Title: National Institute of Justice Journal (Number 239). Series: Journal Author(s): NIJ Published: National Institute of Justice, April 1999 Subject(s): Community policing, law enforcement, crime mapping, ADAM, drug abuse, drug use indicators, corrections, inmate health care, and criminal justice system 71 pages 160,000 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 Journal (Number 239) April 1999 ------------------------------- NIJ Building Knowledge to Meet the Challenge of Crime and Justice National Institute of Justice Jeremy Travis Director The NIJ Journal is published by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, to announce the Institute's policy-relevant research results and initiatives. The Attorney General has determined that publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by law of the Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. For more information about NIJ activities, products, and publications, visit NIJ on the World Wide Web at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. NIJ Journal Editorial Board David Boyd Deputy Director for Office of Science and Technology Sally T. Hillsman Deputy Director for Office of Research and Evaluation John L. Schwarz Deputy Director for Office of Development and Communications Christy A. Visher Science Advisor to the Director Bernard V. Auchter Saralyn Borrowman A. Trent DePersia Cheryl A. Crawford James O. Finckenauer Mary G. Graham Sharla P. Rausch Gerald P. Soucy Managing Editors Brenner Brown Jolene Hernon ------------------------------- Director's Message We've given the NIJ Journal a face lift this quarter. To accompany the new look, we've added the new section "At-A-Glance: Recent Research Findings," which summarizes findings from several of the latest scientific inquiries in the criminal justice field. In this issue's At-A-Glance, we present research on police integrity, the growth of incarceration in the United States, and why citizens obey the law. This issue's four feature articles highlight the sometimes provocative and always tough issues policymakers and practitioners face every day--citizens' views about the police, police perceptions about minorities, interpretation and application of drug use data, and the costs and safety risks associated with health care for prisoners. Susan Hartnett and Wes Skogan have been a part of the Chicago community policing effort since day one. Their research involves one of the first and longest running interactive evaluations funded by NIJ. Through it the police routinely receive researcher feedback on the program and make adjustments to increase its effectiveness. The department continues to struggle in developing quantitative performance measures for its program, but indications are that the Chicago police are on the right track. Peter Reuter helps us interpret the sometimes confusing data about who's using drugs in America, how much they are using, and what we should do about it. Reuter points out that the various drug use measures sometimes seem to contradict one another and trends can be hard to discern until one understands the foundations upon which the measures are based. Douglas McDonald, Andrea Hassol, and Kenneth Carlson have measured the effectiveness of new technologies to maximize health care resources in prisons while maintaining quality medical service. The authors show us that in the Federal prison system, telemedicine can clearly save taxpayers money. Additional work now under way will help us determine if the technology is as valuable to State and local prison systems. Christopher Stone's essay on the relationship between perceptions about ethnic and racial groups and their implications for criminal justice policy and practice should stimulate thought-provoking discussion. He originally delivered these remarks to the President's Advisory Board on Race as the Board investigated race, crime, and the administration of justice. These four feature stories each illustrate the value of using data to solve problems--whether they relate to police work, drug use, costs and benefits of prison health care, or racial injustices. Sometimes quantifying a problem is the first step in the process of solving the problem. Future issues of the NIJ Journal will continue to present ways in which science can contribute to solutions. Jeremy Travis Director ------------------------------- Contents FEATURES Community Policing: Chicago's Experience Susan M. Hartnett and Wesley G. Skogan Drug Use Measures: What Are They Really Telling Us? Peter Reuter Can Telemedicine Reduce Spending and Improve Prisoner Health Care? Douglas McDonald, Andrea Hassoll, and Kenneth Carlson Race, Crime, and the Administration of Justice Christopher Stone AT-A-GLANCE Recent Research Findings DEPARTMENTS New & Noteworthy Solicitations & Awards Events NIJ in the Journals ------------------------------- Community Policing: Chicago's Experience by Susan M. Hartnett and Wesley G. Skogan Chicago's community policing program had its origin in soaring rates of crime at the beginning of the 1990's, and in city leaders' belief that the police department could respond to crime more effectively if it could draw on Chicago's other strengths--including its well-organized neighborhoods and municipal service agencies. From Mayor Richard M. Daley on down, the city wanted a "smarter" approach to policing--one that mobilized residents, police officers, and other city workers around a problem-solving approach that emphasized community safety and stability and responded to the varying needs of the city's diverse neighborhoods. As the city's program of community policing evolved, it brought many people into the process of building safer neighborhoods and began to focus all their efforts on solving underlying neighborhood problems rather than simply reacting to the symptoms of these problems. This overview of the Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS) emphasizes the effects this program has had on both residents and police officers and the key role of municipal service agencies as partners in community policing. The program's implementation and its overall success in confronting neighborhood problems are being assessed by an evaluation team from Northwestern University's Institute for Policy Research, which has a long history of program evaluation and public service. Chicago Introduced CAPS in Stages Initiated at the highest levels of civic leadership in Chicago--the mayor and the police department--CAPS was planned for more than a year by the Chicago Police Department before it was officially instituted in April 1993 in 5 of the city's 25 police districts. During this initial experimental phase, patrol officers were permanently assigned to fixed beats and trained in problem-solving strategies. Neighborhood meetings between police and area residents were held, and citizen committees were formed to advise district commanders. City agencies were mobilized to respond to CAPS-generated requests for services. The experimental districts, identified in exhibit 1, represented a cross-section of the city. Two--Austin and Englewood--were poor and predominately African American. Marquette was home to poor African Americans and had one of the city's largest concentrations of Latinos. Rogers Park was somewhat better off, but it was extremely diverse and had relatively few homeowners or long-term residents. The Morgan Park police district encompassed large middle-class white and African-American neighborhoods, though there were pockets of poverty at the east end of the area. In fall 1994, elements of CAPS began to be introduced in Chicago's other districts. New administrative mechanisms for coordinating the delivery of city services with the CAPS program were introduced first, and the remainder of the districts formed civilian advisory committees. Citywide resident involvement in the program began in the spring of 1995, when monthly community meetings were held in each of Chicago's 279 police beats. The Evaluation Started Early The National Institute of Justice has been sponsoring research on community policing since the early 1980's, and the evaluation team knew the concept held great promise but also knew that effecting change in a 15,000-member police organization was going to be a big job. Northwestern University's evaluation began in the fall of 1992, during the program's planning stage, so that pre-CAPS data could be collected and compared to post-CAPS data and provide "before" and "after" pictures of the program. CAPS has broad goals. At its core lies crime prevention, but major elements of the program are directed at combating physical decay, responding to concern about social disorder, and improving relations between police and the community at the neighborhood level. The evaluation addressed all of those goals, including how the districts formulated their programs and how they involved residents in problem solving. The evaluation used surveys and direct observation to measure the program's impact on problems ranked as most important by residents. Surveys were used to gauge the impact of the program on residents' perceptions of the police and police officers' perceptions of community policing. (See "CAPS Evaluation Methods" for details of the techniques the Northwestern team is using to measure the effects of CAPS.) Citizens' Perceptions of Problems Pre-CAPS surveys in the five initial experimental districts and matched comparison districts identified residents' biggest concerns and measured their satisfaction with the quality of police service. Residents were worried about a wide range of issues. Some were common problems everywhere, but others were very localized, and every problem varied in intensity. Street drug dealing, for example, was among the top four problems in each of the five districts, but the relative importance of this problem varied by district: 60 percent or more of residents in Austin, Englewood, and Marquette rated it high on their list of problems, but 20 percent or fewer of residents in Morgan Park and Rogers Park rated it as high. Some examples of localized problems were vandalism to parked cars (an issue in densely populated areas with little off-street parking), burglary (one of the highest ranked problems only in the most affluent of the five districts), and graffiti (typically most troubling in Latino neighborhoods). Effects on the Community and Citizen Perceptions Residents play a leading role in CAPS. The model calls for the formation of problem-solving partnerships between police and citizens. Community involvement comes through several channels, but primarily through monthly beat meetings and advisory committees formed in each police district. Some of the most frequently discussed problems include graffiti, noisy neighbors, abandoned buildings, public drinking, and loitering bands of youths. These discussions, which often involve issues that transcend the traditional police mission, help police understand residents' agendas, develop priorities, and devise solutions to problems. Both police and citizens play major roles in identifying and prioritizing problems, formulating ways of addressing them, and helping bring community resources to bear in solving them. Such involvement can be difficult to sustain in any neighborhood, but especially in poor and disenfranchised neighborhoods with a history of troubled relations with the police. Overall, the evaluation found evidence of CAPS-related success with physical decay problems in three of the five initial experimental districts, as well as a decline in gang and drug problems in two districts and a decline in major crimes in two districts. Many other positive changes were recorded in the experimental areas, but they could not be linked directly to CAPS because they could not be differentiated from trends taking place in the matched comparison areas. The Effects in Englewood. The most notable initial effects of the program were in the Englewood district. As exhibit 2 illustrates, the four major problems identified by the community decreased during the 16-month period after CAPS was introduced, while none decreased significantly and gang violence increased a great deal in Englewood's comparison area. Although Englewood was one of the highest crime districts in the city, residents put two physical decay problems near the top of their agenda: abandoned buildings and trash problems. At the start of the program, Englewood had more than 600 abandoned buildings, and junk and litter filled its vacant lots, streets, and alleys. Englewood's successes reflect, in part, the vigor with which residents and police were able to mobilize city services to respond to these problems. In the 16 months from April 1993 to August 1994, they generated 1,314 requests for city services to attend to abandoned buildings and 2,379 requests for clean-ups by the Department of Streets and Sanitation. Because municipal services have such a high profile in Chicago's community policing, the requests for services were answered in a timely manner. Over the next 18 months, abandonment and trash problems declined sharply compared to other matched areas, as did drug and gang violence problems. Englewood was one of the program's biggest early successes. Today, there is still a great deal of enthusiasm for the program in Englewood. As one community activist put it, "One thing that really stands out in my mind is the block that I live on. Before CAPS, drug dealers and gang bangers had owned that block for 8 years. People didn't come out, there were no children playing. There was no grass, there were no flowers. There were no lights in the windows. There were huge rats. The alleys were filled with garbage. It looked like a dump. Enormous numbers of empty alcohol containers were everywhere. You could taste the fear. Now when you come onto the block, instead of profanity, you hear children's laughter. Instead of fights and arguments, you see grass and flowers. And instead of the noise level escalating when the sun goes down, it gets quiet. It's a nice, peaceful block." Effects Citywide. When the program expanded to encompass the entire city, the evaluation team began tracking parallel citywide measures over time. As these data accumulate, crime trends will appear more clearly, as will any changes in citizen perceptions of disorder and neighborhood decay. Meanwhile, other measures point to improving conditions in Chicago's neighborhoods. Most notably, reported crime has been declining at a steady rate. As in many cities, this decline began before Chicago inaugurated its community policing program, but analysis of the impact of CAPS in the five experimental districts suggests that community policing may be helping the trend along. During the experimental period, before CAPS went citywide, one of its most significant successes was in fostering better relationships between police and residents in some of the city's poorest communities. As a result of the program, citizens reported seeing more community-oriented policing activity, and in two areas, there was a decline in perceptions of excessive aggressiveness by police. People grew more optimistic about future trends in policing in every experimental area, and satisfaction with police responsiveness to neighborhood problems went up in four of the five initial prototype districts. It also went up in several comparison areas among people who had heard about the program. Perceptions of the quality of police service went up significantly among African Americans and whites, but not among Latinos. Since CAPS has gone citywide, surveys of all major groups point to steady increases in satisfaction with the quality of police service. As one resident of the 10th district said recently: "You have a sense of camaraderie and cooperation between beat officers and community residents; you lose that sense of fear." His point was reiterated by a senior command staff member: "I can't see policing any other way. When I was growing up, there was a real separation between the citizens and the police. Now there's a genuine trust that's come because they know us, and they know we can effect change together." Measuring Citizen Involvement and Awareness Because of CAPS' heavy emphasis on citizen involvement, the city promotes participation through an aggressive television, radio, and print campaign that publicizes the program and encourages people to participate in beat meetings and activities sponsored by their district's advisory committee. The campaign is working. Program awareness has increased steadily, and as of the spring of 1998, almost 80 percent of Chicagoans knew of the city's community policing effort. More than 60 percent knew that beat meetings were being held in their neighborhood, and among that group, 31 percent (and 15 percent overall) indicated that they had attended at least one meeting. Television is the most common way that people learn about CAPS, although many Spanish-speaking residents have learned about CAPS from the radio. There is a "buzz" about the program: as exhibit 3 indicates, the second most frequent way people learn about it is by talking with other people. Interestingly, although television is the largest source of program awareness, it does not particularly motivate people to attend meetings. Instead, the important factors driving involvement are personal contact and public awareness projects that intimately touch people's lives. Two examples of the latter: in 1998, 30 percent of those who recalled hearing about CAPS via announcements issued with report cards by the Chicago public schools subsequently attended a meeting, and 25 percent of those who heard about CAPS at their church attended at least once. A similar number--27 percent--turned out among those who heard about CAPS from a friend, neighbor, or associate. By contrast, only 14 percent of those who "connected" via television reported attending a meeting. When quizzed about how the meetings went, the vast majority of participants reported that they learned something at the meetings, that things happened in their community because of them, and that the meetings were useful for solving neighborhood problems and improving relations with police. The CAPS outreach campaign also spread the word widely. Awareness is as high among African Americans as it is among whites, and an equal proportion of Latinos who are comfortable speaking English are aware of CAPS. Spanish-speakers remain a more problematic group for successful outreach. The city is experimenting with a variety of ways to reach more members of the Latino community. To date, they have been reached most effectively through Spanish-language television and radio announcements and programs but, again, those sources of awareness are least likely to stimulate involvement. A new city program involving community organizers is heavily targeting many areas with large Latino populations. The organizers are forming block clubs and problem-solving programs that involve Latinos more extensively in CAPS. There are other differences in awareness. Homeowners are somewhat more likely to know about CAPS than are renters, and those with at least a high school diploma are more informed than those without; however, these gaps are not very large, and awareness has grown steadily among all of these groups. Turnout at beat meetings has remained high. Based on administrative records, researchers estimate that 60,000 people attended in 1995; 61,000 in 1996; 65,000 in 1997; and more than 66,000 in 1998. Importantly, the program has been most successful as measured by rates of involvement (which take into account the number of adults living in each beat) in African-American neighborhoods and in poor areas with high levels of violent crime. Effects on Community Activists The evaluation team also conducts regular surveys of community activists in every police district in the city. Community activists are more closely attuned to CAPS and more knowledgeable about the program's progress than many in the general population. Most are optimistic about how CAPS has developed. Between 1996 and 1997, activists reported improvements in most parts of the program. They are most satisfied with beat community meetings, their district commanders' efforts to implement CAPS, program marketing efforts, and the quality of service provided by beat officers. Over time, activists reported seeing the most improvement in the delivery of city services, the stability and consistency with which officers are assigned to beats, and the aggressive court watch program mounted by all districts' advisory committees. An activist in district 18 recently commented, "Communication and building partnerships are hugely different than they used to be, and that's such a big success. I'd say more people have more access to policing and city services." And another activist from the 23rd district stated, "CAPS has become the open door to just about anything in the administration of city government services. You don't need to know anybody, you don't need to be connected to anything, it's an open door. It's allowed people to get engaged who didn't have access in the past." Activists have been less optimistic about the extent of citizen involvement in problem solving. The evaluation has documented the limited role residents have played in this area. Too many residents expect the police to solve their problems for them and too often think problems can be solved by arresting someone. Activists also report that they are dissatisfied with the extent to which patrol officers have embraced the program. Effects on the Police Department CAPS has had a significant effect on the daily work of the department. Thousands of officers are assigned to teams dedicated to working in small beats. The department's dispatch policy was revised to enable officers to stay in their assigned beats for the bulk of their working day. Officers representing all three shifts attend each beat community meeting, and all officers from all shifts meet regularly as a group to discuss beat priorities and how to handle them. A special supervisor--a beat team sergeant-- coordinates their efforts. To staff the program adequately, Chicago hired more than 1,000 new police officers between 1993 and 1998.