Title: National Institute of Justice 1998 Annual Report to Congress.
Series: Annual Report
Author: NIJ
Published: NIJ, December 1999
Subject: Criminal justice system
147 pages
255,000 bytes
-------------------------------
Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text
file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat
graphic file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS
at 800-851-3420 (877-712-9279 for TTY users).
-------------------------------
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice
National Institute of Justice
1998 Annual Report To Congress
December 1999
-------------------------------
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20531
Janet Reno
Attorney General
Daniel Marcus
Acting Associate Attorney General
Laurie Robinson
Assistant Attorney General
Noel Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General
Jeremy Travis
Director, National Institute of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
World Wide Web Site
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov
National Institute of Justice
World Wide Web Site
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij
The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of
Justice Statistics, Office of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention, and
Office for Victims of Crime.
NCJ 177617
-------------------------------
Table of Contents
Message From the Director
NIJ in Brief
o Organization and Financial Data
o Growth in Funding and Collaborative Activities Since 1994
Overview of the Year
o Basic Research
o Applied Research
o Technology Development
o Testing New Ideas and Technology
o Expanding the Horizons
o Sharing Knowledge
Selected Highlights
o Making Communities Safer
o Monitoring Arrestees' Drug Use Reveals Community Trends
o Strategic Approaches to Community Safety
o Policing in the Community
o Minimizing Risk Through Less-Than-Lethal Technology
o Taking Steps to Prevent Crime
o Mapping Out Crime
o Partnerships Promote the Safety of Women and Families
o Enhancing Public Safety by Improving and Detecting Weapons
o Finding New Ways of Working Together
o Partnerships--Multiplying Perspectives and Resources
o Consulting the Experts in Science and Technology
o Guiding the User of State-of-the-Art Technology
o Exploring Issues of Special Concern
o Understanding Crime in Its Context: The Project on Human
Development in Chicago Neighborhoods
o Examining Youth and Crime Issues
o Issues in Sentencing and Corrections
Appendixes
Appendix A: Awards Made in Fiscal Year 1998
o Corrections
o Courts
o Crime Mapping
o Crime Prevention
o Drugs and Crime
o Information Dissemination and General Support
o International Crime
o Policing
o Public Housing and Crime
o Schools
o Sentencing
o Technology Development
o Victimization and Victim Services
o Violence
o Youth
Appendix B: Documents Published in Fiscal Year 1998
o Corrections
o Courts and Sentencing
o Crime Prevention
o Drugs and Crime
o Law Enforcement
o Technology
o Victims
o Violence
o Other
o NIJ Journal
o Solicitations for Research and Evaluation
o Annual Reports
o Award Lists
o Catalogs of Publications
o Electronic Publications
-------------------------------
Message From the Director
Criminal justice research has come of age in the 30 years since Congress
established NIJ as the Nation's criminal justice research institute. Much of
the information in this year's annual report is based on accumulated
knowledge gained through past research.
The natural curve of scientific discovery is a deliberate one--gathering
evidence, analyzing it, and replicating findings take time. Progress often
comes in small increments. The process can be compared to building
blocks in which each block contributes to a stronger foundation and a
sounder structure. NIJ has followed this building block approach--
maximizing each success, learning from each disappointment, and
making headway so that scientific research today is more frequently
recognized as an integral step toward effective policy and practice.
As a research institute, NIJ recognizes that the challenges of the 21st
century involve an acceptance of the incremental pace of scientific
research, the continuing assurance of the rigor of the scientific process,
and the importance of prompt dissemination of the results so that they may
be assimilated into both policy and practice.
It is a testament to the perseverance of researchers and practitioners and
the importance of knowledge building for policy and practice that we have
come this far; the promise of tomorrow lies in the ability to sustain our
collaboration to meet continuing challenges.
Public safety issues will continue to be complex and perplexing, and
many crime issues of the past remain with us. Issues related to the pursuit
of justice and the role of the criminal sanction assume new saliency as
rates of imprisonment continue to soar. The good news is that researchers
and practitioners are beginning to tease apart the complexities of crime,
crime prevention, criminal behavior, and the impact of crime policies
through use of an ever stronger scientific infrastructure.
Criminal justice research is making a difference, and an increasing
number of practitioners and policymakers are using research data in
crafting their decisions and policies. Thirty years ago, when the
President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of
Justice recommended the creation of a research institute that would apply
the principles of science and technology to understanding the problems of
crime, crime control, and the administration of justice, the fledgling
National Institute of Justice opened shop with a mandate, a vision, a set
of good minds, and, in the words of the Commission, "a pervasive lack
of information about crime and the possible effects of various techniques
for crime control."
Some things have remained the same in the last 30 years--NIJ continues to
encourage minds in a variety of disciplines--but other things have
changed significantly. An incredible arsenal of tools is now
commonplace, most notably computers, analytic software, and other
technological advances. However, the biggest change has come with the
dramatic growth of empirical foundations of criminal justice knowledge,
which has grown with expanded research findings. The past 30 years
have brought steady progress toward understanding, preventing, and
solving crime problems.
Jeremy Travis
Director
-------------------------------
NIJ in Brief
Criminal justice research is making a difference, and an increasing number
of practitioners and policymakers are using research data in crafting
their decisions and policies.
Congress created the National Institute of Justice 30 years ago to support
research, evaluation, demonstration programs, development of
technology, and dissemination of information relating to crime and the
administration of justice.[1]
The Institute's mandate is the same today as it was in 1968--to marry
science to criminal justice problem solving and policy development. Over
the intervening years, NIJ has made steady, incremental progress, each
year building on the years past. In the process, researchers have followed
the natural course of scientific discovery, finding science-based
knowledge to help develop answers to complicated social and technical
problems.
Although the mandate remains the same, NIJ's portfolio of research,
evaluation, and technology has broadened considerably. It now
encompasses more than discrete studies of police, courts, drugs, and
corrections. It also focuses on crime in its social context, crime and its
relation to public health issues, crime policy and the use of data, crime
prevention through technology, and crime analysis through geocoding and
geographic analysis. It takes into consideration community action, active
partnerships, multiple scientific disciplines, and many technological
approaches.
As NIJ moves toward 2000, it continues to demonstrate its ability to build
bridges between research on criminal justice policy and practice and
research in related disciplines and to find more and more conduits for
sharing research results with practitioners.
Organization and Financial Data
NIJ is composed of the director's office plus three main offices. (See
exhibit 1, "Organization of NIJ.") Each has distinct responsibilities:
o The Office of the Director sets the Institute's agenda, develops
strategic plans and policies, initiates collaboration with other government
 and private agencies, and oversees the Institute's budget and management
activities.
o The Office of Development and Communications develops and tests
research-based programs, brings promising new practices to the attention
of the field, and communicates findings and technological innovations
through multiple methods. Priority is given to the needs of State and local
officials and criminal justice practitioners. The new International Center
focuses on justice issues that transcend national boundaries and have an
impact on State and local criminal justice systems.
o The Office of Research and Evaluation develops, conducts, directs, and
supervises comprehensive research and evaluation activities. The range of
research and evaluation projects cuts across a wide array of distinct
topics within the Institute's charter. Two programs operate as distinct
centers of activity: the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program and the
Crime Mapping Research Center. In addition, the Data Resources Program
works to ensure the preservation and availability of research and
evaluation data collected through NIJ-funded research.
o The Office of Science and Technology directs and supervises
technology research, development, and demonstrations to provide law
enforcement and corrections agencies access to the best technologies
available. It also provides technology assistance so that these agencies can
enhance their capabilities to improve efficiency and effectiveness.
Technology assistance is provided through the network of the regional
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers.
During 1998, all of NIJ's offices moved into one building, allowing the
complete staff to be together for the first time in almost 2 years. The
consolidation of NIJ accompanied a parallel consolidation of all the other
bureaus and offices that comprise the Office of Justice Programs and
infused both NIJ and the Office of Justice Programs with renewed energy
 and collaborative activity.
Growth in Funding and Collaborative Activities Since 1994
The Institute's research and development portfolio continued to grow
throughout fiscal year 1998: 358 grants were awarded, bringing the total
number of active grants to 796. (See exhibit 2, "Growth of NIJ's Research
and Development Portfolio, 1994-98.") The awards made in 1998 are
listed in appendix A, page 53.
The Institute's total funding reached almost $116 million. Congress
appropriated $41 million for core operations, and other Federal agencies
and Crime Act offices transferred an additional $74.9 million for research
and evaluation activities. (See exhibit 3, "Sources of NIJ Funds, in
Millions, FY 1994-98," and exhibit 4, "Allocation of NIJ Funds as a
Percentage of Total Expenditure, FY 1998.")
NIJ's partnerships with Federal agencies have grown dramatically since
1994. During 1998, NIJ entered into research, development, testing, and
evaluation funding agreements that totaled more than NIJ's base
appropriation from Congress. Half of these partnerships were with
agencies within the U.S. Department of Justice and were supported with
funds from the 1994 Crime Act. Other major partnerships are with the
White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy and the U.S.
Department of State.
Interdisciplinary partnerships (those outside the fields of criminal justice)
have enriched the scientific method; NIJ continues to strongly support
multi-disciplinary collaborations. Criminology can reveal only one
piece of the puzzle; other disciplines contribute to a more subtle and
nuanced understanding of crime, criminal behavior, and crime prevention
in a broader context. That is why, for example, NIJ's portfolio of
violence against women research is cofunded by agencies interested in the
physical and mental health implications of such violence.
-------------------------------
Overview of the Year
Basic Research, Applied Research, New Technologies
The Nation was heartened to witness once again a year in which crime
rates declined. Criminal justice practitioners, policymakers, community
leaders, and researchers alike can justifiably celebrate this downward
trend. At the same time, these partners are keenly aware that too much
crime still occurs and that the causes of the decline are imperfectly
understood. Much hard work remains to build upon the gains of the last
few years.
In addition to the optimism declining crime rates bring, they also spur
debate and heated discussion: What exactly has caused them to decline?
Will they continue to decline? What can be done to keep crime rates
down?
There are several answers and points of view related to each question, but
one rings true for each: only research and experimentation can help
explain and answer these questions systematically and objectively.
Communities and their leaders are hungry for definitive and
comprehensive answers--and the sooner the better. Much scientific
discovery is, by its nature, a steady, time-consuming process that involves
putting one piece with another until a pattern or picture evolves and
avenues for success become clearer.
Research and evaluation can provide suggestive data, fuller logic models
of what is likely to work, and data to support problem identification.
Experiments with problem-solving approaches can occur as the more
deliberative scientific process continues to collect needed data, posit
solutions, and evaluate the process and its impact.
The Institute's research, evaluation, and development endeavors fall into
three main categories: basic research, applied research, and the testing of
new ideas and technologies. This section is an overview of NIJ's
activities in these three areas. It includes a special section on activities
that go beyond the horizons of American criminal justice and concludes
with a discussion of how the Institute disseminates knowledge.
Basic Research
NIJ's research rests on the fundamental assumption that scientific inquiry
forms the basis of sound policy and practice. The heart of such basic
research involves identifying key questions for study, gathering relevant
data, analyzing that data, and drawing conclusions and inferences without
prejudice or preconceived expectations.
The findings from basic research inform the larger society--those outside
the realm of criminal justice--of factors that contribute to policy action
and the implications of those actions.
The conclusions and insights gained from basic research are then
translated into programs that can be tested in real world settings. But the
process of making policy regarding public safety usually does not follow
science's straight and careful path because public policy is based on
consensus, tradeoffs, individual rights, legal rulings, political climate,
public perceptions, and community values. Criminal justice researchers--
like all social science researchers--cannot work in a white-coat laboratory
where they control all variables as they apply different tests.
Several major projects under way fall into the category of basic research at
NIJ:
Chicago Project on Human Development
Understanding the complexities of family, peer, and neighborhood
influences on criminal behavior is the goal of the Project on Human
Development in Chicago Neighborhoods. The Project, now in its 5th of 8
years, asks theoretical questions about both group and individual behavior
in a social context as it examines how individual personalities, family
relationships, school environment, and type of community interact over
time to contribute to delinquency, criminal behavior, and prosocial
development.
One of the Project's priorities for 1998 was the building of a master file of
primary variables for a number of analyses, including ones focusing on
exposure to violence, adolescent substance abuse, social cohesion as a
protective factor in adolescent suicide, and risk factors, such as depression
for adolescent girls' delinquency.
DNA Research
The rapid advance of DNA technologies has left many criminal justice
professionals without proper training and technical support. Hence, NIJ is
sponsoring three initiatives to foster understanding about the use of
DNA evidence and to improve public safety: The National Commission on
the Future of DNA Evidence, the Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement
Program, and the DNA 5-Year Plan.
The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. This
Commission is gathering data and testimony to make recommendations
to the Attorney General on the means of enhancing the use of DNA in
the criminal justice system. The Commission is considering how recent
advances in DNA research affect operation of the entire criminal justice
system, from crime scene through trial, including legal issues, laboratory
funding issues, and the use of DNA in postconviction relief.
The 21 Commission members were selected from a broad spectrum of
policymakers, defense attorneys, prosecutors, law enforcement officials,
scientists, professors, and other experts in the use of DNA forensic
evidence. Wisconsin State Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley
Abrahamson chairs the Commission.
During 1998, the Commission held three meetings; its work will continue
through 1999 and conclude with final recommendations and a report in
2000.
The Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program. This Program,
authorized by the DNA Identification Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-322),
is increasing the capacity of State and local forensic laboratories to
conduct standardized DNA testing.
Most States use a combination of State, county, and municipal laboratories
to provide forensic services to their police organizations, but the
equipment and staffing of the laboratories are woefully inadequate to
handle the volume of cases involving DNA testing to support analysis of
biological evidence recovered from crime scenes.
NIJ awarded $11.6 million to 39 State and local agencies in fiscal year
1998, plus an additional $500,000 through two awards to: (1) fund a study
to determine the feasibility of external, blind-proficiency testing for DNA
laboratories, and (2) conduct an evaluation of the impact of Federal DNA
funding programs. The cumulative funds for the Forensic DNA Laboratory
Improvement Program now total $24,118,448.
The DNA 5-Year Plan is designed to encourage the development of
cutting-edge molecular biology methods and tools to achieve highly
discriminating, reliable, economic, and rapid DNA testing approaches
appropriate for forensic identity testing. By 2003, NIJ hopes to
dramatically reduce DNA testing costs; reduce analysis time from hours to
minutes; develop inexpensive, portable, disposable DNA test kits for
field use; increase the reliability and legal credibility of DNA testing
through the development of a dual testing approach; and develop
standard materials for population databases.
Systematic Social Observation
NIJ is supporting basic research on police behavior using a field research
method called systematic social observation, which requires researchers to
follow precise rules for observing and measuring behavior in its natural
setting. Trained observers accompany police officers in their cars, on foot,
or on bicycle to observe everything the officer does during a typical tour
of duty. They do not rely upon others to describe or interpret events. The
goal is to improve general understanding of policing and police policy
and to account for variations in the way policing is performed and policies
are carried out in different jurisdictions.
Researchers are using systematic social observation in several sites--urban,
suburban, and rural--to inform police managers and the public about how
officers spend their time, how they organize to work with the public, how
they use their authority with the public, how policing styles vary in
different beats, and the nature and extent of onscene supervision.
Although systematic social observation yields an extraordinary amount of
information on police at work, it is costly, time-consuming, and
dependent on the cooperation of the police. It is, therefore, best suited to
special studies rather than routine monitoring of police practices. Despite
its expense, it provides a rich volume of information about policing in
different contexts.
NIJ has published several reports based on these studies and expects
additional reports in the coming year.[2]
Violence Against Women
Violence against women came to be widely recognized as a serious social
problem in the early 1970's, but basic empirical data on the frequency and
types of violence against women have been limited until the last few years.
To further knowledge in this area, NIJ and the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention jointly sponsored--through a grant to the Denver-based
Center for Policy Research--the National Violence Against Women
(NVAW) telephone survey of a national, representative sample of 8,000
women and 8,000 men.
In 1998, the NVAW survey produced two major reports detailing the first
empirical data on stalking and other violence.[3] The researchers found
that the extent of violence against women is more profound and more
widespread than originally thought. Among the key findings:
o Stalking. Approximately 1 million women and 371,000 men are stalked
annually in the United States; 8 percent of surveyed women and 2 percent
of surveyed men said they had been stalked at some time in their lives.
o Rape. Eighteen percent of women surveyed said they had experienced a
completed or attempted rape at some time in their lives, and 0.3 percent
said they had experienced a completed or attempted rape in the previous
12 months. Of the women who reported being raped at some time in their
lives, 22 percent were under 12 years old and 32 percent were 12 to 17
years old when they were first raped. Women who were raped before the
age of 18 were significantly more likely to be raped as adults.
o Partner violence. The findings further revealed that women experienced
significantly more partner violence than men: 25 percent of surveyed
women (compared to 8 percent of men) said they had been raped and/or
physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or
date.
o Extent of injury. Women were significantly more likely than men to be
injured during an assault: 32 percent of women and 16 percent of men
who were raped since age 18 were injured during their most recent rape.
However, many questions still remain unanswered. For example, studies
are needed to determine why the prevalence of violence varies
significantly among women of different racial and ethnic backgrounds,
and more needs to be understood about the financial impact of medical
treatment for violence against women.
In the coming years, NIJ's vigorous violence against women and family
violence portfolio will begin producing more findings as projects funded
in 1996 and later are completed.
Evaluating Drug Use in Prisons
In addition to the awards NIJ gives to research centers, NIJ's own staff also
contribute scientific expertise to the store of knowledge. (See "NIJ's
Intramural Research Program.") One of these intramural projects involved
evaluating a drug detection and interdiction effort in the Pennsylvania
prison system. The study found that drug testing through hair analysis can
be a valuable component in the drive to eliminate illegal drugs in prisons.
In 1996, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections instituted get-tough
policies--such as phone monitoring, increased use of narcotic-detecting
electronic devices on visitors, and increased cell searches using
drug-sniffing dogs--to tackle the serious problem of drug use in several of
its State prisons.
Before the changes were put in place, NIJ researchers analyzed data from
samples of hair and urine from inmates to determine the extent to which
inmates were using drugs. Urinalysis was used to reveal short-term,
recent use, and hair analysis was used to reveal sporadic or episodic use
that might have occurred over a period of several months.
Two years later, researchers analyzed a second wave of samples and
compared the pre- and posttest results to assess the effectiveness of the
new drug interdiction measures. The results: The number of inmates who
tested positive for illegal drugs decreased nearly 80 percent during the
2-year period.[4] The research, the first of its kind within a State prison
system, not only provided feedback to prison administrators about the
effectiveness of their methods, it also contributed to a better
understanding of the effects of prison-based drug detection and
interdiction strategies and the prevalence of drug use within prisons. As
important, it demonstrated both the advantages and challenges of using
hair analysis to detect drug use in prison.
Applied Research
Translating basic research into action has been characterized as "a cyclical
process."[5] It involves diagnosing the problem, developing solutions,
planning and implementing action steps, evaluating the results, making
mid-course corrections, and repeating the steps. Two distinguishing
features of applied research are the nature of the partnerships that are
formed and the evaluations that are conducted to make programs and
projects work.
Partnerships
In 1997, NIJ published a report to Congress called Preventing Crime:
What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising.[6] The authors concluded
that seven entities--communities, families, schools, labor markets, places,
police, and criminal justice agencies--are interdependent in affecting crime
at the local level. NIJ's applied research program frequently encompasses
many of these institutions.
Criminal Justice Partnerships. In the researcher and practitioner model,
both parties work hand-in-glove to develop strategies and solutions to
community problems.
Some research partnerships, such as Boston's Ceasefire Project, involve
multiple Federal, State, and local agencies and community groups with
multiple perspectives on the problem. These types of projects often
involve several midcourse adjustments.
When Boston wanted to stop youth violence and homicide, a
partnership--composed of researchers, community leaders, members of the
clergy, probation officers, police officials, and Federal enforcement
agency personnel--came together to devise a strategy to intervene in the
local gun market. When data revealed that the problem was more
specifically caused by youth gangs, not simply gun markets, the
partnership adjusted its strategies. Boston's hard work paid off: youth
homicides fell by two-thirds after the Ceasefire strategy was put in place.
NIJ is now supporting a five-city effort that is similar to Boston's. The
Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative involves teams led
by the local U.S. attorney and composed of local law enforcement
officials, criminal justice agencies, other community stakeholders, and a
research partner. The goal is to identify and tackle their communities' most
pressing problems.
During 1998, the teams identified their problems, analyzed data to confirm
their hypotheses, and began drawing up their action steps. Among the first
things they learned were that they were not accustomed to thinking and
acting as partners and their "corporate cultures" varied tremendously.
They also learned that data can confirm or reject their "hunches" about the
cause of their crime problems.
During 1999, the researchers will provide strategic feedback as the
practitioners implement the action steps. Policymakers and community
leaders will be watching the results carefully for the impact on the
community. A national assessment also is in place to draw cross-site
lessons and understand common factors that lead to success.
Multidisciplinary Research Partnerships. As criminal justice practitioners
and policymakers clamor to figure out what works, they look to a wider
research community for answers, including educators, public health
specialists, engineers, and psychologists. Science naturally evolves to
encompass multiple disciplines--research that starts as social or forensic
science often evolves to include epidemiology, technology, geography,
psychosociology, life-course studies, and prevention research. Just as it
has taken time for criminal justice methodologies to mature, so too has it
taken time to recognize that so many fields touch criminal justice.
Multidisciplinary partnerships play a major role in several areas of NIJ's
research, evaluation, and technology portfolio. Funding partners in NIJ's
family violence program, for example, include the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health. NIJ's
partners in several technology projects include various branches of the
U.S. Departments of Defense, Transportation, Commerce, and Energy.
The Institute's international perspectives on criminal justice naturally
involve colleagues at the U.S. Department of State and researchers and
practitioners from other countries.
Evaluation
Evaluation is an important aspect of NIJ's larger mission to identify
programs of proven success and to understand why they work. As
researchers examine innovative programs, they analyze all aspects of the
effort and provide feedback--both positive and negative. Knowing what
doesn't work is equally as valuable as knowing what does. These
objective, reliable evaluations are helping communities as they strive to
prevent and reduce crime in their neighborhoods.
One portion of NIJ's evaluation portfolio consists of national evaluations
of major congressional anticrime initiatives. These are conducted under
NIJ's statutory mandate to report to Congress and the public on the
lessons learned from national-level programs. Several major national
evaluations were funded in 1998:
o An evaluation of law enforcement programs designed to encourage
arrest will document the type and extent of arrest policies in cases of
domestic violence in 20 sites and the impact on victim well-being and
offender accountability in 5 of the sites.
o The Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant program
encourages States to hold juveniles to strict accountability for
delinquent behavior. A State is eligible for funds by demonstrating that it
is actively considering or will consider legislation, policy, or practices
that provide accountability-based sanctions, such as transferring violent
and repeat juvenile offenders to adult court.
o An evaluation of victim assistance programs will assess the
effectiveness of State victim compensation and assistance programs. The
project will obtain information from the victims' viewpoint, including
assessments of the services available to victims, identification of unmet
needs, and suggestions for improving the delivery of and payment for
services to crime victims.
In addition, several national evaluations concluded their analyses and
reported findings during 1998:
The National Evaluation of the Youth Firearm Violence Initiative. This
project examined firearms reduction strategies in 10 sites, identified the
factors that contributed to the program's successes and failures, and
suggested strategies that could be transferred to other jurisdictions.
The evaluation focused on implementation and operation in five of the
cities (Birmingham, Alabama; Bridgeport, Connecticut; Milwaukee,
Wisconsin; Richmond, Virginia; and Seattle, Washington) and on crime
impact and process issues in the other five cities (Baltimore, Maryland;
Cleveland, Ohio; Inglewood, California; Salinas, California; and San
Antonio, Texas).
A number of factors varied considerably from site to site:
o The strategic emphasis (traditional enforcement or prevention and
education).
o The tactical approach to enforcement (saturation or directed patrol,
search warrants, probation stops and searches, knock and talk, bar checks,
or use of informants).
o Police organizational structure (dedicated, full-time units or staffing by
rotation with overtime).
o The geographic focus (citywide or defined target areas).
o The population targeted (general population, gangs, or identified
individuals).
The evaluation found considerable variation in the number of arrests
made (less than 100 to more than 1,000) and the number of guns seized
(less than 40 to more than 250). To a large extent, the number of arrests
and seizures was influenced by the choices the sites made in strategy and
tactics. A city that emphasized prevention and education, for instance,
had fewer arrests and seizures than one that emphasized traditional
enforcement techniques, such as patrol and stop and search.
In half of the cities where an impact evaluation was conducted, a
relationship between the intervention and gun-crime trends was evident. In
the remainder, changes in the target area did not differ much from trends
in the city at large. Using data from Salinas, California, the researchers
examined the 2-year relationship between gun-related arrest rates and
subsequent gun-related crimes, taking into account the total level of crime
(the crime index) in the surrounding county. The researchers found that
gun crimes, the general crime index, and gun-related arrests were related
as follows: a 10-percentage point increase in the crime index was
associated with one additional gun crime in Salinas, California, and an
increase of five gun-related arrests was associated with one less
subsequent gun crime in that town.
This finding suggests that enforcement directed at firearms possession and
use has a systematic, measurable impact on gun crime.
Assault Weapons Ban. An NIJ-funded look at the short-term effects of the
assault weapons ban (Title XVIII of the Violent Crime Control Act of
1994) found the following:[7]
o The ban triggered speculative price increases and ramped-up production
of the banned firearms prior to the law's implementation, followed by a
substantial postban drop in prices to levels of previous years.
o Criminal use of the banned guns declined, at least temporarily, after the
law went into effect, which suggests that the legal stock of preban assault
weapons was, at least for the short term, largely in the hands of collectors
and dealers.
o The ban may have contributed to a reduction in the gun murder rate and
the murder of police officers by criminals armed with assault weapons.
o The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun
murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims.
