Title: National Institute of Justice 1998 Annual Report to Congress. Series: Annual Report Author: NIJ Published: NIJ, December 1999 Subject: Criminal justice system 147 pages 255,000 bytes ------------------------------- Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS at 800-851-3420 (877-712-9279 for TTY users). ------------------------------- U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice National Institute of Justice 1998 Annual Report To Congress December 1999 ------------------------------- U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs 810 Seventh Street N.W. Washington, DC 20531 Janet Reno Attorney General Daniel Marcus Acting Associate Attorney General Laurie Robinson Assistant Attorney General Noel Brennan Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jeremy Travis Director, National Institute of Justice Office of Justice Programs World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov National Institute of Justice World Wide Web Site http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention, and Office for Victims of Crime. NCJ 177617 ------------------------------- Table of Contents Message From the Director NIJ in Brief o Organization and Financial Data o Growth in Funding and Collaborative Activities Since 1994 Overview of the Year o Basic Research o Applied Research o Technology Development o Testing New Ideas and Technology o Expanding the Horizons o Sharing Knowledge Selected Highlights o Making Communities Safer o Monitoring Arrestees' Drug Use Reveals Community Trends o Strategic Approaches to Community Safety o Policing in the Community o Minimizing Risk Through Less-Than-Lethal Technology o Taking Steps to Prevent Crime o Mapping Out Crime o Partnerships Promote the Safety of Women and Families o Enhancing Public Safety by Improving and Detecting Weapons o Finding New Ways of Working Together o Partnerships--Multiplying Perspectives and Resources o Consulting the Experts in Science and Technology o Guiding the User of State-of-the-Art Technology o Exploring Issues of Special Concern o Understanding Crime in Its Context: The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods o Examining Youth and Crime Issues o Issues in Sentencing and Corrections Appendixes Appendix A: Awards Made in Fiscal Year 1998 o Corrections o Courts o Crime Mapping o Crime Prevention o Drugs and Crime o Information Dissemination and General Support o International Crime o Policing o Public Housing and Crime o Schools o Sentencing o Technology Development o Victimization and Victim Services o Violence o Youth Appendix B: Documents Published in Fiscal Year 1998 o Corrections o Courts and Sentencing o Crime Prevention o Drugs and Crime o Law Enforcement o Technology o Victims o Violence o Other o NIJ Journal o Solicitations for Research and Evaluation o Annual Reports o Award Lists o Catalogs of Publications o Electronic Publications ------------------------------- Message From the Director Criminal justice research has come of age in the 30 years since Congress established NIJ as the Nation's criminal justice research institute. Much of the information in this year's annual report is based on accumulated knowledge gained through past research. The natural curve of scientific discovery is a deliberate one--gathering evidence, analyzing it, and replicating findings take time. Progress often comes in small increments. The process can be compared to building blocks in which each block contributes to a stronger foundation and a sounder structure. NIJ has followed this building block approach-- maximizing each success, learning from each disappointment, and making headway so that scientific research today is more frequently recognized as an integral step toward effective policy and practice. As a research institute, NIJ recognizes that the challenges of the 21st century involve an acceptance of the incremental pace of scientific research, the continuing assurance of the rigor of the scientific process, and the importance of prompt dissemination of the results so that they may be assimilated into both policy and practice. It is a testament to the perseverance of researchers and practitioners and the importance of knowledge building for policy and practice that we have come this far; the promise of tomorrow lies in the ability to sustain our collaboration to meet continuing challenges. Public safety issues will continue to be complex and perplexing, and many crime issues of the past remain with us. Issues related to the pursuit of justice and the role of the criminal sanction assume new saliency as rates of imprisonment continue to soar. The good news is that researchers and practitioners are beginning to tease apart the complexities of crime, crime prevention, criminal behavior, and the impact of crime policies through use of an ever stronger scientific infrastructure. Criminal justice research is making a difference, and an increasing number of practitioners and policymakers are using research data in crafting their decisions and policies. Thirty years ago, when the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice recommended the creation of a research institute that would apply the principles of science and technology to understanding the problems of crime, crime control, and the administration of justice, the fledgling National Institute of Justice opened shop with a mandate, a vision, a set of good minds, and, in the words of the Commission, "a pervasive lack of information about crime and the possible effects of various techniques for crime control." Some things have remained the same in the last 30 years--NIJ continues to encourage minds in a variety of disciplines--but other things have changed significantly. An incredible arsenal of tools is now commonplace, most notably computers, analytic software, and other technological advances. However, the biggest change has come with the dramatic growth of empirical foundations of criminal justice knowledge, which has grown with expanded research findings. The past 30 years have brought steady progress toward understanding, preventing, and solving crime problems. Jeremy Travis Director ------------------------------- NIJ in Brief Criminal justice research is making a difference, and an increasing number of practitioners and policymakers are using research data in crafting their decisions and policies. Congress created the National Institute of Justice 30 years ago to support research, evaluation, demonstration programs, development of technology, and dissemination of information relating to crime and the administration of justice.