database of information from media and law enforcement agency websites to identify incidents where a criminal, non-accidental discharge of a firearm resulted in the death or injury of one or more victims. Once all incidents had been identified, suspect and victim demographic information and arrest histories were downloaded and matched with incident information. Analyses were then conducted to examine characteristics of shooting incidents, victims, and suspects.

Delaware Shootings 2016: An Overview of Incidents, Suspects, and Victims
Jim Salt, Delaware Statistical Analysis Center
October 2017, 28 pp.

This report is the sixth in a series examining criminal, non-accidental shooting incidents in Delaware that resulted in the injury or death of another person. This report focuses on victims injured as a result of, and suspects involved in shooting incidents that occurred in 2016.

The shooting incident-related data included in this report were obtained from Delaware's Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS). Complaint records filed by law enforcement agencies were downloaded from CJIS for 2016 then filtered, reviewed, and triangulated against a database of information from media and law enforcement agency websites to identify incidents where a criminal, non-accidental discharge of a firearm resulted in the death or injury of one or more victims. Once all incidents had been identified, suspect and victim demographic information and arrest histories were downloaded and matched with incident information. Analyses were then conducted to examine characteristics of shooting incidents, victims, and suspects.

Shooting Incidents in Delaware Mapping Supplement for the 2015-2016 Statewide Reports
Eric Ranger, Delaware Statistical Analysis Center
October 2017, 17 pp.

This document contains maps of Delaware shooting incidents for calendar years 2015 and 2016. These maps are intended to supplement the detailed information provided in the 2015 and 2016 versions of Delaware Shootings: An Overview of Incidents, Suspects, Victims, and Dispositions. The maps included in this supplement cover the entire State of Delaware, New Castle, Kent, and Sussex Counties, and the cities of Wilmington and Dover. These maps distinguish between fatal and non-fatal incidents and between those with a single victim and those with multiple victims. The resolution provides enough information to determine relative incident locations without compromising victim and witness privacy issues.

This report provides an analysis of firearm offenses in Tennessee committed between 2013 and 2016. It includes specific information for violent crimes, such as crime committed against persons, involving the use of a firearm. The firearm offense data obtained from the Tennessee Incident Based Reporting System (TIBRS). All data have been verified by reporting agencies for accuracy.

Tennessee
Firearm Offenses in Tennessee 2013-2016
CJIS Division, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
December 2017, 14 pp.

This report provides an analysis of firearm offenses in Tennessee committed between 2013 and 2016. It includes specific information for violent crimes, such as crime committed against persons, involving the use of a firearm. The firearm offense data obtained from the Tennessee Incident Based Reporting System (TIBRS). All data have been verified by reporting agencies for accuracy.

Hate Crimes

California
Hate Crimes in California 2016
Criminal Justice Statistics Center
August 2017, 40 pp.

Hate Crime in California, 2016 reports statistics on hate crimes that occurred in California during 2016. These statistics include the number of hate crime events, hate crime offenses, victims of hate crimes, and suspects of hate crimes. This report also provides statistics from district and elected city attorneys on the number of hate crime cases referred to prosecutors, the number of cases filed in court, and the disposition of those cases. Finally, this report puts these statistics in a historical perspective by providing trend information on the number and types of hate crimes over the past ten years. All law enforcement agencies, district attorneys, and elected city attorney's offices in California, in cooperation with the Department of Justice, have developed local data collection programs and submitted hate crime statistics for this 2016 edition of Hate Crime in California.

New York
Hate Crime in New York State 2016 Annual Report
Office of Justice Research and Performance
September 2017, 14 pp.

Under New York’s Hate Crime Law (Penal Law Article 485) a person commits a hate crime when a designated offense is committed targeting a victim because of a perception or belief about their race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation, or when such an act is committed as a result of that type of perception or belief. These crimes can target an individual, a group of individuals or public or private property. This report details hate crime incidents for 2016 reported to DCJS by police departments and sheriffs' through the Uniform Crime Reporting system as of August 28, 2017. It also details hate crime arrests reported by those agencies and dispositions provided by the courts; both data sets are derived from the Computerized Criminal History (CCH) system at DCJS.

Juvenile Justice

California
Juvenile Justice in California 2016
Criminal Justice Statistics Center
August 2017, 130 pp.