An evaluation is now under way of the long-term effects of the ban on
semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition
magazines. It is examining the impact increased juvenile restrictions and
regulation of Federal firearms licenses are having on violent crime.
National Evaluation of the Violence Against Women Act Grants. This
ongoing project documents the range of programs funded by the STOP
(Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) grants program for law
enforcement and prosecution under the Violence Against Women Act.
The evaluation is assessing grantee outcomes and planning and
implementation efforts, along with developing a strategy for documenting
long-term impacts. Reports on the evaluation of STOP formula grants
were prepared in 1996 and 1997. The 1998 report found the following:[8]
o In fiscal year 1998, 54 of the 56 States and territories eligible for STOP
funds received them-- totaling more than $130 million--within 3 months
of the congressional appropriation.
o The majority of the grants are providing direct services to victims,
alone or in combination with other activities. Training for law enforcement
and prosecution is the focus of nearly a quarter of the projects.
o More than 90 percent of the subgrantees required to provide matching
funds did so.
o All States submitted certification, as required, showing that victims do
not bear the costs of prosecuting offenders in sexual assault or domestic
violence cases.
Other ongoing evaluations of the STOP grants program include reviews of
agencies that set police training standards, an examination of the States'
capacity to comply with the full faith and credit provision of the
Violence Against Women Act, and a study of the effects of the grants on
raising awareness among tribal leaders.
Weed and Seed. The Weed and Seed strategy brings together Federal,
State, and local crime fighting agencies; social service providers;
business owners and other representatives of the private sector; and
neighborhood residents--linking them in a shared goal of "weeding" out
violent criminals, drug trafficking, drug-related crime, and gang activity
in targeted areas while "seeding" the area with social services, economic
revitalization, and neighborhood reclamation projects.
During 1998, evaluators presented their report and recommendations
about Weed and Seed efforts in 10 communities in 8 different cities.
Major findings and recommendations include:
o Pre-existing community features--such as the strength of the social and
institutional infrastructure, the severity of the crime problem,
geographical advantages favoring economic development, and
transiency of the population--may make Weed and Seed easier or more
difficult to effectively implement.
o The mix of weeding and seeding activities and the sequence in which
these components are introduced appear to be important factors in
gaining community support for the program.
o Sites appeared to have greater success if they concentrated their
program resources on smaller population groups, especially if they could
channel other public funds into similar activities and leverage private
funds.
o The more successful programs tended to have the active and
constructive leadership of key individuals in the community.
o The most effective implementation strategies were those that relied on
bottom-up, participatory decisionmaking approaches.
Technology Development
A significant portion of NIJ's portfolio of research and evaluation relates
to the development and demonstration of better technology for law
enforcement and corrections.
In fiscal years 1996-98, Congress set aside 1 percent of Crime Act law
enforcement funds to create, in each of these years, a $20-million fund at
NIJ for investment in law enforcement and criminal justice technology.
Congress also began funding a program to improve State-operated DNA
laboratories (discussed on pages 6 and 7).
In fiscal years 1997 and 1998, Congress also appropriated funds for the
development of domestic counterterrorism technologies. Those funds
have been used to expand technology development and demonstrations
for State and local law enforcement and corrections agencies.
NIJ has responded to this expanded mandate by creating an integrated
mix of science and technology strategies. To make sure NIJ is addressing
the needs of State and local agencies, the Institute regularly consults with
practitioners, primarily the 150 members of the Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC). The priorities
identified by the Council are translated into an agenda for funding
science and technology research and development programs.
The top technology needs of the law enforcement and corrections
communities, as identified by LECTAC, include the following:
o Concealed weapons and contraband detection. NIJ and the U.S.
Departments of Defense and Transportation are the leaders in the
development of relatively inexpensive, easy-to-use concealed weapons
detection technology.
o Vehicle-stopping technology. Research is under way on a variety of
new and innovative technologies that can be used to safely and effectively
stop a vehicle. In 1998, NIJ completed the process to commercialize the
Road Spike [trademark] tire deflation device--a retractable strip designed
to be carried in the trunk of a car and rolled onto the highway well in
advance of a fleeing vehicle. The Road Spike [trademark] deploys
retractable hollow metal spikes that will puncture, embed in, and release
the air out of a tire in several minutes. This device prevents the driver from
losing control of the vehicle and allows pursuit vehicles to quickly catch
up and arrest the suspect. In a related area, NIJ supported the Pursuit
Manage-ment Task Force, a multidisciplinary group that defined
contemporary police pursuit practices and the role of technology in
managing high-speed vehicular pursuits. The Task Force issued
recommendations regarding the development and application of
technology in pursuit management. In 1998, NIJ issued a solicitation for
proposals to test electromagnetic devices designed to stop vehicles and
completed a strategic plan for NIJ's vehicle-stopping program.
o Investigative and forensic science initiatives. A major focus of NIJ's
investigative and forensic science technologies portfolio is the
identification and development of evidence to solve criminal cases.
Among areas of interest in which NIJ is funding research are the
following: DNA analysis, trace evidence, questioned documents
examination, fingerprints, firearms, and teleforensics.
Testing New Ideas and Technology
Once research begins uncovering the cause-and-effect factors that
contribute to certain social conditions, criminal behaviors, or phenomena,
science can begin experiments that test the validity of various hypotheses.
Testing and experimenting, however, must be accompanied by rigorous
evaluation of the effects--intended and unintended--of the mechanisms
employed to improve the situation, eliminate the behavior, or reduce the
effects of the phenomenon. NIJ supported several important demonstration
tests during 1998.
Breaking the Drug Abuse-Crime Cycle. Since 1997, the Institute has
supported a program in Birmingham, Alabama, that is testing the
hypothesis that a systemwide effort to use drug testing, mandatory
treatment, enhanced judicial involvement, and other interventions with all
arrested adults with a history of illicit drug use will reduce drug abuse and
criminal behavior. Much of the funding for this initiative was provided
by the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy. During
1998, NIJ extended the program to two more sites and one juvenile justice
site.
At the end of 1998, NIJ awarded $3 million each to Jacksonville,
Florida, and Tacoma, Washington, to implement jurisdictionwide
intervention strategies designed to identify, supervise, and treat all adult
drug-using defendants and $2 million to the Eugene, Oregon, site targeting
juvenile drug offenders. The results of a process and impact evaluation
will become available in 2000.
Reducing Corrections and Police Officer Stress. Since 1996, NIJ has
awarded 25 grants to support activities to better understand and reduce
the harmful effects of stress on law enforcement and correctional officers
and their families. Congress established the program under Title XXI of
the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Among
other development activities, the program consists of demonstration and
research grants awarded to State and local law enforcement and
corrections agencies or their affiliated support organizations, such as
unions and professional associations. The grants are being used to
develop and promote education, training, and treatment programs at the
local level. Several programs are comparing stress intervention methods,
conducting research on the extent and nature of stress among officers,
and examining critical incident stress debriefings. NIJ intends to publicize
results from the innovative programs to reduce stress as the early findings
become available.
Developing Standards and Testing Products. In the realm of technology,
NIJ pioneers efforts to find advanced technological methods of deterring,
identifying, and apprehending criminals. It supports the exploration and
creation of alternative techniques to improve criminal justice practice.
The Forensic DNA Lab Improvement Program is a good example. The
Program is increasing the capacity of State and local forensic laboratories
to support criminal investigations involving biological evidence
recovered from crime scenes. State and local labs are purchasing
equipment, supplies, and training to both upgrade and standardize their
forensic DNA labs.
Improving old technologies and developing new ones introduces the need
to develop standards against which to measure the usefulness of the
technology. NIJ not only develops such performance standards for
equipment and technology, it also supports testing of products against
those standards. This way, law enforcement and corrections agencies can
make more informed decisions about the equipment they purchase. NIJ
does not recommend particular brands of products. Rather, it tests many
brands and distributes lists of products that have passed the standardized
tests showing the strength, endurance, and performance of a particular
product.
Testing and research have led to performance standards for more than 60
types of criminal justice equipment, including handguns, soft body armor,
 patrol cars, and handcuffs.
NIJ's primary partner in the development of standards and the testing of
products is the Office of Law Enforcement Standards at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Expanding the Horizons
During this last decade, many economic and social phenomena--
including crime--previously confined by national boundaries have
exploded across the globe. The globalization of financial markets and
communications systems, the easing of international transportation, the
tearing down of the Berlin Wall, and the collapse of the Soviet Union
have all contributed mightily to an international and transnational crime
problem. The illicit movement of people, money, goods, and services
across national borders has created new challenges for law enforcement
and the administration of justice. New kinds of crimes--such as human
trafficking; cybercrime; international money laundering; and transnational
trafficking in drugs, arms, and stolen autos--are confronting not only
Federal authorities, but also State and local law enforcement. The impact
of these developments clearly is being felt on the streets of America.
NIJ created an International Center in 1997 to coordinate international
activities within the Office of Justice Programs and NIJ, to help inform
policymaking on transnational issues, and to promote the global
exchange of criminal justice research information. The latter task involves
both exporting American research and practice information abroad and
importing the best research and practices from around the world. (See, for
example, "ADAM Goes International.") The International Center's
primary constituents are American policymakers, practitioners,
researchers, and scholars.
In 1998, the Center undertook a number of activities to fulfill its
coordinating role and to facilitate comparative and transnational research,
including the following:
o Three international challenge grants were awarded to support research
on (1) comparative juvenile justice processing in Denver, Colorado, and
Bremen, Germany; (2) human trafficking from Fuzhou, China; and (3) the
commercial sexual exploitation of children trafficked into the United
States through Canada and Mexico.
o Major research partnerships were begun with Israel, Ukraine, and the
United Kingdom.
o An international visiting fellow was brought to NIJ from Russia to share
knowledge about transnational organized crime in the former Soviet
Union.
o The international visitor program coordinated meetings with 117
visitors from 34 countries.
In addition, work proceeded on the International Center's Web site, linking
the World Justice Information Network and the National Criminal Justice
Reference Service to provide an electronic network serving the worldwide
criminal justice community. (See "NIJ's World Wide Web Presence.")
The International Center is the vehicle for extending NIJ's research and
development role onto the global stage. As the face of crime takes on an
increasingly international cast, our level of understanding and ability to
respond must change. It is the Center's mission to inform and enlighten
that process.
Sharing Knowledge
One of NIJ's primary goals is to disseminate science-based findings and
their related policy implications as widely as possible. One path involves
traditional mechanisms--publications, conferences, and face-to-face
meetings. The other path is an electronic one where information-sharing
occurs instantly in cyberspace.
Reaching Out Via Cyberspace
Since NIJ's World Wide Web site was unveiled in 1997, it has continued
to grow and be refined, especially in regard to content and ease of access.
The site regularly posts newly released publications, which can be
downloaded directly or requested through the National Criminal Justice
Reference Service (NCJRS). The site also posts news about awards,
grants, solicitations, upcoming conferences, and links to related sites.
In addition, visitors can learn detailed information about NIJ's programs.
The newest addition to the NIJ Web site is NIJ News. Launched in June
1998, the online newletter features articles from the director on current
issues, along with coordinated articles, announcements, and links to
related sites. The newsletter has been expanding its format to reach a
broader audience and soliciting feedback on possible improvements. Like
other segments of NIJ's Web site, the newsletter helps bridge the time gap
of print media by making information available to audiences sooner.
Several NIJ program areas have greatly expanded their presence on the
Web during the past year, adding links to publications, announcements
about events, other sites, and summaries of grants. (See "NIJ's World
Wide Web Presence.")
Reaching Out Via Traditional Means
Even as electronic distribution and dissemination took on heightened
visibility and intensity this year, traditional modes of dissemination
continued to be highly popular with NIJ's audience. (See "Most Popular
Publications Released in Fiscal Year 1998.")
Publications. NIJ's published materials fall into three major categories:
o Concise summaries of research or programs. These publications, which
range from 4 to 32 pages, discuss findings from discrete projects or
programs. Included in this category are several newsletters and the
Research in Brief, Research in Action, Research Preview, and Program
Focus series. This year, NIJ's newsletter TechBeat, which is issued
quarterly and devoted to keeping readers up to date on technologies for
use in law enforcement, corrections, and other criminal justice agencies,
won two national publishing awards.
o Longer discussions of the issues. This category of publications includes
the Research Report series, which spans a wide range of topics; the Issues
and Practices in Criminal Justice series, which features innovative
programs designed to address critical topics of the day; and the Research
Forum series, which highlights papers from NIJ-sponsored conferences.
o The NIJ Journal. The Institute's quarterly journal contains feature
articles on thought-provoking issues, new findings, or research questions
of general interest to policymakers and practitioners. Cover stories during
1998 included articles on drug addiction as a brain disease (by Alan
Leshner, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse); the challenges
of conducting research on crime in public housing (by Jeffrey Fagan and
colleagues at Columbia University); and Boston's interdisciplinary and
multiagency approach to crime prevention (by David Kennedy, senior
researcher at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of
Government).
o Crime and Justice. NIJ supports the Crime and Justice series, which
provides comprehensive, authoritative, and balanced summaries of current
knowledge, prior experience, and promising future inquiries in the field.
Editor Michael Tonry and an 11-member editorial board of prominent
scholars guide the series, which is published by the University of Chicago
Press. Each annual volume contains essays from nationally acclaimed
researchers and other experts. Occasionally, an issue with a single theme,
such as youth violence or prisons, is published.
A complete list of the publications produced in fiscal year 1998 can be
found in appendix B.
Meetings and Other Gatherings. NIJ uses conferences, panels, lectures,
seminars, workshops, and other meetings to stimulate discussion, shape
its research agenda, and resolve scientific controversies. Such face-to-face
gatherings, which encourage frank discussions and debate, are one of the
best ways to share information and shape future research activity.
Far too many gatherings occurred in 1998 to list in this report. However,
highlights include:
o Technology fair. In March 1998, NIJ displayed an array of technology
(both under development and commercially available) at a technology fair
held in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill. Members of
Congress and their staffs visited numerous booths examining
state-of-the-art equipment for law enforcement and correctional officers
and discussing the issues surrounding these new technologies.
Equipment featured at the fair included telemedicine for correctional
settings, thermal imagers (which resemble palm-size camcorders and
allow officers to see in the dark), devices that allow officers to translate
simple phrases from English into another language so they can
communicate with non-English speaking citizens, and guns that can be
fired only by an authorized user.
o Perspectives lectures. To promote informed and rational discourse, NIJ
established the first Perspectives on Crime and Justice series in 1996.
Since then, NIJ has invited the Nation's most prominent scholars to share
their policy perspectives with an audience of opinion leaders,
congressional staff, Federal officials, journalists, policymakers,
researchers, and criminal justice professionals. Speakers are asked to
challenge conventional thinking, offer candid recommendations, and
stimulate a robust debate. Their collected lectures are published in the
Research Forum series.
The 1998 series featured the following scholars:
-- George Kelling, "Crime Control, the Police, and Culture
Wars: Broken Windows and Cultural Pluralism," December 1997.
-- Randall Kennedy, "Race, the Police, and 'Reasonable Suspicion,'"
February 1998.
-- David Musto, "The American Experience With Stimulants and Opiates,"
March 1998.
-- Joan Petersilia, "A Decade of Experimenting With Intermediate
Sanctions: What Have We Learned," April 1998.
--Philip Cook, "The Epidemic of Youth Gun Violence," May 1998.
o Annual research and evaluation conference. Every summer, NIJ
cosponsors with other Office of Justice Programs offices and bureaus a
conference for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers on the latest
research and evaluation. The 1998 conference, titled "Viewing Crime and
Justice From a Collaborative Perspective," focused on the rewards and
challenges of collaborative endeavors with the community and other
partners. More than 750 people attended.
o National Academy of Sciences workshops. The National Research
Council of the National Academy of Sciences is a key partner with NIJ in
the effort to increase scientific understanding of crime and justice,
identify new areas of research, and promote theory development. During
1998, the National Research Council, through its Committee on Law and
Justice and with NIJ support, conducted workshops on transnational crime
and pathological gambling.
The transnational crime workshop focused on defining the issues and
measuring the problem while considering the interface between legal and
illegal activities and the implications of transnational crime for local law
enforcement. The workshop's report, Transnational Organized Crime:
Summary of a Workshop, edited by Peter Reuter and Carol Petrie, is
available from the National Academy Press at http://www.nas.edu.
The project on pathological gambling is studying data sources that can
produce reliable measures of the prevalence of pathological gambling and
its multiple impacts. The project also is examining the factors that cause or
mitigate problem gambling and its social and economic costs. The
National Research Council's Report, Pathological Gambling: A Critical
Review, is available from the National Academy Press at
http://www.nas.edu.
o Executive sessions on corrections and sentencing. The effects of
sentencing reforms, the continuing increase in the inmate population, and
concerns about the effects of large numbers of former inmates returning
to their communities have prompted NIJ and the Corrections Program
Office to jointly sponsor a multiyear series of meetings at which a group
of researchers and practitioners examine major issues surrounding
sentencing and corrections. Using commissioned papers as the basis for
their meetings, practitioners and scholars discuss a variety of topics. Five
sessions are planned; three were held in fiscal year 1998. The papers will
be published as they become available.
o Technology Institutes. Since 1997, NIJ has brought State and local law
enforcement practitioners together to introduce them to the array of tech-
nology and technical assistance available from the Federal Government
and teach practitioners about the many ways technology can help them
confront current challenges. This year, NIJ introduced a Technology
Institute designed especially for correctional practitioners. The 23
practitioners selected by NIJ visited several Federal agencies in the
Washington, D.C., area to learn how they can improve the detection of
drugs and contraband in facilities and among probationers and parolees,
how to improve security in facilities, and how to exchange information
and share their experiences and lessons learned.
o Multinational peacekeeping missions. Civilian police are increasingly
being used in multinational peacekeeping missions around the world.
During 1998, NIJ, in conjunction with the Police Executive Research
Forum and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, convened a
workshop that brought together public safety specialists with experience in
peacekeeping missions in Bosnia, Haiti, Somalia, and Central America.
The group addressed a range of issues related to the limitations of the
United Nations CIVPOL (civilian police) unit, particularly its inability to
provide effective oversight and logistical support for field operations. NIJ
published the proceedings of the conference.[9]
o National Governors' Association and juvenile crime. NIJ and the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention worked closely
with the National Governors' Association's Center for Best Practices to
develop three regional policy forums on crime prevention and the
effective administration of juvenile justice and corrections. After each
forum, the Center published an Issue Brief highlighting the issues,
research findings, and best practices in the field.[10]
Reaching Out Through an Information Network
The NCJRS is one of the most extensive sources of information on
criminal and juvenile justice in the world, providing services to an
international community of policymakers and professionals. Sponsored by
NIJ, its Office of Justice Programs partners, and the Office of National
Drug Control Policy, NCJRS functions as a dynamic information
clearinghouse, responding to more than 5,000 requests each month from
around the world. Its database of abstracts, available on the Web, contains
summaries of more than 150,000 documents. The complete text of more
than 1,500 documents is available on its Web site (http://www.ncjrs.org).
-------------------------------
Selected Highlights
Making Communities Safer, Taking Steps to Prevent Crime, Finding New
Ways of Working Together, Exploring Issues of Special Concern
Making Communities Safer
Monitoring Arrestees' Drug Use Reveals Community Trends
Research has firmly established the link between drug use and subsequent
criminal behavior. NIJ has been tracking drug use among booked arrestees
since 1987. Today, through the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM)
program, community leaders and their research partners are following
trends in the prevalence and types of drug use among arrestees in 35
locations around the Nation.[11]
ADAM data, which are collected quarterly through voluntary and
anonymous urine testing and interviews, allow State and local
policymakers and analysts to view trends as they develop and make it
possible to intervene earlier and in a more targeted way.
ADAM offers communities a means to assess the breadth and
characteristics of their particular drug abuse problems; evaluate, at low
cost, programs and interventions that serve or target the criminally active
population; and plan specific policy interventions appropriate for local
substance abuse problems.
Enhancements in 1998
NIJ has developed the capacity to test for a broader range of drugs than in
the past, thus increasing a community's ability to detect important local
variations in drug trends. Recent additions to the list of drugs that can be
detected include LSD, inhalants, MDMA (ecstasy), and flunitrazepam
(rohypnol). In addition, three sexually transmitted diseases--HIV,
chlamydia, and gonorrhea--can be detected in urine.
ADAM also has initiated several projects to improve drug testing
procedures and make results more precise:
o Analyzing the impact that specimen storage and handling procedures
have on drug test results.
o Confirming opiate test results to differentiate heroin use from
medications containing opiate compounds.
o Testing for metabolites and markers that indicate crack cocaine use, as
opposed to powder cocaine use.
ADAM's interview instrument was redesigned to concentrate on issues of
interest to policymakers and practitioners. The new instrument increases
the ability to calculate the prevalence of drug dependency, determine the
prevalence of need for treatment, and illuminate drug market dynamics.
Interest From Abroad
ADAM has sparked international interest, and last year the program held
its first gathering of representatives from other countries interested in
following ADAM protocols. International ADAM is intended to create a
research partnership among criminal justice organizations across the
world. Drug surveillance or measurement systems in most countries are
not compatible, making comparisons among countries difficult. I-ADAM
addresses this limitation by introducing a standardized international
surveillance system that will allow researchers to compare the prevalence
of drug use among arrestees in different nations and assess the
consequences of drug abuse both within and across national boundaries.
Like the United States, many countries want to track drug use trends
among their arrested population. I-ADAM can do this as well as collect
information to gain a better understanding about the relationship between
drugs and crime, sources of illegal income for arrestees, drug
dependency, use of substance abuse treatment, age of onset of drug use,
drug market dynamics, and certain public health topics.
I-ADAM also can contribute to a better understanding of crime issues that
cross national borders, such as organized crime. I-ADAM data are tools to
help countries coordinate their drug control policies and resources.
Identification of similar drug problems in different nations can give
governments grounds for such coordination. In addition, spotting a
growing substance abuse problem in a country's arrestee population can
help predict a potential target for international drug trafficking.
The Data Collection Process
Sites collect data for a 2-week period, four times a year. Each site collects
data on adult males, and all but two are currently collecting data on adult
females. Juvenile collection occurs in 12 sites, but is expected to expand
with the FY 2001 appropriations. A random selection of arrestees are
asked to take part in the study. The interviews are anonymous and
confidential, which contributes to the high proportion of individuals who
consent to participate at most sites.
Staff in individual sites may ask additional questions geared specifically to
their community. Examples of such questions include:
o Patterns of acquiring and using crack, powder cocaine, and heroin.
o Patterns of acquiring and using methamphetamine.
o Acquisition of and attitudes toward firearms.
o Definitions of gang membership and participation in gang activities.
o Attitudes toward and patterns of sexually risky behaviors.
In January 2000, all ADAM sites will field a new interview instrument
that will focus on three policy areas: drug use, dependency and need for
treatment, and drug markets. These questions will serve to elicit
information on the frequency and severity of drug use within each site,
estimate the number of individuals dependent on drugs and in need of
treatment, inventory treatment experiences to help assess how individuals
attempt to access treatment, and show how drug market activity in a
community responds to specific interventions.
Local Outreach and Involvement
ADAM represents an important partnership with and among local, State,
and national policymakers. Officials at all levels can tailor aspects of the
program to meet specific needs. For example, officials interested in gang
activity can, together with their local data collection team, append
gang-related questions to the main interview instrument. Such special
studies can be done on a local, regional, or national basis, depending on
who is interested in the topic. Such research needs are identified by local
coordinating councils, which also play a big part in disseminating the data
to local planners and policymakers.
For More Information
Visit the NIJ Web site at http://www.adam-nij.net.
The ADAM annual reports for 1998:
1998 Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and Juvenile Arrestees
(NCJ 175656).
1998 Annual Report on Cocaine Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175657).
1998 Annual Report on Marijuana Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175658).
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use Among Arrestees (NCJ
175660).
1998 Annual Report on Opiate Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175659).
-------------------------------
Strategic Approaches to Community Safety
Although many law enforcement entities join forces with agencies in their
communities to respond to crime, relatively few do so in a systematic,
integrated way to analyze information and develop strategic plans to
reduce a specific, targeted problem. Cities that have experienced the
greatest reductions in crime, such as Boston and New York, have made
remarkable efforts to collectively and comprehensively gather and analyze
information from multiple agencies. Together, these groups analyze
patterns and trends that define the precise nature of a problem, suggest
strategic opportunities for interventions, and develop efficient ways to
employ limited resources.
The Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative, or SACSI, is a
2-year Department of Justice project intended to establish integrated and
systematic approaches in five pilot cities:
o Indianapolis, Indiana.
o Memphis, Tennessee.
o New Haven, Connecticut.
o Portland, Oregon.
o Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
SACSI bolsters the use of a collaborative, knowledge-driven,
problem-solving process through which groups can better identify and
analyze their local problems and devise and implement strategies likely to
reduce them. It builds on the knowledge gained from other comprehensive
efforts, which have encouraged collaborations among Federal, State, and
local agencies.[12]
The Process
The SACSI approach is unique in that the U.S. attorney takes on a new
role--as community problem solver and proactive leader in reducing local
crime. The U.S. attorney acts as a catalyst to the strategic approaches
project, undertaking functions and activities not traditionally assumed by
U.S. attorneys or their offices.
The U.S. attorney convenes a team of local, State, and Federal criminal
justice practitioners; representatives from relevant community agencies;
and a research partner. This team meets frequently to develop, implement,
and evaluate a crime prevention and reduction strategy focusing on a
major crime problem facing the city. Team members then work to better
utilize both Federal law enforcement and community resources, making
every effort to coordinate around the identified problem and desired
outcome. They build on existing coalitions that might include a broad
spectrum of individuals and organizations, consider varying perspectives
on the problem, and lay the foundation for specific strategies adopted later
in the process.
The research partner assists the group in analyzing information and
devising a theory-based strategy to reduce the target crime problem. The
research partner also takes responsibility for evaluating the effectiveness
of the intervention, suggesting adjustments, and reevaluating the strategy.