[1] The Difficulties of Changing Police Work Habits. All of the city's uniformed officers and their supervisors have been trained in problem-solving strategies. Supervisors have received additional management training and attended special sessions on conducting beat meetings and mastering the program's many new elements. Not all of this went smoothly. CAPS has challenged "business as usual" in the police department because the program involves significant change in the way work is assigned and how officers spend their time. There was initial pessimism about the idea of taking on non-crime problems, in part because officers did not understand the role that other city agencies would play in supporting them. Officers did not want to be "pooper-scooper police," and they said so. They were concerned about how warmly they would be received at beat meetings and whether those meetings would be dominated by "loudmouths" and "squeaky wheels." Dealing with peoples' concerns sounded too much like social work, and having all of the communities' problems dumped on them sounded like too much work. As one detective graphically put it, "I'm a policeman, not a social worker. I don't have time to sit and shoot the [expletive]." Some officers did not like the idea of civilians planning a program for them or playing a role in setting their priorities, and they really disliked the new paperwork they had to complete. Summing up the feelings of many beat team sergeants, one stated, "That's the one element that defeats its own purpose--the paperwork. They pile it on and never take it away. I'd like to be part of a task force that reduces the paperwork related to CAPS. You could type a report a day dealing with CAPS." Many were convinced (and hopeful) that CAPS would disappear after the 1995 mayoral election. Measuring Performance. From police headquarters, it is difficult to see the extent to which these concerns got in the way because the department lacks any measure of how well it is performing. For management purposes, the department continues to gather and distribute the same list of activity counts as before (calls answered and arrests made), and only in early 1999 could it generate a measure of the ability of the new dispatching plan to hold teams to their beats. There are no measures of the extent to which officers are involved in problem solving and no indicators of their success. Like most cities, it has proven difficult for Chicago to develop workable performance measures that match the organization's new mission. Incentives, too, remain a problem. This gap, of course, has caused complaints from officers. In the words of one watch commander, "Nothing has been implemented--new disciplinary procedures, efficiency ratings. Good officers get disciplined the same as bum officers. Honest mistakes are judged the same as intentional mistakes. They promised a new promotional process--we haven't seen it. It's hypocritical. They wrote it, but they don't abide by it." Police Perceptions of CAPS. Nonetheless, support for the program has grown noticeably among rank-and-file officers. Surveys between 1993 and 1995 found that, on attitudinal scales that rate their views, officers became more optimistic about the impact of CAPS on the community and their own work, about their personal capacity to engage in problem solving, and about the viability of community-oriented policing. The city has addressed officers' concerns through training, but the most important factors helping to "bring officers on board" have been time and experience. The reorganization of patrol officers into fixed problem-solving beat teams has worked because the program was adequately staffed, the service delivery system functioned well, and citizens proved to be enormously receptive to the officers who work in their neighborhood. The program's success can also be attributed to consistent support from high-level civic leaders, including Mayor Daley, who won reelection in 1995. The Role of City Agencies The importance of the municipal services component of CAPS cannot be overemphasized. City agencies are critical partners in Chicago's model of neighborhood-oriented policing. New administrative systems were set up to hold the agencies accountable for delivery on this commitment, and special procedures were instituted to give priority to police requests for routine city services that have an impact on crime and public safety. At community meetings, residents often prioritize problems like graffiti and abandoned vehicles, malfunctioning streetlights and stoplights, and unsafe or abandoned buildings. The new procedures and systems have worked. "By getting the streetlight fixed, it ups the police's credibility that they can get things done," said a former commander of one of the experimental districts, now an assistant deputy superintendent. During the startup years of the program, the city services component paid visible dividends. The experimental districts were noticeably cleaner, and police officers and residents alike quickly realized that the administrative systems put in place to support their problem-solving efforts actually worked. The Outlook for the Future CAPS is in its sixth year. Many of its early organizational experiments are now routine practice, but the program continues to evolve. In 1995 and 1996, pairs of police and civilian trainers fanned out through the city, training more than 12,000 neighbors in problem solving. Both frontline supervisors and top department managers have been retrained. The city hired a cadre of community organizers in early 1998 to mobilize residents of the city's poorest neighborhoods. New advances have been made on the technology front, including the development of sophisticated crime analysis and mapping capabilities for every station house. The computerized system is constantly being enhanced; the latest version now also delivers offender information and mug shots, both very popular with working officers. A 1998 survey of officers working the evening watch (from about 4 p.m. to midnight) found that 83 percent of sergeants reported using the system "very often" or "often," as do 61 percent of beat team officers. Modern databases are now being harnessed to support problem identification and improve the department's management capacities. Beat boundaries are being redrawn to better fit the program. City attorneys sit in selected district stations to assist officers with code enforcement and other civil remedies for neighborhood problems. Responsibility for enforcing many building and licensing ordinances has been shifted out of the courts and into an administrative tribunal. The separate police agency serving the city's public housing developments is being reorganized and radically downsized, and its functions are being transferred to city police. The evaluation of these new features of the program continues. CAPS has now become integrated into the city's fabric, and within the police department, there is less talk of "CAPS," for in important ways, the program is not an "alternative" any longer. Notes 1. A careful study of the Chicago Police Department's staffing needs documented how many officers the CAPS beat teams would require. The city then found the money to hire an additional 1,000 officers, even before the Crime Act of 1994 made Federal funds available to hire additional officers. In 1993, Chicago had 12,350 sworn officers; in 1998, it had 13,484. ------------------------------- about the authors Susan M. Hartnett is Project Director for the Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy evaluation and Research Associate at the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University. Wesley G. Skogan is Professor of Political Science and Faculty Fellow at the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University. ------------------------------- CAPS Evaluation Methods A Long-Term Process and Outcome Evaluation. Evaluators often distinguish between "process" evaluations (which examine how programs operate) and "outcome" evaluations (which gauge their effects). The CAPS evaluation team is conducting both types over a long period of time because learning how police organizations change is as important as understanding the consequences. The team is able to do both because potential stakeholders in the evaluation understood from the beginning the need for long-term research and for an indepth assessment of both process and outcome. The evaluation involves conducting sample surveys and personal interviews, observing meetings and other events, analyzing documents, participating in ride-alongs, examining station-house activities, and analyzing quantitative data on police workloads and activity. The evaluation used a comparative, quasi-experimental approach to assess the impact of the initial program during its early, formative years, collecting quantitative data from the first five prototype areas, from a set of matched comparison areas, and from the remainder of the city before community policing was implemented citywide. The data included surveys of city residents and police officers, systematic observation to measure the quality-of-life conditions of blockfaces, and analysis of detailed crime and demographic data geographically coded by neighborhood. When CAPS was implemented citywide, the evaluation began data collection efforts that have encompassed the entire city. Almost every year, a large sample of beat meetings are observed, and residents and officers who attend are surveyed to assess how well the discussion and outcome of the meetings fit the department's model of dynamic involvement of residents in community policing. Each spring, a large, citywide survey is conducted, and selected neighborhoods and community activists are surveyed in more depth. Evaluation staff spend a great deal of time in the field collecting data by interviewing beat officers and neighborhood activists, attending planning and training sessions, observing marches and rallies, and talking with organization leaders and community residents. The researchers also evaluate major training programs by observing the training and surveying the police officers and civilians who are involved. There are regular contacts with a wide assortment of knowledgeable officers at all levels and occasional police surveys at roll calls. An Interactive Evaluation. The CAPS evaluation is independent of the police department, but it is also a "hands-on" effort that provides research feedback in support of the city's effort to constantly improve the program. The evaluation generates regular formal public reports that are widely distributed and discussed. Just as important, the evaluation team members interact regularly with police and civilian stakeholders in the program. Respecting their openness and willingness to share information, research team members discuss findings regularly with stakeholders and give them an opportunity to comment in advance on all reports to ensure their factual accuracy and to provide alternative views and interpretations of events for the researchers to consider. The evaluation tries to focus on strategic concerns: what works and what does not, the features of projects that seem to require attention, the reasons why things are moving rapidly or slowly, and the impact of conditions or events that are outside of the department's control but affect departmental plans. Support for the evaluation has come from the National Institute of Justice in partnership with the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the Chicago Community Trust. ------------------------------- Chicago Community Policing At a Glance Chicago's community policing effort is more extensive and more organized than programs in most other jurisdictions, and it permeates the city to a greater extent than in most others. Below is an "at a glance" description of a typical, more limited program compared to Chicago's program. Chicago's Community Policing Model Police --The entire patrol division is involved. --The program is fully staffed with permanent officers on regular shifts. --Extensive training is given to both officers and supervisors. --All districts and all shifts are involved. --Program activities are supervised through the regular chain of command and through standard patrol operations. Residents --Residents are expected to take an active role in solving problems. --Residents are encouraged to meet with police regularly to exchange information and report on actions taken. --Public priorities play an important role in setting beat team priorities. --Residents receive training in Chicago's problem-solving model. Municipal Services --Management systems are in place to trigger a rapid response to service requests. --Agencies are held accountable by the mayor for the effectiveness of their response. --Community policing is the entire city's program, not the police department's program. More Limited Community Policing Model Police --Small units are staffed by officers who have volunteered for a community policing assignment. --Officers work overtime and are usually paid with temporary Federal funding. --Officers work on evening shift only. --Little training is provided; officers' personal motivation propels the program. --Officers are assigned only to selected areas. --Program activities are supervised by the chief's office or from outside the routine command structure. Residents --Residents are asked to be the police department's "eyes and ears." --Surveys or postcards are distributed to residents as a way of gathering information. --Residents are called to meet occasionally, to publicize the program. --Residents have no role in setting police priorities or operations. Municipal Services --Service agencies have no special responsibility to police or citizen groups. --Service agencies believe community policing is the police department's program and should be funded by the police department's budget. ------------------------------- (Quotes) Both police and citizens play major roles in identifying and prioritizing problems, formulating ways of addressing them, and helping bring community resources to bear in solving them. "CAPS has become the open door to just about anything in the administration of city government services. You don't need to know anybody, you don't need to be connected to anything, it's an open door. It's allowed people to get engaged who didn't have access in the past." --Community activist, 23rd district CAPS has now become integrated into the city's fabric, and within the police department, there is less talk of "CAPS," for in important ways, the program is not an "alternative" any longer. ------------------------------- For More Information Books and Articles Skogan, Wesley G., "Community Policing in Chicago," in Community Policing, Geoffry Alpert and Alex Piquero, eds. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998, 159-174. Skogan, Wesley G., and Susan M. Hartnett, Community Policing, Chicago Style, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Skogan, Wesley G., Susan M. Hartnett, J. Dubois, J. Comey, M. Kaiser, and J. Lovig, On the Beat: Police and Community Problem Solving, Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1999. The National Institute of Justice expects to publish more reports about CAPS during 1999. These materials will be available both in print and on the NIJ Web site. Web Sites National Institute of Justice: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij Chicago Police Department: http://www.ci.chi.il.us/CommunityPolicing Northwestern University's Institute for Policy Research: http://www.nwu.edu/IPR ------------------------------- Drug Use Measures: What Are They Really Telling Us? by Peter Reuter For the last 15 years, the available indicators on drug use and abuse have been telling a confusing story. On the one hand, surveys of the general population show a sharp decline in drug use in the late 1980's and essentially no change in the 1990's. On the other hand, more direct measures of drug use, such as the number of drug-related deaths and emergency room admissions, have increased steadily and are much higher than they were in 1980. Many observers argue that self-reported survey indicators inadequately describe drug use and that the more direct indicators, such as emergency room admissions, are more reliable. The truth, of course, is that each measure has certain strengths and limitations, each reveals different aspects of drug use, and policymakers who integrate data from the several indicators can weave a consistent tale of American drug use and changes over time. This article discusses several key drug indicators and what they tell us-- both as individual snapshots of specific populations during specific periods of time as well as broad, collective overviews of drug use. (See "The Most Frequently Cited Drug Indicators, on page 14.") It should be noted at the outset that each data set was developed under a specific program with a specific purpose. The need to understand their seeming inconsistencies and conflicts is important because the Federal government's planned improvements and expansion of the data sets will make them more comprehensive. The improvements also will make it easier for legislators, policymakers, police chiefs, and educators to integrate analysis of the data to gain a clearer picture of a particular community's drug abuse patterns and trends. The Big Picture: Drug Use in the United States in the Last 20 Years Drug use can be categorized in several ways: initiation or first-time use, continued use (which can be either frequent or occasional), and abuse (which causes both the user and society significant problems). The trends for each category vary. --First-time Use. Initiation into the use of illicit drugs rose through the late 1970's and perhaps into the early 1980's, then began a sharp decline around 1983.