This report presents juvenile justice statistics in four sections: Arrests, Referrals, Petitions, and Adult Court Dispositions. The arrest data were reported by law enforcement agencies and referral data were reported by probation departments. More than half of the juveniles were arrested for a misdemeanor offense. Nearly a third were arrested for a felony offense, and the remainder were arrested for a status offense. Over one-fourth of juveniles referred to county probation departments were detained. Of the juveniles handled formally by the juvenile court, nearly two-thirds were made wards of the court. Comparisons between arrest data and referral data should not be made because of differences in the way data were reported between the two sources.

Illinois
Juvenile Justice in Illinois 2015
Criminal Justice Statistics Center
July 2017, 20 pp.

Juvenile Justice in Illinois, 2015 provides a statistical overview of the juvenile justice system in Illinois across four decision points in which data were available: arrest, detention admissions, active probation caseloads, and new sentence admissions to corrections. Statewide and regional figures are provided with rates spanning from 2011 to 2015. In addition, population, demographic, and offense type information is provided for decision points in which data were available in 2015. Overall, rates for arrest, active probation caseload, detention admissions, and new sentence admissions to corrections have decreased between 2011 and 2015; however, the Central and Southern regions had slight increases in detention admission rates.

Maine
Juvenile Justice in Illinois 2015
Robyn Dumont and Erica King, Maine Statistical Analysis Center, University of Southern Maine
December 2017, 75 pp.

This report summarizes data from four system responses to youth involved with the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) between 2010 and 2014. Included are analyses of youth demographics (gender, age, and race/ethnicity); offense class and type; length of supervision; Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS-CMI) risk scores and levels; and recidivism rates, or in the case of youth on community reintegration, return rates.

It is important to note that the same youth may experience more than one system response (e.g., diversion, supervision, etc.) and that youth have different risk and protective factors. This contributes to outcomes that vary not only by system but by individual as well. Thus, policy solutions must be tailored to the system of response, and programmatic interventions must be tailored to individual characteristics. The one theme that appeared across all system responses was a decrease in number—fewer youth entered Maine's juvenile justice system over time, and this was reflected in each of the four types of responses studied.

Oregon
Oregon Juvenile Justice System Recidivism Analysis: Recidivism Rates by Race, Ethnicity, and Gender
Oregon Statistical Analysis Center
December 2017, 49pp.

This report expands on the July 2016 report by presenting recidivism rates broken out by race/ethnicity and gender. This report contains statewide measures of three-year recidivism by youth race/ethnicity and gender for all youth placed on probation or released from a youth correctional facility between July 2001 and June 2011. This includes youth placed on county probation, youth placed on OYA probation, OYA youth released from OYA facilities, and DOC youth released from OYA facilities. Recidivism rates by race/ethnicity and gender are presented for all of these youth combined, as well as separately for each of the four juvenile justice cohorts (county probation, OYA probation, OYA parole, and DOC release). The cohorts, recidivism measures, and methodologies used in this report are identical to those of the earlier report.

Law Enforcement

California
Use of Force Incident Reporting, 2016
Criminal Justice Statistics Center
August 2017, 68 pp.

URSUS, 2016 presents a summary overview of use of force and discharge of firearm incidents as defined in Government Code section 12525.2.  Due to the narrow definition of this statute, the data contained in this report only represent incidents where use of force resulted in serious bodily injury or death or the discharge of a firearm.  Caution should be used in making comparisons or generalizations with this data set as it does not contain the full spectrum of use of force incidents that occurred in California. In 2016, there were 782 incidents that involved use of force resulting in serious bodily injury or death of a civilian or officer; or the discharge of a firearm. Of the 782 incidents, 328 reported a discharge of a firearm.

Colorado
Summary: Report on the C.L.E.A.R. Act: Community Law Enforcement Action Reporting Act
Kim English, Peg Flick, and Laurence Lucero, Office of Research and Statistics
October 2017, 61 pp.

In 2015, the General Assembly passed Senate Bill 185, the Community Law Enforcement Action Reporting Act, or the CLEAR Act. The CLEAR Act mandates that the Division of Criminal Justice (DCJ) annually analyze and report data provided by law enforcement agencies,3 the Judicial Department, and the adult Parole Board, to reflect decisions made at multiple points in the justice system process. The CLEAR Act requires that the data be analyzed by race/ethnicity and gender. This study presents information for calendar year 2016.

Illinois
Article: Procedural Justice in Policing: How the Process of Justice Impacts Public Attitudes and Law Enforcement Outcomes
Emma Peterson, Jessica Reichert, and Kaitlyn Konefal, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
November 2017

An increasing number of widely publicized and divisive incidents between police and citizens suggest a need for police policies and practices to improve procedural justice. Procedural justice emphasizes the need for police to demonstrate their legitimacy to the public in four areas—voice, neutrality, respect, and trustworthiness. This article explains procedural justice and police legitimacy, examines the often racial divide between citizens and police, and offers implications for police policy and practice.

