A Review of the Status of DMC Efforts in Iowa and Virginia - April 2010

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3. OJJDP and the states should provide more detailed and specific information to localities on identifying and measuring the performance of DMC-related initiatives. States and localities need to understand what to measure for their specific initiatives and how to collect data on these measures. OJJDP should explore options for providing this information, including training aids and individual consultations. 4. OJJDP should fund comprehensive national evaluations of JDAI and the Burns Institute’s approach to dealing with DMC. Although JDAI and the Burns Institute have been working with a number of localities across the country, neither of these initiatives has been adequately evaluated by an objective source. We would suggest that OJJDP seek funding for such an evaluation, and work with the National Institute of Justice to identify goals and objectives for such an evaluation. xiii
Background In 2007, the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) began a project funded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to examine the strategies that have been implemented in Iowa and Virginia to reduce disproportionate minority contact (DMC) in the states’ juvenile justice systems. We were especially interested in using these states as case studies of how states and localities are utilizing empirical information to: (1) identify the extent and nature of the DMC problem; and (2) assess the effectiveness of their efforts to reduce DMC. In each state, we sought to examine both state-level efforts, as well as ongoing efforts in two targeted localities, to address DMC. In Iowa, the two target localities were Johnson and Linn counties, and in Virginia they were the cities of Newport News and Norfolk. To accomplish the goal of the project, staff examined all documents relating to DMC in both states, with a particular focus on those produced in the last five years. These included assessment studies, reports prepared by commissions and consultants, and the DMC components of the states’ three-year plans (and annual updates). We also conducted interviews with state and local stakeholders in both states. The purpose of the interviews was to obtain opinions on DMC issues in the state or locality in which efforts are focused and to gather information on DMC efforts not available in published reports. Interview respondents included state and local juvenile justice system staff, other state staff involved in justice issues, and representatives of community efforts focused on DMC. In addition, project staff attended meetings of local groups meeting to address DMC issues. In Virginia, we also participated in two statewide DMC conferences. Finally, project staff requested juvenile justice data from both states. In Iowa, we received data from the state’s Justice Data Warehouse, as well as data from one of the local court jurisdictions. 1
Page 1 and 2: A Review of the Status of Dispropor
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents Executive Summary
Page 5 and 6: provided a tremendous resource to t
Page 7 and 8: Detention Assessment Instrument (DA
Page 9 and 10: Evaluation Neither Iowa nor Virgini
Page 11 and 12: 5. OJJDP should undertake a compreh
Page 13: 3. States should document all local
Page 17 and 18: applicability to the rest of the co
Page 19 and 20: The Virginia 2009 DMC update report
Page 21 and 22: The latter set of numbers, while on
Page 23 and 24: data, the DCJS site also contains l
Page 25 and 26: egression, for example) designed to
Page 27 and 28: We would point out that the Virgini
Page 29 and 30: example assumes a high RRI for Afri
Page 31 and 32: • Implementing a statewide risk a
Page 33 and 34: Training In June 2007, a two-day cu
Page 35 and 36: of color; diversifying the composit
Page 37 and 38: the data; establishing an instituti
Page 39 and 40: Evaluation The Manual provides two
Page 41 and 42: color in detention (Annie E. Casey
Page 43 and 44: Both JDAI and the Burns Institute s
Page 45 and 46: easonable standard of scientific va
Page 47 and 48: Before offering our conclusions and
Page 49 and 50: majority of minority youth, while i
Page 51 and 52: localities with more severe DMC pro
Page 53 and 54: 2. OJJDP should develop and pilot t
Page 55 and 56: In addition to posting the type of
Page 57 and 58: 3. OJJDP and the states should prov
Page 59 and 60: 19 The Bureau of Justice Assistance
Page 61 and 62: W. Haywood Burns Institute. 2009 An
Page 63 and 64: Linn County: Community Liaison Dive
Page 65 and 66:
1 0.8 RRI 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 2005 2006 2
Page 67 and 68:
community liaison. The time series
Page 69 and 70:
theft charge. We were only able to
Page 71 and 72:
50 n=61 Percent of Complaints 45 40
Page 73 and 74:
there was a decrease in program-eli
Page 75 and 76:
a JCO to complete the long version
Page 77 and 78:
1.4 1.2 1 RRI 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 200
Page 79 and 80:
complaints from January 1 to June 3
Page 81 and 82:
was little change in the percentage
Page 83:
actually receive it; 2) issues or i
show all

A Review of the Status of DMC Efforts in Iowa and Virginia - April 2010

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?