[1] First-time drug use started to rise again in 1992, but by 1997, it was still well below the peaks of the early 1980's. --Continued Use. Although the number of people who continued using drugs may have risen steadily into the mid-1980's, the numbers were almost certainly in decline after 1987. Since 1990, the percentage of the population using drugs has remained essentially flat. --Drug Abuse. Drug abuse continued to rise through the 1980's, even as the rates of first-time and continued use declined, because it usually takes several years to move from first-time use to the beginning of dependent use. The number of drug abusers probably flattened out at the end of the 1980's, but it has declined only modestly since then. The fraction of today's population using illicit drugs is well below the peak of the early 1980's. However, the severity of drug-related problems has not declined much, probably because drug abusers have such difficulty quitting and because the problems they cause themselves and society change, but do not abate, as their drug using careers lengthen and their health deteriorates. Since 1980, a higher fraction of all users have been problematic users--a phenomenon that increases the association between drug abuse and crime--and the population of drug abusers has aged. Drug use is declining across all demographic groups, but the decline has been notably sharper among more educated segments of the population, probably reflecting these groups' greater sensitivity to health messages. Drug Use Among Specific Population Groups Analysis of drug use indicators can reveal patterns among different segments of the population and can help policymakers and community leaders tailor drug prevention and reduction programs to particular audiences--for example, high school students, criminal offenders, or particular age or racial groups. Young People's Drug Use. Drug use among high school seniors peaked between 1978-79 and then declined steadily and substantially until 1992 when it turned upward again. At the peak, nearly one in nine seniors (11 percent) reported daily use of marijuana; in 1992, only about 2 percent were daily users. By 1997, 6 percent reported daily use of marijuana. The decline in young people's use of cocaine differs from marijuana both in the timing and in the percentage using the drug. Whereas marijuana use peaked in the late 1970's, cocaine use peaked in 1986 and then began a steady decline that paralleled marijuana's decline. When cocaine peaked, 7 percent of high school seniors reported cocaine use in the past month, compared to 36 percent who reported marijuana use within the past month when marijuana peaked. Exhibit 1 shows self-reported marijuana and cocaine use among high school seniors as reported in the Monitoring the Future survey.[2] Exhibit 2 shows a similar pattern for the next oldest age group, 18- to 25-year-olds, as reported to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. Arrestees' Drug Use. While drug use among young people was decreasing in the 1980's, it was increasing significantly among a subpopulation that represents an uncomfortably large share of the young male population in large cities--persons arrested for crimes. For example, in Washington, D.C., where the use of urinalysis to track drug trends was pioneered, the percentage of arrestees testing positive for any drug (mostly cocaine and PCP) rose from 55 percent in 1984 to nearly 75 percent in 1989. Through the 1990's, the rates of detected cocaine use stabilized, though there was considerable variation among cities. By 1997 in most cities for which data are available, the rates of arrestees who tested positive for any drug were below their highest levels, although cocaine use remained high. In 1997, 40 percent or more of males tested positive for cocaine in 8 of 23 cities. Exhibit 3 presents Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program data for male arrestees in four cities.[3] ADAM's trend data show that cocaine-using offenders are getting older. The percent of 18- to 20-year-old arrestees who tested positive for cocaine in Los Angeles, for example, dropped from 47 percent in 1988 to 24 percent by 1996.[4] As the ADAM Annual Report notes, "This suggests, at least with respect to the arrestee population, that cocaine use is increasingly a problem of a group of long-term users who developed their habits in the early stages of the epidemic."[5] Other drug indicators, such as hospital and coroner data, also show this aging of cocaine users. ADAM's urinalysis tests detect cocaine and heroin use only within the past 48 hours, but ADAM also collects interview data that confirm that most arrestees who test positive are frequent users of cocaine and/or heroin. ADAM data can be further integrated with data collected by the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics to paint a vivid picture of the widespread use of drugs among offenders. A recent report issued by the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that about three-quarters of all prisoners report being involved with alcohol or drug abuse in the time leading up to their arrest.[6] These data bolster understanding about the strong relationship between drug use and crime, a notion that has been folk wisdom for centuries and a research finding for decades. The data also bolster the notion that efforts to reduce recidivism are most effective when they focus on controlling drug use among offenders at all stages of the process--pretrial release, prison, and probation and parole. This has encouraged policies tying treatment to the criminal justice system, such as drug courts and treatment programs. Hospital and Coroner Reports The most direct measure of serious drug problems comes from reports of deaths and emergency room treatment related to drug abuse. These data are collected through the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), which gathers statistics from emergency rooms (ER) and medical examiners (ME). Since 1987, DAWN data have indicated six major reasons for entry into emergency rooms, such as "seeking detoxification" or "experiencing withdrawal symptoms." These data have been used to classify users as "dependent" on drugs or as "recreational" users. DAWN has been implicitly interpreted as an indicator of the number of persons most heavily involved with drugs. An increase in ER or ME cases involving cocaine is seen as indicative of an increase in the number of persons who are heavy users of cocaine. Accident, injury, or problems related to occasional cocaine use are thought to constitute a small share of the DAWN total. Since 1980, the DAWN ER and ME reports for cocaine and heroin use have increased dramatically. Exhibit 4 presents data on ER admissions between 1982-96 for cocaine and heroin. The brief downturn in 1990 may have resulted from the crackdown by the Colombian government against the Medellin cartel, which made cocaine substantially less available for a short time. As with data from the other drug indicators, the ME data, which largely parallel the ER data, show the changing demographic composition of the population of frequent users of cocaine and heroin--they are getting older and are increasingly likely to be African American. (Exhibit 5 shows the aging pattern.) Almost half of the reported deaths related to cocaine and heroin were for people 30 years old or older in 1982; by 1996, two-thirds were 35 or older. Correspondingly, the percentage of deaths among 18- to 25-year-olds fell from 23 to 8 percent. In 1982, about 23 percent of the population dying from cocaine was African American; by 1996, the figure was 44 percent. The data also suggest that a greater proportion of the cocaine-using population is dependent--a finding that is consistent with the observation that cocaine users developed their habits over time and are now experiencing the problems that stem from long-term use. In 1988, 57 percent of cocaine-related admissions were classified as dependent; by 1996, the figure had climbed to 62 percent. The share of those who seek ER attention because of an unexpected reaction to cocaine, typically associated with inexperienced use, fell from 25 percent in 1988 to 20 percent in 1996. Both the ER and ME data show that drug-related deaths are concentrated in urban communities. What It All Means It should be apparent that the various indicators need careful reconciliation and interpretation mixed with solid understanding of drug-use patterns. But these apparent inconsistencies do not necessarily point to conflict or inaccuracy. Rather, they point to a need to recognize cocaine and heroin use as a career rather than as an event. During the late 1970's and early 1980's, many individuals (mostly young adults) experimented with cocaine. Some became regular, but occasional users; a smaller group went on to become regular and frequent users. By the mid-1980's, the percentage of first-time users had slowed substantially and remained low through the mid-1990's. But the total stock of cocaine users did not begin to decline because a modest share (perhaps one-third) of the earlier initiates continued to use. As the dangers--medical rather than legal--of cocaine use became more apparent and widely known, regular users who were not dependent and generally using only occasionally were increasingly likely to quit.[7] But as cocaine became cheaper and more addictive in the form of crack, users who had not quit were more likely to become dependent. They were also more likely to be among the urban poor, whose use has serious consequences both for themselves and for society. As a result, there is now a stronger association between cocaine use and health problems (as reflected in DAWN's rise) and a strong association with crime. Each indicator provides useful information. Monitoring the Future provided the early indications of the cocaine epidemic, while ADAM did a good job in tracking its later stages. DAWN has shown that drug problems can increase even as the rate of drug use in the population stabilizes and has provided compelling evidence that drug problems are disproportionately borne by poor and urban minority populations. The National Household Survey on Drug Abuse has provided an essential measure of the decline of drug use in the general population through the 1980's. Implications for the Future Projecting future drug problems and patterns can be hazardous, even though more data are becoming available. Shocks like the introduction of crack defy prediction. Even without such shocks, however, the future is unclear. While the general population surveys have shown very stable prevalence figures throughout the 1990's, aggregate stability masks a great deal of change in patterns of drug use. The rapid rise in marijuana use among adolescents since 1992, for example, has been accompanied by an unexplained decline in marijuana use among adults, so that the prevalence of marijuana in the total population remains unchanged. This rise in adolescent marijuana use has led to a general call to arms that has been reinforced by the diffusion of methamphetamine from its established base in the Southwest and to claims that heroin use is growing among young adults as heroin prices have plummeted and purity has risen. However, marijuana use among youth is a weak predictor of future cocaine use, methamphetamine is still primarily a regional drug, and indicators of heroin use are very inconsistent. ADAM data, for example, show minimal increases in heroin use among young arrestees. Measuring the extent of a nation's drug problems requires more than estimating the number of persons using illicit drugs. Drug use differs in the damage it does to individuals and in the damage those individuals do to the rest of society. The task for local decisionmakers and their social science partners is how to use the expanded Federal data systems to better understand changes in local drug problems. Notes 1. Gfroerer, J., and M. Brodsky, "The Incidence of Drug Use in the United States," British Journal of Addiction 87(9) (1992) 1345-52. 2. Johnston, L.D., J. Bachman, and P. O'Malley, Monitoring the Future: Questionnaire Responses From the Nation's High School Seniors, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Institute for Social Research, (annual). 3. The arrestee population is now, and always has been, predominantly male. Female arrestees include a high proportion arrested on drug and prostitution charges and are thus disproportionately likely to test positive. 4. Golub, A., and B. Johnson, Crack's Decline: Some Surprises Across U.S. Cities, Research in Brief, Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1997 (NCJ 165707). 5. ADAM 1997 Annual Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998, (NCJ 171672): 1. 6. Mumola, Christopher, Substance Abuse and Treatment, State and Federal Prisoners, 1997, BJS Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1999 (NCJ 172871). More than 60 percent of Federal prisoners and 21 percent of State prisoners were incarcerated for a drug law violation in 1997. 7. This phenomenon is modeled by S. Everingham and C.P. Rydell in Modeling the Demand for Cocaine, Santa Monica, California: RAND, 1994. ------------------------------- about the author Peter Reuter is a Professor in the School of Public Affairs and in the Department of Criminology at the University of Maryland and Editor-Elect of the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. He is the former Codirector of the Drug Policy Research Center at the RAND Corporation. ------------------------------- The Most Frequently Cited Drug Indicators Monitoring the Future, sponsored by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), has been conducted annually since 1975. Initially administered in classrooms to approximately 16,000 seniors in a national probability sample of high schools, the survey added similar size samples of 8th and 10th grade students in 1991. The written questionnaire, which is also mailed to a subsample of the seniors for up to 14 years after high school, covers current and past use of licit and illicit drugs. The survey also measures drug availability and attitudes toward use. In the near future, the addition of more schools in a few cities will allow for estimates at the metropolitan area level. Strengths: Students' response rate is high, the data collected allow for long-term trend analysis, and this population is an important group to study. Anonymous classroom questionnaires produce more valid self-reports than do interviewer- administered instruments. Limitations: Because the survey data cover only the early years of use, few of a user's eventual problems will have manifested themselves. The questionnaire has not allowed additional research topics over the years. National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA) is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). It was conducted periodically from 1971 to 1990 and annually since then. Face-to-face interviews are conducted with a national probability sample of household members aged 12 and over. Interviewers ask questions about past and current use of a wide range of licit and illicit substances. The survey has expanded from 25,000 interviews conducted in 1998 to 70,000 interviews in 1999, which will allow for estimates of prevalence at the State level. Strengths: The sample is representative of most of the U.S. resident population and allows for good trend analysis. Limitations: The survey underreports frequent use of cocaine and heroin. Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM), sponsored by NIJ, has been conducted quarterly since 1987. The questionnaire and protocol are administered to adult arrestees in 35 sites across the country and to juvenile arrestees in 10 sites. ADAM data are based on voluntary, anonymous interviews and on analysis of voluntary, anonymous urine specimens. ADAM plans to expand eventually to 75 sites, include a true probability sample within each site, and establish an interview schedule that allows for policy-targeted questions. The expansion includes funding for local coordinating councils that will integrate the data into a community's planning processes so that decisionmakers can develop policies targeted to specific local needs. In 2000, existing sites will supplement their primarily urban data collection with rotating outreach data collections in rural, suburban, and Native American territory locations. Strengths: ADAM reaches a population with a high fraction of problematic drug users, and data are available in a timely fashion at the local level. Limitations: The data are difficult to integrate with other indicators of prevalence. Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), which is sponsored by SAMHSA, has been collecting data since 1975. DAWN collects data on drug-related admissions to emergency rooms (ER) and drug-related deaths from medical examiners (ME); the data are now reported semiannually. The ER data come from a national probability sample of hospitals, augmented by probability samples in 21 metropolitan areas. ME data come from 145 medical examiners' jurisdictions in 43 metropolitan areas. Strengths: DAWN is locally available on a timely basis and provides direct measures of drug-related problems. Limitations: ER data are collected from hospital records, which substantially underreport drug-related ER admissions. Other indicators, in addition to the four major sources of data, include a number of secondary reports and less systematic data that contribute to a view of drug use: --Pulse Check was developed by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) in 1992, and it collects quarterly interview data from such knowledgeable sources as police, ethnographers, and treatment providers on their perceptions of changes in approximately 20 metropolitan areas. --The Community Epidemiology Work Group (CEWG) is a group of experts from 21 metropolitan areas who report on various local indicators every 6 months and assess developing drug use trends in their local communities. CEWG is sponsored by NIDA. ------------------------------- (Quotes) These apparent inconsistencies [in the data] ... point to the need to recognize cocaine and heroin use as a career rather than as an event. Measuring the extent of a nation's drug problems requires more than estimating the number of persons using illicit drugs. Drug use differs in the damage it does to individuals and in the damage those individuals do to the rest of society. ------------------------------- For More Information Download reports, access data, and view tables and figures at the following Web sites: National Institute on Drug Abuse http://www.nida.nih.gov Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration http://www.samhsa.gov National Institute of Justice http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij Monitoring the Future http://www.isr.umich.edu/src/mtf National Household Survey on Drug Abuse http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/SAMHSA/nhsda.html Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program http://www.adam-nij.net Drug Abuse Warning Network http://www.health.org/pubs/dawn/index.htm and http://www.samhsa.gov/OAS/dawn/dwnfiles.htm Bureau of Justice Statistics http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ Office of National Drug Control Policy http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov The Report of the Drug Control Research, Data and Evaluation Advisory Committee (NCJ 174454) is available from the ONDCP Drug Policy Information Clearinghouse at 1-800-666-3332 or from the ONDCP Web page. ------------------------------- Can Telemedicine Reduce Spending and Improve Prisoner Health Care? An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network by Douglas McDonald, Andrea Hassol, and Kenneth Carlson Imagine a physician conducting surgery on a prisoner from a remote facility thousands of miles away. Or a health care specialist examining a patient in another State. New telemedicine technologies now make these possible. In February 1999, for example, a physician in Washington, D.C., collaborated with a team in Ohio to perform laproscopic surgery using a miniature video camera that beamed pictures of the patient's insides across a high-speed Internet connection. Although such long-distance surgery has not yet come to prisons, telemedicine--loosely defined as the remote delivery of health care via telecommunications--holds great promise for law enforcement and corrections officials seeking to provide high-quality health care at competitive prices. Providing prisoners with adequate and cost-effective health care has long been challenging assignment for many correctional administrators. Federal courts have endowed prisoners with a constitutional right to adequate health care (a right the rest of the population lacks), and Federal judges have brought many correctional agencies under court order for failure to provide such care. Giving prisoners access to specialist physicians is especially difficult, because facilities are often located in rural areas where specialists are in short supply. Taking prisoners to specialists outside the prison poses a danger to law enforcement officials and to the community, as prisoners may orchestrate ambushes or try to escape by other means. Telemedicine has been most useful in situations where physical barriers hinder contact between patients and doctors--where rural patients lack easy access to doctors found in urban areas, for example. Accordingly, the U.S. military has been especially interested in telemedicine for combat or other field settings and has sponsored much of the development of this new technology. Prisons face unique physical barriers that are tailor-made for telemedicine technology. Relying upon telecommunication links makes it possible to find a larger number of physicians willing to serve prisoners because they do not have to bear the inconvenience of traveling to and from prisons. The inconvenience of taking prisoners to the physicians also is minimized because the prisoners live where the telemedicine equipment is housed. To evaluate the extent to which telemedicine can improve health care in correctional settings and to estimate the associated costs and, savings, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, NIJ, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, U.S. Department of Defense, embarked on a joint demonstration program to design, procure, install, and evaluate a telemedicine system. This demonstration linked three Federal prisons in Pennsylvania and one Federal prison medical center in Kentucky to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Kentucky. (See "Participating Telemedicine Prisons," for the four prison sites.) The evaluation showed that telemedicine was adopted rapidly by prison health care administrators and that it improved prisoners' access to medical specialists who were not otherwise available to them. It also showed that the costs of adding this new technology can be offset by substantial savings. This article summarizes the findings of the evaluation, which was conducted by Abt Associates Inc. The Demonstration The demonstration of the telemedicine system lasted slightly longer than a year, from September 1996 to December 1997. It was not designed to replace the routine primary care provided by prison employees. Rather, it was hoped that use of the new technology would reduce the use of three other types of care: in-prison consultations by specialist physicians who visit prisons on a regular schedule, prisoners' trips out to local hospitals or physicians, and long-distance transfers of prisoners to Federal medical centers (prison hospitals) for intensive, long-term treatment--an especially costly alternative. The equipment leased for the demonstration included: --Interactive videoconferencing equipment with multiple specialized medical cameras. --Compatible medical peripheral devices, including an electronic stethoscope and a micro/intraoral camera. --Telecommunications equipment and software. --A PC-based computer work-station and software. This equipment was located in a dedicated room in each prison. A telemedicine coordinator at each prison scheduled the sessions and managed the cameras and sound equipment. A prison clinician (usually a physician's assistant or psychologist) "presented" the patient to the specialist, assisting the examination by placing the electronic stethoscope on the patient, rotating the patient's limbs, or reviewing his case history, for example. At the other end of the telemedicine circuit, health care specialists had equipment to receive and display the audio and video information. Remote controls enabled the specialists, sitting in their location, to steer cameras located in the patient exam room. The Research Questions The evaluators examined the practice of specialist consultations, both conventional and telemedical, during the demonstration period and the year preceding the demonstration. During the demonstration period, the evaluators also examined practices at other Federal penitentiaries lacking telemedical capabilities. They focused on four principal questions: --Was telemedicine used as a substitute for conventional consultations with specialists, and if so, at what rate? --How expensive was telemedicine relative to the costs of conventional specialist consultations, either bringing specialists to the prisons or sending patients outside the prison for care? --What are the net costs and savings that would accrue in a telemedicine system designed for ongoing operation, rather than for a test? --Does the use of telemedicine bring other nonfinancial benefits? Findings During the demonstration, physicians made approximately 100 telemedicine consultations per month for a total of 1,321 consultations. Approximately 58 percent of the visits were for psychiatric consultations; nearly all of the others were for dermatology, orthopedics, podiatry, and dietary counseling. (See exhibit 1.) To compare conventional and telemedicine consultations, researchers selected four specialties--psychiatry, dermatology, orthopedics, and cardiology--because Federal Bureau of Prisons data unambiguously identified these specialty encounters both during the telemedicine period and in the preceding year. These were also among the most frequently used specialties prior to the demonstration and, therefore, offered the greatest opportunity for the new technology to have an impact. --Psychiatry. The telemedicine psychiatrists at the Federal Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky, virtually replaced visits by Pennsylvania's local psychiatrists. Pennsylvania's prison officials found the Lexington psychiatrists to be more experienced at treating prisoners and more readily available when needed. (See exhibit 2.) This conversion to near-total reliance on telemedicine technology for psychiatric consultations occurred in part because psychiatry involves communication of visual and verbal information (as opposed to tactile information), which is accurately passed through the telemedicine equipment. --Dermatology. There was an average of 6 dermatology consultations per month during the year preceding the demonstration and 14 per month during the demonstration. Seventy-six percent of the dermatology consultations during the demonstration were provided via telemedicine. --Orthopedics. Telemedicine was used for orthopedic consultations in all facilities, but conventional in-prison orthopedic consultations continued as well. Telemedicine did not replace conventional in-person consultations because orthopedists rely on tactile information obtained in hands-on examinations. Technologies now in development may someday support the communication of kinesthetic experience in sufficient richness that orthopedists will accept it as a substitute for direct contact. --Cardiology. Too few cardiology telemedicine consultations (only 18) were performed to draw conclusions about substitution rates for this specialty. Financial Costs and Savings The demonstration suggests that telemedicine can generate significant savings and benefits if it is configured for ongoing operations. For example, if the equipment were purchased rather than leased, the capital investment would be recovered in less than 2 years. Most of the telemedicine costs, including at least $3,400 for setting up the telemedicine suites, are fixed and do not depend on the number of patients seen. Other costs vary, including telecommunications charges and payment to the Veterans Administration for the physicians' time. --In-Prison Consultations. Consultation costs decreased through telemedicine. A conventional consultation with a specialist costs approximately $108 inside the Federal correctional facilities, whereas the per consultation cost for telemedicine was estimated at $71--a full $37 less. In an average month with 100 consultations, the prison would pay $10,800 per month for conventional in-prison consultations or $7,100 for telemedicine consultations--a monthly savings of $3,700 if there were a perfect substitution of one for the other. However, there was not a one-for-one substitution during the demonstration, except in psychiatry. The total number of consults increased with the addition of telemedicine, which increased total health care expenditures over levels that would result from one-for-one substitution. (See exhibit 3.) --Trips to Local Providers. Approximately 30 to 35 trips for inmates to see local specialists outside prison walls were averted through telemedicine, saving approximately $27,500. A large number of other trips were not averted, however, for inmates who needed invasive tests, surgery, trauma care, or other medical care not suited to telemedicine. --Transfers to Federal Medical Centers. The Bureau of Prisons saved an additional $59,134 by averting costly air transfers from the three Pennsylvania prisons to Federal medical centers, a result of treating prisoners telemedically. These averted transfers were nearly all psychiatric patients who required intensive monitoring and medication control that was not possible with a local psychiatrist who only visited the prison 1 or 2 times per month. Other or Nonfinancial Benefits Financial savings were not the only benefits of telemedicine. Nonfinancial benefits included the following: --Prisoners' waiting times to see specialists decreased. --New services became available through telemedicine, particularly more specialized HIV/AIDS care. --Anecdotal evidence showed that the quality of care, particularly psychiatric care, improved. --Fewer acts of inmate aggression or use of force by guards were noted, but this decline began before telemedicine was introduced and only occurred in two of the three prisons, making it impossible to conclude that the reductions were due to telemedicine. Implications for Expanding Telemedicine to State and Local Prisons The demonstration in these Federal prisons shows that telemedicine, if used and managed well, can be successful in controlling health care costs (which can comprise 10-20 percent of total prison operating costs). It offers security advantages by reducing opportunities for escape and improves inmates' medical care by speeding up treatment that could take months to occur under normal circumstances. It has transitioned smoothly from the demonstration stage to the permanent stage, and utilization levels remain stable. Many of the cost savings found in the demonstration stem from averted transfers to Federal medical centers--something that most State and local correctional agencies are less likely to need because the distances are shorter than in the Federal system. Thus, the largest single opportunity for cost saving in this analysis would have no counterpart in many jurisdictions. State and local prison officials who are considering telemedicine should first identify other structural savings, such as air transfers. Telemedicine may save taxpayer dollars in systems hoping to reduce medical costs by accessing less costly specialists in distant locations and by being able to access them more often than is possible with visiting local specialists. The greatest savings are likely to occur in correctional systems that use costly air charters for individual medical trips over long distances. Contrary to expectations, telemedicine did not greatly reduce the number or frequency of trips outside the prison to local health care providers. Examination of medical records for such trips indicates that these were most commonly taken for hands-on diagnostic tests or surgical procedures, or for emergencies that would not be amenable to telemedicine. In jurisdictions where outside trips are less tightly rationed, opportunities to produce savings by using telemedicine may exist. In prison systems that rely less heavily upon air transports and trips out, the average cost of telemedicine consultations will be approximately the same as the cost of conventional in-prison consultations. Physician licensure and insurance issues did not arise in this demonstration but pose constraints elsewhere. (Both The Veterans Administration and the Bureau of Prisons are Federal Government agencies, and staff physicians are allowed to practice across State lines.) Indeed, dozens of States have formal barriers prohibiting remote physicians from providing care across State lines unless they also have licenses in the State where the patient is physically located. These issues could be relevant for State and local correctional systems wishing to access specialists beyond their States' borders. As a result of the success of the telemedicine demonstration, the project has been expanded to determine the viability of telemedicine in jails. In addition, NIJ is testing videoconferencing technology for crime scene investigators and medical examiners. ------------------------------- about the authors Douglas McDonald, Ph.D., Andrea Hassol, and Kenneth Carlson are researchers at Abt Associates Inc. a research-based consulting company headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts. They relied upon the substantial contributions of several other Abt Associates Inc. staff members, including Jeffrey McCullough, Elizabeth Fournier, and Jennifer Yap. Telemedicine coordinators at each facility collected and relayed data needed for the evaluation. Health services staff in each prison accommodated requests for information and access to medical records. The Federal Bureau of Prisons' Office of Research and Evaluation provided a large amount of data from automated patient records for the analysis. The telemedicine demonstration and evaluation were made possible through a joint U.S. Department of Justice, Department of Defense Memorandum of Understanding to advance understanding of technology for law enforcement and corrections. The telemedicine suites were designed and installed by Tracor Systems Technologies, Inc., and SPAWAR Systems Center. The evaluation was conducted by Abt Associates Inc. under the direction of Douglas McDonald. ------------------------------- Participating Telemedicine Prisons U.S. Penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. Maximum security, opened in 1932, houses an average of 1,300 male prisoners. U.S. Penitentiary in Allenwood, Pennsylvania. Maximum security, opened in 1993, houses an average of 1,000 male prisoners. Federal Correctional Institution in Allenwood, Pennsylvania. Low and medium security, opened in 1993 and located on the same campus as the U.S. Penitentiary in Allenwood, houses an average of 1,100 male prisoners. Federal Medical Center in Lexington, Kentucky. Operated as a Federal correctional institution since 1974, converted to a medical center in 1991. Accepts patients rquiring specialized health care from many Federal prisons. Its primary focus is medium and minimum security prisoners with chronic illnesses. Houses an average of 1,450 prisoners, mostly male. ------------------------------- For More Information --The full report of the evaluation, Douglas McDonald, et al., Telemedicine Can Reduce Spending for Prisoner Healthcare: An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network, is forthcoming in spring 1999. (NCJ 175040) --A 60-minute VHS videotape of Douglas McDonald's seminar, Can Telemedicine Reduce Spending for Prisoner Healthcare? An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network, is available for $19 ($24 in Canada and other countries). (NCJ 173390) Order copies of the full report and the videotape by calling the National Criminal Justice Reference Service at 1-800-851-3420. In the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, call 301-519-5500, or write P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000. Or e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.org with questions. Download a copy of the full report by visiting the NIJ Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Click on Publications. --Demonstrating the Viability of Telemedicine in Correctional Health Care by Allan Turner, Pete Nacci, and Ronald Waldron in Corrections Today, February 1999. --Government Accounting Office, "Telemedicine: Federal Strategy Is Needed to Guide Investments," Washington, D.C.: Government Accounting Office, February 1997. (GAO/NSIAD/HEHS-97-67) ------------------------------- Race, Crime, and the Administration of Justice A Summary of the Available Facts by Christopher Stone The author presented this paper to President Clinton's Advisory Board on Race on May 19, 1998, at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., for the Board's discussion of race, crime, and the administration of justice. The presentation was commissioned to provide a brief overview of the issues and available facts. The author was among a group of experts who were invited to serve as panelists and presenters at the Board's discussion. Charles Ogletree of Harvard University moderated the discussion. Other presenters included Attorney General Janet Reno; William J. Bratton, former New York City Police Commissioner; Randall Kennedy of Harvard Law School; Charles Ramsey, Chief of Police of the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department; and Robert Yazzie, Chief Justice of the Navajo Nation. The National Institute of Justice is committed to supporting research that furthers understanding of the nexus between crime and other social concerns. The Institute is pleased to present this enlightening and provocative paper in the hope that it will inform the discourse among criminal justice practitioners, policymakers, and researchers. We each know about race, crime, and the administration of justice in many ways: from our own experience, through stories we hear, and from our various understandings of history. We may also retain a current statistic or two, especially if we have stumbled on one that reinforces what we already believe. But what does the subject of race, crime, and justice look like if approached empirically, and with reference to all of what we refer to today as racial groups? At the most general level, we know that many people of color-- Native Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, black Americans--do not trust the justice system. For example, a study of Hispanic Texans in the mid-1980's found that fewer than 30 percent rated the job performance of their local police as good.