[1] The Institute's mandate is the same today as it was in 1968--to marry science to criminal justice problem solving and policy development. Over the intervening years, NIJ has made steady, incremental progress, each year building on the years past. In the process, researchers have followed the natural course of scientific discovery, finding science-based knowledge to help develop answers to complicated social and technical problems. Although the mandate remains the same, NIJ's portfolio of research, evaluation, and technology has broadened considerably. It now encompasses more than discrete studies of police, courts, drugs, and corrections. It also focuses on crime in its social context, crime and its relation to public health issues, crime policy and the use of data, crime prevention through technology, and crime analysis through geocoding and geographic analysis. It takes into consideration community action, active partnerships, multiple scientific disciplines, and many technological approaches. As NIJ moves toward 2000, it continues to demonstrate its ability to build bridges between research on criminal justice policy and practice and research in related disciplines and to find more and more conduits for sharing research results with practitioners. Organization and Financial Data NIJ is composed of the director's office plus three main offices. (See exhibit 1, "Organization of NIJ.") Each has distinct responsibilities: o The Office of the Director sets the Institute's agenda, develops strategic plans and policies, initiates collaboration with other government and private agencies, and oversees the Institute's budget and management activities. o The Office of Development and Communications develops and tests research-based programs, brings promising new practices to the attention of the field, and communicates findings and technological innovations through multiple methods. Priority is given to the needs of State and local officials and criminal justice practitioners. The new International Center focuses on justice issues that transcend national boundaries and have an impact on State and local criminal justice systems. o The Office of Research and Evaluation develops, conducts, directs, and supervises comprehensive research and evaluation activities. The range of research and evaluation projects cuts across a wide array of distinct topics within the Institute's charter. Two programs operate as distinct centers of activity: the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program and the Crime Mapping Research Center. In addition, the Data Resources Program works to ensure the preservation and availability of research and evaluation data collected through NIJ-funded research. o The Office of Science and Technology directs and supervises technology research, development, and demonstrations to provide law enforcement and corrections agencies access to the best technologies available. It also provides technology assistance so that these agencies can enhance their capabilities to improve efficiency and effectiveness. Technology assistance is provided through the network of the regional National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers. During 1998, all of NIJ's offices moved into one building, allowing the complete staff to be together for the first time in almost 2 years. The consolidation of NIJ accompanied a parallel consolidation of all the other bureaus and offices that comprise the Office of Justice Programs and infused both NIJ and the Office of Justice Programs with renewed energy and collaborative activity. Growth in Funding and Collaborative Activities Since 1994 The Institute's research and development portfolio continued to grow throughout fiscal year 1998: 358 grants were awarded, bringing the total number of active grants to 796. (See exhibit 2, "Growth of NIJ's Research and Development Portfolio, 1994-98.") The awards made in 1998 are listed in appendix A, page 53. The Institute's total funding reached almost $116 million. Congress appropriated $41 million for core operations, and other Federal agencies and Crime Act offices transferred an additional $74.9 million for research and evaluation activities. (See exhibit 3, "Sources of NIJ Funds, in Millions, FY 1994-98," and exhibit 4, "Allocation of NIJ Funds as a Percentage of Total Expenditure, FY 1998.") NIJ's partnerships with Federal agencies have grown dramatically since 1994. During 1998, NIJ entered into research, development, testing, and evaluation funding agreements that totaled more than NIJ's base appropriation from Congress. Half of these partnerships were with agencies within the U.S. Department of Justice and were supported with funds from the 1994 Crime Act. Other major partnerships are with the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy and the U.S. Department of State. Interdisciplinary partnerships (those outside the fields of criminal justice) have enriched the scientific method; NIJ continues to strongly support multi-disciplinary collaborations. Criminology can reveal only one piece of the puzzle; other disciplines contribute to a more subtle and nuanced understanding of crime, criminal behavior, and crime prevention in a broader context. That is why, for example, NIJ's portfolio of violence against women research is cofunded by agencies interested in the physical and mental health implications of such violence. ------------------------------- Overview of the Year Basic Research, Applied Research, New Technologies The Nation was heartened to witness once again a year in which crime rates declined. Criminal justice practitioners, policymakers, community leaders, and