Article: Procedural Justice in Policing: How the Process of Justice Impacts Public Attitudes and Law Enforcement Outcomes
Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
December 2017, 31 pp.

The Law Enforcement Information Sharing Task Force (Task Force) reviewed the mission set forth in PA 99-0874 and determined that the imminent technological possibilities were a priority. Moreover, while PA 99-0874 highlights the importance of studying information sharing technologies and processes for the purpose of improving the criminal discovery process, the Task Force determined that the state's role in facilitating information sharing for public safety and criminal justice agencies must go beyond criminal discovery. Illinois must advance its efforts for using technology to improve multi-jurisdictional, cross-boundary, information sharing between local and state public safety agencies and criminal justice agencies. The Task Force believes that the charge set forth by PA 99-0874 could serve as an effective use case for state and local governments to collaboratively initiate the development of a comprehensive statewide information sharing environment for the public safety and criminal justice domain. However, the Task Force also agreed that it did not have the resources and or capacities to fully examine this complex issue, which would include, at a minimum, a deeper analysis of the different information systems local jurisdictions use, how the state could promote more effective information sharing practices among local jurisdictions, and the real cost and benefits of implementation. As such, the Task Force offers this report as a preliminary analysis and set of recommendations to promote more effective and efficient state and local information sharing practices and systems.

Michigan
Developing Performance Metrics for Drug Enforcement: Evaluating the Efficacy of the MJTF Team Using a Tiered and Priority Scoring System, a Continuation Study
Kylei Brown, Amanda Nguyen, and Edmund McGarrell, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University
July 2017, 92 pp.

This report observes twenty-two funded MJTF teams, along with two non-funded teams, to specifically look at the drug-related arrests made by the teams from fiscal year 2014 through fiscal year 2016. The drug categories reported include heroin, prescription opiates, methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana, prescription stimulants, prescription depressants, and synthetic drugs. The report also aims to prioritize drug arrests based on the estimated harm each specific drug could inflict. The data covered in this summary looks at the number of arrests made by the MJTF teams, rather than the arrest scores.

Vermont
Law Enforcement Data Access and Dissemination Project Final Report
Crime Research Group, Inc.
September 2017, 12 pp.

The Vermont Department of Public Safety (DPS) is the designated SAC for Vermont and they contract with Crime Research Group, Inc. (CRG) to provide SAC services. DPS and CRG regularly encounter two major hurdles when trying to utilize law enforcement data to answer criminal justice-related questions: 1) It is time consuming and costly to gain permission from LEAs statewide to access their data; and 2) It is difficult to extract data from the three computer aided dispatch and records management systems. The latter problem is not only an issue for the SAC; LEAs themselves have difficulty accessing their own data and as a result have difficulty answering their own questions as well as questions from town officials, community groups, state agencies, the legislature, the media, and other groups. The Vermont Statewide Law Enforcement Data Access Project was designed to resolve both of these impediments by establishing a data sharing agreement between LEAs and DPS/CRG which is designed to facilitate the creation of a shared data set or "Flat File" which can be used to answer questions of interest to law enforcement agencies and others.

Law Enforcement Data Quality Assessment Project Final Report
Crime Research Group, Inc.
December 2017, 11 pp.

Based on crime data reported to the Vermont Crime Information Center (VCIC), the FBI reports that overall crime in Vermont dropped by 60.9 percent between 2012 and 2015. The accuracy of Vermont crime statistics has been called into question, as the precipitous drop in crime could reflect inaccuracies in reporting.

In February 2017, the Crime Research Group (CRG) convened a Data Quality Assessment Working Group to discuss problems associated with NIBRS data quality reported to the FBI. The group consisted of law enforcement executives, officers, dispatchers, administrative assistants, and Vermont’s NIBRS auditor/data analyst for VCIC. Several attendees serve as NIBRS auditors for their agency. The report contains the findings and recommendations on improving NIBRS data quality in Vermont.

Other

Nevada
Regulation of the Gaming Industry Across Time and Place
Research in Brief (CCJP 2017-01)
Melissa L. Rorie, Center for Criminal and Justice Policy
September 2017, 12 pp.