[1] In a 1995 Gallup poll, more than half of black Americans said the justice system was biased against them. Moreover, two-thirds of black Americans in that same Gallup poll said that police racism against blacks is common across the country, and a majority of white Americans (52 percent) agreed.[2] Social scientists usually explain this broad distrust in two ways: historical experience and present-day practice. The historical experience with the justice system among Native Americans, Asian immigrants, black Americans, and Hispanic Americans is more than enough to provoke distrust, but is it being reinforced by current practice? How does the pattern of crime and victimization keep us from living as one America? How do stereotypes work to cause people of some races and ethnic groups to be unfairly suspected of crime? How and when does the justice system itself treat defendants and offenders differently on the basis of race or ethnicity? Does a lack of diversity in the justice system add to the distrust? Social science research has shed some light on each of these concerns, but our empirical knowledge is uneven. We know a lot about some of these issues, but there are great gaps in what we know through research. We know much less about discrimination in judicial decisions regarding Asian-American defendants, for example, than we do about "black and white" discrimination. And we know much more about reported index crimes (homicide, robbery, rape, burglary, aggravated assault, larceny, auto theft, and arson) than we do about other criminal conduct. The lack of data and good research on the experience of Asian Americans and Native Americans in particular is a problem. Patterns of Crime Victimization Consider first the pattern of crime victimization. In general, whites have the lowest victimization rates, followed by Asians, followed by Native Americans, then Hispanics, then blacks. But the differences are dramatic. In 1995, for example, there were 5.1 homicide victims per 100,000 non-Hispanic white males. The rate for Asian-American males was more than one-and-a-half times higher, at 8.3 per 100,000. But the rate for Native American males was 18, more than three times the white rate, and the rate for Hispanics was 25.1, almost five times the white rate. And the rate for blacks was 57.6, more than 10 times the white rate.[3] This pattern changes somewhat for different crimes. For more common violent crimes, such as robbery, the relative position of the groups is the same, but the differences are not as great. For household crimes, such as burglary, Hispanics report the highest rates of victimization in the annual victimization surveys conducted by the Census Bureau for the Justice Department.[4] Why the differences? The crudest analyses focus on the offenders, telling us that most crime is intraracial. More than 80 percent of homicides where we know the race of the killer are either white-on-white or black-on-black. Research among Vietnamese and Chinese in California has also shown that most crime there is intraracial.[5] Does this mean that groups with high victimization rates also have high offending rates? Yes, but with three crucial caveats. First, it is essential to remember that most crime is committed by whites. Their offending rates may be low, but there are so many of them that they still manage to commit most of the crime. Second, the chances that a young adult has ever committed a violent offense is roughly equal across races. This is what social scientists call the "ever prevalence rate," and it is the percentage of people who, by a certain age, have at least once in his or her lifetime committed a certain act. The "ever prevalence rate" for committing a violent crime is roughly the same for black and white people. The difference in violent crime rates among these two groups is a function of the greater number of offenses committed each year by those in certain groups and of their persistence in such behavior over time.[6] Third, community conditions seem to be the reason that crime falls so heavily on some groups. The more sophisticated analyses today focus on neighborhoods, and they show us that the differences in victimization and offending rates between groups may have more to do with neighborhood and community conditions than with race itself. Where people live in neighborhoods of concentrated disadvantage, victimization and offending rates are high. When researchers compare similar neighborhoods of different races, the racial differences seem to disappear.[7] The problem is that researchers cannot find white communities to compare to the most disadvantaged urban communities. Stereotypes and Criminal Profiles Most people of all races and ethnic groups are never convicted of a crime, but stereotypes can work to brand all members of some groups with suspicion. These stereotypes may have their roots in past biases, but they also can be reinforced through broadcast news and newspaper reports. One social scientist, for example, finds that Asians are overidentified with Asian gangs.[8] A team of researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles has found that blacks and Hispanics are overrepresented in TV news depictions of violent crime, while whites are overrepresented in stories involving nonviolent crime.[9] These stereotypes are bad enough in the culture at large, but they also work their way into law enforcement through the use of criminal profiles, putting an undue burden on innocent members of these groups. A particularly clear example of this phenomenon is found in a study of Maryland State troopers and the searches they made of motorists on Interstate Highway 95 in 1995. On this particular stretch of highway, motorists were found to be speeding equally across races. Black motorists, for example, constituted 17 percent of the motorists and 17.5 percent of the speeders. But black motorists were the subject of 409 of the 533 searches made by the police looking for contraband.[10] Why were black motorists searched so often? The police might justify such practices on the ground that blacks are more likely to be carrying contraband. And the statistics show this to be true: the police found contraband in 33 percent of the searches of black motorists, and in 22 percent of the searches of white motorists. But the mischief in this practice is quickly exposed. Blacks had a 50 percent higher chance of being found with contraband, but were searched more than 400 percent more often. The result is that 274 innocent black motorists were searched, while only 76 innocent white motorists were searched. The profiles apparently used by the Maryland State troopers make 17 percent of the motorists pay 76 percent of the price of law enforcement strategy, solely because of their race. Disparities in Conviction Rates The combination of higher rates of crime and higher levels of police attention produce disproportionate numbers of arrests among some groups. Arrest rates for violent crimes among Asian Americans are about half of that among white Americans. Rates for Native Americans are about one-and-a-half times that for whites, and rates for blacks are about five times that for whites. Again, as with crime, the arrest rate for whites may be low, but there are so many whites that they account for 55 percent of all arrests for violent crime.[11] But then what happens? Here is the problem that has attracted more research than any other area under discussion today. Black Americans account for fewer than half of the arrests for violent crimes, but they account for just over half of the convictions and approximately 60 percent of the prison admissions.12 At the beginning of this decade, the chance that a black male born in the United States would go to prison in his lifetime--not reform school, not a few days or weeks in jail, but State or Federal prison following conviction for a felony and a sentence of more than a year--was more than 28.5 percent. The corresponding chance for an Hispanic male was 16 percent, and for a white male, 4.4 percent.[13] A similar pattern of disproportionate representation of black and Hispanic Americans appears in juvenile detention facilities, where, in 1994, 43 percent of juveniles were black, 19 percent were Hispanic, and 35 percent were white.[14] These are national figures, but the reality in many individual juvenile and adult institutions is even more stark as geography and classification systems increase the segregation and concentration of minority inmates. How has this happened? Is this simply the result of fair-minded prosecutors and courts applying the law to disproportionate arrests, or is there bias at work at these later stages of the justice process? Researchers have looked carefully for evidence of bias, reaching different conclusions. Some of the disparity we see when we visit these institutions is clearly explained by differences in arrest charges, and much more is explained by differences in the prior records of those convicted. There is no evidence of disparity that stretches across the justice system as a whole when we consider index crimes. But studies of individual jurisdictions and specific parts of the court process do find some evidence of race bias in a significant number of cases. The most we can say is that when crime type and prior record are taken into account, black defendants in some jurisdictions are more likely to receive prison sentences than are white defendants. In addition, there is some evidence that race influences detention and placement decisions in juvenile justice processing.[15] The problems we encounter in this research are illustrated in a recent study of sentencing disparity of Native Americans in Arizona. After accounting for prior felony records and other factors, American Indians were found to receive longer sentences than whites only for robbery and burglary, while whites received significantly longer sentences for homicide than did American Indians.[16] Of course, both of these findings could be evidence of bias. The longer sentences could be evidence of harsher treatment of Native American offenders for crimes against strangers, while the lower sentences for homicide could be evidence that the courts do not treat seriously offenses among acquaintances within this population. Across race and ethnic groups, concerns about both of these kinds of bias are regularly reported: underenforcement of laws within a minority community and overpunishment when that community is seen as a threat to the majority. These two kinds of bias can balance each other in simple studies. Their interaction is captured most famously in the research on the death penalty, showing that black offenders found guilty of murdering white victims are at the highest risk for the death penalty, while offenders of any race found guilty of murdering black victims are least likely to receive the death penalty.[17] Finally, in considering the work of the justice system itself, the special case of drug offenses needs to be considered separately. Asian-American youth report very low drug use compared with other groups. Black youth consistently report lower rates of use than whites; Hispanic youth report more use than black youth, but less than white youth.[18] Yet police activity, new criminal legislation, special courts, and longer sentences were all brought to bear in the late 1980's against the use and sale of drugs, particularly crack cocaine. Whatever one believes about the rationality of the decision to create special, harsher penalties for crack cocaine, the concentration of these sentences on black defendants is striking. For example, of the drug defendants sentenced for powdered cocaine in the United States District Courts during the 1995 Federal fiscal year, 35 percent were black, 37 percent were Hispanic, and 21 percent were white. In contrast, of those sentenced for crack cocaine, 86 percent were black, 9 percent were Hispanic, and fewer than 5 percent were white.[19] As striking as these statistics can be, the most powerful reminder of bias in these stages of the justice system sometimes comes from qualitative research. That is because bias in the system is most often found in local practices rather than aggregate statistics. For example, in a study in Washington State in the late 1980's, researchers found that nonwhites were sentenced to prison at higher rates in counties with large minority populations. In follow-up interviews, justice officials and community leaders told the researchers directly that citizens in their counties were concerned about the "dangerousness" of minorities and admitted using race as a code for a culture that to them signified criminality.[20] Strengthening Diversity Within the Criminal Justice System If these biases were eliminated from the justice system, would we still have a problem? If the police abandoned the use of offensive stereotypes, if the remnants of institutional bias were driven from the courts, would the justice system deserve and win respect across lines of race and ethnicity? Or is the sheer volume of black and Hispanic prisoners in America a problem in its own right? There is little empirical evidence on this, but it is a question worth considering. Respect for the justice system can be won or lost not just in its decisions, but in who is making them. Slow but real progress has been made in strengthening the diversity of law enforcement throughout the United States, but some signs indicate that this effort is losing momentum. A recent study commissioned by NIJ focusing on the hiring of police executives in Florida, for example, concluded that the number of minority law enforcement executives has declined in recent years, after earlier gains. A large percentage of minority officers remain in entry-level positions throughout their careers and the outlook for any change, the researchers concluded, is bleak.[21] Declining Crime Rates: A Reason for Optimism If there is a strong reason for optimism among all these data, it is in the steady decline in crime over the last several years in most large U.S. cities. Let me focus here on the often neglected yet dramatic decline in domestic homicide, where we again find a stark difference between blacks and whites. Twenty years ago, white men were rarely victims of domestic homicide--approximately 1 victim per 100,000 males age 20-44. White women were victims at about twice that rate. Both rates have declined modestly over these 2 decades. Rates for black victims of domestic homicide were roughly 7 times higher 20 years ago, and they have plummeted since. The rate for black male victims has dropped from more than 16 to fewer than 3 homicides per 100,000; and for black women the rate has fallen from more than 12 to fewer than 5.[22] These declines leave us with two important lessons. First, they remind us of the power of neighborhood disadvantage, for as stark as the black/white differences are, they disappear when researchers control for housing conditions.23 Second, they remind us of the power these communities have to help themselves. There are some aspects of the drop in crime for which police can claim the credit, and there is plenty of crime reduction for everybody to claim some, but this drop, occurring over 20 years, exceeds the reach of any single program or administration. It is an example of cultural change and communities working to heal themselves. In sum, these declines hold out the promise of a day when race will no longer be a proxy for suspicion, and crime no longer a proxy for concentrated community disadvantage. ------------------------------- Notes 1. Carter, David L., "Hispanic Perception of Police Performance: An Empirical Assessment," Journal of Criminal Justice 13:487-500 (1985). 2. Gallup Poll Monthly, October 1995. 3. Unpublished analysis of various data provided to the author by the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 4. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Criminal Victimization Rates in the United States, 1994, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, May 1997. 5. Song, J. H-L., "Attitudes of Chinese Immigrants and Vietnamese Refugees Toward Law Enforcement in the United States," Justice Quarterly 9(4): 703-19 (1992) (NCJ 143561). 6. Elliott, Delbert S., "Serious Violent Offenders: Onset, Developmental Course, and Termination--The American Society of Criminology 1993 Presidential Address," Criminology 32(1):8 (1994). 7. Sampson, Robert J., Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Felton Earls, "Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy," Science 277:2-25 (August 15, 1997) (NCJ 173119). 8. "Asians Are Automatically Labeled Gang Members," Los Angeles Times, December 12, 1994, B-5. 9. Gilliam, Jr., Frank D., Shanto Iyengar, Adam Simon, and Oliver Wright, "Crime in Black and White: The Violent Scary World of Local News," Press/Politics 1(3):6-23 (1996). 10. This discussion of stops by Maryland State troopers is based on statistics published in Katheryn K. Russell, The Color of Crime (New York: New York University Press, 1998), 41-2. Since the presentation of this paper, additional data from this study have been presented showing that black motorists were no more likely to be found with contraband than white motorists. In either case, the burden of this enforcement practice falls disproportionately on innocent black motorists. 11. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1996. 12. Unpublished analysis of various data provided to the author by the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 13. Bonczar, Thomas P., and Allen J. Beck, Lifetime Likelihood of Going to State or Federal Prison, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, March 1997 (NCJ 160092). 14. Roscoe, Mark, and Reggie Morton, Disproportionate Minority Confinement, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, April 1994. 15. Sampson, Robert J., and Janet L. Lauritsen, "Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Crime and Criminal Justice in the United States," in Michael Tonry, (ed.) Ethnicity, Crime, and Immigration: Comparative and Cross-National Perspectives, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1997, 355 (NCJ 165176). 16. Alvarez, A, and R. D. Bachman, "American Indians and Sentencing Disparity, An Arizona Test," Journal of Criminal Justice 24:549-61 (1996). 17. Sampson and Lauritsen, pp. 354-5. 18. National Institute on Drug Abuse, "Drug Use Among Racial/Ethnic Minorities," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1995 (Pub. No. 95-30008). 19. U.S. Sentencing Commission, 1996 datafile, MONFY96. 20. Sampson and Lauritsen, p. 357. 21. National Institute of Justice, The Future of Minority Law Enforcement Executives in the State of Florida, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1994 (NCJ 153059). 22. Greenfeld, Lawrence A., et al., "Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, March 1998 (NCJ 167237). 