researchers alike can justifiably celebrate this downward trend. At the same time, these partners are keenly aware that too much crime still occurs and that the causes of the decline are imperfectly understood. Much hard work remains to build upon the gains of the last few years. In addition to the optimism declining crime rates bring, they also spur debate and heated discussion: What exactly has caused them to decline? Will they continue to decline? What can be done to keep crime rates down? There are several answers and points of view related to each question, but one rings true for each: only research and experimentation can help explain and answer these questions systematically and objectively. Communities and their leaders are hungry for definitive and comprehensive answers--and the sooner the better. Much scientific discovery is, by its nature, a steady, time-consuming process that involves putting one piece with another until a pattern or picture evolves and avenues for success become clearer. Research and evaluation can provide suggestive data, fuller logic models of what is likely to work, and data to support problem identification. Experiments with problem-solving approaches can occur as the more deliberative scientific process continues to collect needed data, posit solutions, and evaluate the process and its impact. The Institute's research, evaluation, and development endeavors fall into three main categories: basic research, applied research, and the testing of new ideas and technologies. This section is an overview of NIJ's activities in these three areas. It includes a special section on activities that go beyond the horizons of American criminal justice and concludes with a discussion of how the Institute disseminates knowledge. Basic Research NIJ's research rests on the fundamental assumption that scientific inquiry forms the basis of sound policy and practice. The heart of such basic research involves identifying key questions for study, gathering relevant data, analyzing that data, and drawing conclusions and inferences without prejudice or preconceived expectations. The findings from basic research inform the larger society--those outside the realm of criminal justice--of factors that contribute to policy action and the implications of those actions. The conclusions and insights gained from basic research are then translated into programs that can be tested in real world settings. But the process of making policy regarding public safety usually does not follow science's straight and careful path because public policy is based on consensus, tradeoffs, individual rights, legal rulings, political climate, public perceptions, and community values. Criminal justice researchers-- like all social science researchers--cannot work in a white-coat laboratory where they control all variables as they apply different tests. Several major projects under way fall into the category of basic research at NIJ: Chicago Project on Human Development Understanding the complexities of family, peer, and neighborhood influences on criminal behavior is the goal of the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods. The Project, now in its 5th of 8 years, asks theoretical questions about both group and individual behavior in a social context as it examines how individual personalities, family relationships, school environment, and type of community interact over time to contribute to delinquency, criminal behavior, and prosocial development. One of the Project's priorities for 1998 was the building of a master file of primary variables for a number of analyses, including ones focusing on exposure to violence, adolescent substance abuse, social cohesion as a protective factor in adolescent suicide, and risk factors, such as depression for adolescent girls' delinquency. DNA Research The rapid advance of DNA technologies has left many criminal justice professionals without proper training and technical support. Hence, NIJ is sponsoring three initiatives to foster understanding about the use of DNA evidence and to improve public safety: The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence, the Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program, and the DNA 5-Year Plan. The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. This Commission is gathering data and testimony to make recommendations to the Attorney General on the means of enhancing the use of DNA in the criminal justice system. The Commission is considering how recent advances in DNA research affect operation of the entire criminal justice system, from crime scene through trial, including legal issues, laboratory funding issues, and the use of DNA in postconviction relief. The 21 Commission members were selected from a broad spectrum of policymakers, defense attorneys, prosecutors, law enforcement officials, scientists, professors, and other experts in the use of DNA forensic evidence. Wisconsin State Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson chairs the Commission. During 1998, the Commission held three meetings; its work will continue through 1999 and conclude with final recommendations and a report in 2000. The Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program. This Program, authorized by the DNA Identification Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-322), is increasing the capacity of State and local forensic laboratories to conduct standardized DNA testing. Most States use a combination of State, county, and municipal laboratories to provide forensic services to their police organizations, but the equipment and staffing of the laboratories are woefully inadequate to handle the volume of cases involving DNA testing to support analysis of biological evidence recovered from crime scenes. NIJ awarded $11.6 million to 39 State and local agencies in fiscal year 1998, plus an additional $500,000 through two awards to: (1) fund a study to determine the feasibility of external, blind-proficiency testing for DNA laboratories, and (2) conduct an evaluation of the impact of Federal DNA funding programs. The cumulative funds for the Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program now total $24,118,448. The DNA 5-Year Plan is designed to encourage the development of cutting-edge molecular biology methods and tools to achieve highly discriminating, reliable, economic, and rapid DNA testing approaches appropriate for forensic identity testing. By 2003, NIJ hopes to dramatically reduce DNA testing costs; reduce analysis time from hours to minutes; develop inexpensive, portable, disposable DNA test kits for field use; increase the reliability and legal credibility of DNA testing through the development of a dual testing approach; and develop standard materials for population databases. Systematic Social Observation NIJ is supporting basic research on police behavior using a field research method called systematic social observation, which requires researchers to follow precise rules for observing and measuring behavior in its natural setting. Trained observers accompany police officers in their cars, on foot, or on bicycle to observe everything the officer does during a typical tour of duty. They do not rely upon others to describe or interpret events. The goal is to improve general understanding of policing and police policy and to account for variations in the way policing is performed and policies are carried out in different jurisdictions. Researchers are using systematic social observation in several sites--urban, suburban, and rural--to inform police managers and the public about how officers spend their time, how they organize to work with the public, how they use their authority with the public, how policing styles vary in different beats, and the nature and extent of onscene supervision. Although systematic social observation yields an extraordinary amount of information on police at work, it is costly, time-consuming, and dependent on the cooperation of the police. It is, therefore, best suited to special studies rather than routine monitoring of police practices. Despite its expense, it provides a rich volume of information about policing in different contexts. NIJ has published several reports based on these studies and expects additional reports in the coming year.[2] Violence Against Women Violence against women came to be widely recognized as a serious social problem in the early 1970's, but basic empirical data on the frequency and types of violence against women have been limited until the last few years. To further knowledge in this area, NIJ and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention jointly sponsored--through a grant to the Denver-based Center for Policy Research--the National Violence Against Women (NVAW) telephone survey of a national, representative sample of 8,000 women and 8,000 men. In 1998, the NVAW survey produced two major reports detailing the first empirical data on stalking and other violence.[3] The researchers found that the extent of violence against women is more profound and more widespread than originally thought. Among the key findings: o Stalking. Approximately 1 million women and 371,000 men are stalked annually in the United States; 8 percent of surveyed women and 2 percent of surveyed men said they had been stalked at some time in their lives. o Rape. Eighteen percent of women surveyed said they had experienced a completed or attempted rape at some time in their lives, and 0.3 percent said they had experienced a completed or attempted rape in the previous 12 months. Of the women who reported being raped at some time in their lives, 22 percent were under 12 years old and 32 percent were 12 to 17 years old when they were first raped. Women who were raped before the age of 18 were significantly more likely to be raped as adults. o Partner violence. The findings further revealed that women experienced significantly more partner violence than men: 25 percent of surveyed women (compared to 8 percent of men) said they had been raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or date. o Extent of injury. Women were significantly more likely than men to be injured during an assault: 32 percent of women and 16 percent of men who were raped since age 18 were injured during their most recent rape. However, many questions still remain unanswered. For example, studies are needed to determine why the prevalence of violence varies significantly among women of different racial and ethnic backgrounds, and more needs to be understood about the financial impact of medical treatment for violence against women. In the coming years, NIJ's vigorous violence against women and family violence portfolio will begin producing more findings as projects funded in 1996 and later are completed. Evaluating Drug Use in Prisons In addition to the awards NIJ gives to research centers, NIJ's own staff also contribute scientific expertise to the store of knowledge. (See "NIJ's Intramural Research Program.") One of these intramural projects involved evaluating a drug detection and interdiction effort in the Pennsylvania prison system. The study found that drug testing through hair analysis can be a valuable component in the drive to eliminate illegal drugs in prisons. In 1996, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections instituted get-tough policies--such as phone monitoring, increased use of narcotic-detecting electronic devices on visitors, and increased cell searches using drug-sniffing dogs--to tackle the serious problem of drug use in several of its State prisons. Before the changes were put in place, NIJ researchers analyzed data from samples of hair and urine from inmates to determine the extent to which inmates were using drugs. Urinalysis was used to reveal short-term, recent use, and hair analysis was used to reveal sporadic or episodic use that might have occurred over a period of several months. Two years later, researchers analyzed a second wave of samples and compared the pre- and posttest results to assess the effectiveness of the new drug interdiction measures. The results: The number of inmates who tested positive for illegal drugs decreased nearly 80 percent during the 2-year period.