This brief examines how the state and its agents manage balance the social benefits and social costs associated with gaming legalization. Specifically, the current research uses the gambling industries in Las Vegas, NV and Atlantic City, NJ and explores how gaming regulators help legitimize the industry (to reap the economic benefits of consumption) while also ensuring that consumers and their citizens are protected. The brief begins with an overview of the costs/benefits involved with gambling legalization as well as the industry characteristics of Las Vegas and Atlantic City. Then it explains the methods used to examine regulatory responses to violations by gaming licensees in both jurisdictions, followed by the results of the research study. The research brief concludes with a discussion of the broader implications of the research for regulatory agencies, other stakeholders, and other researchers interested in the study of gambling regulation.

Vermont
Vermont Results First - Department for Children and Families (DCF) Program Inventory and Benefit-Cost Analysis of Intensive Family-Based Services (IFBS)
Crime Research Group
December 2017, 13 pp.

A program inventory and benefit-cost analysis are intended to help policymakers at all levels of government identify evidence-based programs and make data-driven budget decisions. This report on Vermont’s Intensive Family-Based Services (IFBS) program differs from previous Results First reports produced by Crime Research Group (CRG) in that it focuses on just one program, rather than assessing the evidence base of all programs operated in a policy area or agency. Due to this single program focus, this report instead assesses variation in implementation of IFBS across multiple Department for Children and Families (DCF) providers. Consequently, it became important to review the research on the programs that most closely resemble IFBS. Homebuilders is the one program that stood out for its positive results and cost effectiveness. Because of this we used Homebuilders as a benchmark to compare to the DCF Handbook and Contract, and to the key program elements implemented by the local providers.

Policy Analysis

District of Columbia
The District's Youth Rehabilitation Act: An Analysis
Ellen P. McCann, Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
September 2017, 66 pp.

In December 2016, Mayor Bowser requested that the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (CJCC) conduct analysis on the District's Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA). The specific questions to be examined include: how is the YRA applied; what is the recidivism rate of those who received it; and, what programming is available to those sentenced under YRA? In addition to the Mayor's research request, on the same day, Councilmember Allen requested that the CJCC address: how many times YRA was applied to felonies, and later resulted in a set aside; how many later committed another felony, particularly with a weapon or a crime of violence; and how are programs identified for these persons, and the details of their supervision. Responses to Councilmember Allen's requests were submitted February 1, 2017, and informed the analysis conducted herein. The research conducted in response to the Mayor's request examines all eligible offenses, cases, and offenders that were convicted in the DC Superior Court in 2010, 2011, and 2012. This timeframe was selected to offer at least two years after the completion of a term in order to gauge reoffending.

Indiana
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute Annual Evaluation of Indiana’s Criminal Code Reform
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
December 2017, 174 pp.

In 2013, the Indiana General Assembly introduced House Bill 1006 (HB 1006), which revised the state's criminal code. The legislature sought to improve the code by simplifying procedure, ensuring effectiveness and fairness, implementing evidence-based practices, diverting non-dangerous offenders, maximizing judicial discretion, maintaining proportionality of penalties across the criminal code, increase the certainty of sentences, and preserve public welfare and secure the fundamental rights of individuals.

This legislation mandates that the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute (ICJI) provide a comprehensive annual report on the impact of HB 1006.  This report seeks to build on previous reports and evaluate the effects of HB 1006 on the entirety of the Indiana criminal justice system.  It is based on data gathered by ICJI researchers from the Department of Correction and Community Corrections, courts, probation, and county jails. In addition to these data, ICJI sought out the voices of criminal justice, mental health, and addictions practitioners at local and state levels in public and private agencies to contextualize the story of Indiana criminal code reform through surveys and focus groups.

Iowa
2017 State Justice System Legislation Monitoring Report
Sarah Fineran, Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal & Juvenile Justice Planning & Statistical Analysis Center
December 2017, 10 pp.

The Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council (CJJPAC) requested that the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) monitor the correctional impact of enacted legislation of particular interest. The following information provides a summary of enacted legislation during the 2017 session by the 87th General Assembly and the estimated correctional impact.

New York
New York State 2009 Drug Law Changes, 2017 Annual Report
Office of Justice Research and Performance
Novembeember 2017, 26 pp.

This report details final index crime statistics for New York State in 2016 and satisfies the reporting requirement found in Section 837 (4)(c) of the Executive Law. Annual historical crime data from 2007 through 2016 for New York State as a whole and its two regions - New York City (Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens and Richmond counties) and Non-New York City (the 57 remaining counties in the state) - also are presented, as is an index crime summary by county for 2015 vs. 2016. Reported crime reached an all-time low in 2016. A total of 376,676 Index crimes were reported, the fewest since statewide reporting began in 1975. That milestone, combined with the state's population increasing by 450,000 residents over the past 10 years, resulted in the state's Index crime rate declining by 20 percent when comparing 2007 vs. 2016.