23. Short, Jr., James F., "Measuring Violent Crime: Trends and Social Distributions" in John Hagan (ed.) Poverty, Ethnicity, and Violent Crime, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1997, 24 (NCJ 169786). ------------------------------- (Quotes) Most people of all races and ethnic groups are never convicted of a crime, but stereotypes can work to brand all members of some groups with suspicion. ... these declines hold out the promise of a day when race will no longer be a proxy for suspicion, and crime no longer a proxy for concentrated community disadvantage. ------------------------------- about the author Christopher Stone is the President and Director of the Vera Institute of Justice, an action-research institute based in New York City that collaborates with government institutions to encourage innovation and reform in public services. ------------------------------- One America in the 21st Century: The President's Initiative on Race President Clinton announced One America in the 21st Century: The President's Initiative on Race on June 14, 1997. The goals of the initiative are to help educate Americans about the facts surrounding issues of race; promote a national dialog to confront and address these issues; engage government, business, and community leaders in developing and implementing innovative approaches to calming racial tensions; and identify, develop, and recommend how to implement solutions to problems in areas in which race has a substantial impact, such as education, economic opportunity, housing, health care, and the administration of justice. Advisory Board on Race Explores the Issues To accomplish these goals, the President enlisted the expertise of a seven-member Advisory Board on Race. Chaired by historian John Hope Franklin, the Board included two former governors and an attorney who served as special counsel to the Assembly Special Committee on the Los Angeles Crisis following the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, California. The Board spent a year meeting with experts and convening community forums to discuss such issues as racial demographics, surveys, and attitudes on race; race in the workplace; race and poverty; and race, crime, and the administration of justice. The Board also convened four forums for corporate leaders and two for religious leaders and met with approximately 600 tribal leaders and members. The Advisory Board Issues Recommendations on Race, Crime, and the Administration of Justice When its work concluded in September 1998, the Board presented the President with a report that included recommendations for how to address the problems it studied. In One America in the 21st Century: Forging a New Future, the members acknowledged the need to build trust in the criminal justice system among minorities and to reduce crime by and against minorities and people of color. The Board made eight recommendations to the President on how to achieve these goals. It supported the administration's recommendation to reduce the disparity between sentences for crack versus cocaine and the administration's efforts to prevent and address youth crime and its ongoing support of community policing and related strategies in communities of color. The Board also recommended the following: Expand data collection and analysis to provide more complete data for all racial and ethnic groups--particularly for Hispanics, Asian Pacific Americans, American Indians, and Alaska Natives--with regard to criminal justice issues. --Consider restricting the use of and developing alternatives to racial profiling. --Eliminate racial stereotypes and increase the number of minorities and people of color serving as criminal justice practitioners. --Support initiatives that improve access to courts through outreach, public education, and the availability of court-certified interpreters. --Support continued action to strengthen tribal law enforcement and justice systems in a manner that respects tribal sovereignty and preserves traditional tribal justice practices. National Academy of Sciences Holds Conference on Racial Trends The President's Initiative on Race also involved the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council in convening a research conference on racial trends in the United States. The conference, held in October 1998, brought together leading scholars of race relations to present the key data trends and discuss the research literature that attempts to explain those trends. The papers from the conference will contribute to the President's report to the American people, anticipated for release in 1999, and also will be published by the National Academy Press to serve as a resource for Federal, State, and local policymakers; the media; and scholars. (See "For More Information," p. 32.) The conference was cosponsored by the White House Council on Economic Advisers, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Social Security Administration, and the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Justice, Labor, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs. For More Information --"Race, the Police, and 'Reasonable Suspicion,'" a lecture by Harvard Professor Randall Kennedy, presented in February 1998 in Washington, D.C., as part of NIJ's annual lecture series "Perspectives on Crime and Justice." Kennedy discussed the use of race by police as a factor to determine increased risk that a person is a drug offender or has engaged in other criminal conduct. The presentation is featured in Perspectives on Crime and Justice: 1997-1998 Lecture Series Volume II (NCJ 172851), available from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) by calling 1-800-851-3420. The report also is available on the NIJ Web page at http://www/ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. A videotape of the lecture is available for $29.50 by calling NCJRS and requesting NCJ 168967. --The National Research Council's report on its conference on racial trends in the United States, anticipated for release in 1999. Visit the National Academy Press Web site at http://www.nap.edu. For more information about the conference, contact Faith Mitchell at NRC, 2101 Constitution Ave., NW, HA 156, Washington, DC 20418; phone: 202-334-3730; fax: 202-334-3829; e-mail: fmitchel@nas.edu. --American Indians and Crime, by Lawrence A. Greenfeld and Steven K. Smith, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice (NCJ 173386). This report presents the rates and characteristics of violent crimes experienced by American Indians and summarizes data on American Indians in the criminal justice system. The report is available from NCJRS by calling 1-800-732-3277 or online at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/aic.htm. --Visit the White House Web site to view or download materials: http://www.whitehouse.gov/Initiatives/OneAmerica/america.html One America in the 21st Century: Forging a New Future, which presents the observations and recommendations of the President's Advisory Board on Race. One America Dialogue Guide, a guide for conducting dialogs on race in neighborhoods, schools, and places of worship. Changing America: Indicators of Social and Economic Well-Being by Race and Hispanic Origin, a statistical chart book prepared by the Council of Economic Advisers. ------------------------------- At-A-Glance: Recent Research Findings The following summaries of ongoing research are based on NIJ Research in Progress Seminars, which feature well-known scholars discussing their work with an audience of researchers and criminal justice professionals and practitioners. A 60-minute VHS videotape for each seminar is available for $19 ($24 in Canada and other countries) by contacting the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) at 1-800-851-3420. Enhancing Police Integrity Carl Klockars, Professor of Criminal Justice at the University of Delaware, and his colleagues Bill Geller, Maria Haberfeld, Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovich, and Aaron Uydess are exploring ways to measure police integrity--the normative inclination among police to resist temptations to abuse the rights and privileges of their office. As part of this effort, they are studying how three exemplary police agencies prevent, control, and respond to officer misconduct. The three police agencies participating in the research are from Charleston, South Carolina; Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina; and St. Petersburg, Florida. In each agency, the research team is studying how that agency creates and communicates rules, detects and disciplines violations, controls the "code of silence," and deals with forces in the social and political environment that threaten or support police integrity. Klockars and his colleagues propose that police misconduct of all types, including corruption, inappropriate use of force, and abuse of discretion in arrest and order maintenance authority, must be understood as organizational rather than individual problems. The best means of controlling them, they suggest, is to create an organizational culture among police officers that is intolerant of these types of misconduct. To measure the level of intolerance for misconduct, the research team developed a measurement instrument that permits the calculation of how seriously police officers regard different types of misconduct, what level of discipline they believe each type merits, and how willing they are to step forward to report it. These measures can be combined to create an "integrity profile" to compare agencies and alert police administrators and trainers to areas that may require attention. Findings from the study are expected in late 1999. When ordering a videotape of this research seminar from NCJRS, ask for NCJ 174459. The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Where Are All the Prisoners Coming From? The U.S. incarceration rate more than tripled between 1980 and 1996. To examine this growth, researchers Alfred Blumstein of Carnegie-Mellon University and Allen Beck of the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, analyzed Federal and State data from all components of the criminal justice system according to offense type, gender, and race. Blumstein and Beck found that drug offenses comprised the bulk of the rate increase and that nondrug-related growth in State incarceration rates between 1980 and 1996 was entirely a result of increases in the number of people sentenced to prison per arrest and the amount of time offenders served. Incarceration rates for drug arrests increased by 10 times between 1980 and 1996, representing a third of the growth in the total incarceration rate. In 1996, drug offenders comprised 60 percent of the Federal prison population and 23 percent of State prison populations. Incarceration rates for aggravated assault and sexual assault each increased approximately 300 percent. Incarceration rates for murder increased 164 percent from 1980 to 1996; for burglary, 81 percent; and for robbery, 54 percent. The researchers attributed a significant portion of the growth in time served at the State level to mandatory-minimum laws, sentencing enhancements, three-strikes laws, and changes in release policies. The growth in the Federal prison population was spread across time served per commitment (44 percent), growth in arrest rates (38 percent), commitments per conviction (12 percent), and convictions per prosecution (6 percent). Incarceration rates in State and Federal prisons grew faster for women (364 percent) and minorities (184 percent for blacks and 235 percent for Hispanics) than for men (195 percent) and non-Hispanic whites (164 percent). Drug offenses accounted for 43 percent of the total growth among females in State prisons, 28 percent among males, 17 percent among whites, 36 percent among blacks, and 32 percent among Hispanics. The researchers noted that changes in recent years were primarily attributable to increases in time served. This has a smaller deterrent effect than an increased probability of commitment to prison following commission of a crime. Furthermore, from the point of view of incapacitation, as time served increases, the more likely it is that some individuals will be serving time after their criminal careers would have ended. They also noted that the link between the decline in crime and the growth in the prison population is complex and cannot be addressed by simply asserting that the decline in crime during the 1990's is the result of the rising prison population. To develop informed imprisonment policy, the researchers recommend further research to compare the incapacitation and deterrence values of incarceration with its costs: annual national expenditures of more than $20 billion and immeasurable costs to families and communities disrupted by imprisonment. A full discussion of this research will appear in the forthcoming volume 26 of Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, a thematic volume on prisons edited by Michael Tonry and Joan Petersilia. To order the volume, contact the publisher, The University of Chicago Press, Journals Division, P.O. Box 37005, Chicago, IL 60637; phone: 773-753-0811; fax: 773-753-3347; e-mail: orders@journals.uchicago.edu. Or visit the publisher's Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu. When ordering a videotape of this research seminar from NCJRS, ask for NCJ 172853. Why Do Citizens Defer to Legal Authorities? A Comparison of European Americans, African Americans, and Hispanics For the past 20 to 25 years, the idea of deterrence has dominated the American approach to a wide array of problems. This is reflected in the dramatic growth in the prison population; the United States now ranks second behind Russia for the number of citizens per capita in prison. Despite the prominence of the deterrence theory, recent studies suggest that it has, at best, a modest or moderate effect on criminal behavior. New York University Psychology Professor Tom Tyler and his research team have conducted interviews with residents of Chicago, Los Angeles, and Oakland and identified an alternative approach: gain the cooperation and support of citizens by developing within them attitudes and values that lead them to want to comply with legal authorities. According to Tyler, this can be accomplished by enhancing the quality of legal authorities' interactions with citizens. In his studies of white, African-American, and Hispanic residents, Tyler examined the factors that determine whether residents will obey the law, focusing on the quality of residents' most recent interactions with legal authorities. He found that residents are much more likely to comply with the law because of their belief that authorities are legitimate than because of their fear of being caught and punished. He also found that residents' perception of fairness in their interactions with legal authorities more strongly influenced their feelings than whether the outcome of their interaction was favorable. For example, the shaping of residents' beliefs and attitudes had less to do with the fact that a police officer issued them a ticket than with their perception that the officer treated them fairly. When Tyler examined what it means to residents to be treated fairly, he found that it was determined by the quality of the police-resident interaction, not the outcome. Whether residents trusted the motives of the authorities, felt they had been treated with dignity and respect, perceived the authorities as neutral, and felt they had a voice in decisions had much more effect on their perception of fairness than whether they had "won" or "lost" in their interactions. These findings were true irrespective of residents' ethnic backgrounds. Tyler also found that the same factors that lead citizens to believe they have been treated fairly are those that lead them to defer to and respect decisions made by the authorities. These factors become particularly important when the outcome of an interaction is unfavorable. Tyler concludes that the quality with which legal authorities treat citizens can lead to stronger perceptions of fairness and that enhancing the quality of those interactions can be viewed as a viable and effective alternative to deterrence. Complete findings are presented in Tyler's book, Why People Obey the Law, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990. Discussion of related research can be found in Social Justice in a Diverse Society, Tom Tyler (ed.), Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1998. When ordering the videotape of this research seminar from NCJRS, ask for NCJ 175055. ------------------------------- New & Noteworthy Crime and Justice: A Review of Research (Volume 23) A new volume in the Crime and Justice series contains seven essays on current issues. --"Criminal Deterrence Research at the Outset of the Twenty-First Century" by Daniel S. Nagin. The author focuses on the current state of knowledge about deterrence, with emphasis placed on research since 1980. He identifies important gaps in knowledge and suggests a research agenda for the outset of the 21st century. He concludes that understanding of deterrent effects is vastly greater than it was in 1980 but that gaps in knowledge limit our capacity to make confident predictions about what deters criminal behavior in certain circumstances. --"Sexual Predators and Social Policy" by Roxanne Lieb, Vernon Quinsey, and Lucy Berliner. This essay addresses social policy questions regarding dangerous sex offenders. Among the issues the authors discuss are how sex offenders differ from and how they resemble other types of offenders, the prevalence of sex offenses, the legislative history in the United States concerning sex offenders, and treatment for sex offenders. --"Developmental Criminology Updated" by Marc Le Blanc and Rolf Loeber. The authors discuss developmental criminology, which refers to changes in individuals' offending over time. This essay updates and expands upon the authors' 1990 Crime and Justice essay on the topic, with a focus on the dynamics of offending and a discussion of the dynamics of deviant behavior. The authors conclude that numerous factors operate and interact along the developmental timeline to cause criminal behavior. --"Intermediate Sanctions in Sentencing Guidelines" by Michael Tonry. This essay discusses intermediate sanctions--punishments less burdensome and intrusive than imprisonment but more so than standard probation--and offers suggestions for incorporating them into sentencing guidelines. The author's recommendations sequence the steps for creating comprehensive sentencing systems that incorporate confinement and nonconfinement sanctions and that attempt to achieve reasonable consistency in sentencing while allowing judges to take account of meaningful differences between cases. --"Juvenile Crime and Violence in Europe" by Christian Pfeiffer. This essay presents data on youth violence trends in 11 countries. The author discusses problems of data comparability that need to be considered when using police and judicial statistics to investigate juvenile violence. The author identifies parallels among the European countries and compares them to U.S. policies toward juvenile crime. --"Excusing and the New Excuse Defenses: A Legal and Conceptual Review" by Stephen J. Morse. This essay examines the current criminal law debate about the practice of excusing defendants' criminal behavior because, for example, they are legally insane or under duress. The author canvasses the issues and arguments concerning excusing in general and examines the new excuses, such as battered woman syndrome, Vietnam syndrome, and child sexual abuse syndrome. The author concludes that the current system of criminal blame and punishment is