Academic partners unfamiliar with this type of "research in action"
receive guidance and support from NIJ.
Features of the Justice Department's Support
Numerous components of the Justice Department are partners in the
program: the Office of the Associate Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, Intergovernmental Affairs, and the
Office of Justice Programs, which includes the Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Executive Office of Weed and
Seed, National Institute of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, Office of
the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services, and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
NIJ's ongoing support includes grants to local research partners, funding
for project coordinators in the sites, technical assistance to help sites move
toward their goals, and development and installation of a Community
Safety Information System that will enhance the sites' ability to combine
and analyze data across agencies.
SACSI Takes Shape
Initial formative meetings for SACSI took place during the spring of 1998.
Working groups, researchers, and project coordinators were then identified
in the summer of 1998. Subsequently, sites began building broad
coalitions and have been gathering information to identify and better
understand their targeted crime problem. Sites have begun identifying
possible interventions, and in some cases, they have started implementing
their strategies.
State, local, and community partners have experienced an unparalleled
amount of cooperation from a diverse group of stakeholders. Partners
have commented on the unprecedented involvement of U.S. attorney's
offices in developing effective local crime reduction strategies.
Specific crime problems being addressed in pilot cities include:
o Indianapolis: homicide and gun violence.
o Memphis: sexual assault.
o New Haven: gun violence and community fear.
o Portland: youth gun violence.
o Winston-Salem: youth violence.
Through careful observation of efforts in the pilot jurisdictions and
feedback from the research partners, the process will be refined and
information will be shared with communities across the country about
how to plan their individualized crime control strategies. This rigorous,
dynamic method of addressing crime recognizes that crime is local.
Although specific problems and solutions will vary by community,
SACSI is showing that when certain steps are included in a strategic
planning and implementation process, the likelihood of success in fighting
local crime rises substantially.
For more information
National Institute of Justice and Executive Office for Weed and Seed,
What Can the Federal Government Do To Decrease Crime and Revitalize
Communities? October 1998 (NCJ 172210).
Coleman, Veronica, Walter C. Holton, Jr., Kristine Olson, Stephen C.
Robinson, and Judith Stewart, "Using Knowledge and Teamwork To
Reduce Crime," NIJ Journal, October 1999 (JR 000241): 16-23.
Kennedy, David, "Pulling Levers: Getting Deterrence Right," NIJ Journal,
July 1998 (JR 00236): 2-8.
-------------------------------
Policing in the Community
Policing in the United States continues to undergo dramatic
transformation. Heightened focus on the characteristics and the role of the
community has changed the manner in which many police agencies
conduct business and has reshaped much of the thinking about the nature
of law enforcement organizations and the policing strategies used to
combat crime and disorder.
As one author noted, "In well-informed and well-organized communities,
police departments are increasingly expected to understand the community
as a partner, prepare department personnel for their part in the partnership
process, and support officers in the process."[13] The view that police
departments and communities are coproducers of safety and public order is
based on research showing that a coproduction strategy is more effective
than a policing style that distances officers from the public by, in effect,
relegating the community to the sidelines.[14]
An advantage of encouraging closer police-community relations is
highlighted in a discussion paper prepared for one of a series of policing
meetings on "measuring what matters," sponsored by NIJ and the Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). Written by a police chief,
the paper notes that police have begun to think about crime and violence
within the context of neighborhood conditions, education, the economy,
and other demographic factors. Some police departments, he wrote, "are
beginning to look at these factors to determine the effect of initiatives
aimed at neighborhood problems."[15]
For example, a research study sponsored by NIJ and the Carnegie
Corporation of New York observed that in one of the community-oriented
police agencies studied, officers interacted positively on a daily basis with
persons of all ages, including children. By interacting with children,
"officers learn about family situations that can be ameliorated through
referrals to specialized community agencies, and occasionally they may
learn about activities, such as child abuse and drug offense activities, that
require law enforcement action."[16]
Defining "Community"
As law enforcement agencies move closer to the populace and to their
communities, many are defining "community" broadly to include the
cultural, religious, and ethnic contexts as well as the residents, businesses,
and nonprofit groups in the community.[17]
When the concept of community is seen in this larger context, the mission
of law enforcement expands from making the life and possessions of the
individual safe and secure to also ensuring the safety and security of
community life. Achieving the former is not necessarily the same as
attaining the latter.
Consider a 10-year-old child returning from school through a designated
safety corridor patrolled by police backed up by an occasional safe house.
Arriving home, with its fortified extra locks, grilles, and perhaps an alarm
system, the child is safe. But community life is likely to be seriously
compromised in such an environment.
Safety corridors and other such reactive tactics are not enough to
maximize community safety. The body of research about policing has
demonstrated that proactive strategies are needed as well. The most
effective proactive strategies result from various types of collaborative
police-community interactions. These interactions flow, in part, from law
enforcement's building trust among the public, forging police-community
problem-solving projects and other partnerships, and gaining important
insights into the community and its constituent groups through research.
Building Trust
To promote and maintain police-community coproduction of safety and
public order, the community must trust the police. To build the public's
trust, the police must engage the community in a manner seen as fair.
Research shows that when individuals report that a police officer treated
them fairly, their sense of fairness comes more from the quality of the
officer's interaction with them than from the outcome of the interaction.
For example, in one study, residents said that their beliefs and attitudes
about the police had more to do with how the officer treated them than
with the fact that the officer did or did not issue them a ticket.[18]
Officer rudeness, aloofness, excessive force, lack of interaction and
integrity, and the like foster distrust within the community and a sense of
being treated unfairly, often entailing major adverse consequences.[19]
Officer integrity, another trust-enhancing quality, also is a research area
receiving NIJ funding. The Institute is sponsoring a variety of
integrity-related studies, among them an examination of the citizen
complaint review process, a review of early warning systems, a
demonstration of organizational and leadership contributions to integrity,
an exploration of the characteristics of model sergeants, and development
of indicators of the status of corruption within a police agency.
Understanding Community Characteristics
Research also can help law enforcement agencies get closer to their
communities by gathering data about a community's characteristics,
attitudes, and opinions. One method by which to conduct such studies
is systematic social observation (SSO), which systematizes field methods
for teams of researchers who observe events as they see and hear them,
in contrast to relying on others to describe or interpret the events.[20]
Supported by NIJ and COPS, an SSO-based study (Project on Policing
Neighborhoods) focused on how police and citizens interacted with one
another in different neighborhood environments and the consequences the
interactions had on the quality of neighborhood life.[21] These are among
the findings in one of the two jurisdictions studied:
o Officers serving particular beats tended to rate a range of neighborhood
problems as more severe than did residents.
o About half the residents reported that the police were "excellent" or
"good" at working with the public to solve problems.
o Older residents reported feeling less safe than did younger ones, and
members of neighborhood organizations felt safer than nonmembers.
Another study, based on interviews in Chicago, concluded that
neighborhood context (such as socioeconomic status of residents and
degree of neighborhood stability) appeared to be the crucial factor
influencing attitudes and beliefs about crime and law. The researchers
suggested that "to design more effective crime control strategies,
policymakers and agents of the criminal justice system would do well to
consider the role of community social norms."[22]
This same study also found that "collective efficacy"--the presence of
mutual trust among neighbors combined with a willingness to intervene on
behalf of the common good, specifically to supervise children and
maintain public order--not race or poverty, was the largest single predictor
of the overall violent crime rate. Understanding collective efficacy,
according to the researchers, better equips planners, policymakers, and
community service organizations to work with residents in addressing
community problems.[23] (See "Under-standing Crime in Its Context: The
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods," page 44).
Police-Community Problem Solving
An example of a police department working out ways to engage the
community in problem solving is the Chicago Police Department's
Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS), which is being evaluated with
support from NIJ and others. Under CAPS, police and residents
collaborate in identifying and prioritizing problems, devising ways to
address them, and helping to marshal community resources to find
solutions.[24]
Under the police-community approach to coproducing safety--whether in
Chicago or elsewhere[25]--police agencies, various components of the
community, and a research partner participate in identifying problems and
putting them in priority order. To define a problem, the problem solvers
collect data, analyze incidents that may be related to the targeted problem,
look beyond the individual incidents, and begin asking whether the
incidents were triggered by a common underlying cause or condition that,
if resolved, would prevent many of them from recurring.
To foster greater collaboration with researchers, NIJ, with support from
the COPS Office, has funded many projects (called locally initiated
research partnerships) through which police and researchers share
responsibility for jointly selecting a target problem, collaborating on a
research design, interpreting findings, and implementing strategies for
effecting change. In one jurisdiction, for example, the police department
worked in concert with researchers from a nearby university to evaluate
the department's community policing initiative and unearth factors that
facilitated or hindered implementation.[26] ( For further discussion of
NIJ's support for a major effort in five communities to institutionalize the
data-driven, problem-solving partnership approach, see "Strategic
Approaches to Community Safety," page 25.)
Closer Is Better
"Policing in the community" increasingly means a policing style
fine-tuned to the community. That is the message of the quip "Law
enforcement is not a game of cops and robbers in which the public plays
the trees." And it is the message of this remark by a police chief: "We
must get closer to the people we serve. Closer is better. Distance is
danger."[27]
For More Information
Chaiken, M.R., Kids, COPS, and Communities, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998 (NCJ
169599).
Hartnett, S.M., and W.G. Skogan, "Community Policing: Chicago's
Experience," NIJ Journal, April 1999, 2-11 (JR 000239).
Langworthy, R.H. Measuring What Matters: Proceedings From the
Policing Research Institute Meetings, Washington, D.C.: Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice and Office of Community Policing
Services, July 1999 (NCJ 170610).
Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden, Policing
Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (FS
000223).
Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., R.E. Worden, C. DeJong, J.B.
Snipes, and W. Terrill, Systematic Observation of Public Police: Applying
Field Research Methods to Policy Issues, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1998, vii
(NCJ 172859).
Sampson, R.J., and D.J. Bartusch, Attitudes Toward Crime, Police, and
the Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1999 (FS
000240).
-------------------------------
Minimizing Risk Through Less-Than-Lethal Technology
Police, corrections officers, and concerned citizens have long expressed a
need for public safety officers to have alternatives to using their hands,
firearms, or batons when confronted by violent, uncooperative, or fleeing
suspects. The development of less-than-lethal (LTL) technologies,
including alternatives to high-speed pursuits, has consistently been among
the top 10 priorities of NIJ's Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Advisory Committee.
NIJ's LTL program identifies, develops, and evaluates new or improved
devices and technologies that minimize the risk of death and injury to law
enforcement officers, suspects, prisoners, and citizens. The program also
contributes to reducing civil and criminal liability suits against law
enforcement and corrections agencies.
Because no single LTL technology accommodates all scenarios and fulfills
all requirements safely and effectively, NIJ's program is designed to
provide options that best fit various needs while meeting such criteria as
community acceptance and safety. NIJ does so in the following ways:
o Funding the development and improvement of existing LTL
technologies.
o Testing and evaluating the safety and effectiveness of LTL technologies.
o Addressing the legal liabilities and social acceptability issues raised by
LTL technologies.
o Coordinating with other Federal and international agencies to leverage
LTL research, testing, and technology development.
o Providing information to law enforcement and corrections agencies
about LTL technologies.
The LTL Program Portfolio
In 1998, NIJ's LTL portfolio consisted of six major project areas. NIJ has
funded the development of some of these technologies as well as provided
new and better information about several existing LTL weapons, such as
pepper spray and shot bags.
Blunt impact projectiles. NIJ is funding research on three types of
projects: (1) modification of a ring airfoil projectile (RAP), originally
developed (but not fielded) by the U.S. Department of Defense; (2)
development of test devices and models that predict the probability of
injury from blunt-impact projectiles; and (3) development of a database on
the effectiveness of projectiles currently in use.
RAP is a rubber ring weighing about 1 ounce and resembling a large
napkin ring. Fired from an M-16A1 rifle equipped with an adaptor that
makes the weapon nonlethal at the muzzle, RAP flies straight ahead at a
constant velocity of 185 to 210 feet per second. A launching device
suitable for use by law enforcement and corrections officers is under
development, and modifications are being made to deliver pepper powder.
Officers equipped with RAP will have a weapon that can be used at
standoff range (30 feet--a sufficiently safe distance) when confronting
violent suspects armed with weapons other than firearms.
Chemicals. Pepper spray (oleoresin capsicum, or OC) is the primary
chemical LTL weapon used by law enforcement and corrections agencies
for one-on-one confrontations. NIJ is sponsoring a number of evaluations
of its health effects and operational effectiveness.
Electrical devices. An electric stun projectile, developed through NIJ's
Joint Program Steering Group (a partnership between NIJ and the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency to jointly identify and fund projects),
overcomes many of the limitations of currently available electric shock
LTL devices, such as the stun gun and laser. The projectile is more
effective because it allows the officer standoff distance from a suspect or
prisoner and ensures electrical contact. Unlike earlier devices, there are no
wires extending between officer and subject, and both electrical contacts
are contained in a single device. The health effects of the stun projectile
are being evaluated, with technical information from the developer
forming the basis of the assessment.
NIJ compared the effectiveness of stun guns and pepper spray against
hands-on tactics. The study, conducted in a jail environment, revealed
fewer injuries with pepper spray than with hands-on tactics, but more
injuries occurred with stun guns than with hands-on tactics.
Nets. Many practitioners and civilians view nets as particularly safe,
noninvasive LTL weapons, preferable to chemical or electrical devices.
One of the nets whose development was funded by NIJ was recently made
available commercially. Another net design, unique in that it can be
launched by a baton, is under development.
Light. NIJ is supporting the development of a laser dazzler to disorient
suspects or prisoners and is funding the safety certification of the device.
Car stopping. With funding from the Department of Justice's Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services, NIJ has invested in two projects
related to vehicle-stopping technologies: a Pursuit Management Task
Force and a laboratory performance evaluation, which also received
support from the U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
The Task Force, consisting of senior law enforcement officers and other
experts, identifies police practices and the role of technology in high-speed
pursuits of fleeing vehicles. The full range of police pursuit issues has
been explored by the Task Force. Its recommendations are being used to
plan the development and demonstration of advanced vehicle-stopping
devices and to provide a resource for law enforcement agencies that
develop and implement policies and procedures related to situations
involving fleeing vehicles.
NIJ and the Army Research Laboratory evaluated a number of
vehicle-stopping concepts and related hardware, assessing their
performance, operational characteristics, and safety. These laboratory
performance tests indicated that all devices met or could be modified to
meet established standards for human safety. The evaluations also
indicated that some devices could disrupt the engine performance of most
vehicles tested. For some devices, more comprehensive testing is needed
to determine effectiveness in operational scenarios; other devices need
further development.
For More Information
Visit the JUSTNET Web site, at http://www.nlectc.org, where specific
projects are described in more detail.
Edwards, Steven M., John Granfield, and Jamie Onnen, Evaluation of
Pepper Spray, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, February 1997 (NCJ 162358).
Kaminski, Robert, Steven M. Edwards, and James W. Johnson, "Assessing
the Incapacitative Effects of Pepper Spray During Resistive Encounters
With the Police," Policing 22 (1) (1999):7-29.
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, Pursuit
Management Task Force Report, Rockville, Maryland: National Law
Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, September 1998 (NCJ
172200).
-------------------------------
Taking Steps to Prevent Crime
Mapping Out Crime
The use of computer-generated maps showing precise details about a
neighborhood is a well-established practice in the private sector when a
developer, for example, makes a decision about the location of a new
business or mixed-use development. But only in the last few years has
mapping become more widely used by public safety agencies.[28]
Those who use geographic information systems (GIS) technology are
finding that they can use GIS not only to pinpoint the locations of crime
by type, but also to add multiple layers of information--such as the
location of schools, public transportation routes, residence of convicted
sex offenders, and other neighborhood characteristics--so they can place
crime in its context within the neighborhood and uncover the more subtle
dynamics of crime and victimization patterns. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg
(North Carolina) Police Department, for example, is integrating multiple
sources of information using data collected by the office of public works,
the tax assessor, and other city and county agencies.
Mapping, with its rich data content and possibilities for viewing multiple
scenarios, gives police greater capability to analyze criminal events more
precisely, identify emerging high-crime areas (hot spots), develop
solutions, and deploy resources.
NIJ Participates in a Vice Presidential Task Force
In 1998, NIJ participated in Vice President Gore's Task Force on Crime
Mapping and Data-Driven Management, which aims to expand the use of
crime mapping and data-driven management to improve law enforcement.
Through the Task Force subcommittees, NIJ is working with State and
local agencies to help them upgrade their technology and equipment and
learn more about the various uses of crime mapping, especially with
regard to integrating mapping with real-time data that supports community
policing and crime prevention.
In establishing the Task Force, Vice President Gore cited the power of
technology to reduce crime by employing up-to-the-minute mapping,
tracking, and strategic analysis of crime data combined with local
accountability for results.
Training and Assistance for Crime Mapping
To realize the technology's full potential, law enforcement agencies say
they need training and technical assistance on the use of crime mapping
and GIS. This is one finding from a 1998 national survey on the extent to
which law enforcement agencies use analytic mapping. Published in The
Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey
Results, the researchers' findings will help NIJ to develop a strategic plan
that will respond best to law enforcement needs related to GIS hardware,
software, training, technical assistance, other resources, and dissemination
techniques.
NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center (CMRC), established in 1997,
serves as a central source of information about mapping research. NIJ also
makes training and practical application assistance available through NIJ's
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-Rocky
Mountain Region in Denver. (See page 40 for more information about the
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center.)
In collaboration with police officers, crime analysts, and researchers, NIJ
has developed a number of courses to train law enforcement personnel in
using crime mapping. The courses range from an introductory overview to
specific uses and intermediate-level analysis.
During 1998, NIJ published jointly with the Police Executive Research
Forum a volume to answer the question: "How do police agencies use
crime mapping?" Crime Mapping Case Studies: Successes in the Field
highlights successful efforts across the country that used mapping to
identify suspects and prevent or reduce crime, from auto theft in Newark,
New Jersey, to burglary in Shreveport, Louisiana, and murder in Lowell,
Massachusetts.
In the coming years, NIJ plans to continue reaching out to community
safety agencies and providing assistance and technical expertise with
mapping as a tool that can promote collaborative problem solving.
For More Information
Visit NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center at
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/cmrc, or call the Center at 202-514-3431.
To subscribe to the listserv (Crimemap), send an Internet message to
listproc@aspensys.com. Leave the subject line blank and in the body of
the message type: subscribe crimemap,<Your Name>.
For assistance from NLECTC--Rocky Mountain Region, visit the
JUSTNET Web site at http://www.nlectc.org. Click on the "Rocky
Mountain" center. Or contact the director of Rocky Mountain's Crime
Mapping and Analysis Program, Noah Fritz, at 1-800-416-8086, or NIJ
Program Manager James Williams at 202-305-9078.
LaVigne, Nancy G., and Julie Wartell, Crime Mapping Case Studies:
Success in the Field, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research
Forum, 1998 (PERF product #834).
Mamalian, Cynthia A., and Nancy G. LaVigne, The Use of Computerized
Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey Results, Research Preview,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, January 1999 (FS 000237).
-------------------------------
Partnerships Promote the Safety of Women and Families
The Violence Against Women and Family Violence (VAW/FV) Research
and Evaluation program was launched in 1996 in direct response to the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Crime Act).
Over the past year, NIJ continued its ambitious research agenda in
collaboration with many other Federal agencies, committing nearly $10
million during 1998 to determine the nature and scope of violence against
women and to address gaps in family violence programs, policies, and
practices.
NIJ's VAW/FV program seeks to enhance the effectiveness of the criminal
justice system's response to this type of violence and to improve the safety
of women and their families. It achieves its goals through a
multidisciplinary, collaborative research portfolio that is examining the
causes and consequences of violence against women and family violence,
evaluating prevention and intervention initiatives, and supporting field
research that can be used to improve practice and formulate policy.
The initiative addresses the following program objectives:
o Describe the extent of violence against women and family violence.
o Identify the reasons why violent behavior against women and within the
family occurs and the factors required to end this type of violence.
o Assess the effectiveness of prevention and intervention programs.
o Provide research results to justice system practitioners, victim service
providers, and policymakers.
o Develop multidisciplinary partnerships to broaden research efforts.
Collaboration Enhances Ambitious Research Program
The foundation of NIJ's research on violence against women and family
violence is built on a variety of intra- and interagency partnerships. Each
partner enhances the depth and breadth of the program. NIJ's VAW/FV
infrastructure is comprised of four components:
o The NIJ Violence Against Women Research and Evaluation Agenda.
o The NIJ/Violence Against Women Office Joint Program.
o The NIJ/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration.
o The Interagency Consortium on Violence Against Women.
NIJ's Violence Against Women Research and Evaluation Agenda. NIJ has
funded projects on such issues as domestic violence/intimate partner
violence, sexual assault, and stalking. These studies fall under four major
program areas: practitioner-researcher collaborations; evaluation of
policies and programs, including experimental research designs;
longitudinal studies of women's experience with violence; and basic
research.
NIJ and VAWO Joint Program. Together, NIJ and the Office of Justice
Program's Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) are evaluating the
effectiveness of four programs, plus the largest VAWO program, STOP
(Services Training Officers Prosecutors) Violence Against Women grants
program. A majority of STOP grants provide direct services to victims,
with emphasis on providing assistance to underserved victims and
building community capacity to combat violence against women. Nearly a
quarter of the projects provide training for law enforcement and
prosecution. Many grantees are developing policies and protocols or
supporting specialized units within law enforcement or prosecution
agencies.
NIJ and CDC Collaboration. NIJ and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) are collaborating on a 5-year effort to examine violence
against women--why it occurs, how to prevent it, and how to increase the
effectiveness of legal and health care interventions. The partners support
joint publications, projects, conferences, meetings, and panels at
professional gatherings. A major component of the NIJ/CDC collaboration
is the National Violence Against Women Survey, which is described on
pages 7-8.
NIJ and CDC expanded their joint research efforts in 1998 with almost $1
million in funding for two new projects: a longitudinal examination of the
effects of welfare system changes on domestic abuse among low-income
minority women, and a study of partner violence among young, at-risk
Mexican-American females to help develop culturally responsive,
effective prevention programs.
Interagency Consortium. In 1996, nine Federal agencies formed a
consortium to examine violence against women using a multidisciplinary
approach. The consortium brings together researchers from the mental
health, public health and prevention, alcohol and drug abuse, and child
development fields. Twelve research projects have been funded on a range
of topics, including abuse of children and the elderly, partner violence,
sexual violence, and perpetrators and victims of multiple episodes of
family violence. Findings from the 12 projects are expected in 1999 and
2000.
For More Information
Visit NIJ's Violence Against Women and Family Violence Program Web
site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/vawprog/welcome.html.
Visit CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Web site at
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/fivpt.
Burt, M.R., L.C. Newmark, L.K. Jacobs, and A.V. Harrell, Evaluation of
the STOP Formula Grants to Combat Violence Against Women,
Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, July 1998. To access this report on the
Urban Institute's Web page, go to www.urban.org, then click on
"Researchers by Name," and then on "Burt."
Chalk, R., and P. King, eds., Violence in Families: Assessing Prevention
and Treatment Programs, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press,
1998.
Crowell, N.A., and A.W. Burgess, eds., Understanding Violence Against
Women, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1996.
Healey, K., C. Smith, and C. O'Sullivan, Batterer Intervention: Program
Approaches and Criminal Justice Strategies, Issues and Practices,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, February 1998 (NCJ 168638).
Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy
Implications, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: American Bar
Association and U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice,
July 1998 (NCJ 171666).
Tjaden, P., and N. Thoennes, Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of
Violence Against Women: Findings From the National Violence Against
Women Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1998 (NCJ 172837).
-------------------------------
Enhancing Public Safety by Improving and Detecting Weapons
Firearms were the cause of 34,000 deaths in 1996.[29] In addition,
firearms killed 688 law enforcement officers (92 percent of those killed in
the line of duty) from 1988 through 1997. Ten percent (or 62) of these
officers were slain with their own firearm.[30]
NIJ is supporting research and development activities that will lead to
safer guns and better ways to detect concealed weapons.
Developing Smart Guns
NIJ's smart gun project supports the development and refinement of a
firearm that will only fire for a recognized user.
In 1994, NIJ sponsored research to determine the viability of a smart gun
that would be effective enough for law enforcement officers to use. In
1995, Colt Manufacturing developed the first working smart gun prototype
using radio frequency identification technology. When activated, Colt
Manufacturing's smart gun emits a radio signal, which is received by a
small transponder worn by the authorized user. The transponder returns a
coded radio signal to the firearm. When the weapon hears the signal, the
trigger is unlocked and the weapon can be fired.
At a meeting convened in early 1998, NIJ demonstrated the product and
solicited ideas for improvements from law enforcement and corrections
officials. NIJ is supporting Colt Manufacturing's efforts to build Prototype
II, which will contain more advanced features, including a smaller receiver
that can fit on the back of a watch, in a bracelet, or be made a permanent
part of a uniform. The rest of the components will be inserted in the grip
of the gun.
Other research, conducted by Sandia National Laboratories, suggests
several existing technologies that also may be suitable for smart gun
application, including touch memory, biometric technologies, and voice
recognition.
In addition to making a police weapon safer, the smart gun concept, once
fully developed and tested, has the potential to greatly improve safety for
private owners by reducing the potential for accidental shooting and the
opportunity for a suspect to turn a homeowner's firearm against the
occupant.
Detecting Concealed Weapons
Concealed weapons in the hands of criminals are serious threats to the
safety of the public and to law enforcement officials. Recognizing the
severity of the problem, President Clinton directed the Department of
Justice to address it. In response, NIJ initiated a technology program to
provide better tools to detect weapons.
The Department of Justice/Department of Defense Joint Program Steering
Group manages the concealed weapons detection program for NIJ, in
collaboration with the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory in Rome, New
York, and the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology
Center-Northeast Region.