Probation/Parole

New Mexico
Absconding and Other Supervision Violations: A Study of Probationers, Parolees, and Dual Supervision in New Mexico
Kristine Denman, Dale Willits, and Jenna Dole, New Mexico Statistical Analysis Center
August 2017, 111 pp.

This study examined violations of supervision among a cohort of individuals under state supervision in New Mexico. We included probationers, who comprise the vast majority of those under state supervision, parolees, and those supervised under dual supervision (both probation and parole). We focused on several key questions, intended to improve our understanding of violations of supervision and revocations. Additionally, we built on our prior study of parole violations where we found that absconding was one of the most common violations of parole, and the most salient predictor of revocation. The key differences between the prior study and the current one are that we expanded the study population to include probationers, and added variables that may help to explain absconding behavior. Our overall objectives for this part of the study were to explore the risk and protective factors associated with absconding, and to understand whether these differed by supervision type. In the summary below, we list each of the key questions guiding the research and summarize the key findings.

Recidivism

Delaware
Recidivism in Delaware
Philisa Weidlein-Crist & Charles Huenke, Statistical Analysis Center, Delaware Criminal Justice Council
December 2017, 31 pp.

This is the fifth report produced pursuant to SB 226. As required, three measures of recidivism were analyzed for this report: rearrest, reconviction, and recommitment. As in previous reports, only inmates released from Delaware prison terms were included in this study. In Delaware's unified corrections system, prison is defined as an incarceration term of more than one year, either as a sentence on a single charge or as the aggregate of contiguous multiple sentences. Similar to previous reports, this report provides recidivism information on prison release cohorts for three consecutive years (2011-2013). The one-, two-, and three-year recidivism rates for the three cohorts are presented. By the end of three years, about 75% of offenders in each cohort had been rearrested for a serious offense. More than 65% had a reconviction and almost two-thirds had a recommitment.

Illinois
Performance Incentive Funding for Prison Diversion: An Implementation Evaluation of the Winnebago County Adult Redeploy Illinois Program
Lynne Mock, Risa Sacomani, and Sara Gonzales, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
October 2017, 48 pp.

Adult Redeploy Illinois (ARI) awards funds to counties to divert adult non-violent individuals from state prisons by developing and implementing evidence-based supervision programs which are linked to treatment and supportive services in their communities. ARI is a performance incentive funding program whereby continued funding is based on meeting performance measures including a reduction in the number of prison admissions from a defined eligible target population. A monetary penalty may be assessed by the ARI Oversight Board when a program fails to meet its target reduction.

This report presents an implementation evaluation of the ARI-funded Winnebago County Drug Court (WCDC) using qualitative and quantitative approaches. It covers the initial pilot phase of the program, which ran from October 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012. Data collection included four components: (1) interviews with staff and stakeholders, (2) interviews with probationers, (3) analysis of program administrative data, and (4) criminal history record information.

Oregon
Oregon Recidivism Analysis
Oregon Statistical Analysis Center
November 2017, 14 pp.

This report is released twice a year in a series of comprehensive statewide analysis using the definition of adult recidivism in HB 3194 (codified in ORS 423.557). The most recent data available is included, and the statewide recidivism analysis is provided in this report. In addition, the CJC has released an interactive and online data dashboard to present the recidivism analyses. This data dashboard includes many different filters and breakouts of the recidivism data, including results by gender, age, race, county, and risk-to-recidivate level. This dashboard is available to criminal justice stakeholders and members of the public as an interactive and online data sharing tool to provide recidivism analysis results.

Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of Reentry Programs in Washington and Linn Counties
Jason E. Chapman, Michael R. McCart, & Ashli J. Sheidow, Oregon Social Learning Center
August 2017, 59 pp.

This report describes the results of a quasi-experimental evaluation of Reentry programs in Washington and Linn Counties. Overall, results provide evidence from multiple sources indicating the Reentry programs as delivered in Washington and Linn Counties are associated with reduced recidivism among offenders. Compared to statewide trends, Linn County had years with greater reductions in recidivism for arrests, convictions, and prison use. Compared to statewide trends, Washington County had years with greater reductions in recidivism for arrests and convictions, and kept pace with the statewide change in prison use. Such findings are consistent with a large-scale meta-analysis indicating that Reentry programs are effective at reducing criminal recidivism. This is particularly true for Reentry programs that are initiated when offenders are still incarcerated (i.e., a Reach-in) and continue through their release to the community, as is the case for the programs in Washington and Linn. As an example, when there was a high rate of pre-release Reach-ins, arrest recidivism was up to 20% lower than when there was no use of Reach-Ins.