coherent, fair in principle, and can accommodate the claims for new excuses. --"Multiple Homicide: Patterns of Serial and Mass Murder" by James Alan Fox and Jack Levin. In this essay the authors attempt to bring together and demystify the research and theoretical literatures on serial and mass murder. They discuss the nature, prevalence, and causes of multiple homicide and present a unified typology for multiple murder based on motivation rather than timing. The authors argue that because the study of serial and mass murder can contribute to our understanding of criminal behavior, these phenomena should be considered topics of serious scholarship and not just of popular culture. Youth Violence (Volume 24) The latest volume in the Crime and Justice series contains 10 essays about juvenile violence. --"Youth Violence in America" by Mark H. Moore and Michael Tonry. The introduction to this volume of Crime and Justice highlights the contributions of the various essays and notes that effective prevention probably does not depend on any particular program but rather on mobilizing local communities to define and deal with problems. --"The Unprecedented Epidemic in Youth Violence" by Philip J. Cook and John H. Laub. The authors provide detailed data to put the epidemic of youth violence in perspective. They note that while the sizes of successive youth cohorts are increasing and will continue to do so, this is not a sound basis for predicting that youth violence will also increase. They refute the claim that "super predators" are the source of the explosion in youth violence because such a notion does not accord well with available data. --"Social Ecology of Youth Violence" by Elijah Anderson. The author describes his interview-based research and explains how youths' behavior is prescribed and proscribed by the "code of the street." In communities that are economically, physically, and socially isolated, young people learn the code both in the home and on the street and are particularly adept at switching between codes that encourage "decent" actions (i.e., middle-class values) or "street" actions (i.e., violent values). --"Guns, Youth Violence, and Social Identity in Inner Cities" by Jeffery Fagan and Deanna L. Wilkinson. This essay presents perspectives and data on the role of guns in shaping youth violence, and it offers a framework to explain the impact that the supply of and demand for guns has had on the level and seriousness of youth violence. The relationship is complex: the effects of guns are mediated by structural factors that increase the youth demand for, and supply of, guns and by a culture that teaches kids lethal ways to use guns. --"Juvenile and Criminal Justice Systems' Responses to Youth Violence" by Barry C. Feld. This essay draws from several sources in its analysis of changes in sentencing policies related to chronic and violent young offenders. The author argues that because of differences in offending rates and types by race, laws that target violent offenses for waiver or exclusion indirectly identify larger proportions of black juveniles than white and expose them to more severe adult penal consequences. The essay asserts that it is possible to devise a youth sentencing policy that is more responsive to the adolescent and criminal career developmental continuum and that still protects the public safety. --"Prevention of Youth Violence" by James C. Howell and J. David Hawkins. This essay describes research on two types of violent youthful offenders: life-course-persistent offenders and adolescent-limited offenders. Research has identified predictors of both patterns of behavior, and the authors describe violence prevention approaches that have shown promise. --"Curriculum, Culture, and Community: The Challenge of School Violence" by David C. Anderson. When public schools were first introduced, they were supposed to be the cure for violence and social disorder. Today they are widely believed to be hostage to it. In the first part of this essay, the author discusses the events that led to a 1989 education summit to free schools of drugs and violence and offer a safe, disciplined learning environment. The second part of the essay draws heavily on evaluations to describe programs intended to reduce school violence. --"Gang Violence in the Postindustrial Era" by John M. Hagedorn. The availability of guns, the need to regulate the illegal drug market, and the emphasis on profits may be changing the nature and definition of current gang violence. Today, cities of different sizes report more gangs than ever before, and these gangs tend to be more male-oriented and violent. But the author also maintains that there are probably more female gangs than ever before. He identifies five factors that help to explain the changes in the nature and prevalence of gang-related violence in the current era. --"Predictors, Causes, and Correlates of Male Youth Violence" by David P. Farrington. The author reviews the types of violent crimes, the development of violent criminal careers, the state of knowledge about changeable risk factors, and theories of youth violence. He also discusses gaps in knowledge and priorities for research. --"Toward a Jurisprudence of Youth Violence" by Franklin E. Zimring. This essay examines the basic principles that should govern public policies toward a wide range of dangerous, harmful acts committed by youthful offenders, dividing the principles into four major segments. The essay provides a framework to inform the questions that a youth violence policy must address. NIJ Technology Newsletter Wins National Awards TechBeat, a quarterly newsletter devoted to keeping readers up to date on technologies developed by NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center system, recently won two national awards: --Best of Category, presented by the Printing and Graphics Communications Association. --Blue Pencil Award, presented by the National Association of Government Communicators. To obtain copies or subscribe, contact Rick Neimiller, managing editor, at 1-800-248-2742 or e-mail asknlectc@nlectc.org. ADAM Program Launches New Web Site NIJ's Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program, which collects data on drug use among arrestees at 35 sites, recently launched its Web site. The program succeeds the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program, which began in 1987 and was expanded and renamed the ADAM program in 1997. By 2001, the program expects to expand to a maximum of 75 sites. The new Web site features information about the program's background and operation, a U.S. map identifying each of the sites, individual site data, reports, contact information for ADAM staff, and links to related Web sites. The site also features a page devoted to NIJ's International ADAM (I-ADAM) program, a research partnership among criminal justice organizations across the world. The I-ADAM sites are located in Australia, Chile, England, Netherlands, Scotland, and South Africa. I-ADAM is developing a standardized international drug surveillance system that will allow researchers to compare the prevalence of drug use among arrestees in different countries and assess the consequences of drug abuse within and across national boundaries. Watch for the following reports, which will be available after April 1999, on the ADAM home page, or contact the National Criminal Justice Reference Service at 1-800-851-3420: --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). The ADAM home page can be accessed through the NIJ Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Click on "Programs" or go directly to the ADAM Web site at http://www.adam-nij. net/adam. ------------------------------- NIJ's electronic newsletter, "NIJ News," contains more information about Crime and Justice, as well as stories about ADAM, crime mapping, DNA, and other topics. The newsletter's address is http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/newsletter. ------------------------------- New Volumes of Crime and Justice Available: Special Volume Focuses on Youth Violence Two new volumes in the Crime and Justice series are now available. Volume 23, an annual review of research, contains seven essays on legal and philosophical issues. Volume 24, a special theme volume, focuses on youth violence. NIJ launched the Crime and Justice series in 1977 to provide 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. Brief descriptions of the essays in the two latest volumes are provided on this page. To order individual volumes of Crime and Justice, contact the publisher, The University of Chicago Press, Journals Division, P.O. Box 37005, Chicago, IL 60637; phone: 773-753-0811, fax: 773-753-3347; e-mail: orders@journals.uchicago.edu. Or visit the publisher's Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu. ------------------------------- International Perspectives on Crime and Justice Research This page describes several highlights of the many NIJ activities related to research about inter-national criminal justice issues. --Partnership With Israel. NIJ Director Jeremy Travis traveled to Israel in February to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Bureau of the Chief Scientist, Israeli Ministry of Public Security. Discussions were held with Israeli officials and researchers that established a framework for cooperation and collaboration on scientific research, development, evaluation, and operational use of law enforcement and corrections technology. --Police Integrity in Democracies. NIJ, in cooperation with the New York University School of Law, is hosting a conference in Florence, Italy, May 20-23, to review police integrity issues common to Europe and the United States. Discussions will focus on such issues as the form integrity violations take in democratic nations, why these violations occur, how agencies can control them, and related topics. NIJ Director Jeremy Travis and Director of Research and Evaluation Sally Hillsman will participate in the conference. Phyllis McDonald of NIJ's Research and Evaluation Office and Jerome Skolnick of the New York University School of Law are coordinating the conference. --Britain's Crime Prevention Strategy. The British Government's multiyear Crime Reduction Program is using research data to develop programs, conduct evaluations, and assess the costs and benefits of new and continuing efforts to reduce crime and increase prevention. Sally Hillsman, NIJ's Director of Research and Evaluation, has been invited by the Director of the Home Office Research, Demonstration, and Statistics Directorate, Christopher Nuttall, to serve on the research advisory group of the major new program. --Global Network for Crime and Justice Information. The World Justice Information Network, a project supported by NIJ's International Center and the U.S. State Department's Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, is developing a model for sharing information among researchers and practitioners worldwide. The Network features a specialized criminal justice search engine with more than 2,000 indexed sites; daily news about crime and justice from international news wires; special collections of documents on transnational organized crime, cybercrime, the rule of law in emerging democracies, and United Nations crime initiatives; and other services. The Network is being developed by the Rule of Law Foundation. To register free of charge, visit the Network's Web site at http://www.wjin.net, or contact the Foundation at 202-514- 6208; fax: 202-307-2217. --United Nations Crime Prevention Workshop. The 10th United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders is scheduled for April 2000 in Vienna, Austria. Researchers met recently in Buenos Aires, Argentina, to plan a workshop on community involvement in crime prevention, which will take place during the meeting. Nancy LaVigne, Director of NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center, participated in the planning meeting, which addressed mapping, environmental design, and situational crime prevention. --Indigenous People in Corrections. The International Indigenous Symposium on Corrections, "Effective Corrections Through Indigenous Wisdom," was held in Vancouver, British Columbia, March 23-25. Delegates for indigenous peoples from several continents shared ideas and experiences on aboriginal corrections programming. Several countries presented their corrections-based restorative justice programs, which focus on reintegrating offenders into the community. The symposium was hosted by the Sto:lo Nation and sponsored by the Correctional Service of Canada and the Inter-national Correction and Prisons Association for the Advancement of Professional Corrections. Janice Munsterman represented NIJ at the symposium. --Northern Ireland and Policing Technology. The Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland is exploring new less-than-lethal technologies for use by law enforcement. One of the commissioners and two commission staff members met recently with NIJ to discuss NIJ's less-than-lethal research program and to identify any less-than-lethal technologies currently in use by United States law enforcement or under development that might be appropriate for consideration by Northern Ireland's police. --Russian Visiting Fellow. In March, NIJ welcomed visiting fellow Yury A. Voronin, a professor of criminal law from Urals State Law Academy in Ekaterinberg, Russia, and an expert on Russian organized crime. During the year he is at NIJ, Professor Voronin will collect, analyze, and generate materials on transnational organized crime originating in the former Soviet Union. ------------------------------- Solicitations & Awards Solicitation: Corrections and Law Enforcement Family Support NIJ recently released a solicitation under its Corrections and Law Enforcement Family Support program to support research and development on job-related stress and interventions among law enforcement and corrections personnel and their families. Applications are due June 14, 1999. For more information, visit the NIJ Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij or contact the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) at 1-800-851-3420. Solicitation: Operation of Western Region Technology Center In late June, NIJ expects to release a solicitation for continued operations of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-West, which coordinates and supports the identification, development, and application of technology and information to meet the needs of law enforcement, corrections, and other criminal justice agencies at the local, State, and Federal levels. The Center serves Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. Potential bidders should watch for an announcement in the Federal Register or visit the NIJ Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij for more details. Doctoral Students Can Receive Financial Support Doctoral students from all academic disciplines are encouraged to apply for funding through NIJ's Graduate Research Fellowship program. A student's research must focus on a topic that fills key gaps in scientific knowledge, especially those relevant to criminal justice policy or to the concerns of criminal justice and other agencies that focus on crime and justice problems. The deadline for the last round of 1999 applications is September 15. A $15,000 stipend will be awarded to successful applicants. Up to 15 awards are anticipated. For information about applying, contact NCJRS at 1-800-851-3420 or download information from NIJ's Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Click on "Funding Opportunities." For a description of NIJ's research goals, see Building Knowledge About Crime and Justice: The 1999 Research Prospectus of the National Institute of Justice (NCJ 172883), available from NCJRS and the NIJ Web site. Public Housing-Researcher Partnerships Under Way NIJ and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are fostering partnerships to assess the effectiveness of HUD's Public Housing Drug Elimination Program. Last year, NIJ issued a solicitation seeking proposals for public housing authority-researcher partnerships. Out of 50 applicants, 7 partners received funding. The seven teams met one another and their HUD and NIJ sponsors at a grantee "cluster conference" in Washington, D.C., December 7 and 8, at which they presented their research plans, learned more about the Federal role, and discussed issues of common concern. For more information, contact Rosemary Murphy at 202-307-2959 or Winnie Reed at 202-307-2952. The projects are listed below: --Calexico County, California "A Community-Based Assessment of the Calexico Housing Authority's Drug Elimination Program: Using Multiple Perspectives to Find Sensible Solutions." Calexico Housing Authority: Lupita Rios. San Diego State University: Michael Sabath. $131,357, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0055 --Jonesboro, Arkansas "An Evaluation of Project Hope: A Public Housing Drug Elimination Program." Jonesboro Urban Renewal and Housing Authority: Cheryl Dison. Arkansas State University: David Harding. Jonesboro Police Department: Rohnny McDaniel. $74,182, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0061 --Nashville, Tennessee "An Evaluation of the Truancy Reduction Program." Metropolitan Development and Housing Agency: Jan Platt. University of Memphis: Nancy Hepler. Juvenile Court of Davidson County: Gary A. Lukowski. $118,042, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0056 --New Haven, Connecticut "An Evaluation of a Comprehensive Service-Based Intervention Strategy in Public Housing." Yale University: Denise Stevens. Fighting Back: Nadine Livingston. $191,718, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0053 --Omaha, Nebraska "A Comparative Assessment of the Effects of High-Rise Public Housing for Elderly and Mixed Populations on Crime, Fear of Crime, and Disorder." Omaha Housing Authority: Katy Salzman. University of Nebraska, Omaha: Dennis Roncek. $132,843, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0075 --Philadelphia, Pennsylvania "Evaluating Community Policing in Public Housing: The South Philadelphia Initiative." Philadelphia Housing Authority: John Gargiulo. Temple University: Jack R. Greene and Alex Piquero. $191,475, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0052 --Raleigh, North Carolina "Fear of Crime in Two Public Housing Contexts." Housing Authority of the City of Raleigh: Leynette Branch. Raleigh Interchurch Housing Association: Everette Noland. North Carolina State University: William Smith and Denise Bissler. $63,261, Grant number: 98-IJ-CX-0050 International Challenge Grants Awarded NIJ's International Challenge Grant program encourages cross-national partnerships to produce and analyze comparative crime data. The grants challenge American researchers to identify counterparts in other countries and conduct parallel research. The Institute recently funded three projects for cross-national and comparative research. For more information, contact Jordan Leiter at NIJ at 202-616-9487. The projects are described below: --"The Effect of Juvenile Justice System Processing on Subsequent Delinquent Behavior: A Cross-National Comparison." University of Colorado: David Huizinga. $174,121 Using data from two ongoing longitudinal research projects in Denver, Colorado, and Bremen, Germany, researchers will examine the effect of juvenile justice processing on subsequent juvenile delinquency and adult criminality and develop common ways to measure sanctioning and the effect of arrest. --"The Social Organization of Human Trafficking--A Cross-National Research