[4] The research, the first of its kind within a State prison system, not only provided feedback to prison administrators about the effectiveness of their methods, it also contributed to a better understanding of the effects of prison-based drug detection and interdiction strategies and the prevalence of drug use within prisons. As important, it demonstrated both the advantages and challenges of using hair analysis to detect drug use in prison. Applied Research Translating basic research into action has been characterized as "a cyclical process."[5] It involves diagnosing the problem, developing solutions, planning and implementing action steps, evaluating the results, making mid-course corrections, and repeating the steps. Two distinguishing features of applied research are the nature of the partnerships that are formed and the evaluations that are conducted to make programs and projects work. Partnerships In 1997, NIJ published a report to Congress called Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising.[6] The authors concluded that seven entities--communities, families, schools, labor markets, places, police, and criminal justice agencies--are interdependent in affecting crime at the local level. NIJ's applied research program frequently encompasses many of these institutions. Criminal Justice Partnerships. In the researcher and practitioner model, both parties work hand-in-glove to develop strategies and solutions to community problems. Some research partnerships, such as Boston's Ceasefire Project, involve multiple Federal, State, and local agencies and community groups with multiple perspectives on the problem. These types of projects often involve several midcourse adjustments. When Boston wanted to stop youth violence and homicide, a partnership--composed of researchers, community leaders, members of the clergy, probation officers, police officials, and Federal enforcement agency personnel--came together to devise a strategy to intervene in the local gun market. When data revealed that the problem was more specifically caused by youth gangs, not simply gun markets, the partnership adjusted its strategies. Boston's hard work paid off: youth homicides fell by two-thirds after the Ceasefire strategy was put in place. NIJ is now supporting a five-city effort that is similar to Boston's. The Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative involves teams led by the local U.S. attorney and composed of local law enforcement officials, criminal justice agencies, other community stakeholders, and a research partner. The goal is to identify and tackle their communities' most pressing problems. During 1998, the teams identified their problems, analyzed data to confirm their hypotheses, and began drawing up their action steps. Among the first things they learned were that they were not accustomed to thinking and acting as partners and their "corporate cultures" varied tremendously. They also learned that data can confirm or reject their "hunches" about the cause of their crime problems. During 1999, the researchers will provide strategic feedback as the practitioners implement the action steps. Policymakers and community leaders will be watching the results carefully for the impact on the community. A national assessment also is in place to draw cross-site lessons and understand common factors that lead to success. Multidisciplinary Research Partnerships. As criminal justice practitioners and policymakers clamor to figure out what works, they look to a wider research community for answers, including educators, public health specialists, engineers, and psychologists. Science naturally evolves to encompass multiple disciplines--research that starts as social or forensic science often evolves to include epidemiology, technology, geography, psychosociology, life-course studies, and prevention research. Just as it has taken time for criminal justice methodologies to mature, so too has it taken time to recognize that so many fields touch criminal justice. Multidisciplinary partnerships play a major role in several areas of NIJ's research, evaluation, and technology portfolio. Funding partners in NIJ's family violence program, for example, include the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health. NIJ's partners in several technology projects include various branches of the U.S. Departments of Defense, Transportation, Commerce, and Energy. The Institute's international perspectives on criminal justice naturally involve colleagues at the U.S. Department of State and researchers and practitioners from other countries. Evaluation Evaluation is an important aspect of NIJ's larger mission to identify programs of proven success and to understand why they work. As researchers examine innovative programs, they analyze all aspects of the effort and provide feedback--both positive and negative. Knowing what doesn't work is equally as valuable as knowing what does. These objective, reliable evaluations are helping communities as they strive to prevent and reduce crime in their neighborhoods. One portion of NIJ's evaluation portfolio consists of national evaluations of major congressional anticrime initiatives. These are conducted under NIJ's statutory mandate to report to Congress and the public on the lessons learned from national-level programs. Several major national evaluations were funded in 1998: o An evaluation of law enforcement programs designed to encourage arrest will document the type and extent of arrest policies in cases of domestic violence in 20 sites and the impact on victim well-being and offender accountability in 5 of the sites. o The Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant program encourages States to hold juveniles to strict accountability for delinquent behavior. A State is eligible for funds by demonstrating that it is actively considering or will consider legislation, policy, or practices that provide accountability-based sanctions, such as transferring violent and repeat juvenile offenders to adult court. o An evaluation of victim assistance programs will assess the effectiveness of State victim compensation and assistance