Sentencing

District of Columbia
Diversion and Deflection in the District of Columbia Brief (Vol. 2 Issue 1)
Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
Fall 2017, 7 pp.

Diversion and deflection programs seek to re-direct or channel people away from adult or juvenile justice systems. The concept of diversion is based on the theory that processing certain individuals through the justice system may do more harm than good, or maybe an inappropriate response for someone with unmet behavioral health needs. This brief explains diversion and deflection programs and it details some of these types programs currently being used in the District of Columbia.

Sexual Assault

Idaho
Sexual Violence in Idaho: 2009-2015
Daniel Swerin, Idaho Statistical Analysis Center
August 2017, 24 pp.

Results from the Idaho Crime Victimization Survey indicate that 202 per 1,000 residents have been sexually assaulted in their lifetime; based on current population estimates, this equates to more than 330,000 Idaho residents. The purpose of this report is to inform the criminal justice community and other interested parties about the prevalence, characteristics, and response to sexual violence in Idaho. Information discussed throughout this report reflects reported sexual violence in Idaho from 2009 through 2015. This report utilizes Crime data from the Idaho Incident Based Reporting System (IIBRS) and criminal court filings for defendants aged 18 or older from the Idaho Supreme Court Repository.

Michigan
Patterns of Childhood Sexual Victimization in Michigan: MICR 2014-2015 Report
Jason Rydberg, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University
August 2017, 22 pp.

This report describes childhood sexual victimization in Michigan by using data from the 2014 and 2015 Michigan Incident Crime Reports (MICR) to compare child victims (under 13), minor victims (under 18), and adult victims (18 and older). Descriptive analyses focus on the offenders, victims, and contexts of sexual assault. Some of the key finding show that approximately half of sexual victimizations against minors reported in 2014 and 2015 were committed against children under the age of 13, and about 32% were committed against victims over age 17. Most victims of sexual offenses are female, and those victims are at the highest risk of victimization between ages 12 and 17. Male victims are less common, but are at their highest risk of victimization at younger ages than females, between 3 and 11 years. Finally, the overall trends in the Michigan data are largely consistent with national trends, notably that young persons are at a disproportionately high risk of sexual victimization, and young persons are overrepresented among the offenders of such crimes.

Substance Abuse

Illinois
Article: An Overview of Medication-Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorders for Criminal Justice-Involved Individuals
Jessica Reichert, Lily Gleicher, and Elizabeth Salisbury-Afshar, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
July 2017

There is a national opioid epidemic and one intervention to help those suffering from an opioid use disorder (OUD) is medication-assisted treatment (MAT). MAT is the use of medications in conjunction with behavioral therapy as part of a long-term treatment regimen. There are three main MAT medications used today—methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone. Research has shown MAT, in particular the use of methadone or buprenorphine, is considered an evidence-based practice to treat OUD. Studies indicate those in MAT have better outcomes than those who engage in therapy alone. This article provides an overview of MAT with a focus on use with criminal justice populations.

Article: Exploring Effective Post-Opioid Overdose Reversal Responses for Law Enforcement and Other First Responders
Jessica Reichert and Jac Charlier, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
November 2017

First responders across the country are carrying and administering naloxone to successfully reverse countless overdose deaths. However, experiencing a revival isn't always a deterrent for those suffering with opioid use disorder, as many continue to use, experience repeated overdoses and repeatedly come into contact with local law enforcement. Some police officers are beginning to experience a frustration with the repeated calls for revival—as well as continued and frequent contacts and arrests—of the same individuals. Communities are learning overdose reversal is just the first step in opioid intervention. This article explores law enforcement overdose reversal and post-resuscitation and treatment responses in the newly emerging field of pre-arrest diversion. With opioid deaths on the rise and fentanyl deaths rapidly increasing, a crisis of this magnitude requires innovative responses at multiple intervention points, including post-overdose, as part of a comprehensive strategy to aid in the treatment of and recovery from opioid use disorders.

Article: Fighting the Opioid Crisis through Substance Use Disorder Treatment: A Study of a Police Program Model in Illinois
Jessica Reichert, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
September 2017

Seeking to more effectively help individuals suffering from opioid use disorder, police departments across the country are embracing a deflection model that offers treatment access to those in need. Researchers interviewed representatives of seven agencies employing law enforcement-based treatment program models in Illinois to better understand operations, leverage lessons learned, measure sustainability, and inform other agencies as they implement their own programs.