NIJ and the partner agencies are developing technologies to unobtrusively
detect metallic and nonmetallic concealed weapons using imagery-capable
and multiple technology-based systems. NIJ also monitors other promising
technology developments, including low-power x-rays that penetrate
clothing but do not penetrate the body. Instead, the device reflects x-rays
back from the skin, subjecting individuals to the equivalent of about 5
minutes of exposure to the sun at sea level. Computer software creates a
composite image of the person from the reflected x-rays. The color and
shape of objects in the image enable everyday items, like keys, to be
distinguished from suspicious items.
The major advantage of this device over current walk-through portals, like
those found at airports and courthouses, is that it can detect weapons with
no metal content. The device was successfully demonstrated in a Federal
courthouse in Los Angeles and at a State correctional facility in North
Carolina in 1997 and at the U.S. Capitol in April 1998.
The second product is a walk-through portal developed by the Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory of Idaho Falls, Idaho.
This device uses fluxgate magnetometers to detect changes in the earth's
magnetic field caused by the magnetic material in weapons carried by
individuals walking through it. It can detect weapons with even a small
ferrous content. Another advantage it holds over current portals, besides
improved sensitivity, is that it is not as likely to issue an alert for
innocuous objects like keys, which usually do not contain ferrous material.
This technology is almost ready for commercialization. A prototype is in
operation in the Bannock County, Idaho, courthouse.
In addition to portal devices, NIJ has a number of handheld weapons
detectors in development. These devices are intended to allow law
enforcement officials to scan individuals for illicit weapons at a safe
distance. NIJ is pursuing multiple technical approaches to increase the
chance of producing one or more devices that are highly effective. Two of
these approaches use different types of radar and a third uses ultrasound.
Each approach has different advantages and limitations. The ultrasound
device is the least expensive and the most readily developed. On the other
hand, ultrasound does not penetrate clothing as well as radar. The
ultrasound device was demonstrated in 1998 for the California Border
Alliance Group, where it was well received. Three prototypes of this
device were delivered to the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory's Rome
research site for evaluation. If the prototypes perform as expected, NIJ
plans to demonstrate them with law enforcement agencies.
Also in development are two portable devices used for scanning groups of
individuals for illicit weapons. One uses radar; the other is a hybrid system
using both radar and infrared (heat-detecting) sensors. Both appear
promising.
NIJ is developing a weapons detector that will mount to the front of patrol
cars. It is intended to allow law enforcement officials to screen individuals
standing 10 to 15 feet away for concealed weapons made of metal, like
handguns and knives, from inside a patrol car.
Finally, NIJ is funding an effort to develop a device for noninvasive body
cavity screening using magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, a technology
perhaps best known for its use in medicine.
Although NIJ's weapons technology and detection capability programs
have only existed for 4 years, they have been remarkably successful in
their endeavors to develop promising technologies.
For More Information
Visit the Web site of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Centers at http://www.nlectc.org.
"Making Guns Smart: The Next Step," TechBeat, Winter 1999: 3.
-------------------------------
Finding New Ways of Working Together
Partnerships--Multiplying Perspectives and Resources
Recognizing that no single organization or field of study has the answer
to reducing and preventing crime, NIJ joins with other government
agencies, as well as with professional groups and other organizations,
to work on issues collaboratively. The Institute also encourages the
partnership approach at the local level. Partnerships bring together multiple
perspectives, skills, experiences, and types of knowledge, increasing the
chances of devising effective solutions and avoiding duplication of effort.
They also help to ensure the involvement of all stakeholders.
The Rationale
Partnerships make sense for criminal justice because many issues that
touch the field of criminal justice also affect other disciplines. Substance
abuse, perceived as both a public health and criminal justice problem, is
perhaps the best example. Health concerns also intersect with criminal
justice concerns in corrections. This conjuncture prompted NIJ's
partnership with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
which is conducting surveys on the prevalence of HIV/AIDS and other
infectious diseases in prisons. Violence against women, also a concern of
both health and criminal justice professionals, prompted a partnership
between NIJ and CDC aimed at understanding the extent of the problem
and finding effective responses.
In recent years, Congress has made it possible for partnerships among
government agencies to flourish. Following passage of the 1994 Crime
Act, for example, NIJ formed partnerships with the offices created to
administer the Act to evaluate the innovative programs established at the
State and local levels. Partnerships have greatly expanded NIJ's research
capacity. Funds transferred to NIJ from other government agencies have
more than doubled since 1995.[31]
Partnerships make strategic sense when criminal justice agencies at
different levels of government come together in a single community to
focus their collective skills on a common problem. At several sites
nationwide, the Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative
(SACSI) is targeting problems like gang violence through a team approach
that combines the efforts of U.S. attorneys, researchers, and local agencies
and organizations to build the necessary infrastructure of research and
technology for precise definition of problems and promising
countermeasures. (See "Strategic Approaches to Community Safety," page
25.)
Researchers and Practitioners--Equal Partners
SACSI is only the most recent way in which NIJ has encouraged
collaboration. Since 1995, the Institute has been promoting a new way for
researchers to work together with criminal justice practitioners in law
enforcement and other fields. In the locally initiated research partnerships
program, the partners work as equals on pressing local problems. The
collaborative approach is viewed by NIJ as such a valuable tool that it was
selected as the theme of the 1998 criminal justice research and evaluation
conference.
Police departments have long worked with researchers, but the traditional
approach has been for the researcher to identify the topic of study and for
the agency to provide access to data and staff. NIJ's locally initiated
research partnerships are a departure from that model in that the law
enforcement agency and the researchers together identify the problem to
be studied and work side by side to develop strategies to deal with the
problem. The two collaborate on the research design and its
implementation and on the interpretation of study findings. In the long
term, NIJ anticipates that the partnerships will extend beyond the life of
the initial project to become ongoing collaborations that build
practitioners' research capacity.
The 41 researcher-practitioner partnerships in policing are the subject of a
national evaluation of both process and impact, with the final report
expected early in the year 2000. From their beginnings in policing, the
partnerships have been extended to other areas, including research on
inmate substance abuse, crime in public housing, and violence against
women (see "Partnerships Promote the Safety of Women and Families,"
page 34.)
Drug Treatment for Prisoners--Partnerships Extended
Because large proportions of arrestees are substance abusers, treatment
offered in the correctional setting holds the potential for reducing drug use
as well as recidivism. The Residential Substance Abuse Treatment
(RSAT) program, authorized under the 1994 Crime Act, offers funds to
the States to develop such programs in prisons and jails. States are
encouraged to adopt comprehensive approaches that include relapse
prevention and aftercare. With support from the Corrections Program
Office, NIJ is evaluating selected RSAT programs.
The evaluations are patterned on the researcher-practitioner model.
Researchers based in local universities or other research institutions are
encouraged to collaborate with the State agency whose program is being
assessed. Again, the immediate aim is to measure program effectiveness,
while the long-term goal is to build the research capacity of the agency. A
national-level evaluation, covering programs in all States that have RSAT
programs, is also under way. In 1998, NIJ awarded many additional
evaluation grants.
Joining Forces for Safer Public Housing
Some public housing communities across America experience
disproportionately high levels of crime. NIJ has established a partnership
with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to
help local public housing authorities (PHA's) reduce crime.
In one partnership effort, NIJ is developing measurable indicators of the
impact of HUD's Public Housing Drug Elimination Program (PHDEP) so
that public housing officials and residents will have empirically based
evidence for deciding whether a program supported by PHDEP should be
continued, modified, or discontinued and whether it can or should be
replicated.
Another NIJ-HUD partnership effort brings together researchers, local
PHA's, residents, and law enforcement officials. As with all research
partnerships, NIJ sees this effort as helping to develop and sustain local
research capacity. Researchers work with the PHA's and residents to
design technically sound strategies for evaluating the impact of a program,
with a built-in feedback loop that allows for midcourse correction.
Alternatively, the partnership can first identify problems related to drug
abuse and trafficking and other crime, then design and implement
solutions and evaluate their impact. For the researchers, the projects afford
the opportunity to apply their knowledge in a real-world setting where it
can make a difference.
Eight researcher-practitioner partnerships are now under way in Calexico,
California; Jonesboro, Arkansas; Omaha, Nebraska; Nashville, Tennessee;
New Haven, Connecticut; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Raleigh, North
Carolina; and Salt Lake City, Utah.
For More Information
McEwen, Tom, "NIJ's Locally Initiated Research Partnerships in Policing:
Factors That Add Up to Success," NIJ Journal (January 1999): 2-10 (JR
000238).
Viewing Crime and Justice From a Collaborative Perspective: Plenary
Papers of the 1998 Conference on Criminal Justice Research and
Evaluation, Research Forum, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1999 (NCJ 176979).
-------------------------------
Consulting the Experts in Science and Technology
A paramount concern in developing new equipment and technology is
uncovering and understanding the needs of those who will use it. Equally
important is making sure a product is the best tool for the job and has
received the imprimatur of the experts. Lives are on the line every day--
law enforcement officers, corrections personnel, and citizens. That reality
is the driving force behind NIJ's creation of an array of measures to make
sure these issues are fully addressed.
Identifying the Needs of the Field
Input from the people who work on the front lines comes to NIJ via a
group of practitioners organized as the Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC). In essence, LECTAC members
are the voice of State and local practitioners who will be the end users of
NIJ-developed products, services, standards, guidelines, and publications.
They work through the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Centers (NLECTC), NIJ's one-stop technology education,
assessment, and referral source for law enforcement and corrections
agencies. LECTAC pinpoints needs and NIJ passes the information on to
researchers, scientists, and engineers. Major imperatives are affordability,
safety, effectiveness, and limited liability.
A Smart Gun (a gun that can be fired only by recognized users);
through-the-wall surveillance systems (which can detect movement behind
concrete walls); and advanced body armor inserts (lighter than the vests
now used, they also protect against assault rifles) are among the products
being developed on the basis of LECTAC recommendations.
Deciding on Priorities
Promising technologies and related policy issues are reviewed for NIJ by
experts from the private sector and various Federal agencies. These
knowledgeable representatives constitute the Technology and Policy
Assessment Panel, whose primary function is presenting different
perspectives on the best approaches to getting new technologies into
practitioners' hands in both the short and long term. Legal, social, and
other problems that might arise in developing a specific product are
examined in depth. One of the Panel's subcommittees is dedicated to
investigating liability, a recurring issue for criminal justice agencies.
It was the Panel that recognized the potential to adapt for law enforcement
use some of the products developed for the military; the result has been a
vigorous Justice-Defense Department collaboration on a number of
products, including the ring airfoil projectile, a nonlethal deterrent device
initially developed for use by the National Guard; a laser dazzler, which
uses laser light to temporarily immobilize suspects; and an explosives
diagnostic system that detects bombs and similar devices.
Refining and Standardizing Procedures
The work of law enforcement and corrections agencies encompasses a vast
array of issues. These agencies operate best when they have access to the
most advanced techniques and proven practices. Through a process
involving technical working groups (TWG's), each dedicated to a specific
discipline or practice, NIJ helps to identify the best techniques and
practices, develop standardized procedures, and draw on community
opinion in the shaping of its long-range policies. The goal of each TWG is
to produce objective, comprehensive, verifiable guidelines and procedures.
TWG's are established in response to community-articulated issues and in
response to requests from the criminal justice community. A key
component is a resource pool of organizations and experts in the field for
which a TWG has been established. The guidelines for death
investigations, recently published by NIJ, were developed through the
work of a TWG.[32]
In recent months, NIJ has set up TWG's to develop procedures for
investigating bomb and explosive evidence, crime scenes, and arson; using
eyewitness evidence; and responding to electronic crime. The guidelines
for each procedure will be developed by surveying representatives of all
relevant disciplines and arriving at a consensus that reflects their diverse
perspectives.
Coordinating the Work of Federal Agencies
The Justice Department is only one of several Federal agencies that work
on research and technology development that could be useful in law
enforcement and corrections. For example, advances in communications
and transportation could be adopted or adapted for police use. To avoid
costly duplication, the many Federal agencies that conduct these types of
activities now share information through the Technology Policy Council
(TPC).[33]
One way TPC maximizes the value of investments in research and
development is by tracking Federal initiatives under way in all
participating agencies. As the executive agent for TPC, NIJ maintains a
list of initiatives, which currently contains more than 150 projects at some
stage of development.
Community Acceptance--An Essential Component
The technology tools developed under NIJ sponsorship must not only meet
the tests of scientific soundness, cost-effectiveness, and responsiveness to
practitioner needs, they also must be socially acceptable. That is, they
must reflect community perceptions of appropriate and valid use.
Social acceptability is particularly important when unfamiliar
technologies, such as new methods of nonlethal incapacitation, are
proposed. Ensuring that the community has the opportunity to become
familiar with proposed tools and technologies is the work of the
Community Acceptance Panel, through which NIJ asks representatives
with highly differing points of view to express their views and concerns. A
typical panel, for example, might be composed of representatives from the
American Civil Liberties Union, Hand-Gun Control, the National Rifle
Association, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People, neighborhood public housing associations, and crime watch
groups. New and proposed technologies are presented to the panel by
experts and criminal justice practitioners. NIJ uses the Panel's reactions to
improve the way the technology programs are presented to the public and,
if necessary, to modify the programs or specific products. The Community
Acceptance Panel is not the only way NIJ receives public input about a
new technology, but it is the most structured way, and every effort is made
to achieve a balanced public perspective.
For More Information
Visit the Web site of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center at http://www.nlectc.org.
Visit the Web site of the National Institute of Justice, Office of Science
and Technology at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/sciencetech.
-------------------------------
Guiding the User of State-of-the-Art Technology
Criminal justice agencies face the same imperative for ongoing
technological advancement as do other organizations. For that reason, NIJ
has spearheaded technology-related research and development to produce
life-saving equipment and devices that promise to prevent crime and
improve criminal justice. NIJ also develops performance standards for
equipment, tests equipment against them, and issues guidelines for using
the equipment. In 1998, standards and guidelines were developed in
several areas, and a number of training and technical assistance initiatives
were undertaken to familiarize prospective users with the new
technologies.
Measuring Performance, Issuing Standards
In law enforcement and corrections, where lives are on the line every day,
equipment needs to meet rigorous and exacting standards for safety,
dependability, and effectiveness. For more than 25 years, NIJ has
developed standards for commercial equipment and tested it to help
officials make informed decisions when purchasing such items as
protective clothing, vehicles, weapons, and communications systems. In
1998, NIJ released standards for several types of equipment, among them:
o Antennas used by law enforcement in radio communication. The revised
standard covers newer antennas, at base stations or other fixed sites, that
use new frequency bands.
o Pistols used by law enforcement officers. Performance requirements
were set for new weapon designs and calibers, and testing procedures were
revised.
Guidance for Technology Users
Guidelines, as distinct from standards, present information in nontechnical
terms and reach a wide audience. For example, NIJ developed guidelines
for death investigations in conjunction with the Bureau of Justice
Assistance and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the
booklet has been one of NIJ's most frequently requested publications.
Other guidelines issued in 1998 include:
o Batteries used by law enforcement. Vehicles, flashlights, mobile radios,
laptop computers, and cell phones all require batteries. The guidelines
cover performance advantages and disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and
handling and maintenance.
o Designing and building forensics laboratories. Developed with the
American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors, the guidelines are a
resource for building or refurbishing a laboratory. Safety, security, and
adaptability to changing technologies were the main considerations in
developing the guidelines.
Demonstrating Safe, Effective Riot Control in Prisons
A mock prison riot held at the West Virginia penitentiary showcased
emerging technologies useful for rapid, safe response. Some 300 observers
watched several scenarios set up to depict real-life riot situations. They
included a stabbing and hostage-taking during a basketball game, an
uprising in the prison chapel, cellblock takeovers, and high-speed escapes
by boat and automobile.
The basketball game scenario featured a range of equipment used for
restraint and communication. An electronic fence foiled an attempted
escape, and other inmates were prevented from fleeing when their vehicle
was disabled by a road spike. During the simulated hostage negotiations, a
voice translator was used to talk with inmates who could not speak
English. Participants used a biometric device to verify the identities of
staff and inmates and an ion tracker to detect explosives in the facility.
Other scenarios demonstrated the capabilities of night-vision devices,
security systems, officer protection products, drug detection systems, and
location/tracking systems. Telemedicine technology was used to respond
to staged injuries.
Saving Resources Through Technology-Based Training
Using advanced technologies as training tools can be a relatively low-cost
alternative or supplement to conventional classroom learning. NIJ is
developing several training tools in a number of areas of interest to law
enforcement and corrections and has created an Internet-based database,
the Law Enforcement Instructional Technology Information System, to
catalog training curricula that use advanced technologies.
Handling bomb threats. Bomb threats are among the most frightening and
dangerous situations public safety officers face. Under NIJ sponsorship,
the University of Houston is developing an interactive multimedia package
that trains first responders to conduct bomb threat assessments that cover
evaluating the situation, searching, and evacuating.
Because the Bomb Threat Training Simulator (BTTS) is in CD-ROM
format, it requires only a multimedia-equipped computer and enables
trainees to learn at their own pace, saving travel time, class time, and
money. An evaluation of the initial version of BTTS showed it to be more
effective than conventional bomb threat response training. On the basis of
reviews by experts, NIJ provided additional funds to develop BTTS for
actual field use, with rollout scheduled for mid-2000.
Analyzing bombs. Dealing with explosive devices requires an
understanding of how they are made and what they are made of. With the
Department of Defense and the FBI, NIJ is piloting and evaluating a better
way for law enforcement to diagnose these devices. One tool, the RTR-3,
is a computer-based, portable x-ray system that permits real-time
diagnosis or enables the x-ray images of the devices to be transmitted
electronically for examination. The RTR-3 is being piloted in 28 State and
local agencies nationwide.
Training bomb disposal experts. To aid in the highly dangerous and
delicate process of dismantling bombs, NIJ, along with the FBI, is
developing a computer-based, interactive tool for training bomb disposal
technicians. Packaged as a CD-ROM, it is intended as a refresher course,
supplementing basic training.
Preparing weapons team responses. Rescuing hostages, using force,
clearing rooms and buildings, and dealing with threats to school security
are simulated by an interactive technology, the Weapons Team
Engagement Trainer (WTET). Trainees equipped with a range of
simulated weapons respond to various scenarios that are projected on large
screens and can be replayed for evaluation purposes. Originally developed
for the Navy, WTET was commercialized for law enforcement use and has
been installed in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
Briefing the Field: NIJ's Technology Institutes Transferring technology to
law enforcement and corrections is the aim of the Technology Institutes
NIJ has held to bring State and local agency officials up to speed on recent
developments applicable to their fields. In two sessions held in 1998, one
for law enforcement and another for corrections, the range of affordable,
effective technologies currently available or in the pipeline was
showcased.
At each weeklong Institute, some 24 officials selected from a pool of
applicants were briefed on technologies being developed by NIJ and other
Federal agencies. The Institutes also served as forums where participants
discussed the specific challenges they face and explored possible
solutions. NIJ staff were on hand to direct them to further information.
For More Information
Visit the Law Enforcement Instructional Technology Information System
Web site at http://www.leitis.com, for information about training curricula.
Visit the Web site of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections
Technology Center (NLECTC) at http://www.nlectc.org, for information
about new products and technologies for law enforcement and corrections.
Or contact NLECTC by phone (800-248-2742) or e-mail
(nlectc@aspensys.com).
Forensic Laboratories: Handbook for Facility Planning, Design,
Construction, and Moving, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (NCJ
168106).
New Technology Batteries Guide, NIJ Guide 200-98, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998.
NIJ Standard 0112.03, Autoloading Pistols for Police Officers,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, November 1998.
NIJ Standard 0204.02, Fixed and Base Station Antennas, Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998.
-------------------------------
Exploring Issues of Special Concern
Understanding Crime in Its Context: The Project on Human Development
in Chicago Neighborhoods
What makes some communities relatively safe and lawful while others
experience high rates of crime, violence, and substance abuse? How do
individual personalities, family relationships, school environments, and
type of community interact to contribute to delinquency and criminal
behavior? What characteristics--of communities, families, and individuals-
-enable citizens to lead crimefree lives even in high-risk neighborhoods?
Using Chicago as a laboratory, researchers are attempting to answer such
questions about the complex relationships among community, crime,
delinquency, family, and individual development.
The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods brings
together experts from many disciplines to examine crime in the context of
community. It combines two studies into a single integrated research
effort. The first is an intensive examination of the social, economic,
organizational, political, and cultural structure of Chicago's neighborhoods
and the changes that take place in them over time. The second is a series of
longitudinal studies assessing the personal characteristics and changing
circumstances of a sample of children and adolescents. Researchers have
conducted surveys among nearly 9,000 residents of 343 Chicago
neighborhood clusters, more than 2,800 key community leaders, and a
sample of 6,000 children and adolescents (from birth through age 18). The
Chicago Project goes beyond previous studies by examining individuals
and their communities--as well as individuals in their communities.
NIJ is conducting the Chicago study in partnership with the Harvard
School of Public Health. The Project is cofunded by the John D. and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; the National Institute of Mental
Health and the Administration for Children, Youth and Families of the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; and the U.S. Department
of Education.
Understanding Community Influences Offers Practical Benefits
The study's focus on the effects of community and neighborhood contexts
on individual behavior offers a deeper understanding of human
development and the role of changing social environments. Already,
researchers have amassed a wealth of information that reveals significant
ways in which the social environment of neighborhoods shapes and
determines behavior and that identifies the developmental pathways that
attract people to or deter them from a variety of antisocial behaviors.
Preliminary analyses have provided new insight into the origins of some of
the Nation's most serious problems: delinquency, substance abuse, and
other forms of criminal behavior. This knowledge will help practitioners
and policymakers develop effective strategies for prevention, intervention,
treatment, rehabilitation, and sanctions.
As the Project's researchers explore how communities influence individual
development, they are addressing specific questions such as, "What role is
played by the economic opportunities available in a community?" and
"How are residents affected by a range of social factors operating in the
community?" Another concept being explored is the "spheres of influence"
or "nested contexts" within the larger community, which play important
roles in human development. These influences range from social contexts,
such as school and peer groups, to family relationships, to an individual's
own health and temperament.
The research produced by the Chicago Project has other useful
applications. For example, the study is generating a substantial database of
information about a major urban area--its people, institutions, resources,
and their relationships within communities--along with a detailed
description of life in the city's neighborhoods. This information should
prove valuable to community agencies and leaders in Chicago and other
large cities.
Community Cohesion and Residential Stability Help Reduce Crime
The Project's researchers have found that a community's cohesiveness
offers insights into the social mechanisms that link neighborhood poverty
and instability with high crime rates. This cohesiveness, or collective
efficacy, is defined as mutual trust and a willingness on the part of
neighborhood residents to help maintain public order where they live.
Examples of collective efficacy include monitoring children's play groups;
helping one another; and intervening to prevent juvenile truancy,
street-corner loitering, and similar antisocial behavior. The researchers
also found that collective efficacy is itself influenced by the extent of a
neighborhood's residential stability.
The study is devoting particular attention to early childhood and family
economic conditions and the ways in which they are related to the services
available in neighborhoods. The local environment plays a crucial role in a
neighborhood's educational, recreational, and child care services; the
question of why similar environments affect children differently,
depending on their age, gender, and ethnicity, is being examined.
Underlying factors, such as a child's temperament and social isolation,
may produce problems for both parents and children. The researchers are
looking at how these developments occur, hoping to generate findings
useful in developing community initiatives to strengthen
neighborhood-based service programs.
For More Information
Visit NIJ's Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Click on "Program"
and "Publications."
Visit the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods' Web
site at http://phdcn.harvard.edu for current Project information, including
Project brochures, descriptions of funded grants, a list of recent scientific
publications, newsletters, progress reports, press releases, and staff contact
information. Requests to receive the Project's quarterly newsletter, "The
Chicago Project News," can be made via the Web site.
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN)
Annual Report, November 1998. Available from PHDCN, Harvard School
of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115; phone:
617-432-1227.
Sampson, Robert J., and Dawn Jeglum Bartusch, Attitudes Toward Crime,
Police, and the Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Research
Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, June 1999 (FS 000240); and Obeidallah, Dawn A., and Felton J.
Earls, Adolescent Girls: The Role of Depression in the Development of
Delinquency, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1999 (FS 000244).
Sampson, R., S. Raudenbusch, and F. Earls. "Neighborhoods and Violent
Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy," Science 277:918-924;
see also by the same authors, Neighborhood Collective Efficacy: Does It
Help Reduce Violence? Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS
000203).
Selner-O'Hagan, M.B., et al., "Assessing Exposure to Violence in Urban
Youth," Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied
Disciplines 39(2) (1998); see also by the same authors, Assessing the
Exposure of Urban Youth to Violence, Research Preview, Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November
1996.
-------------------------------
Examining Youth and Crime Issues
Overall arrests of juveniles have been declining since 1994, but persons
under the age of 18 still accounted for an estimated 19 percent of all
persons arrested and 17 percent of all violent crime arrests in 1997.[34]
During 1998, with support from NIJ, the University of Chicago published
a special volume in the Crime and Justice series devoted exclusively to
youth crime issues.[35] The volume's 10 essays by highly respected
scholars focus especially on youth violence. Other NIJ-funded research is
examining the developmental sequences that lead some children to engage
in antisocial behavior, safety in schools, gang-related violence, and
transfers of youth to adult courts.
Developmental Antecedents to Youth Violence
A great deal of research has been done on the importance of early
childhood in shaping later criminal behavior. A study of New York prison
inmates found that 68 percent of the sample reported some form of child
victimization and 23 percent reported experiencing multiple forms of
abuse and neglect, including physical and sexual abuse.[36] Such findings
have important policy implications for developing prevention programs
for youth and providing treatment services for offenders.
NIJ-funded research also has found that one of the most important
influences in keeping violent crime low in urban neighborhoods is
collective efficacy--that is, mutual trust among neighbors combined with a
willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good, including
supervision of neighborhood children.[37] (See "Understanding Crime in
Its Context: The Project on Human Development in Chicago
Neighborhoods," page 44, for more details about these findings.)