Program." California State University, San Marcos: Sheldon Zhang. $203,977 American researchers will collaborate with their counterparts in Fuzhou, China, to investigate the individual and group characteristics of people smugglers; the financial and violent aspects of illegal migration; how human smuggling is related to Chinese gangs and organized crime groups; and the alleged connection between the human trade and government corruption. --"The Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the United States, Canada, and Mexico." University of Pennsylvania: Richard Estes. $232,000 The project will collect and analyze first-generation baseline data concerning the prevalence of child sexual exploitation in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. ------------------------------- Events Cybercrime Seminar Attracts a Cross-Section of Law Enforcement NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC)-Northeast Region recently hosted a computer crime seminar to identify the needs of State and local agencies in addressing computer crime. The seminar participants included law enforcement officers from all levels of government, district attorneys, scholars, and industry representatives. The seminar addressed such issues as cybercrime and computer forensics, Internet-based crime, and computer crime from the investigators' and prosecutors' perspectives. Discussions underlined the value of needs assessments and guidelines for handling electronic crime. For more information, contact NLECTC-Northeast Region's John Ritz at 315-330- 7739 or Fred Demma at 315-339-6184. NIJ and Governors' Association Host Policy Forum on School Violence Governor James B. Hunt, Jr., of North Carolina, spoke at a recent executive policy forum on violence prevention in schools. The gathering was cosponsored by NIJ, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), and the National Governors' Association's (NGA) Center for Best Practices. The forum was hosted by the Center for the Prevention of School Violence in Raleigh, North Carolina, and the invitees included State-level education and criminal justice policymakers and practitioners. In addition to Governor Hunt, other speakers included OJJDP Administrator Shay Bilchik and Christopher Stone, Director of the Vera Institute of Justice. Jamon Kent, Superintendent of Springfield Public Schools in Springfield, Oregon, whose school district experienced a shooting incident last year, spoke about dealing with high-profile school crime incidents. NIJ, OJJDP, and NGA will host two additional executive policy forums. The next will focus on handling violent juvenile offenders in the juvenile and criminal justice systems. Watch for Issue Brief publications on each forum, forthcoming from NGA. For information about NGA publications or the Center for Best Practices, visit the NGA's Web site at http://www.nga.org. Jurisdictions Learn About Innovative Program to Address Prostitution San Francisco's First Offender Prostitution Program (FOPP) is an innovative partnership that addresses both the supply and demand sides of the sex trade. The program diverts prostitutes' customers to an educational "John School" and uses fines levied against customers to fund services for prostitutes. The program, which reports a recidivism rate among prostitutes' customers of less than 5 percent, recently was awarded an Innovations in American Government Award from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. NIJ recently sponsored a workshop in San Francisco for jurisdictions interested in replicating the principles of the program. Thirty participants representing seven jurisdictional teams attended. The teams were from Washington, D.C.; Jacksonville, Florida; St. Paul, Minnesota; Springfield, Missouri; Portland, Oregon; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Seattle, Washington. The workshop materials will be available through the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) and will include a complete description of the FOPP, detailed information on the service needs of ex-prostitutes, and information to assist jurisdictions in building support in their communities and working with the local media. To order a copy of the materials, contact NCJRS at 1-800-851-3420 and refer to NCJ 175680. DNA Commission Holds Fourth Meeting in Dallas The fourth meeting of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence was held February 28 and March 1 in Dallas, Texas, and focused on implications of DNA evidence for the law enforcement community. The policy of collecting DNA samples from suspects upon arrest was the topic of discussion among guest speakers Howard Safir, New York City Police Commissioner; Barry Steinhardt, Associate Director of the American Civil Liberties Union; Harlin Levy, a defense attorney and representative of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; and Frank Weathersbee, State's Attorney for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, and representative of the National District Attorney's Association. Dr. Lee Colwell, Director of the Criminal Justice Institute, discussed the status of rural law enforcement education and training. The Commission's first meeting, held March 18, 1998, focused on defining the Commission's goals. Other meetings have focused on postconviction issues, laboratory funding, and reducing the backlog in the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). The Commission's meetings are open to the public, and transcripts are available on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/dna. For more information, visit the Commission's Web site. Boston Police and Justice Department Sponsor Police-Corrections Partnerships Workshop To tackle youth gun violence in Boston, the Boston Gun Project and its Ceasefire Working Group brought together the Boston Police Department's gang unit, the departments of probation and parole, the U.S. Attorney's and county prosecutor's offices, the Office of the State Attorney General, school police, youth corrections staff, youth workers, religious leaders, and other community advisors. The resulting decline in Boston's youth homicides demonstrated the effectiveness of such successful partnerships. To facilitate similar efforts, a 3-day regional workshop was held recently in Boston that brought together interdisciplinary teams from jurisdictions with experience in or interest in forming law enforcement-corrections partnerships. The partnership teams discussed issues of mutual concern with national experts and experienced practitioners, shared information and experiences, discussed the concepts and research associated with law enforcement-corrections partnerships, and developed strategies to combat an identified crime problem in their communities. Representatives from Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, D.C., and West Virginia were invited to apply to send jurisdictional teams to the workshop. Additional workshops are scheduled to take place in Minneapolis, Raleigh, and Seattle. The workshop was sponsored by the Boston Police Department, the Ford Foundation, and the Justice Department's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Corrections Program Office, and NIJ, in cooperation with the Justice Department's National Institute of Corrections and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. For more information, contact Erin Von Tobel at the Institute for Law and Justice at 703-684-5300. Mock Prison Riot Provides Hands-On Training Each year at the former West Virginia Penitentiary in Moundsville, West Virginia, preplanned scenarios of prison riots are enacted to train corrections and law enforcement personnel. The mock riots involve prisoner uprisings, hostage negotiations, and demonstrations of more than 60 emergency law enforcement and corrections technologies. Approximately 150 students and corrections officers perform the roles of inmates and hostages. More than 100 local medical, fire, and emergency response personnel also participate. The training is sponsored by NIJ's Office of Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Commercialization (OLECTC), the West Virginia Division of Corrections, and the Moundsville Economic Development Council, with assistance from the Ohio and Pennsylvania Departments of Corrections and Wheeling Jesuit University. This year's Mock Prison Riot will take place in May. NIJ anticipates releasing a videotape and report on the mock riot. To order a videotape from last year's mock riot or for additional information, contact Jerry Bortman at OLECTC at 1-888-306-5382. 21st Century Public Safety Technology Topic of Upcoming Conference Law enforcement, fire, medical, emergency, and transportation practitioners will learn about technologies and tools to help them safely respond to public safety emergencies, including terrorist threats and acts, at the Technologies and Tools for Public Safety in the 21st Century Conference May 26-28, 1999, in Orlando, Florida. The conference's three tracks will cover technology issues, such as interoperability and testing and evaluation of equipment and technology; training issues, such as tools for training first responders and risk assessment and response; and transportation security issues, such as crisis management and special event security. To register for the conference online, visit the Web site of NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Technology Center System at http://www.nlectc.org/conf/21stcentury.html. The registration fees for the conference are $195 for public sector participants and $295 for private sector participants. For more information, contact Michelle Healy at 410- 737-8258. Youth Gang Symposium Scheduled for July 1999 The second National Youth Gang Symposium, sponsored by the National Youth Gang Center, will highlight innovative and successful gang-related programs. The National Youth Gang Center assists State and local jurisdictions in the collection, analysis, and exchange of information on gang-related demographics, legislation, literature, research, and promising program strategies. At the Federal level, the Center assists OJJDP in coordinating its Youth Gang Consortium, a group of Federal agencies, gang program representatives, and other service providers. The conference, "Youth Gangs and Violence: A Balanced Approach for the Future," to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada, July 27-30, is presented in cooperation with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, NIJ, and other Office of Justice Programs offices. The fee for early registration is $225. The deadline for early registration is May 28. For more information, call 1-800-446-0912. ------------------------------- NIJ in the Journals The following summarizes key articles of interest to the Journal's readers. Most are based on studies sponsored by NIJ. Copies are available on loan from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS); in some cases, photocopies may be obtained and a corresponding fee charged. For information on availability, call NCJRS at 1-800-851-3420; or e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.org. Please cite the accession (ACCN) number. "Assessing the Effects of School-Based Drug Education: A Six- Year Multilevel Analysis of Project D.A.R.E." by D.P. Rosenbaum and G. Hanson, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35(4) (November 1998), 381-412, ACCN 174174. The authors conducted a longitudinal study of the attitudes, beliefs, social skills, and drug use behaviors of 1,798 students in urban, suburban, and rural schools to measure the long-term effects of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) program. They conclude that D.A.R.E. had no long-term effects on a wide range of drug use measures. "Crime in the Ivory Tower: The Level and Sources of Student Victimization" by B.S. Fisher, et al., Criminology, 36(3) (August 1998), 671-710, grant number 93-IJ-CX-0049, ACCN 173581. To understand more about the level and sources of students' victimization, the authors conducted interviews based on the National Crime Victimization Survey with 3,472 students from 12 colleges and universities. More than one-third of the sample reported being victims during the 1993-94 academic year. "Deterrent Effect of Prosecuting Domestic Violence Misdemeanors" by R.C. Davis, et al., Crime & Delinquency, 44(3) (July 1998), 434-42, grant numbers 94-IJ-CX-0052 and 95-IJ-CX-0105, ACCN 173568. This study analyzed rearrest as a function of court disposition in a sample of 1,133 domestic violence misdemeanor cases. The researchers found that disposition had no effect on rearrest within a 6-month period. They conclude that much habitual abusive behavior is likely to be highly resistant to change because it occurs in the privacy of people's homes and out of the public eye. "The Deterrent Effects of Oleoresin Capsicum on Assaults Against Police: Testing the Velcro-Effect Hypothesis" by R.J. Kaminski, S.M. Edwards, and J. W. Johnson, Police Quarterly, 1(2), (1998), 1-20, ACCN 176335. The study analyzed 917 assault-and-battery and 570 pepper spray incidents occurring over several years. The authors employed a quasi-experimental design--the interrupted time series--to test whether the introduction of pepper spray into the Baltimore County, Maryland, Police Department deterred assaults on police officers. The results suggest that pepper spray had a statistically significant deterrent effect on violence against police, reducing assaults on officers by an average of about 3.2 per month, or 15 percent overall, following the introduction of pepper spray. "Hierarchical Bayesian Analysis of Arrest Rates" by J. Cohen, et al., Journal of the American Statistical Association, 93(44) (December 1998), 1260-70, ACCN 174172. The authors analyzed and compared the incapacitation effects of incarcerating drug offenders versus nondrug offenders. They examined the relative rates of criminal activity, as measured by arrest rates, of drug offenders compared to burglars and robbers. The findings indicate that persons convicted of and imprisoned for drug trafficking had lower nondrug felony arrest rates than persons imprisoned for robbery and burglary, implying that the increased representation of traffickers in prisons has reduced the overall incapacitation effectiveness of the U.S. prison system. "Identifying a Drug Use Typology of Philadelphia Arrestees: A Cluster Analysis" by G. S. Yacoubian, Jr., and R.J. Kane, Journal of Drug Issues, 28(2) (Spring 1998), 559-74, grant number 96-IJ-R026, ACCN 173625. The researchers analyzed NIJ's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) data for 1,329 Philadelphia arrestees, identified six types of drug users, and examined how their criminal behavior varied. The authors conclude that offenders use different drugs for a variety of purposes and, thus, should be approached in light of this variability. "Matching Alcoholism Treatments to Client Heterogeneity: Project MATCH Three-Year Drinking Outcomes" by the National Institute of Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse, Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 22(6) (September 1998), 1300-11, ACCN 174173. This study reports the 3-year outcomes for clients who had been treated in the five outpatient sites of Project MATCH (Matching Alcoholism Treatment to Client Heterogeneity), a multisite clinical trial that is testing whether different types of alcoholics respond differently to particular treatments. The researchers found a high rate of abstinence from alcohol within the first year of posttreatment, which was sustained after 2 additional years. Approximately 30 percent of the outpatient clients were totally abstinent after 3 years. Clients who did report drinking were abstinent two-thirds of the time, on average, in the 3 months prior to an interview. "Mental Health Services in United States Jails: A Survey of Innovative Practices" by S.M. Morris, et al., Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24(1) (March 1997) 3-19, grant number 92-IJ-CX-K020, ACCN 172290. The authors studied the policies and practices used by different size jails to manage detainees with mental illnesses. They found that mental health services emphasize screening, evaluation, and suicide prevention. Despite the many barriers jails face in providing treatment for mentally ill detainees, they have designed and implemented innovative programs and policies that can be adapted to other communities' jails. "Monetary Value of Saving a High-Risk Youth" by M.A. Cohen, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14(1) (March 1998), 5-33, grant number 92- DD-CX-0031, ACCN 173873. By estimating the lifetime costs associated with the typical career criminal, drug abuser, and high school dropout, the authors estimated the potential monetary benefits of saving a high-risk youth at $1.7 to $2.3 million. The article addresses policy implications of the findings and research limitations related to estimating such costs. "Self-Reports of Early Childhood Victimization Among Incarcerated Adult Male Felons" by R. Weeks and C.S. Widom, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(3) (June 1998), 346-61, grant numbers 86-IJ- CX-0033 and 89-IJ-CX- 0007, ACCN 173571. This article reports on the incidence of early childhood victimization among incarcerated adult male felons. The researchers conducted a retrospective assessment of childhood victimization (physical abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect), based on self-reports of 301 convicted adult male felons in a New York State medium-security correctional facility. Overall, 68 percent of the men reported some form of childhood victimization, although the percentage varied depending on the measure used to assess the abuse. "Third-Party Policing: A Theoretical Analysis of an Emerging Trend" by M.E. Buerger and L.G. Mazerolle, Justice Quarterly, 15(2) (June 1998), 301-27, grant numbers 86-IJ- CX-0037 and 92-IJ-CX- 4011, ACCN 173153. Third-party policing describes police efforts to persuade or coerce, usually through the systematic application of ordinances, nonoffending persons, such as landlords, bar owners, or other property owners, to engage in activities to prevent or control crime in their community. The practice attempts to influence potential offenders' future behavior through the actions of persons who possess a formal authority in the offenders' immediate social environment, and, thus, have some power over the offenders' lives. The authors link theoretical bases of crime prevention to the theory of third-party policing and examine gaps in traditional policing that have led to the practice of third-party policing. The authors conclude that third-party policing represents a developing area of law and that it remains vulnerable to court challenges unless it becomes an articulated and developed doctrine. ------------------------------- U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street N.W. Washington, DC 20531 Janet Reno Attorney General Raymond C. Fisher 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 Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), a centralized national clearinghouse of criminal justice information, is sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs agencies and the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Registered users of NCJRS receive the NIJ Journal and NCJRS Catalog free. To become a registered user, write NCJRS User Services, Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000, call 800-851-3420, or e-mail askncjrs@ncjrs.org. Visit the NCRJS World Wide Web site at http://www.ncjrs.org. The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. JR 000239