Vermont
Windsor County DUI Treatment Docket Preliminary Outcome Evaluation and Benefit – Cost Analysis Final Report
Robin Joy and Marcia L. Bellas, Crime Research Group
September 2017 (revised December 2017), 9 pp.

Robin Joy and Marcia L. Bellas, Crime Research Group September 2017 (revised December 2017), 9 pp. This report presents the preliminary findings from an outcome evaluation and cost-benefit analysis of the Windsor County DUI Treatment Docket (WCDTD). Established in 2012, the purpose of the DUI Treatment Docket is to hold repeat DUI offenders accountable and change their behavior through long-term treatment and other interventions. The analyses address the following questions:

  • How many participants were charged with a criminal offense prosecuted in the Vermont Superior Court Criminal Division during the time that they participated in the WCDTD and after they exited the program?
  • When did participants recidivate?
  • In what county or counties did recidivism occur?
  • What types of crimes were committed by those who recidivated?
  • What other factors contribute to success or failure in the program?

Vermont Results First: Inventory and Benefit-Cost Analysis for The Department of Health / Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Program's Medication Assisted Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (Hub and Spoke)
Robin Joy and Marcia L. Bellas, Crime Research Group
December 2017, 14 pp.

A program inventory and benefit-cost analysis are intended to help policymakers at all levels of government identify evidence-based programs and make data-driven budget decisions. This Inventory and Benefit-Cost Analysis of the Vermont Hub and Spoke Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) program for opioid use disorder differs from previous Results First reports produced by CRG in that it focuses on just one program, rather than assessing the evidence base of all programs operating in a policy area or agency.1 Program inventories were completed for the Hubs but not Spokes, so additional program information is presented for Hubs. The Hub inventory assesses similarities and variations of MAT across multiple Hub providers. This report includes the financial benefits and costs to the state associated with operating both Hubs and Spokes.

Victimization

Illinois
Article: A Comprehensive Model for Underserved Victims of Violent Crime: Trauma Recovery Centers
Jaclyn Houston-Kolnik, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
August 2017

Violent crime victimization can impact multiple areas of victims' lives. Victims who are underserved or marginalized face unique individual, societal, and cultural hurdles that impact help-seeking. Models of service delivery that provide a single point of contact and comprehensive, evidence-based services hold promise to serve victims whose needs extend beyond traditional services. Comprehensive trauma recovery center (TRC) models have been shown to lead to positive survivor outcomes. TRC model expansion should be explored to assess how they might complement existing services and reach underserved individuals and groups.

Article: An Examination of Fear of Crime and Social Vulnerability in Chicago Neighborhoods
Jessica Reichert and Kaitlyn Konefal, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
August 2017

Although there have been documented declines in U.S. crime rates in past decades, recent news headlines in Chicago often highlight incidents of, and concerns about, violence, particularly gun violence. Prior research has noted fear of crime in urban neighborhoods is associated with physical deterioration, as well as social disorganization and vulnerability. ICJIA researchers surveyed more than 1,000 Chicago residents in 16 neighborhoods on fear of crime and compared their responses to a measure of neighborhood social vulnerability. This study found an association between social vulnerability and fear of crime. In addition, half of the residents had greater fear than expected based on neighborhood social vulnerability and half had less fear of crime than expected. Future research can serve to understand the impact of, and ways to reduce, unwarranted fear that can have a negative impact on individuals.

Article: Comprehensive Legal Services for Victims of Crime
Amanda L. Vasquez, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
December 2017

Illinois victims and victim service providers indicate that legal services are needed post-victimization, and for many victims in the state this need is left unmet. Meeting a victim's legal needs is key to ensuring their safety and security and enabling them to continue to recover from their victimization experience. Crime victims can directly benefit from access to comprehensive legal services, including legal advocacy, civil legal services and victim rights enforcement. Numerous legal avenues are open to victims of crime, and legal advocates and attorneys are well positioned to assist victims as they engage either the criminal justice or civil legal systems. This article explores types of victim legal services, the roles of legal service providers, the needs and potential remedies available to victims by crime type, and barriers to legal service access and delivery. Implications for both providers and funders to ensure comprehensive legal services to victims of crime also are discussed.

Victim Need Report: Service Providers' Perspectives on the Needs of Crime Victims and Service Gaps
Amanda L. Vasquez and Jaclyn Houston-Kolnik, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
November 2017, 43 pp.