Safety in Schools
As community institutions, schools can serve as the physical places and
social networks where communities mobilize against violence. Although
children are generally safer in school than they are elsewhere, the recent
series of violent incidents has raised school crime and safety to the highest
level of priority.
According to the 1998 joint U.S. Department of Education/U.S.
Department of Justice Annual Report on School Safety, key indicators
show that few of the murders and suicides of youth occur at school and
that most schools did not report any serious violent crimes to police in
1996.[38] Other major findings include the following:
o The percentage of 12th graders injured in violence at school has not
changed over the 20-year period, 1976-96, although the percentage
threatened with injury showed a very slight overall upward trend.
o In 1996-97, 10 percent of all public schools reported at least one serious
violent crime to police. Another 47 percent reported at least one less
serious violent or nonviolent crime. The remaining 43 percent did not
report any crimes to police.
o Elementary schools were much less likely than either middle or high
schools to report any type of crime to the police in 1996-97.
The NIJ-funded High School Youths, Weapons, and Violence: A National
Survey examined the extent to which a national sample of male high
school sophomores and juniors was involved in or otherwise affected by
firearm-related activity and exposure to weapons in 1996.[39] Highlights
of the survey findings include the following:
o Fifty percent of the juveniles surveyed felt that they could obtain
firearms relatively easily.
o Family and friends were the primary sources of guns.
o The majority of respondents who said they carry or possess firearms said
they did so primarily for protection.
o Most schools had implemented some violence-limiting measures.
An assessment of one student-level problem-solving curriculum for 11th
grade students found that the program was responsible for a significant
drop in fear levels as well as a decline in actual incidents of crime and
violence.[40] Classroom conditions improved as well; by the end of the
year, the number of teachers reporting that they spent a majority of their
time dealing with disruptive students had been reduced by half.
The curriculum brings together students, teachers, administrators, and the
police to identify problems and develop responses. The program's major
components include regular meetings among faculty, administrators, and
the police; problem-solving classes for students; and regular reviews by
police and teachers to identify problem students.
Replication of the program is needed in different school settings and
regions of the country to determine the project's potential for positive
outcomes.
Gang-Related Violence
In the area of gang violence, an NIJ-funded study corroborates previous
findings that gang members are more likely to engage in serious and
violent crimes. More significantly, however, the research identified
windows of opportunity for intervention and revealed that, contrary to
popular belief, reprisals suffered by those youths who resisted overtures to
join a gang were often milder than the serious assaults endured by youths
during gang initiation.[41]
These findings underscore the need for effective gang-resistance education
programs directed at preteens, especially those prone to delinquent and
violent behavior.
In another NIJ study, interviews with 16- to 24-year-old males with
violent histories revealed that young men saw violence as a way to achieve
and maintain social power and dominance. It also was seen as a means to
acquire flashy cars, control or humiliate others, defy authority, settle
drug-related disputes, attain retribution, satisfy the need for thrills, and
respond to challenges of one's manhood. The presence of guns, alcohol, or
drugs also tended to influence social interactions leading to violence. The
study identified several factors, such as the reaction of bystanders, that
affect outcomes. Findings indicate that teaching negotiation and conflict
avoidance skills under conditions that mimic the street can be
effective.[42]
Europeans are seeing a significant increase in juvenile crime, and the
trends in juvenile violence in Europe appear to parallel the American
experience. Although socioeconomic conditions such as rising
unemployment and poverty were linked with increased juvenile crime
rates, one study of European gangs revealed that an individual's family
history of violence was a key indicator.[43]
Juvenile Transfers to Adult Courts
Several ongoing studies are examining the implications of the trend to
adjudicate serious juvenile offenders in adult courts rather than through the
juvenile justice system. According to the National Survey on Sentencing
Structures, 35 States have made it easier to transfer juveniles to adult
courts, and a larger number of youths are being sentenced as adults and
incarcerated in adult prisons.
Placing juveniles in adult facilities raises several issues:
o Housing: Integrating youth with adult inmates exposes them to potential
rape or assault; yet segregated housing may not be available, and isolation
for protection may increase the risk of suicide.
o Programming: Juveniles may be subject to mandatory education laws in
addition to having different needs in terms of diet and physical exercise.
Discipline methods for incarcerated adults may not be appropriate for
juveniles.
o Recidivism: The most common change in State juvenile laws in recent
years has been in transferring juveniles to the adult court system.[44]
However, the findings about how transferring juveniles to the adult
criminal justice system affects recidivism rates are quite limited.
Many States also have changed their laws with regard to confidentiality of
a juvenile's criminal record and now are opening court proceedings to the
public. Several States have created laws that make the juvenile's parents
accountable for the child's crimes. For example, some States require
parents to pay court or supervision fees. Legislation passed in 1995 in
Idaho, Indiana, and New Hampshire requires parents to pay fees toward
their child's custody in a State institution.
For More Information
Fagan, J., Adolescent Violence: A View From the Street, Research
Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, January 1998 (FS 000189).
Greenwood, P.W., Costs and Benefits of Early Childhood Intervention,
OJJDP Fact Sheet, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, February 1999 (FS 9994).
Huff, C.R., Comparing the Criminal Behavior of Youth Gangs and
At-Risk Youth, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ 172852).
Joint Justice Department and Education Department Report Shows Most
Crime Against Students Occurs Away From Schools, BJS Fact Sheet,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, October 1998 (NCES 98-251).
Kaufman, P., X. Chen, S.P. Choy, K.A. Chandler, C.D. Chapman, M.R.
Rand, and C. Ringel, Indicators of School Crime and Safety 1998,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, 1998
(NCES 98-251/NCJ 172215).
Kenney, D., Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach,
Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (FS 000224).
Pfeiffer, C., Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries, Research
Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, May 1998 (NCJ 167029).
Sheley, J.F., and J.D. Wright, High School Youths, Weapons, and
Violence: A National Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ
172857).
Tonry, Michael, and Mark H. Moore, eds., Youth Violence, vol. 24 in
Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1998.
Weeks, R., and C.S. Widom, Early Childhood Victimization Among
Incarcerated Adult Male Felons, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS
000204).
-------------------------------
Issues in Sentencing and Corrections
The number of people incarcerated in the United States has more than
tripled since 1980, and now tops 1 million.[45] And although the rate of
increase seems to be leveling out, prison populations continue to rise.
A significant portion of this growth is attributable to sentencing reforms,
such as mandatory-minimum and three-strikes laws, and to changing
policies on parole release. The challenge of managing the influx of
offenders has given rise to new approaches based in the courts and
elsewhere. It also has generated new ways of thinking about how to
manage the increasing number of offenders who are released into the
community after serving their sentence and how to deal with the public
safety issues that accompany their release.
Effects of Sentencing Reform
The amount of time offenders serve in prison is almost always less than
the time they are sentenced to serve.[46] According to some critics of
sentencing practices, large differences between time sentenced and
served--particularly for violent offenders--drive a conceptual wedge
between public expectations of punishment and systems practice, eroding
public confidence.
To ensure that violent offenders serve larger portions of their sentences,
Congress established the Violent Offender Incarceration and
Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) program through the 1994 Crime Act.
Through grants to States, VOI/TIS helps States to ensure that violent
offenders are incarcerated with more certainty and with longer, more
determinate sentences.
NIJ has been working with the Justice Department's Corrections Program
Office (CPO) to support research aimed at understanding the impacts of
VOI/TIS. Collaborating with CPO and consulting with corrections
practitioners, sentencing policymakers, and researchers, NIJ is evaluating
programs funded under VOI/TIS and conducting related research that will
improve the ability of State and local jurisdictions to achieve the goals of
their violent offender and truth-in-sentencing programs.
Rethinking Justice
To explore sentencing issues in depth, NIJ and CPO launched a series of
executive sessions on sentencing and its implications for corrections.
Begun in 1998, the sessions bring together practitioners and scholars
foremost in their fields to find out if there are better ways to think about
the purposes, functions, and interdependence of sentencing and
corrections.
To better manage the flow of offenders, many jurisdictions are
experimenting with specialized courts that streamline case processing and
make services available to keep defendants from returning to court. Drug
courts, for example, feature a treatment component, backed by the
authority of the judge. NIJ-sponsored evaluations of drug courts in several
jurisdictions are now under way, with preliminary findings showing
reduction in reoffending by those sentenced. The issue of
cost-effectiveness is of particular interest in these evaluations.
Restorative justice, another fairly recent innovation, attempts to repair the
harm caused by crime and rebuild relationships in the community. The
victim's perspective is central to deciding how to repair the harm caused
by crime. The sanctions imposed also depart from tradition, requiring
offenders to accept responsibility and act to repair the harm they caused.
NIJ has been active in promoting the understanding of restorative justice
in a number of ways. Regional symposia, for example, have produced an
online "notebook," which is available at NIJ's Web page
(www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/rest-just/index.htm).
Like restorative justice, community justice aims to "restore" victim and
offender, but is distinctive in its focus on the community. Local residents
work on an equal footing with government agencies to identify needs and
responses, with partnerships formed among the various stakeholders.
Along with other Office of Justice Programs bureaus, NIJ cosponsored a
major conference on community justice in 1998.
Correctional Health Care
Changing trends in the health of prison and jail populations have brought
health care issues to the top of the corrections management agenda. NIJ
continues its work with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) to measure the extent of HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases,
and tuberculosis in prisons and jails. Surveys have identified high rates of
infection. The most recent survey (1994-95) confirmed that AIDS is far
more prevalent among inmates than in the overall U.S. population.[47]
The results of the 1996-97 survey are expected in mid-1999.
Federal courts have confirmed prisoners' constitutional right to adequate
health care. Providing access to specialist physicians can be difficult
because correctional facilities are often in rural areas where specialists are
in short supply, and taking prisoners to specialists outside the prison poses
security risks.
Telemedicine, the remote delivery of health care via telecommunications,
holds great promise as an alternative. This new mode of care has been
successfully demonstrated and implemented in a correctional setting,
under NIJ sponsorship.[48] It has the potential to contain costs while
improving access to medical specialists not otherwise available.
Women Offenders
Managing and meeting the needs of female prisoners are issues that have
come to the forefront because of the surge in their numbers in the past
decade. Although women still account for a small proportion of the prison
population, their numbers are increasing much faster than that of male
inmates. Women's needs are distinct in part because of their
disproportionate victimization from sexual or physical abuse and their
responsibility for children.
A Department of Justice update on women in criminal justice focused
considerable attention on women offenders and female juvenile offenders.
The report, which NIJ was instrumental in preparing, noted that the
increased number of women offenders has not been matched by enhanced
attention to specialized programs. In a separate study, correctional officials
and administrators identified a number of needs related to women
offenders: a greater number of alternatives to incarceration; classification
and screening for needs related to childhood sexual abuse, spousal abuse,
and offenders' children; management styles that differ from those used
with men; and more drug treatment and mental health services.
The corrections officials identified effective or innovative programs, citing
those that offer strong female role models, the chance to form supportive
peer networks, and attention to women's particular experiences as victims
of abuse and as parents.[49] To further spotlight promising programs for
women offenders, NIJ examined the New York City-based Women's
Prison Association, which offers an array of services, including
transitional assistance to women who are HIV-positive or at risk of
contracting HIV.[50]
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment
Criminologists recognize that the high proportion of offenders who are
substance abusers makes in-custody treatment appropriate for this
population.[51] The 1994 Crime Act provided expanded funds for
residential substance abuse treatment, encouraging the States to adopt
comprehensive programs, including relapse prevention and aftercare. The
Corrections Program Office of the Department of Justice, which
administers the program, transferred funds to NIJ to evaluate these
programs in several States. These process evaluations are now nearing
completion.
Reentry
Communities face public safety and health concerns when large numbers
of offenders are released and returned to their homes. In addition,
ex-offenders need to secure jobs to reduce their risk of recidivism and
increase the likelihood that their reentry will go smoothly.
Health care after release. The health risk posed by inmates returning to the
community suggests the need for collaboration between public health and
corrections. In a study conducted with the CDC, NIJ found that virtually
all correctional systems undertake some collaboration with public health
agencies, but needs persist, especially in discharge planning and
transitional services.[52] Working with the National Commission on
Correctional Health Care, NIJ is identifying the health care needs of
soon-to-be-released inmates, with the goal of generating evidence useful
for informing public policy to better protect offender and community
health.
Academic and life skills programming. Finding a job can be a problem for
released offenders because they often lack skills, have little or no
job-seeking experience, and may encounter employers who refuse to hire
people with criminal records. Prisons have long offered academic and life
skills programs to help meet offenders' needs. NIJ, the National Institute of
Corrections, and the U.S. Department of Education's Office of
Correctional Education have cooperated on a number of projects
addressing these job and educational needs. The Delaware Life Skills
Program, for example, offers academic, violence reduction, and life skills
training.[53] Although programs have not been rigorously evaluated, it is
clear that certain components have been successful among some inmates.
Case management. To aid in the reentry process, some jurisdictions have
borrowed the case management approach of mental health and social
service workers. Most often used by probation and parole officers, case
management aims to deliver services geared to reducing recidivism and to
address health care issues, including drug treatment, joblessness, and
homelessness. NIJ examined several case management models and the
major issues they raise. The greatest contribution of the approach to date
has been to reduce recidivism and supervision costs for mentally
disordered or developmentally disabled offenders.[54]
For More Information
Visit the Sentencing and Adjudication section of the NIJ Web page at
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/saap/welcome.html.
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Correctional Populations in the United States,
1996, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, April 1999 (NCJ 171103).
Ditton, Paula M., and Doris James Wilson, Truth in Sentencing in State
Prisons, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1999 (NCJ 170032).
Hammett, Theodore M., Public Health/Corrections Collaborations:
Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS, STD's, and TB, Research in
Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 169590).
Lipton, Douglas S., The Effectiveness of Treatment for Drug Abusers
Under Criminal Justice Supervision, Research Report, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1995
(NCJ 157642).
McDonald, Douglas C., et al., Telemedicine Can Reduce Correctional
Health Care Costs: An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, March 1999 (NCJ 175040); and McDonald, Douglas C., Andrea
Hassol, and Kenneth Carlson, "Can Telemedicine Reduce Spending and
Improve Prisoner Health Care?" in NIJ Journal, April 1999 (JR 000239).
Morash, Merry, Timothy S. Bynum, and Barbara A. Koons, Women
Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches, Research in
Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, August 1998 (NCJ 171668).
Office of Justice Programs, Women in Criminal Justice: A 20-Year
Update, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
1998 (NCJ 173416).
-------------------------------
Appendixes
Appendix A: Awards Made in Fiscal Year 1998
This appendix presents the grants, interagency and cooperative
agreements, contracts, and fellowships awarded by the National Institute
of Justice during fiscal year 1998. The awards reflect research,
development, evaluation, training, dissemination, and technical support
projects, including those supported by the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Act) and those conducted in
partnership with other Federal agencies.
An annual open solicitation for proposals invites investigators to initiate
research and evaluation in broadly defined topic areas; more focused
solicitations are issued throughout the year on specific topics and
programs, including those emphasized by the Crime Act.
Organization Of This Appendix
The awards are listed alphabetically by project title within 16 major topic
areas with additional subcategories. Listed under each project title are the
awardee organization, principal investigator or contractor, award amount,
and award number. Award numbers beginning with a number other than
98 identify previous years' awards that received supplements in 1998.
An asterisk (*) before the project name means the award was made with
funds appropriated under the Crime Act.
For More Information
The Institute's mission and approach to research is described in the NIJ
Prospectus, Building Knowledge about Crime and Justice.
For online access to this listing as well as information about publications,
programs, funding opportunities, and other aspects of NIJ, visit NIJ's
World Wide Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij, the Justice
Information Center at http://www.ncjrs.org, or contact the National
Criminal Justice Reference Service at (301) 519-5500 or (800) 851-3420.
Corrections
Addressing Sentencing-Related Changes in Correctional Health Care:
Building a Researcher-Practitioner Partnership
University of Texas Medical Branch
Jacques Baillargeon
$150,013
98-CE-VX-0022
*Baseline Psychopathology in Women's Prison: Its Impact on Institutional
Adjustment and Treatment Efficacy
University of Virginia
Janet Warren
$148,457
98-CE-VX-0027
*Building an Effective Research Collaboration Between the Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections and Temple University
Temple University
Jack R. Greene
$159,801
98-CE-VX-0016
Case Classification in Com-munity Corrections: National Survey of the
State of the Art
University of Cincinnati
Edward Latessa
$59,559
98-IJ-CX-0008
*Changing Prison Strategies in Response to Violent Offender
Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Legislation
RAND Corporation
Nancy Merritt
$178,708
98-CE-VX-0023
*Community Jails Statewide Research Consortium
University of Alaska, Anchorage
Nancy E. Schafter
$49,892
98-CE-VX-0014
*Crime, Coercion, and Communities: The Unintended Consequences of
Removal on Community Organization
Urban Institute
William J. Sabol
$166,827
98-CE-VX-0004
Effects of Change Over Time in Numbers and Composition of State Prison
Populations on the Level of Crime
University of New Mexico
Bert Useem
$21,551
98-IJ-CX-0085
Evaluation of the New Mexico Department of Corrections Work-Release
Program
University of New Mexico
Bert Useem
$199,816
98-CE-VX-0005
*Evolving Optimum Prison Classification Policies in the Implementation
of Truth in Sentencing: A Dynamic Model
South Carolina Department of Corrections
Lorraine T. Fowler
$149,585
98-CE-VX-0025
*Explaining Instability in the New Mexico Female Prison Population
University of New Mexico
Gary Lafree
$51,458
98-CE-VX-0020
*Georgia Cognitive Skills Experiment: Georgia Board of Pardons and
Parole
University of Cincinnati
Patricia Van Voorhis
$143,861
98-CE-VX-0013
*Government Management of Prison Privatization
Abt Associates Inc.
Terence Dunworth
$247,438
98-CE-VX-0002
Health Status of Soon-To-Be-Released Inmates
National Commission on Correctional Health Care
Robert Greifinger
$500,000
97-IJ-CX-K018
Impact Assessment of Sex Offender Community Notification on
Wisconsin Communities
Marquette University
Richard G. Zevitz
$49,972
98-IJ-CX-0015
*Impact of Incarceration on Crime, Crime Patterns, and Crime Rates
University of California, Berkeley
Jose Canela-Cacho
$149,998
98-CE-VX-0029
Nighttime Incarceration as an Intermediate Sanction: An Evaluation of the
Oklahoma County Program
University of Oklahoma Department of Public Safety
Thomas E. James
$167,114
98-IJ-CX-0011
*Unintended Consequences of Sentencing Policy: Key Issues in
Developing Strategies to Address Long-Term Care Needs
Pennsylvania State University
Cynthia Massie
$131,768
98-CE-VX-0011
Courts
Are Hung Juries a Problem?
National Center for State Courts
Victor Flango
$169,588
98-IJ-CX-0048
Community Justice Planning Grant
County of Travis, Texas
Chriss Wetherington
$49,959
98-IJ-CX-0045
Domestic Violence Courts: Jurisdiction, Organization, Performance Goals,
and Measures
National Center for State Courts
Susan Keilitz
$124,170
98-WT-VX-0002
Evaluation of Post-adjudication Felony Drug Court
University of Florida, Gainesville
Ronald L. Akers
$22,374
98-IJ-CX-0051
An Evaluation and Review of the Peacemaker Court of the Navajo Nation
Temple University
Eric Gross
$3,990
97-IJ-CX-0039
An Evaluation of Safe Streets Now!
Justice Research Center
Jan Roehl
$163,426
98-IJ-CX-0058
Impact of Community and Legal Context on the Adjudication and
Sentencing Process
Joint Centers for Justice Studies, Inc.
Christopher D. Maxwell
$24,973
98-IJ-CX-0023
Increasing Our Understanding of the Recovery Process Through Drug
Court Narratives
Syracuse University
Mary Ann Holmquist
$49,608
98-IJ-CX-0041
A Review of Specialized Courts: Key Issues in Handling Child Abuse and
Neglect Cases
Urban Institute
Adele Harrell
$75,243
97-IJ-CX-0013
Crime Mapping
*Assistance in Crime Mapping and Analysis Technology for Enhancing
Law Enforcement and Prosecution Coordination
Hunter College
Victor Goldsmith
$63,648
98-LB-VX-0004
*Combining Police and Probation Research to Reduce Burglary
Arizona State University
Vincent Webb
$224,118
98-IJ-CX-0059
Community Safety Information System Implementation
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division
Nancy Sweesy
$399,640
98-IJ-CX-A063
*Crime Hot Spot Forecasting: Modeling and Comparative Evaluation
Carnegie Mellon University
Wilpen Gorr
$200,110
98-IJ-CX-K005
Crime Mapping Research Center Fellowship Program
Julie D. Wartell, NIJ Visiting Fellow
$90,857
98-LB-VX-0003
*Detection and Prediction of Geographical Changes in Crime
State University of New York, Buffalo
Peter Rogerson
$221,520
98-IJ-CX-K008
*GIS Analysis of the Relationship Between Public Order and More
Serious Crime
University of Texas, Austin
William R. Kelly
$147,166
98-IJ-CX-K009
*GITS: Further Analyses Using Orange County's Multijurisdictional Gang
Incident Tracking System
University of California, Irvine
James W. Meeker
$103,060
98-IJ-CX-0072
Innovative Crime Mapping Techniques and Spatial Analysis: Phase II
Hunter College
Victor Goldsmith
$249,821
97-LB-VX-K013
*Mapping Crime: Principle and Practice
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Keith D. Harries
$20,000
98-LB-VX-0009
Predictive Methods for Crime Analysis
University of Virginia
D.E. Brown, Visiting Fellow
$139,043
98-LB-VX-0008
*Predictive Models for Law Enforcement
University of Virginia
D.E. Brown, Visiting Fellow
$299,940
98-IJ-CX-K010
Using a High-Definition Geographic Information System to Enhance
Community Policing on College Campuses
Temple University
George Rengert
$248,662
98-IJ-CX-0001
Crime Prevention
The Children-at-Risk Program: A Study of the Feasibility of a Longer
Term Evaluation
Urban Institute
Adele Harrell
$34,431
92-DD-CX-0031
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
National Science Foundation
Cheryl Eavey
$25,000
98-IJ-CX-A050
Does Community Crime Prevention Make a Difference?
Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority
Carolyn Rebecca Block
$138,067
98-WT-VX-0022
Effects of Casino Gambling on Crime and Quality of Life in New Casino
Jurisdictions
University of Nevada, Reno
Grant Stitt
$252,331
98-IJ-CX-0037
Labor Markets and Crime: Criminal Justice Policy and Research Issues
Orlando Rodriguez, NIJ Visiting Fellow
$115,764
98-IJ-CX-0047
*Process Evaluation of Maryland's Hot Spot Communities Program
Urban Institute
Jeffrey A. Roth
$329,237
98-IJ-CX-0029
Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods
Harvard University
Felton J. Earls
$2,200,000
93-IJ-CX-K005
Drugs and Crime
Drugs and Crime, General
Breaking the Cycle Research Demonstration Project
Jacksonville (Florida)
Judith A. Truett
$3,000,000
98-IJ-CX-K013
Breaking the Cycle Research Demonstration Project
Pierce County (Washington) Alliance
Dean Wilson
$3,000,000
98-IJ-CX-K011
Breaking the Cycle Research Demonstration Project
University of Alabama, Birmingham
L. Foster Cook
$2,812,302
96-IJ-CX-0065
*Classifying Inmates for Strategic Programming
Vera Institute of Justice, Inc.
Douglas Young
$128,240
98-CE-VX-0010
Evaluation of a Comprehensive Service-Based Intervention to Reduce
Substance Abuse
Yale University
Denise Stevens
$191,718
98-IJ-CX-0053
Evaluation of La Bodega de la Familia: A Family Drug Crisis Center
Vera Institute of Justice, Inc.
Douglas Young
$159,980
98-IJ-CX-0049
A Life Course Model of Career in Crime and Substance Abuse
University of Minnesota
Christopher Uggen
$45,903
98-IJ-CX-0036
Operation Drug TEST
District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency
Gerry Chapman
$265,273
98-IJ-CX-A009
PharmChem Drug Testing Laboratory
PharmChem Laboratories, Inc.
Elizabeth M. Lison
$36,000
98-IJ-CX-C010
Sacramento Batterer/Drug Intervention Experiment
California State University, Sacramento
Carole Barnes
$99,905
98-IJ-CX-K014
Why Haven't Drug Prices Risen With Tougher Enforcement? Modeling
the Behavior of Drug Markets
University of Maryland, College Park
Peter Reuter
$260,730
98-IJ-CX-0040
Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring/Drug Use Forecasting Programs
The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program, which was
expanded from the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program in 1997,
performs drug tests on samples of arrestees brought to booking facilities at
23 sites. The test findings indicate levels of drug use, determine what
drugs are used in specific jurisdictions, and track changes in arrestees' drug
use patterns.
Dallas ADAM
County of Dallas
Pat McMillan
$7,636
94-IJ-CX-A039
DUF Program: Assistance With Program Operations
Aspen Systems Corporation
Debra Hoffmaster
$152,310
93-IJ-CX-C002
DUF--Washington, D.C.
District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency
Kathryn Boyer
$9,010
95-IJ-CX-A024
Ft. Lauderdale ADAM
Broward County Sheriff's Office
Ron Cochran
$12,293
94-IJ-CX-A030
Houston ADAM
Houston-Galveston Area Council
Brett Arkinson
$31,965
95-IJ-CX-A008
Indianapolis ADAM
Marion County Justice Agency
Cindy Mowery
$11,554
95-IJ-CX-A013
Los Angeles ADAM
University of California, Los Angeles
Douglas Anglin
$48,157
97-IJ-CX-A007
Manhattan ADAM
New York City Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and
Alcoholism Services
Patricia Thomas
$39,884
94-IJ-CX-A013
Miami ADAM
Miami County Department of Human Services
Raphael Martinez
$9,734
98-IJ-CX-A012
*Rural ADAM Project
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Denise C. Herz
$26,104
98-IJ-CX-0065
Support Services for ADAM Program
Abt Associates Inc.