In June 2016, ICJIA researchers conducted a statewide study to better understand crime victim needs, identify service gaps, and measure the capacity of Illinois victim service providers. The study was initiated to inform ICJIA's strategic plan to establish victim service funding priorities for use of S.T.O.P. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and Victim of Crime Act (VOCA) funds. This report presents research findings on victim needs and gaps in services as described by victim service providers serving victims of crime in Illinois. Victim service providers (N = 235) from all regions of the state responded to an online survey and a subset of providers (N = 28) also participated in focus groups. The findings in this report draw from these quantitative survey data and qualitative focus group data, as well as administrative data.

Maryland
Governor's Office of Crime Control & Prevention Maryland State Board of Victim Services Annual Report
December 2017, 11 pp.

This annual report highlights the important work carried out by the Maryland State Board of Victim Services, State Victim Services Coordinator, and the Governor's Office of Crime Control & Prevention staff, who work in partnership with crime victim service providers, local communities, executive, legislative, and judicial branches of state government, and the federal government to better serve Maryland crime victims. This report encompasses the Maryland State Board of Victim Services' activities for the period of July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017. The Maryland State Board of Victim Services continues to improve the treatment of crime victims by working collectively with criminal justice agencies and private non-profit organizations, creating and expanding innovative initiatives, and welcoming feedback and suggestions from individuals and communities across the state.

Michigan
Governor's Office of Crime Control & Intimate Partner Violence in Michigan: An Analysis of Michigan Incident Crime Reports (MICR) for 2014 and 2015
Rebecca Stone and Jason Rydberg, Michigan Justice Statistics Center, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University
September 2017, 29 pp.

This report details patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization and offending by using the 2014 and 2015 Michigan Incident Crime Reports (MICR). Defining intimate partner violence as physical, sexual, or psychological harm committed by current or former intimate partners or spouses, this report examines characteristics of victims, offenders, their relationships, and offense characteristics. Key results include: Between 2014 and 2015 there were 85,636 IPV offenses reported by Michigan law enforcement agencies, affecting 87,904 victims. The frequency of IPV offenses was relatively stable between 2014 and 2015, with the exception of intimidation offenses, which increased by 9% from 2014 to 2015. Victims and offenders tended to be between 25-34 years old, with the exception of sexual IPV victims, who were most commonly under 18 years old. Offenses between spouses were the most likely to result in an arrest, with offenses among dating relationships and former relationships significantly less likely to result in an arrest.

Ohio
The Ohio Crime Victimization Survey, 2016
Alan Wedd and Kristina Nicholson, Ohio Office of Criminal Justice Services
2016, 46 pp.

The Ohio Crime Victimization Survey (OCVS) was developed by the Ohio Statistical Analysis Center (SAC) to address the known gaps in traditional law enforcement reporting systems. It is designed to collect victimization data related to crimes against persons, crimes against property, and cybercrime. Data from victimization surveys can be used to estimate the frequency of crime, understand why crimes are not reported to law enforcement, and determine the demographic characteristics of crime victims. These data are designed to supplement data that are reported to law enforcement in order to provide a more complete understanding of crime in Ohio. The survey is based on a sample of 1,152 Ohio residents age 18 and older who had lived in their current zip code for at least one year to participate in the survey.

Oklahoma
Oklahoma Statistical Analysis Center and Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation
Oklahoma Statistical Analysis Center and Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation
2016, 50 pp.

The Oklahoma Crime Victimization Survey measures incidents of crime experienced by Oklahomans. This is the third crime victimization survey completed by the Oklahoma Statistical Analysis Center. Researchers completed the first survey in 2011, followed by a second survey in 2012. The survey is modeled after the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. This year's survey included additional questions about crimes related to identity theft and perceptions about the criminal justice system in Oklahoma. To measure crime incidents related to identity theft, project staff used questions from the Identity Theft Supplement (2014) to the National Crime Victimization Survey.

The Oklahoma Statistical Analysis Center was one of nine states to receive funding to conduct a survey in 2016 from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Project staff administered the survey in the early months of 2016. The survey covered crime incidents that occurred in 2015. Project staff limited comparisons of findings from the 2016 survey to previous surveys because of the changes made to the survey; however, comparisons of findings related to respondents' perceptions are included in the second half of this report.




© 1998, Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA). All rights reserved.

1000 Vermont Avenue, NW, Suite 450, Washington, DC 20005
phone: (202) 842-9330
fax: (202) 448-1723

email:  For technical issues about the website, contact webmaster@jrsa.org
email:  For general information, contact cjinfo@jrsa.org

Notice of Federal Funding and Federal Disclaimer

Home | SACs | ISAR | Publications | Resources | Projects | Events | Contact Us | Site Map