D. Hunt
$4,694,545
98-IJ-CX-C001
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program
*A Collaborative Evaluation of Pennsylvania's Program for Drug-Involved
Violators
Vera Institute of Justice, Inc.
Douglas Young
$59,989
98-RT-VX-K002
Evaluation of the Barnstable County Sheriff's Department's RSAT
Program
Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety
Diane Brensilber
$59,990
98-RT-VX-K006
*Evaluation of Jail-Based Treatment in Virginia
University of Maryland, College Park
Bruce Kubu
$59,982
98-RT-VX-K001
*Evaluation of Wisconsin's Residential Substance Abuse Treatment
Program for Female State Prisoners
University of Wisconsin, Madison
D. Paul Moberg
$59,864
98-RT-VX-K003
*Local Process Evaluation of the Michigan Department of Corrections
RSAT Program
National Council on Crime and Delinquency
James Austin
$60,000
98-RT-VX-K007
*Outcome Evaluation of Wisconsin Dual Diagnosis Treatment Program
University of Wisconsin, Madison
D. Paul Moberg
$99,351
98-RT-VX-K005
*Process Assessment of Correctional Treatment
Texas Christian University
Kevin Knight
$59,946
98-RT-VX-K004
Information Dissemination and General Support
Annual Review of Justice Research
Castine Research Corporation
Michael Tonry
$170,592
92-IJ-CX-K044
Committee on Law and Justice Core Support
National Academy of Sciences
Carol Petrie
$210,000
98-IJ-CX-0030
Crime Atlas
Justice Research and Statistics Association
Joan C. Weiss
$89,501
98-IJ-CX-K001
Criminal Justice Research Training Program
University of Maryland, College Park
Charles Wellford
$25,000
95-IJ-CX-A033
Data Resources Program of the National Institute of Justice
University of Michigan
Paul J. Stemple
$458,082
95-IJ-CX-C005
Developing Communications Initiatives in Criminal Justice
CF Productions, Inc.
Thomas V. Brady
$52,000
98-IJ-CX-0076
Development and Production of Annual Reports and Other Materials
Cygnus Corporation
Todd Phillips
$26,000
94-IJ-CX-C005
*Idaho Criminal Justice Statistics
Idaho Department of Law Enforcement
Robert C. Uhlenkott
$50,000
97-MU-MU-K016
John B. Pickett Fellowship in Criminal Justice Policy and Management
Harvard University
Susan Michaelson
$99,600
92-IJ-CX-0012
National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS)
Aspen Systems Corporation
Richard Rosenthal
$10,889,355
94-MU-CX-C006
National Institute of Justice Publications Support
Palladian Partners, Inc.
Cate Timmerman
$113,874
98-IJ-CX-C009
Policy Forums on Crime Issues for State Policymakers
National Governors' Association, Center for Best Practices
David E. Brown
$70,000
98-IJ-CX-0054
Professional Conference Series
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
Edward F. Connors
$129,400
94-MU-CX-C008
Research Application Contract
Abt Associates Inc.
Catherine Conly
$1,156,371
94-MU-CX-C007
Scholarly Conference: "Why Is Crime Decreasing?"
Northwestern University
John P. Heinz
$21,680
98-IJ-CX-0046
Technical Assistance for NIJ's Professional Conference Series
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
Edward F. Connors
$1,200,000
98-IJ-CX-C002
*Technical Assistance and Support
CSR, Inc.
Edward J. Spurlock
$6,313,071
96-MU-MU-C004
International Crime
The Internet Studio: Building Technical Support Infrastructure for NIJ's
International Program
Rule of Law Foundation
Sergey Chapkey
$293,413
98-IJ-CX-0007
Links Between International and Domestic Sex Industries
Coalition Against Trafficking Women
Janice Raymond
$188,677
98-WT-VX-0032
The Role of Local Law Enforcement in Controlling Illegal Immigration
and Other Transnational Crime
Georgetown University
William F. McDonald
$44,988
95-IJ-CX-0110
Transnational Organized Crime Workshop
National Academy of Sciences
Faith Mitchell
$75,000
98-IJ-CX-0019
Policing
Policing, General
*COMPSTAT and Organizational Changes: A National Assessment
Police Foundation
David Weisburd
$351,861
98-IJ-CX-0070
Curbing Police Brutality: What Works?
Eastern Michigan University
Liqun Cao
$25,000
98-IJ-CX-0064
*The Force Factor: Measuring Police Use of Force Relative to Suspect
Resistance
University of South Carolina
Geoffrey Alpert
$270,173
98-IJ-CX-0018
Frontiers of Policing
State University of New York, Albany
David Bayley
$49,994
98-IJ-CX-0017
*Identifying Correlates of Police Deviance: An Empirical Study of Police
Corruption and Brutality in New York (1975-1996)
Temple University
Jack R. Greene
$298,719
96-IJ-CX-0053
*Measuring the Effectiveness of the Police Corps Model
Allegheny County
Susan Allen
$223,377
98-IJ-CX-0084
Monitoring and Modeling Impacts of Policing Initiatives
National Development and Research Institutes, Inc.
Bruce D. Johnson
$212,999
98-IJ-CX-K012
The Phoenix Project: Predictors of Suspect Use of Force
Charlotte Research Center
Russell Johnson
$24,991
98-IJ-CX-0071
Police Perjury: Deviance or Utilitarianism
Michael O. Foley
$17,125
98-IJ-CX-0032
*Process Evaluation of Police Restructuring in the District of Columbia
Urban Institute
Jeffrey A. Roth
$440,803
98-IJ-CX-K007
*Reducing Nonemergency Calls to 911: Four Approaches
University of Cincinnati
Lorraine Green Mazerolle
$399,919
98-IJ-CX-0067
*Responding to the Problem Police Officer: An Evaluation of Early
Warning Systems
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Samuel Walker
$174,643
98-IJ-CX-0002
*Structure of Large Municipal Police Organizations
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Mary Laura Farnham
$177,159
98-IJ-CX-0003
*Supporting Police Integrity
Temple University
Jack R. Greene
$221,589
98-IJ-CX-0066
*Turnover Among Alaska Village Public Safety Officers: An Examination
of the Factors Associated With Attrition
University of Alaska, Anchorage
Darryl Wood
$48,995
98-IJ-CX-0035
Update and Expansion of the RAND Survey Regarding State and Local
Police Investigative Processes
Michigan State University
Frank Horvath
$108,442
98-IJ-CX-0057
*Use of Force by the Montgomery County Police Department
Joint Centers for Justice Studies, Inc.
Joel Garner
$76,034
98-IJ-CX-0086
*Women in Policing: Assessing the Work Environment
New Traditions for Women, Inc.
Donna Milgram
$93,281
98-IJ-CX-0013
Community Policing
*Building Effective Strategies for Community Policing
State University of New York, Albany
Raymond Hunt
$140,991
95-IJ-CX-0081
*Community Policing Strategies: First National Survey Update
Macro International, Inc.
Billy Jones
$39,972
96-IJ-CX-0045
Evaluating Community Policing in Public Housing: South Philadelphia
Initiative
Temple University
Jack R. Greene
$191,475
98-IJ-CX-0052
*An Evaluation of the Dallas Police Department Interactive Community
Policing Program
University of Texas, Arlington
Charles H. Mindel
$295,570
95-IJ-CX-0070
*Organizational Issues in Community Policing: Effects of Geographical
and Staffing Models on Community Policing
City of San Diego
Donna J. Warlick
$176,230
98-IJ-CX-0016
*Police Department and Police Officer Association Leaders' Perceptions
of Community Policing
University of Cincinnati
Lawrence Travis
$139,052
98-IJ-CX-0005
*Policing in a Community Context
University of Cincinnati
James Frank
$373,971
98-IJ-CX-0063
*Problem Solving Strategies and Tactics for Community Policing
City of San Diego
Donna J. Warlick
$213,119
98-IJ-CX-0080
*Transition: Creating a Culture of Community Policing
University of New Mexico
Marjorie Hudson
$177,124
98-IJ-CX-0073
*Wave 4 Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Evaluation
Urban Institute
Jeffrey A. Roth
$427,775
98-IJ-CX-0087
Corrections and Law Enforcement Family Support
*Creating Positive Mentors: Provision of Supervisory Skills Training for
Sergeants and Field Training Officers
Miami Police Department
Paul Sherpard
$45,425
96-FS-VX-0003
*Corrections Officer Maintenance Program
Connecticut Department of Corrections
Robert Munroe
$99,990
98-FS-VX-0003
*Law Enforcement and Corrections Family Support
City of East Lansing (Michigan)
Patricia E. Nowak
$10,202
98-FS-VX-0001
*Law Enforcement and Family Support Program
Iowa State University
Eugene Deisinger
$147,395
96-FS-VX-0006
Law Enforcement Family Support Project
Michigan State Police, Forensic Science Division
Gary Kaufman
$41,422
98-FS-VX-0007
*Longview Police Department Prevention and Treatment of Stress
Longview Police Guild (Washington)
Jim Duscha
$49,252
98-FS-VX-0006
*Modern Prison Work
Southern Illinois University
Jody Sundt
$99,934
98-CE-VX-0021
Online Education, Resources, and Support for Law Enforcement Families
Nashville-Davidson County (Tennessee)
Lorraine Williams-Greene
$99,559
98-FS-VX-0004
*Peer Support Program
Fraternal Order of Police, Old Pueblo Lodge #51 (Tuscon, Arizona)
Larry Morris
$224,016
98-FS-VX-0005
Police Family Life Education Project
Philadelphia Police Department
Mitchell Yanak
$73,447
98-FS-VX-0002
*Reaching Out to North Carolina's Law Enforcement Community
North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety,
Governor's Crime Commission
George S. Ake
$67,020
98-FS-VX-0008
*Stress Reduction Program for Law Enforcement Personnel and Their
Families
City of Los Angeles
Kevin J. Jablonski
$89,785
98-IJ-CX-0010
Locally Initiated Partnerships, Policing
Development of a Multiagency Research Partnership Involving the
Chandler, Glendale, and Scottsdale, Arizona, Police Departments
Arizona State University
Vince Webb
$113,240
98-IJ-CX-0006
*Implementing Community Policing in Los Angeles: A Partnership
Between the Los Angeles Police Department, University of California,
Los Angeles, and University of Southern California
Training Research Corporation
Wellford Wilms
$179,560
95-IJ-CX-0060
*Institutionalizing the Use of Research in a Local Police Department: A
Continuing Partnership
University of Cincinnati
Lawrence Travis
$75,913
98-IJ-CX-0068
*Locally Initiated Research Partnership With Arlington County, Virginia,
Police Department
Urban Institute
Elizabeth Langston
$133,911
98-IJ-CX-0009
National Evaluation of Locally Initiated Research Partnerships I
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
J. Thomas McEwen
$299,971
95-IJ-CX-0083
*Research Partnership Between Lexington, Kentucky, Division of Police
and Eastern Kentucky University
Eastern Kentucky University
Larry Gaines
$33,464
98-IJ-CX-0004
Policing Technology
*Evaluation of Computers in Patrol Cars: Implications for the Community
Policing Roles of Police Officers
San Francisco State University
Caran Colvin
$255,000
98-IJ-CX-0012
*Impact of Oleoresin Capsicum Spray on Respiratory Function in the
Sitting and Prone Maximal Restraint Positions
University of California, San Diego
Theodore C. Chan
$128,176
98-IJ-CX-0079
*Multimethod Study of Police Special Weapons and Tactics Teams
University of Houston
David Klinger
$187,364
98-IJ-CX-0081
Public Housing and Crime
Community-Based Assessment of the Calexico Housing Authority's Drug
Elimination Program
San Diego State University Foundation
Michael Sabath
$131,357
98-IJ-CX-0055
Comparative Effects of High-Rise Public Housing for the Elderly
Omaha Housing Authority
Katy Salzman
$131,063
98-IJ-CX-0075
Evaluating Community Policing in Public
Housing: The South Philadelphia Initiative
Temple University
Jack R. Greene
$191,475
98-IJ-CX-0052
An Evaluation of a Comprehensive Service-Based Intervention Strategy in
Public Housing
Yale University
Denise Stevens
$191,718
98-IJ-CX-0053
Evaluation of a Public Housing Drug Elimination Program
Arkansas State University
David Harding
$74,182
98-IJ-CX-0061
Evaluation of a Truancy Reduction Program
Metropolitan Development and Housing Authority
Gerald F. Nicely
$118,042
98-IJ-CX-0056
Fear of Crime in Two Public Housing Contexts
North Carolina State University
William R. Smith
$63,052
98-IJ-CX-0050
Neighborhood Revitalization and Disorder: An Intervention Evaluation
University of Utah
Barbara Brown
$236,195
98-IJ-CX-0022
Schools
A National Study of Delinquency Prevention in Schools
Gottfredson Associates, Inc.
Gary D. Gottfredson
$261,419
96-MU-MU-0008
Sentencing
*Addressing Sentencing-Related Changes in Correctional Health Care:
Building a Researcher-Practitioner Partnership
University of Texas Medical Branch
Jacques Baillargeon
$150,013
98-CE-VX-0022
Attitudes Toward Crime and Punishment in Vermont: An Experiment
With Restorative Justice
Doble Research Associates, Inc.
John Doble
$94,757
98-IJ-CX-0028
Estimating the Impacts of Three Strikes and Truth-in-Sentencing on
Correctional Populations
University of California, Los Angeles
Elsa Chen
$34,997
98-IJ-CX-0082
*Evaluating the Development of an Empirically Based Risk Assessment
National Center for State Courts
Brian J. Ostrom
$237,787
98-CE-VX-0009
*Examining the Effects of Ohio's Truth-in- Sentencing
Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
Horst Gienapp
$117,570
98-CE-VX-0019
*Impact of Determinate Sentencing Laws on Plea Rates and Court Delay
Justec Research
Thomas Marvell
$110,387
98-CE-VX-0017
*Impact of Ohio's Senate Bill 2 on Sentencing Disparity
University of Cincinnati
John Wooldredge
$149,194
98-CE-VX-0015
*Impact of Truth in Sentencing on Length of Stay in Prison
Urban Institute
William J. Sabol
$212,491
98-CE-VX-0006
*Michigan Sentencing Guidelines: Integrating Intermediate Sanctions into
Guidelines and Examining the Judicial Response
National Center for State Courts
Victor Flango
$250,952
98-CE-VX-0008
*New Jersey No Early Release Act: Impact on Prosecution, Sentencing
Rutgers State University of New Jersey
Candace McCoy
$1,124,219
98-CE-VX-0007
*Research on and Evaluation of Sentencing Reforms and Their Effects
Oregon Criminal Justice Council
Phillip Lemman
$310,152
98-CE-VX-0030
Social and Economic Impact of Sentencing Practices
Yale University
Kathryn Dudley
$93,481
98-CE-VX-0012
*Unintended Consequences of Sentencing Policy: Creation of Long-Term
Health Care Obligations
Abt Associates Inc.
William Rhodes
$127,077
98-CE-VX-0001
Technology Development
Officer Protection and Crime Prevention
*COPLINK Database Integration and Access for Law Enforcement
Intranet
City of Tucson
Douglas F. Smith
$200,000
97-LB-VX-K023
*Offender Wide-Area Continuous Electronic Monitoring Systems
Lucent Technologies, Inc., Integrated Solutions
Laura G. Tutterow
$272,677
98-LB-VX-K005
*Proof of Concept and Demonstration for the Personal Alarm
Telephonics Corporation
Dennis Fortner
$459,078
97-LB-VX-K021
*Technology Thrust Areas and Technology Solutions to Law Enforcement
Raytheon TI Systems, Inc.
Frank Bates
$500,000
98-LB-VX-K001
Investigative and Forensic Science
Forensics, General
*Computational Assistance and Training in DNA Population Genetics for
Forensic Science Laboratories
University of Illinois
R.E. Gaensslen
$98,952
98-LB-VX-A018
*Detection of Date-Rape Drugs in Hair and Urine
University of Illinois, Chicago
Adam Negrusz
$105,564
98-LB-VX-K020
Develop a Rapid Immobilized Probe Assay for the Detection of mtDNA
Variation
Rebecca L. Reynolds
Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute
$193,318
96-IJ-CX-0028
Forensic Accreditation Board: An Accreditation Program for Forensic
Specialty Certifying Programs
American Academy of Forensic Sciences
Graham R. Jones
$51,000
98-IJ-CX-0074
*Medicolegal Death Investigator Guidelines and Training Project
Occupational Research and Assessment, Inc.
Steven C. Clark
$150,000
98-LB-VX-0007
National Center for Forensic Science
University of Central Florida
William W. McGee
$1,047,992
98-IJ-CX-K003
*National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence
U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Columbia
Barbara Anijikaiye
$99,952
98-LB-VX-A049
*Pattern Recognition Techniques in Investigative and Forensic Sciences
Institute for Linguistic Evidence, Inc.
Carole E. Chaski
$90,000
98-LB-VX-0065
*Support to the 15th Meeting of the International Association of Forensic
Sciences
15th Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Sciences, Inc.
Barry A.J. Fisher
$49,920
98-LB-VX-0011
Teleforensic Demonstration Project
New York State Police
Gerald M. Zeosky
$50,000
98-IJ-CX-A051
DNA 5-Year Research and Development Plan
*Chip-Based Genetic Detector for Rapid Identification of Individuals
Nanogen, Inc.
Michael I. Nerenberg
$499,882
97-LB-VX-0004
*Database of Y-Chromosome STR Loci in U.S. Populations
Pennsylvania State University
Mark Stoneking
$110,384
98-LB-VX-0005
*Evaluation of New STR Markers for Forensic Analysis
University of Cincinnati
Ranjan Deka
$220,359
98-LB-VX-0002
*Evaluation of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP's) for Human
Identification Use
University of Texas, Houston
David Stivers
$40,000
98-LB-VX-0010
*Improved Analysis of DNA STR's for Human Identification-Mass
Spectrometry
Genetrace Systems, Inc.
Christopher H. Becker
$301,999
97-LB-VX-0003
*Microchip DNA Fingerprinting Devices
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
J. Michael Ramsey
$498,963
97-LB-VX-A063
*Microdevice for Automated, Ultra-High-Speed, and Portable DNA
Forensics
Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research
Daniel J. Ehrlich
$250,000
98-LB-VX-K022
*Rapid DNA Typing by Laser Desorption Mass Spectroscopy
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
C.H. Winston Chen
$149,040
97-LB-VX-A047
*Validation of the Combined DNA Index System-Approved DNA
Markers for Forensic Testing
University of Texas, Houston
Ranajit Chakraborty
$49,741
98-LB-VX-K019
Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program
Acquisition of CODIS Capabilities
City of Tucson (Arizona)
Walter K. Tannert
$11,360
98-DN-VX-0026
Arizona DNA Analysis Enhancement Program
Arizona Department of Public Safety
Debra A. Figarelli
$420,000
98-DN-VX-0014
Arkansas: Establishment of a DNA Data Bank
Arkansas State Crime Laboratory
Kenneth H. Michau
$161,250
98-DN-VX-0019
California Statewide DNA Laboratory Improvement Program
California Department of Justice, Bureau of Criminal Identification and
Information
Jan Bashinski
$1,000,000
98-DN-VX-0013
Continuation and Expansion of "Fast Track" Forensic Indexing of Crime
Scene Profiles
City of Albuquerque (New Mexico)
John F. Krebsbach
$141,979
98-DN-VX-0009
Denver Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program
Denver Police Department
Greggory S. LaBerge
$198,340
98-DN-VX-0010
Developing Criteria for Model External DNA Proficiency Testing
University of Illinois, Chicago
Joseph L. Peterson
$249,926
96-DN-VX-0001
Development and Implementation of West Virginia Short Tandem Repeat
Combined DNA Index System Database
Marshall University Research Corporation
Terry W. Fenger
$2,000,000
98-DN-VX-K001
DNA Improvement of Data-basing and Forensic Casework
Michigan State Police, Forensic Science Division
Frank E. Schehr
$457,015
98-DN-VX-0031
DNA STR Conversion Project
Marion County (Indianapolis) Forensic Services Agency
James E. Hamby
$359,560
98-DN-VX-0004
Enhancement of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation's Forensic DNA
Laboratory Program
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Forensic Services Division
William J. Darby, III
$85,336
98-DN-VX-0002
Expanded Felon DNA Databank Program for the State of Alabama
Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences
John W. Hicks
$374,900
98-DN-VX-0021
Expanded Forensic DNA Testing Program for the State of Hawaii
Honolulu Police Department
Wayne Kimoto
$300,540
98-DN-VX-0020
Expanding DNA Analysis Capabilities: STR Implementation
County of Bexar (Texas)
Lonnie D. Ginsberg
$171,310
98-DN-VX-0024
Expanding DNA Typing in Georgia
Georgia Bureau of Investigation
George Herrin, Jr.
$380,950
98-DN-VX-0022
Expansion of DNA Analysis Capabilities
Illinois State Police, Springfield
Susan Hart Johns
$150,000
98-DN-VX-0032
Expansion of DNA Services
North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation
Mark S. Nelson
$73,000
98-DN-VX-0012
Florida Statewide Coordinated Forensic DNA Laboratory Program
Florida Department of Law Enforcement
Dale Heideman
$900,000
98-DN-VX-0034
Forensic Development of STR Database and Comparison to Nonsubject
Cases
Maryland State Police
Louis C. Portis
$180,808
96-DN-VX-0002
Forensic DNA Enhancement Project for Texas
Texas Department of Public Safety
D. Pat Johnson
$380,000
98-DN-VX-0001
Forensic DNA Laboratory Program Expansion
Missouri State Highway Patrol
T. J. Luikart
$546,742
98-DN-VX-0025
Forensic DNA Program for Connecticut: PCR Technologies
Connecticut Department of Public Safety
Elaine M. Pagliaro
$191,000
98-DN-VX-0017
Fort Worth DNA Laboratory Enhancement
City of Fort Worth (Texas)
D.E. Garrett
$121,085
98-DN-VX-0027
Houston Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program
City of Houston
James Bolding
$106,909
98-DN-VX-0005
Implementation of Automated Multiplex Short Tandem Repeats in
Forensic Casework
County of Dallas
Timothy J. Sliter
$151,068
98-DN-VX-0006
Improvement of Capability to Analyze DNA
Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services
Deanne F. Dabbs
$375,000
98-DN-VX-0018
Increasing STR Typing Capabilities in the Oregon DNA Laboratory
Oregon Department of State Police
Cecilia H. von Beroldingen
$113,198
97-DN-VX-0013
Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department DNA Equipment Upgrade
Kansas City Police Department
John T. Wilson
$163,700
98-DN-VX-0033
Maine Statewide DNA Laboratory Improvement Program
Maine Department of Public Safety
Timothy D. Kupferschmid
$155,000
97-DN-VX-0008
Montana DNA Program
Montana Department of Justice
James Streeter
$34,550
98-DN-VX-0008
North Dakota Department of Health Crime Laboratory Division DNA
Project
North Dakota Department of Health
Hope R. Olson
$73,774
98-DN-VX-0030
North Louisiana Crime Lab DNA Analysis Improvement Program
North Louisiana Criminalistics Laboratory
Patrick W. Wojtkiewicz
$275,470
98-DN-VX-0003
Northern Illinois Police Crime Lab Forensic DNA Analysis Program
Northern Illinois Police Crime Laboratory
Jane M. Homeyer
$266,669
98-DN-VX-0011
Prince Georges County Police Department DNA/Serology Laboratory
Project
Prince Georges County (Maryland) Government
Michael Ricucci
$222,290
98-DN-VX-0028
STR Conversion and Expansion of CODIS Database
Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Terry L. Laber
$200,000
98-DN-VX-0023
STR Technology Update and Increased Combined DNA Index System
Capacity
New Jersey Division of State Police
Linda B. Jankowski
$297,381
98-DN-VX-0035
Tarrant County Forensic DNA Laboratory Enhancement Program
County of Tarrant (Texas)
Ronald L. Singer
$89,520
98-DN-VX-0016
Upgrade of Serological Analysis to DNA Technologies
Kentucky State Police
Lucy A. Davis
$231,570
98-DN-VX-0007
Validation and Implementation of PCR-STR Analysis and CODIS Site
Establishment
Baltimore County (Maryland) Police Department
Karen L. Irish
$119,300
98-DN-VX-0015
Washington State Patrol Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement
Program, Phase III
Washington State Patrol
Donald C. MacLaren
$300,000
98-DN-VX-0029
Less-Than-Lethal Incapacitation
*Biomechanical Assessment of Nonlethal Weapons
Wayne State University
Albert I. King
$148,276
98-LB-VX-K017
*Development of a Database of the Effects of Less-Than-Lethal Weapons
Pro Tac International
Ken Hubbs
$84,770
98-LB-VX-K006
Evaluation of the Human Effects of a Prototype Electric Stun Projectile
Pennsylvania State University
Pamela R. Kauffman
$99,600
98-IJ-CX-K006
*Evaluation of Vehicle Stopping Electromagnetic Prototype Devices
U.S. Department of the Army
E. Scannell
$250,000
98-LB-VX-A099
Ring Airfoil Projectile System for Less-Than-Lethal Application
Guilford Engineering Associates, Inc.
David Findlay
$249,303
97-IJ-CX-K019
Communication and Information Technology
*Development of Advanced Wireless Technology Standards
Association of Public Safety Communications Officials International, Inc.
Craig M. Jorgensen
$44,570
97-LB-VX-K002
*Development of a Community Access System for the Chicago Police
Department
Abt Associates Inc.
Marianne Beauregard
$474,418
98-LB-VX-0070
*Face Recognition and Intelligent Software Development
Analytic Services, Inc.
Tina M. Babin
$3,749,998
98-LB-VX-K021
*Investigation and Evaluation of Voice Stress Analysis Technology
U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory
Sharon M. Walter
$150,000
98-LB-VX-A013
*Law Enforcement/Criminal Justice Multijurisdiction Information System
Study
Phase II
Center for Technology Commercialization, Inc.
Thomas Kennedy
$299,341
97-LB-VX-K012
*Southwest Border States Antidrug Information System
Criminal Information Sharing Alliance
Glen Gillum
$7,918,174
97-LB-VX-K009
Telemedicine Network Prototype
SPAWAR, Charleston
Jerry A. Koenig
$937,273
98-IJ-CX-A014
*Voice-Response Translator for Preprogrammed Law Enforcement
Phrases
Integrated Wave Technologies, Inc.
John Hall
$401,324
98-LB-VX-K023
Training and Simulation Technologies
*Bomb Threat Training Simulator
University of Houston
Christopher A. Chung
$131,075
98-LB-VX-K016
*Development of Computer-Based Training for Law Enforcement
Advanced Systems Technology
Barbara Hines
$319,436
98-LB-VX-K018
*Law Enforcement Technology Training Needs Assessment Planning
Sam Houston State University
Larry T. Hoover
$500,000
97-LB-VX-K020
*Training, Technology Development, and Implementation
U.S. Department of Defense, Naval Air Warfare Center
Janet Weisenford
$507,944
97-MU-MU-A042
*Working With Technology in Corrections
American Correctional Association
John J. Greene
$164,930
96-LB-VX-K004
Counterterrorism Technologies
Assessment of Explosively Formed Penetrator
U.S. Department of the Navy, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head
Division
Marc Magdinec
$445,988
97-DT-CX-A074
Body Cavity Screening
System
Quantum Magnetics, Inc.
Geoff Barrall
$250,263
98-DT-CX-K005
Chemical/Biological Dosimeter Advanced Concept Technology
Demonstration
U.S. Department of Defense, Directorate of Research and Engineering
Jasper Lupo
$200,000
98-DT-CX-A073
Cybercrime Cyberterrorism Study
Tennessee Valley Authority
David J. Icove
$65,000
98-MU-CX-A076
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Support of the
Joint-Program Steering Group (JPSG)
U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency
David Fields
$349,985
97-IJ-CX-A025
Detection and Classification of Concealed Weapons Using Magnetic
Gradient Measurements
U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
Jonathan Nadler
$101,959
95-IJ-CX-A027
Development of an Inexpensive Radar Flashlight for Law Enforcement
and Corrections Applications
Georgia Institute of Technology
E.F. Greneker
$336,539
98-DT-CX-K003
Explosives Detection and Remediation Research and Evaluation
U.S. Department of Defense, Office of Special Technology
David Perkins
$1,350,000
97-DT-CX-A068
Laser Dazzler Assessment
U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory
Chad Lindstrom
$290,000
98-DT-CX-A040
Multisensor Portal Concealed Weapons Detection
Chang Industry, Inc.
Yu-Wen Chang
$850,164
98-DT-CX-K001
Passive Millimeter-Wave Camera for Concealed Weapons
Thermotrex Corporation
Peter F. Black
$299,942
98-DT-CX-K006
Portable Through-the-Wall Surveillance System
Raytheon Company
Larry Frazier
$278,595
98-DT-CX-K004
Stand-Off Detection and Tracking of Concealed Weapons
Quantum Magnetics, Inc.
Peter V. Czipott
$297,733
98-DT-CX-K002
Technical Support for the Concealed Weapons Detection and Through-
the-Wall Surveillance Programs
U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, Information Directorate
David Ferris
$1,499,076
98-MU-MU-A062
Technical Support to NIJ's Office of Science and Technology
U.S. Department of Energy, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Steven W. Martin
$157,546
97-DT-CX-A092
Program Assessment, Policy, and Coordination
*Facilitation of Domestic and International Technology Partnerships
Eagan, McAllister Associates, Inc.
Robert Greenberg
$428,589
96-LB-VX-K008
*Governance and Technology Delivery Processes for the National Law
Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers and Their User
Communities
Pymatuning Group, Inc.
Ruth M. Davis
$498,204
98-LB-VX-0001
*Information Technology Acquisition
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
J. Thomas McEwen
$499,869
98-LB-VX-K011
*Law Enforcement Technology, Technology Transfer, Less-Than-Lethal
Weapons Technology, and Policy Liability Assessment
SEASKATE, Inc.
E.A. Burkhalter
$255,828
96-LB-VX-K006
*Less-Than-Lethal Policy Assessment Panel
SEASKATE, Inc.
E.A. Burkhalter
$352,866
96-MU-MU-K016
Public Acceptance of Police Technologies
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
J. Thomas McEwen
$100,000
93-IJ-CX-K012
*Research Conference on Illicit Substance Detection
Gordon Research Conferences
Jimmie C. Oxley
$20,000
97-LB-VX-0007
*Surplus Property Program
Ultimate Enterprise Limited
Michael Simpson
$212,998
96-LB-VX-K002
*Systems Engineering and Evaluation Support for the National Institute of
Justice Office of Science and Technology
U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Support Office
Carl F. Klele
$1,298,898
96-LB-VX-A038
Standards and Testing
Technology Assessment Program
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and
Technology
Kathleen M. Higgins
$3,827,375
94-IJ-CX-A004
Technology Assistance
Technology Assistance, General
*Oak Ridge Laboratory Technical Support to the National Institute of
Justice
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
James A. Reafsnyder
$250,000
98-LB-VX-A075
*Sandia National Laboratories Test Facility
Sandia National Laboratories
Debra D. Spencer
$525,000
97-LB-VX-A004
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers
NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers
(NLECTC) offer centralized sources of product and technology
information, assessment, and referral services to law enforcement,
corrections, and other criminal justice professionals. NIJ also supports a
Border Research and Technology Center that focuses on developing and
enhancing border control. The following awards provide technical
assistance and other resources in support of the Director of
Science and Technology at NIJ through operation of the NLECTC.
National--Rockville, Maryland: National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Center
Aspen Systems Corporation
David C. Shinton
$2,649,943
96-MU-MU-K011
Northeast Region--Rome, New York: National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Center
Air Force Research Laboratory Information Directorate
John A. Ritz
$2,670,000
96-IJ-CX-A032
Rocky Mountain Region Denver, Colorado: National Law Enforcement
and Corrections Technology Center
University of Denver, Colorado Seminary
Deborah G. Bradford
$1,786,004
96-MU-MU-K012
Southeast Region--Charleston, South Carolina: National Law Enforcement
and Corrections Technology Center
South Carolina Research Authority
Gary A. Mastrandrea
$1,839,697
97-MU-MU-K020
Southeast Region--Charleston, South Carolina: National Law Enforcement
and Corrections Technology Center
U.S. Department of the Navy, Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center,
Charleston
Ronald L. Polkowsky
$199,030
96-IJ-CX-A010
Western Region--El Segundo, California: National Law Enforcement and
Corrections Technology Center
Aerospace Corporation
Donald Peterson
$1,624,793
96-MU-MU-K006
Operation of the Border Research and Technology Center
SPAWAR, San Diego
Chris Aldridge
$244,250
96-IJ-CX-A036
Operation of the Office of Law Enforcement Technology
Commercialization
Wheeling Jesuit University
Tom Burgoyne
$2,800,000
98-IJ-CX-K002
Victimization and Victim Services
Development of a National Study of Victim Needs and Assistance
Victim Services, Inc.
Ellen Brickman
$379,193
98-VF-GX-0011
Evaluation of Victims of Crime State Compensation and Assistance
Programs
Urban Institute
Blaine Liner
$750,000
98-VF-GX-0016
Repeat and Multiple Victimizations: The Role of Individual and
Contextual Factors
Pennsylvania State University
R. Barry Ruback
$24,997
98-IJ-CX-0034
Victimization Outcomes: What Influences Victim Compliance, Injury, and
Crime Completion?
University of Maryland, College Park
Catherine A. Gallagher
$24,987
98-IJ-CX-0025
Violence
Violence, General
NIJ-NCOVR Partnership
Carnegie Mellon University
Patricia Edgar
$526,342
98-MU-MU-0007
Patterns of Violence: An Analysis of Individual Offenders
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Julie Horney
$86,172
96-IJ-CX-0015
Violence Against Women and Family Violence
Beliefs and Perceptions About Domestic Violence
State University of New York, Albany
Alissa P. Worden
$179,216
98-WT-VX-0018
*Children Exposed to Domestic Violence
American Bar Association
Laura Nickles
$140,987
98-IJ-CX-0069
Conference: Co-Occurrence of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse
University of Minnesota
Jeffrey L. Edleson
$24,975
98-WT-VX-0026
Development of Violence Against Women
University of Houston
Ernest N. Jouriles
$86,054
98-WT-VX-0005
Developmental Antecedents of Violence Against Women: A Longitudinal
Approach
University of North Carolina, Greensboro
Jacquelyn White
$99,745
98-WT-VX-0010
Developmental Theory and Battering Incidents
University of Cincinnati
Paul Mazerolle
$97,142
98-WT-VX-0007
Drugs and Alcohol and Their Connections to Domestic Violence
University of New Mexico
Paul Guerin
$41,428
98-IJ-CX-0031
Ecological Model of Battered Women's Experience Over Time
George Washington University
Mary Ann Dutton
$350,948
98-WT-VX-0023
Economic Distress, Community Context, and Intimate Violence: An
Application and Extension of Social Disorganization Theory
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Michael L. Benson
$93,107
98-WT-VX-0011
Estimating the Population at Risk for Violence During Child Visitation
Victim Services, Inc.
Chris O'Sullivan
$44,797
98-IJ-CX-0021
*Evaluation of a Coordinated Response to Domestic Violence
San Diego Association of Governments
Stuart R. Shaffer
$62,526
98-WT-VX-K014
Evaluation of Efforts to Implement No-Drop Policies
American Bar Association
Laura Nickles
$233,342
98-WT-VX-0029
*Evaluation of Special Session Domestic Violence: Enhanced Advocacy
and Interventions
University of Connecticut
Cathrine M. Havens
$74,999
98-WE-VX-0031
Family Violence: Building a Coordinated Community Response
American Medical Association
Larry S. Goldman
$8,555
96-IJ-CX-0029
Field Testing Domestic Violence Risk Assessment Instruments
Victim Services, Inc.
Chris O'Sullivan
$97,661
98-WT-VX-0019
Impact of Domestic Violence--Employment Experiences of Women on
Welfare
University of South Florida
Martha L. Coulter
$429,068
98-WT-VX-0020
*Impact Evaluation of the Data Collection and Communication Systems
Components of the Violence Against Women Act STOP Grant Projects:
An Implementation Guide
National Center for State Courts
Susan Keilitz
$199,582
96-WT-NX-0002
Impact Evaluation of a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Unit in
Albuquerque, New Mexico
University of New Mexico
Cameron Crandall
$262,853
98-WT-VX-0027
*Impact Evaluation of STOP Grant Programs for Reducing Violence
Against Women
University of Arizona
Eileen M. Luna
$239,072
98-WT-VX-K010
Impact Evaluation of STOP Grants Law Enforcement and Prosecution
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
J. Thomas McEwen
$399,974
96-WT-NX-0007
A Longitudinal Study of Battered Women in the System
University of Colorado, Boulder
Joanne Belknap
$234,934
98-WT-VX-0024
Male-Perpetrated Domestic Violence
Boston University
Barbara A. Cole
$76,667
98-WT-VX-0031
National Evaluation of the Arrest Policies Program Under Violence
Against Women
Institute for Law and Justice, Inc.
J. Thomas McEwen
$624,650
98-WE-VX-0012
*National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child
Victimization Enforcement Grant Program
Cosmos Corporation
Mary A. Dunton
$369,953
98-WR-VX-K002
*National Evaluation of the Violence Against Women Act Grants
Urban Institute
Martha Burt
$449,354
95-WT-NX-0005
Predicting Levels of Abuse and Reassault Among Batterer Program
Participants
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Alex Hackert
$94,981
98-WT-VX-0014
Predicting Reporting and Nonreporting of Sexual Assault to the Police: A
Multivariate Analysis
Hawaii Department of the Attorney General
Libby O. Ruch
$32,227
98-WT-VX-0015
Prosecutors' Charging Decisions in Sexual Assault Cases
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Cassia Spohn
$173,460
98-WT-VX-0003
Research and Evaluation on Violence Against Women
King County Epidemiology, Planning and Evaluation Unit
Sandy Ciske
$119,346
98-WT-VX-0025
Research on Violence Against Women: Syntheses for Practitioners
State University of New York, Albany
Alissa P. Worden
$349,484
98-WT-VX-K011
*Researcher-Practitioner Partnership: Evaluating the Domestic Violence
Enhanced Response Team Program in Colorado Springs
21st Century Solutions
Craig D. Uchida
$75,000
98-WE-VX-K010
Researcher-Practitioner Partnership: Evaluation of Grants to Encourage
Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence
Pennsylvania State University
Paul Antolosky
$74,921
98-WE-VX-0032
*The Richmond/Police Foundation Domestic Violence Partnership
Police Foundation
Rosann Greenspan
$199,098
98-WT-VX-0001
Risk Factors for Violent Victimization of Women: A Prospective Study
Wellesley College
Jane Siegel
$67,035
98-WT-VX-0028
Secondary Data Analysis on the Etiology, Course, and Consequences of
Intimate Partner Violence Against Poor Women
Better Homes Fund
Amy Salomon
$108,962
98-WT-VX-0012
Sexual Violence and Intimate Partner Violence
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Ted Jones
$500,000
98-IJ-CX-A026
Understanding the Intergenerational Transmission of Violence
Michigan State University
G. Anne Bogat
$248,830
98-WT-VX-0021
Using a Longitudinal Data Set to Further Understanding of the Trajectory
of Intimate Violence Over Time
Michigan State University
Cris Sullivan
$99,117
98-WT-VX-0013
Violence Against Immigrant Women and Systemic Responses
Kent State University
Edna Erez
$184,527
98-WT-VX-0030
Violence Against Women
Wichita State University
Jana L. Jasinski
$85,206
98-WT-VX-0017
Violence Against Women--Population-Based Comparison of Assaultive
Injury Pattern
University of Pittsburgh
Harold B. Weiss
$184,917
98-WT-VX-0016
Violence Against Women: The Role of Welfare Reform
California Institute for Mental Health
Sandra Naylor Goodwin
$516,842
98-WT-VX-0009
Violence and Threats of Violence Against Women in America
Center for Policy Research
Patricia G. Tjaden
$250,000
93-IJ-CX-0012
Firearms
Analysis of Title XI Effects: Assault Weapons Ban Evaluation
Urban Institute
Jeffrey A. Roth
$301,826
98-IJ-CX-0039
The Effect of Gun Carry Laws on Crime and Injury
Harvard University
Deborah Azrael
$26,138
98-IJ-CX-0042
Effectiveness of Denial of Handgun Purchase
University of California, Davis
Fay Yee
$160,046
98-IJ-CX-0024
Police Problem-Solving Strategies for Dealing with Youth and
Gang-Related Firearms
Rand Corporation
Peter Greenwood
$397,789
98-IJ-CX-0043
Youth
Youth, General
*Assessing Mental Health Problems Among Serious Delinquents
California Youth Authority
Rudy Haapanen
$310,345
98-CE-VX-0024
Boot Camps for Juveniles: A Multisite Study
University of Maryland, College Park
Doris MacKenzie
$48,063
96-SC-LX-0001
Classification for Juvenile Corrections
University of Cincinnati
Lawrence F. Travis
$187,437
98-JB-VX-0108
*Community Justice Conferences: Restorative Policing
University of Maryland, College Park
Lawrence Sherman
$221,772
98-IJ-CX-0033
Evaluation of the Department of Correction Housing Program for Waived
Juveniles in Ohio
Abt Associates Inc.
Dale Parent
$191,976
98-CE-VX-0003
Exploring Youth Violence: Risk and Protective Factors in Three Settings
University of Southern California
Cheryl Maxson
$124,935
98-IJ-CX-0020
Good Kids in Bad Circumstances: A Longitudinal Analysis
University of Cincinnati
Michael G. Turner
$19,633
98-IJ-CX-0026
Impact of Juvenile Sentencing Guidelines
University of Utah
Russel Van Fleet
$200,000
98-JB-VX-0111
*Longitudinal Analysis of Recidivism Rates in Three California Youth
Authority Parole Release Cohorts
California Youth Authority
Norman Skonovd
$137,450
98-CE-VX-0026
*Maryland Department of Juvenile Justice Partnership to Study Waiver
Effects
University of Baltimore
Jeffrey D. Senese
$146,267
98-CE-VX-0018
Neighborhood and Family Contexts of Adolescent Girls' Delinquency
Harvard University
Dawn A. Obeidallah
$49,505
98-IJ-CX-0044
Process and Outcome Evaluation of Prosecutorial Waiver to Criminal
Court in Virginia
Urban Institute
Sanjeer Sridharan
$194,803
98-JB-VX-0107
Structured Decision Making for Alameda County Probation
National Council on Crime and Delinquency
Barry Krisberg
$75,000
98-JB-VX-0109
Understanding Needs and Outcomes of Substance Abuse Treatment for
Juvenile Offenders
RAND Corporation
Patricia Ebener
$74,976
98-JB-VX-0112
Use of Risk Assessment in Achieving Accountability-Based Sanctions
University of Michigan
Rosemary Sarri
$282,600
98-JB-VX-0110
*Youth-Police Interaction and the Implication for Coproduction of Safety
in Chicago
Chicago Alliance for Neighborhood Safety
Warren Friedman
$160,787
98-IJ-CX-0077
Gangs
Assessment of the Community Impact of Civil Gang Injunctions
University of Southern California
Cheryl Maxson
$398,728
98-IJ-CX-0038
Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T.
University of Nebraska, Omaha
Finn-Aage Esbensen
$300,434
94-IJ-CX-0058
*Gang-Control Efforts in a Community Policing Environment:
Developing Process and Impact Measures
Police Executive Research Forum
Deborah Weisel
$229,484
98-IJ-CX-0083
*Police Problem-Solving Strategies for Dealing With Youth and
Gang-Related Firearms
RAND Corporation
Peter Greenwood
$397,789
98-IJ-CX-0043
*The Police Response to Gangs: A Multisite Study
Arizona State University
Charles Katz
$163,532
98-IJ-CX-0078
Youth Groups and Gangs in Europe: A Joint American/
European Workshop
University of Southern California
Malcolm W. Klein
$9,931
98-IJ-CX-0027
-------------------------------
Appendix B: Documents Published in Fiscal Year 1998
Most NIJ materials are free and can be obtained in several ways:
o Download documents from the NIJ World Wide Web site at
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij.
o Call or write to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service
(NCJRS) at 800-851-3420 (outside the United States, call 301-519-5500),
P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000, or download documents from
the NCJRS Web site at http://www.ncjrs.org.
o Order Research Previews via fax-on-demand by calling 800-851-3420.
o For many science and technology publications, call the National Law
Enforce-ment and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) at 800-248-
2742 or download documents from the NLECTC Web site at
http://www.nlectc.org.
NIJ publishes several types of publications, including:
o Research in Action: Overviews of specific topics and programs in
research and practice.
o Research in Brief: Summaries of recent NIJ research, development, and
evaluation findings.
o Research Reports: Comprehensive reports on NIJ-sponsored research
and development projects.
o Research in Progress Videotapes: Sixty-minute lectures with a
question-and-answer segment presented by well-known scholars and
accompanied by a Research Preview summarizing the salient points of the
discussion.
o Research Previews: Two-page fact sheets on research and evaluation
findings and activities.
o Issues and Practices: Reports presenting program options and issues for
criminal justice managers and administrators.
o Program Focus: Highlights of specific innovative State and local
criminal justice programs.
o Research Forum: Reports based on NIJ-sponsored conferences and
lectures series.
Corrections
Chicago's Safer Foundation: A Road Back for Ex-Offenders, Finn, P.,
Program Focus, June 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 167575.
The Delaware Department of Corrections Life Skills Program, Finn, P.,
Program Focus, September 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 169589.
Managing Prison Growth in North Carolina Through Structured
Sentencing, Wright, R.F., Program Focus, February 1998, 15 pages, NCJ
168944.
The Orange County, Florida, Jail Educational and Vocational Programs,
Finn, P., Program Focus, December 1997, 16 pages, NCJ 166820.
Public Health/Corrections Collaborations: Prevention and Treatment,
Hammett, T.M., Research in Brief, July 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 169590.
Successful Job Placement for Ex-Offenders: The Center for Employment
Opportunities, Finn, P., Program Focus, March 1998, 19 pages, NCJ
168102.
Texas' Project RIO (Re-Integration of Offenders), Finn, P., Program
Focus, June 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 168637.
Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches,
Morash, M., T.S. Bynum, and B.A. Koons, Research in Brief, September
1998, 11 pages, NCJ 171668.
Courts and Sentencing
Resolving Community Conflict: The Dispute Settlement Center of
Durham, North Carolina, McGillis, D., Program Focus, September 1998,
15 pages, NCJ 172203.
Crime Prevention
Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, Kenney, D.,
Research Preview, August 1998, 4 pages, FS 000224.
Kids, COPS, and Communities, Chaiken, M., Issues and Practices, June
1998, 67 pages, NCJ 169599.
National Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T., Esbensen, F., and D.W. Osgood,
Research in Brief, November 1997, 8 pages, NCJ 167264.
Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising,
Sherman, L.W., D.C. Gottfredson, D.L. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, and
S.D. Bushway, Research in Brief, July 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 171676.
Violence Among Middle School and High School Students: Analysis and
Implications for Prevention, Lockwood, D., Research in Brief, October
1997, 12 pages, NCJ 166363.
Visibility and Vigilance: Metro's Situational Approach to Preventing
Subway Crime, La Vigne, N.G., Research in Brief, November 1997, 12
pages, NCJ 166372.
Drugs and Crime
Drug Courts and the Role of Graduated Sanctions, Harrell, A., Research
Preview, August 1998, 4 pages, FS 000219.
Rise of Hallucinogen Use, Hunt, D., Research in Brief, October 1997, 12
pages, NCJ 166607.
Law Enforcement
Community Policing in Action: Lessons From an Observational Study,
Mastrofski, S., R.B. Parks, and R.E. Worden, Research Preview, June
1998, 4 pages, FS 000199.
Measuring What Matters, Part Two: Developing Measures of What the
Police Do, Brady, T.V., Research in Action, November 1997, 16 pages,
NCJ 167255.
Police Overtime: An Examination of Key Issues, Bayley, D.H., and R.E.
Worden, Research in Brief, May 1998, 17 pages, NCJ 167572.
Policing in Emerging Democracies: Workshop Papers and Highlights,
Wirth, T., Research Report, October 1997, 108 pages, NCJ 167024.
Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Mastrofski, S.D.,
R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden, Research Preview, July
1998, 2 pages, FS 000223.
Protective Intelligence Threat Assessment Investigations: A Guide for
State and Local Law Enforcement Officials, Fein, R.A., and B. Vossekvil,
Research Report, July 1998, 65 pages, NCJ 170612.
Technology
Forensic Laboratories: Handbook for Facility Planning, Design,
Construction, and Moving, Office of Law Enforcement Standards,
Research Report, April 1998, 71 pages, NCJ 168106.
Helicopters in Pursuit Operations, Alpert, G.P., Research in Action,
September 1998, 6 pages, NCJ 171695.
National Guidelines for Death Investigation, National Medicolegal
Review Panel, Clark, S.C., Research Report, December 1997, 57 pages,
NCJ 167568.
State and Local Law Enforcement Wireless Communications and
Interoperability: A Quantitative Analysis, Taylor, M.J., R.C. Epper, and
T.K. Tolman, Research Report, January 1998, 131 pages, NCJ 168961.
The Unrealized Potential of DNA Testing, Weedn, V.W., and J.W. Hicks,
Research in Brief, April 1998, 8 pages, NCJ 170596.
Using Gunshot Detection Technology in High-Crime Areas, Mazerolle,
L.G., Research Preview, June 1998, 4 pages, FS 000201.
Wireless Communications and Interoperability Among Law Enforcement
Agencies, Taylor, M.J., R.C. Epper, and T.K. Tolman, Research in Brief,
February 1998, 12 pages, NCJ 168961.
Victims
Civil Protection Orders: Victims' Views on Effectiveness, Keilitz, S.L., C.
Davis, H.S. Efkeman, C. Flango, and P.L. Hannaford, Research Preview,
January 1998, 2 pages, FS 000191.
Early Childhood Victimization Among Incarcerated Adult Male Felons,
Weeks, R., and C.S. Widom, Research Preview, April 1998, 2 pages, FS
000204.
Immigrant Populations as Victims: Toward a Multicultural Criminal
Justice System, Davis, R.C., and E. Erez, Research in Brief, May 1998, 7
pages, NCJ 167571.
Violence
Adolescent Violence: A View From the Street, Fagan, J., Research
Preview, January 1998, 4 pages, FS 000189.
Batterer Intervention: Program Approaches and Criminal Justice
Strategies, Healey, K.M., C. Smith, with C. O'Sullivan, Issues and
Practices, February 1998, 201 pages, NCJ 168638.
Batterer Programs: What Criminal Justice Agencies Need to Know,
Healey, K.M., and C. Smith, Research in Action, July 1998, 12 pages,
NCJ 171683.
The Crime of Stalking: How Big Is the Problem? Tjaden, P., Research
Preview, November 1997, 4 pages, FS 000182.
Criminal Behavior of Gang Members and At-Risk Youth, Huff, C.R.,
Research Preview, March 1998, 4 pages, FS 000190.
Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities: Trends, Context, and Policy Implications,
Lattimore, P.K., J. Trudeau, K.J. Riley, J. Leiter, and S. Edwards,
Research Report, November 1997, 144 pages, NCJ 167262.
Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy
Implications, jointly produced by NIJ and the American Bar Association,
Research Report, July 1998, 89 pages, NCJ 171666.
Neighborhood Collective Efficacy--Does It Help Reduce Violence?
Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls, Research Preview, April
1998, 2 pages, FS 000203.
Predicting Criminal Behavior Among Authorized Purchasers of
Handguns, Wintemute, G., Research Preview, April 1998, 4 pages, FS
000198.
Stalking in America: Findings From the National Violence Against
Women Survey, Tjaden, P., and N. Thoennes, Research in Brief, May
1998, 24 pages, NCJ 169592.
A Study of Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities: An NIJ Intramural Research
Project, Lattimore, P.K., J. Trudeau, K.J. Riley, J. Leiter, and S. Edwards,
Research in Brief, November 1997, 12 pages, NCJ 167263.
Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries, Pfeiffer, C., Research
Preview, May 1998, 4 pages, FS 000202.
Other
Crime and Justice Atlas, Justice Research and Statistics Association, June
1998, 140 pages.
Crime and Place: Plenary Papers of the 1997 Conference on Criminal
Justice Research and Evaluation, Taylor, R.B., G. Bazemore, B. Boland,
T.R. Clear, R.P. Corbett, Jr., J. Feinblatt, G. Berman, M. Sviridoff, and C.
Stone, Research Forum, July 1998, 105 pages, NCJ 168618.
Perspectives on Crime and Justice: 1996-1997 Lecture Series, Vol. I,
Wilson, J.Q., P. Reuter, M.H. Moore, C.S. Widom, and N. Morris,
Research Report, November 1997, 132 pages, NCJ 166609.
NIJ Journal
NIJ Journal, December 1997, No. 234, 44 pages, JL 000234.
NIJ Journal, March 1998, No. 235, 40 pages, JL 000235.
NIJ Journal, July 1998, No. 236, 35 pages, JL 000236.
Solicitations for Research and Evaluation
Building Safer Public Housing Communities Through Locally Initiated
Research Partnerships (1998), January 1998.
Communicating Research Findings: Assessing the Communication
Strategies and Products of the National Institute of Justice, July 1998, SL
000299.
Crime Mapping Research Center Fellowship Program, October 1997, NCJ
166375.
Data Resources Program Funding for the Analysis of Existing Data, April
1998, SL 000278.
Drug Court Evaluation II, December 1997.
Evaluating Task Forces, Toll-Free Information Service Lines, and Drug
Testing Programs: BJA/NIJ Evaluation Partnership for the Edward Byrne
Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program (1998),
August 1998, SL 000289.
Evaluation of Vehicle-Stopping Electromagnetic Prototype Devices, Phase
III: Engineering Field Testing, July 1998, SL 000298.
Evaluation of Victims of Crime Act State Compensation and Assistance
Programs, January 1998, SL 000242.
Forensic Document Examination Validation Studies, June 1998, SL
000297.
Guidelines for Submitting Proposals for National Institute of
Justice-Sponsored Research, August 1998, NIJ 92737.
Guidelines for Submitting Proposals for NIJ Investigator-Initiated
Research, Rev. July 1998, NIJ 92737-4.
Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program Research and
Evaluation Solicitation (1998), April 1998, SL 000282.
Juvenile "Breaking the Cycle" Evaluation, September 1998, SL 000308.
Law Enforcement and Corrections Family Support Solicitation for
Research, Evaluation, Development, and Demonstration Projects, March
1998, SL 000266.
Local Evaluations of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State
Prisoners Program, January 1998, SL 000252.
National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child
Victimization Enforcement Grant Program, March 1998, SL 000270.
NIJ Request for Proposals for Comparative, Cross-National Crime
Research Challenge Grants, April 1998, SL 000277.
Reducing Nonemergency Calls to 911: An Assessment of Four
Approaches to Handling Citizen Calls for Service, February 1998, SL
000264.
Research and Evaluation on Violence Against Women, April 1998, SL
000279.
Research on Violence Against Women: Syntheses for Practitioners, March
1998, SL 000271.
Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships: Evaluations of Grants to Encourage
Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence, May 1998, SL 000295.
Selection of Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Site Management
Teams, March 1998, SL 000258.
Solicitation for the Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program,
Phase 4, September 1998, SL 000307.
Solicitation for Investigator-Initiated Research (1998), March 1998, SL
000240.
Solicitation for Policing Research and Evaluation: Fiscal Year 1998, May
1998, SL 000286.
Solicitation for Research and Evaluation on Corrections and Sentencing
(1998), April 1998, SL 000276.
Annual Reports
1997 Annual Report to Congress, August 1998, 82 pages, NCJ 171679.
Building Knowledge About Crime and Justice: The 1998 Research
Prospectus of the National Institute of Justice, November 1998, 24 pages,
NCJ 167570.
Award Lists
1997 Research Portfolio (Interim), Research in Brief, November 1997, 38
pages, NCJ 166374.
NIJ Awards in Fiscal Year 1997, Research in Brief, August 1998, 27
pages, NCJ 167576.
NIJ Awards Issued in Response to Fiscal Year 1997 Solicitations,
Research in Brief, November 1997, 20 pages, NCJ 167576.
Catalogs of Publications
NCJRS Catalog #36, September/October 1997, 24 pages, BC 000260.
NCJRS Catalog #37, November/ December 1997, 24 pages, BC 000261.
NCJRS Catalog #38, January/ February 1998, 24 pages, BC 000262.
NCJRS Catalog #39, March/April 1998, 24 pages, BC 000263.
NCJRS Catalog #40, May/June 1998, 24 pages, BC 000264.
NCJRS Catalog #41, July/August 1998, 24 pages, BC 000265.
The NIJ Publications Catalog, 1996-1997, November 1997, 72 pages, NCJ
166144.
The NIJ Publications Catalog, 6th Edition, 1986-1996, November 1997,
25 pages, NCJ 167244.
Electronic Publications
NIJ News: An online newsletter that features articles from the director on
current issues, along with coordinated articles, announcements, and links
to related sites. Visit NIJ's Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj.
gov/nij/newsletter.
JUSTINFO: An electronic newsletter service sponsored by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs and published the 1st
and 15th of each month. It provides the latest criminal justice news,
information, services, and publications. Subscription information as well
as back issues can be accessed at http://www.ncjrs.org/justinfo.
-------------------------------
Endnotes
1. NIJ's authorizing legislation is the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968, as amended.
2. Mastrofski, Stephen D., Roger B. Parks, and Albert J. Reiss, Jr.,
Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From St. Petersburg, Research
Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, forthcoming. "Observing Police in Neighborhoods," in Annual
Report to Congress, 1997, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (NCJ 171679). Mastrofski,
Stephen D., Roger B. Parks, and Albert J. Reiss, Jr., Systematic
Observation of Public Police: Applying Field Research Methods to Policy
Issues, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, December 1998 (NCJ 172859).
3. Tjaden, Patricia, and Nancy Thoennes, Stalking in America: Findings
From the National Violence Against Women Survey, Research in Brief,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, April 1998 (NCJ 169592). Tjaden, Patricia, and Nancy Thoennes,
Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women:
Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, Research in
Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, November 1998 (NCJ 172837).
4. Feucht, Thomas E., and Andrew Keyser, "Reducing Drug Use in
Prisons: Pennsylvania's Approach," NIJ Journal, October 1998 (JR
000241):10-15.
5. Elden, Max, and Rupert Chishol, "Emerging Varieties of Action
Research: Introduction to the Special Issue," Human Relations 46(2)
(1993): 121-41.
6. Sherman, Lawrence W., Denise Gottfredson, Doris MacKenzie, John
Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn Bushway, Preventing Crime: What Works,
What Doesn't, What's Promising, A Report to the United States Congress,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, 1997 (NCJ 165366). The full report was followed in 1998 with a
condensed summary especially suited to policymakers and practitioners
(Sherman et al., Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's
Promising, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 171676).
7. Roth, Jeffrey A., and Christopher S. Koper, Impacts of the 1994 Assault
Weapons Ban: 1994-96, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, March 1999 (NCJ
173405).
8. Burt, Martha, Lisa C. Newmark, Lisa K. Jacobs, and Adele V. Harrell,
1998 Report: Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants Under the Violence
Against Women Act of 1994, Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, July
1998.
9. Burack, James, William Lewis, Edward Marks, David H. Bayley,
Robert M. Perito, and Michael Berkow, Civilian Policing and
Multinational Peacekeeping--A Workshop Series: A Role for Democratic
Policing, NIJ Research Forum, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (NCJ 172842).
10. The Issue Briefs are posted at http://www.nga.org.
11. ADAM is a geographically expanded and scientifically more rigorous
version of NIJ's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program, which operated at
23 sites from 1987 to 1997. The program expanded to 35 sites in 1998.
12. Comprehensive efforts that contribute to the SACSI model include the
Boston Gun Project, the Comprehensive Communities Program, and
Weed and Seed.
13. Friedman, W., and M. Clark, "Community Policing: What Is the
Community and What Can It Do?" in Measuring What Matters:
Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings, Research
Report, ed. R.H. Langworthy, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice and Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services, July 1999 (NCJ 170610): 124.
14. Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden,
Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Research Preview,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, July 1998 (FS 000223): 2.
15. Stephens, D.W., "Measuring What Matters," in Measuring What
Matters: Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings,
Research Report, ed. R.H. Langworthy, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services, July 1999 (NCJ 170610): 62.
16. Chaiken, M.R., Kids, COPS, and Communities, Issues and Practices,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, June 1998 (NCJ 169599): 42.
17. Friedman, W., and M. Clark, "Community Policing: What Is the
Community and What Can It Do?" in Measuring What Matters:
Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings, 124.
18. Tyler, Tom, "Why Do Citizens Defer to Legal Authorities? A
Comparison of European Americans, African Americans, and Hispanics,"
summarized in NIJ Journal, April 1999 (JR 000239): 34.
19. Allegations of excessive force, for instance, have led to riots.
Reflecting its ongoing concern about excessive force, NIJ continues to
sponsor many use-of-force research studies, including (1) an examination
of the types of force used by a county police department, the frequency of
incidents, the factors affecting use of force and the extent of injuries, and
the characteristics associated with the frequency and type of force used;
(2) a national assessment of early warning systems law enforcement
agencies have developed to identify officers who receive high rates of
citizen complaints and to provide remedial intervention to correct problem
behavior; (3) a comparison of police officers who, because of force- or
integrity-related matters, have been dismissed or compelled to resign to a
random sample of colleagues to determine whether they differ on a variety
of individual, organizational, and community characteristics; and (4)
development and evaluation of less-than-lethal devices.
20. Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., R.E. Worden, C. DeJong,
J.B. Snipes, and W. Terrill, Systematic Observation of Public Police:
Applying Field Research Methods to Policy Issues, Research Report,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, December 1998 (NCJ 172859): vii.
21. Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden,
Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Research Preview,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, July 1998 (FS 000223): 2.
22. Sampson, R.J., and D.J. Bartusch, Attitudes Toward Crime, Police,
and the Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Research
Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, June 1999 (FS 000240): 2.
23. Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls, Neighborhood
Collective Efficacy
Does It Help Reduce Violence? Research Preview, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS
000203): 1.
24. See Hartnett, S.M., and W.G. Skogan, "Community Policing:
Chicago's Experience," NIJ Journal, April 1999 (JR 000239): 2-11.
25. In fiscal year 1998, NIJ added 10 research projects to its substantial
portfolio of awards related to community-oriented policing. See Appendix
A, page 59.
26. McEwen, Tom, "NIJ's Locally Initiated Research Partnerships in
Policing Factors That Add Up to Success," NIJ Journal, January 1999 (JR
000238): 3.
27. Couper, D.C., "Seven Seeds for the Field of Policing," speech
delivered in acceptance of the Police Executive Research Forum's
leadership award, Washington, D.C., May 4, 1993.
28. An NIJ survey found that 36 percent of law enforcement agencies with
100 or more sworn officers are using some form of crime mapping. The
figure for smaller agencies is 3 percent. Mamalian, Cynthia A., and Nancy
G. LaVigne, The Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law
Enforcement: Survey Results, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (FS
000237).
29. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Vital Statistics
Report, 47(9) (November 10, 1998): 67.
30. Uniform Crime Reports, "Law Enforcement Officers Killed, 1997,"
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, pp. 4, 15.
31. In 1995, transfers of funds from other agencies amounted to $11.1
million; by 1998 that figure had risen to $26.3 million.
32. National Guidelines for Death Investigation, Research Report,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, December 1997 (NCJ 167568).
33. Initially, the Attorney General requested that the law enforcement and
corrections components of the Justice Department that conduct research
and development meet regularly to share information about their
programs. Subsequently, other Federal agencies joined TPC, creating an
interagency council with representatives from several departments.
34. Snyder, Howard N., Juvenile Arrests 1997, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, 1998 (NCJ 173938).
35. Tonry, Michael, and Mark H. Moore, eds., Youth Violence, vol. 24 in
Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1998.
36. Weeks, R., and C.S. Widom, Early Childhood Victimization Among
Incarcerated Adult Male Felons, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS
000204).
37. Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls, Neighborhood
Collective Efficacy-Does It Help Reduce Violence? Research Preview,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, April 1998 (FS 000203); and Earls, Felton, Linking Community
Factors and Individual Development, Research Preview, Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, September
1998 (FS 000230).
38. U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice, Annual
Report on School Safety: 1998. See also Kaufman, P., X. Chen, S.P.
Choy, K.A. Chandler, C.D. Chapman, M.R. Rand, and C. Ringel,
Indicators of School Crime and Safety 1998: Executive Summary,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, October
1998 (NCES 98-251/NCJ 172215).
39. Sheley, J.F., and J.D. Wright, High School Youths, Weapons, and
Violence: A National Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ
172857).
40. Kenney, D., Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach,
Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000224).
41. Huff, C.R., Comparing the Criminal Behavior of Youth Gangs and
At-Risk Youth, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ 172852).
42. Fagan, J., Adolescent Violence: A View From the Street, Research
Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute
of Justice, January 1998 (FS 000189).
43. Pfeiffer, C., Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries,
Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
National Institute of Justice, May 1998 (FS 000202).
44. 1996 National Survey of State Sentencing Structures, Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, September
1998 (NCJ 169270).
45. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Correctional Populations in the United
States, 1996, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of
Justice Statistics, April 1999 (NCJ 171103):iii.
46. Ditton, Paula M., and Doris James Wilson, Truth in Sentencing in
State Prisons, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1999 (NCJ 170032).
47. The incidence of AIDS among State and Federal inmates in 1994-95
was 518 per 100,000, and among city and county inmates 706. By
contrast, the incidence in the U.S. population (1993 data) was 41 per
100,000. Hammett, Theodore M., et al., 1994 Update: HIV/AIDS and
STD's in Correctional Facilities, Issues and Practices, Washington, D.C.:
National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, December 1995 (NCJ 156832).
48. McDonald, Douglas C., et al., Telemedicine Can Reduce Correctional
Health Care Costs: An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, March 1999 (NCJ 175040).
49. Office of Justice Programs, Women in Criminal Justice: A 20-Year
Update, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
1998 (NCJ 173416); and Morash, Merry, Timothy S. Bynum, and Barbara
A. Koons, Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising
Approaches, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (NCJ 171668).
50. Conly, Catherine, The Women's Prison Association: Supporting
Women Offenders and Their Families, Program Focus, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1998
(NCJ 172858).
51. See, for example, Lipton, Douglas S., The Effectiveness of Treatment
for Drug Abusers Under Criminal Justice Supervision, Research Report,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, November 1995 (NCJ 157642):2-3.
52. Hammett, Theodore M., Public Health/Corrections Collaborations:
Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS, STD's, and TB, Research in
Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 169590).
53. Finn, Peter, The Delaware Department of Correction Life Skills
Program, Program Focus, Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice
and National Institute of Corrections, August 1998 (NCJ 169589).
54. Healey, Kerry Murphy, Case Management in the Criminal Justice
System, Research in Action, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, February 1999 (NCJ 173409).
-------------------------------
NIJ's Intramural Research Program
Since its creation in 1968, NIJ has engaged researchers through a diverse,
multidisciplinary extramural research program that involves a highly
competitive award process.
Beginning in 1994, NIJ's science, evaluation, and program development
staff began infusing the agency with knowledge gained through their
independent intramural research studies.
During 1998, staff-authored papers and reports were published or
presented on the following topics:
o International comparisons of drug use among arrestees.[1]
o The use of geocoding and geographic analysis within law enforcement
agencies.[2]
o The role of women in the criminal justice system (as offenders,
victims, volunteers, and professional personnel).[3]
o Victimization and personal fraud.[4]
o The effects of pepper spray.[5]
1. Taylor, Bruce, and Trevor Bennett, Comparing Drug Use Rates of
Detained Arrestees in the United States and England, Research Report,
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, April 1999 (NCJ 175052).
2. LaVigne, Nancy, and Julie Wartell, eds., Crime Mapping Case Studies,
Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1998 (product
#834). Mamalian, Cynthia A., and Nancy G. LaVigne, The Use of
Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey Results,
Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (FS 000237).
3. Office of Justice Programs, Women in Criminal Justice: A
20-Year Update, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1998
(NCJ 173416).
4. Titus, Richard, "Victimization by Personal Fraud," paper presented at
the 1998 Economic Crime Summit, St. Louis, April 28, 1998. Titus,
Richard, "Personal Fraud: Who Are the Victims and What Are the
Scams?" paper presented at the American Society of Criminology 1998
Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., November 11, 1998.
5. Kaminski, Robert, Steven M. Edwards, and James W. Johnson,
"The Effects of Oleoresin Capsicum on Assaults Against Police: Testing
the Velcro-Effect Hypothesis," Police Quarterly 1(2) (NCJ 176335).
-------------------------------
ADAM Goes International
An international component of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring
(ADAM) program held its first strategic planning meeting in Miami,
Florida, in April 1998. In attendance were representatives from:
o Eight nations (Australia, Chile, England, the Netherlands, Panama,
Scotland, South Africa, and Uruguay).
o Two international organizations (Organization of American States and
the United Nations Drug Control Program).
o Experts in the field of drug testing systems.
o NIJ staff.
o Representatives of U.S. Federal agencies (such as the Justice
Department's Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of
Health and Human Services' National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism).
In total, 40 people attended the conference.
With its launching, International ADAM (I-ADAM) became one of only a
few international drug prevalence measures and the only international drug
testing system for monitoring the drug use rates of arrestees. I-ADAM's
development is important because the existing drug surveillance systems
differ from one another to such an extent that comparisons among
countries are difficult.
From its inception, I-ADAM was designed to be a standardized
international system that will use similar instruments, sampling, training,
and other protocols. By 1999, six of the eight strategic planning
countries--Australia, Chile, England, the Netherlands, Scotland, and South
Africa--will have started collecting I-ADAM data. Comparative data will
be analyzed and the results will be published as they become available.
Visit the ADAM Web site at http://www.adam-nij.net.
-------------------------------
NIJ's World Wide Web Presence
In addition to NIJ's Home Page (http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij), several of
NIJ's programmatic and topic areas have their own Web presence:
o The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program tracks trends in the
prevalence and types of drug abuse among booked arrestees in an urban
network of sites across the United States and several international sites
(http://www.adam-nij.net).
o Breaking the Cycle is a systemwide intervention designed to identify
and treat all defendants in need of substance abuse treatment. The
approach focuses on maintaining continuous treatment as the defendant
moves through the system (http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij/brekprog.htm).
o The Corrections and Law Enforcement Family Support program is
discovering innovative ways to prevent and treat the negative effects of
stress experienced by law enforcement and correctional officers and their
families (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ nij/clefs/welcome.html).
o The Crime Mapping Research Center promotes the research and
development of GIS (geographic information systems) and crime mapping
to identify, solve, and monitor crime problems in communities
(http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/cmrc).
o The Data Resources Program ensures the preservation and availability
of research and evaluation data collected through NIJ-funded research.
Datasets collected through NIJ-funded research are archived and made
available to other scientists to support new re-search to replicate original
findings or test new hypo-theses
(http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/dataprog.htm).
o The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence posts
announcements and transcripts of meetings and summaries of working
group meetings. The site will post the Commission's forthcoming report
and recommendations (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/dna/
welcome.html).
o The Sentencing and Adjudication program announces funds for
research, including fellowship and NIJ-funded grant awards in the areas
of judicial decisionmaking, courts management, specialized courts,
prosecution, defense, impact of legislation, sentencing outcomes,
structured sentencing, and the general topic of sentencing
(http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij/saap/welcome.html).
o Technology Development Portfolios describe programmatic areas
related to crime prevention, officer protection, less-than-lethal weapons,
investigative and forensic sciences, information sharing and analysis,
counterterrorism, training, and simulation (http://www.
ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/sciencetech/welcome.html).
o The Violence Against Women and Family Violence program features
research on the safety of women and family members and the
effectiveness of the criminal justice system's response to these crimes
(http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/vawprog/ welcome.html).
In addition to NIJ's programmatic Web sites, the Institute supports several
additional Web sites:
o JUSTNET is a gateway to information on new technologies, equipment,
and other products and services available to the law enforcement,
corrections, and criminal justice communities. The JUSTNET site
contains news and information services, interactive chat lines and topic
boards, data and publications, and links to related sites
(http://www.nlectc.org).
o The Partnerships Against Violence Network (PAVNET) is a database
on violence prevention programs, curricula, and funding. With more than
500 subscribers, the PAVNET listserv is an important online source of
information for professionals and volunteers in the violence prevention,
education, treatment, and enforcement fields (http://www.pavnet.org).
o The World Justice Information Network (WJIN) is a multilingual
communications tool and a professional forum for concerned citizens
worldwide. Through a partnership with Globalink, WJIN members can
instantly translate documents, send e-mail, and chat online in French,
German, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish, with other languages
to be added in the future (http://www.wjin.net).
-------------------------------
Most Popular Publications Released in Fiscal Year 1998 (as measured by
orders for copies, requests for more information, and inquiries from the
media)
o National Guidelines for Death Investigation, by the National
Medicolegal Review Panel, Research Report, February 1998 (NCJ
167568).
o Crack, Powder Cocaine, and Heroin: Drug Purchase and Use Patterns in
Six U.S. Cities, by K. Jack Riley, Research Report, March 1998 (NCJ
167265).
o Kids, COPS, and Communities, by Marcia R. Chaiken, Issues and
Practices, April 1998 (NCJ 169599).
o Stalking in America: Findings From the National Violence Against
Women Survey, by Patricia Tjaden and Nancy Thoennes, Research in
Brief, June 1998 (NCJ 169592).
o Protective Intelligence and Threat Assessment Investigations, by Robert
A. Fein and Bryan Vossekuil, Research Report, July 1998 (NCJ
170612).
o ADAM: 1997 Annual Report on Adult and Juvenile Arrestees, by K.
Jack Riley, Research Report, July 1998 (NCJ 171672).
o Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, by
Lawrence W. Sherman, Denise Gottfredson, Doris MacKenzie, John Eck,
Peter Reuter, and Shawn Bushway, Research in Brief, July 1998 (NCJ
171676).
o Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, by Dennis
Kenney, Research Preview, August 1998 (FS 000224).
o Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women:
Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, by Patricia
Tjaden and Nancy Thoennes, Research in Brief, November 1998 (NCJ
172837).
-------------------------------
ADAM Tracks Drug Use Trends in 35 Sites
Although most of the 35 ADAM sites in the United States are referred to
by the name of the largest city in the area, the boundaries (or catchment
areas) of most sites are substantially larger than the city. In most cases,
the catchment area is the county. (The New York City site, for example,
includes all of the city's five boroughs.) The 35 sites are:
Albuquerque
New Orleans
Anchorage
New York
Atlanta
Oklahoma City
Birmingham
Omaha
Chicago
Philadelphia
Cleveland
Phoenix
Dallas
Portland (Oregon)
Denver
Sacramento
Des Moines
St. Louis
Detroit
Salt Lake City
Ft. Lauderdale
San Antonio
Houston
San Diego
Indianapolis
San Jose
Laredo
Seattle
Las Vegas
Spokane
Los Angeles
Tucson
Miami
Washington, D.C.
Minneapolis
In addition to the ADAM sites listed above, ADAM staff provide
scientific assistance to domestic and international affiliated sites, including
Albany and Buffalo, New York; Australia; Chile; England; Scotland; and
South Africa.
-------------------------------
Crime Mapping Research Awards
NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center awarded nine major grants for
crime mapping research in 1998:
o Assistance in Crime Mapping and Analytic Technologies for Enhancing
Law Enforcement and Prosecution Coordination, Hunter College of the
City University of New York.
o Combining Police and Probation Research To Reduce Burglary: Testing
a Crime-Analysis Problem-Solving Approach, Arizona State University.
o Crime Hot-Spot Forecasting: Modeling and Comparative Evaluation,
Carnegie Mellon University.
o Detection and Prediction of Geographical Changes in Crime Rates, State
University of New York at Buffalo.
o A Geographic Information System Analysis of the Relationship Between
Public Order and More Serious Crimes, University of Texas at Austin.
o Identification, Development, and Implementation of Innovative Crime
Mapping Techniques, Hunter College of the City University of New York.
o Predictive Models for Law Enforcement, University of Virginia.
o The Social and Economic Impact of Sentencing Practices and
Incarceration on Families and Neighborhoods, Yale University.
o Variation in Community Policing Activities Across Neighborhoods,
University of Cincinnati.
-------------------------------
Members of the Interagency Consortium on Violence Against Women
o Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
o National Institute on Aging.
o National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
o National Institute on Drug Abuse.
o National Institute of Justice.
o National Institute of Mental Health.
o Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (at the National
Institutes of Health).
o Office of Child Abuse and Neglect.
o Office of Research on Women's Health (at the National Institutes of
Health).
-------------------------------
For more information on the National Institute of Justice and to obtain an
electronic version of this report, please visit the NIJ World Wide Web site
at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij or contact:
National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Phone: 800-851-3420
Phone: 301-519-5500
E-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org
-------------------------------
NCJ 177617