programs. The project will obtain information from the victims' viewpoint, including assessments of the services available to victims, identification of unmet needs, and suggestions for improving the delivery of and payment for services to crime victims. In addition, several national evaluations concluded their analyses and reported findings during 1998: The National Evaluation of the Youth Firearm Violence Initiative. This project examined firearms reduction strategies in 10 sites, identified the factors that contributed to the program's successes and failures, and suggested strategies that could be transferred to other jurisdictions. The evaluation focused on implementation and operation in five of the cities (Birmingham, Alabama; Bridgeport, Connecticut; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Richmond, Virginia; and Seattle, Washington) and on crime impact and process issues in the other five cities (Baltimore, Maryland; Cleveland, Ohio; Inglewood, California; Salinas, California; and San Antonio, Texas). A number of factors varied considerably from site to site: o The strategic emphasis (traditional enforcement or prevention and education). o The tactical approach to enforcement (saturation or directed patrol, search warrants, probation stops and searches, knock and talk, bar checks, or use of informants). o Police organizational structure (dedicated, full-time units or staffing by rotation with overtime). o The geographic focus (citywide or defined target areas). o The population targeted (general population, gangs, or identified individuals). The evaluation found considerable variation in the number of arrests made (less than 100 to more than 1,000) and the number of guns seized (less than 40 to more than 250). To a large extent, the number of arrests and seizures was influenced by the choices the sites made in strategy and tactics. A city that emphasized prevention and education, for instance, had fewer arrests and seizures than one that emphasized traditional enforcement techniques, such as patrol and stop and search. In half of the cities where an impact evaluation was conducted, a relationship between the intervention and gun-crime trends was evident. In the remainder, changes in the target area did not differ much from trends in the city at large. Using data from Salinas, California, the researchers examined the 2-year relationship between gun-related arrest rates and subsequent gun-related crimes, taking into account the total level of crime (the crime index) in the surrounding county. The researchers found that gun crimes, the general crime index, and gun-related arrests were related as follows: a 10-percentage point increase in the crime index was associated with one additional gun crime in Salinas, California, and an increase of five gun-related arrests was associated with one less subsequent gun crime in that town. This finding suggests that enforcement directed at firearms possession and use has a systematic, measurable impact on gun crime. Assault Weapons Ban. An NIJ-funded look at the short-term effects of the assault weapons ban (Title XVIII of the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994) found the following:[7] o The ban triggered speculative price increases and ramped-up production of the banned firearms prior to the law's implementation, followed by a substantial postban drop in prices to levels of previous years. o Criminal use of the banned guns declined, at least temporarily, after the law went into effect, which suggests that the legal stock of preban assault weapons was, at least for the short term, largely in the hands of collectors and dealers. o The ban may have contributed to a reduction in the gun murder rate and the murder of police officers by criminals armed with assault weapons. o The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims. An evaluation is now under way of the long-term effects of the ban on semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines. It is examining the impact increased juvenile restrictions and regulation of Federal firearms licenses are having on violent crime. National Evaluation of the Violence Against Women Act Grants. This ongoing project documents the range of programs funded by the STOP (Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) grants program for law enforcement and prosecution under the Violence Against Women Act. The evaluation is assessing grantee outcomes and planning and implementation efforts, along with developing a strategy for documenting long-term impacts. Reports on the evaluation of STOP formula grants were prepared in 1996 and 1997. The 1998 report found the following:[8] o In fiscal year 1998, 54 of the 56 States and territories eligible for STOP funds received them-- totaling more than $130 million--within 3 months of the congressional appropriation. o The majority of the grants are providing direct services to victims, alone or in combination with other activities. Training for law enforcement and prosecution is the focus of nearly a quarter of the projects. o More than 90 percent of the subgrantees required to provide matching funds did so. o All States submitted certification, as required, showing that victims do not bear the costs of prosecuting offenders in sexual assault or domestic violence cases. Other ongoing evaluations of the STOP grants program include reviews of agencies that set police training standards, an examination of the States' capacity to comply with the full faith and credit provision of the Violence Against Women Act, and a study of the effects of the grants on raising awareness among tribal leaders. Weed and Seed. The Weed and Seed strategy brings together Federal, State, and local crime fighting agencies; social service providers; business owners and other representatives of the private sector; and neighborhood residents--linking them in a shared goal of "weeding" out violent criminals, drug trafficking, drug-related crime, and gang activity in targeted areas while "seeding" the area with social services, economic revitalization, and neighborhood reclamation projects. During 1998, evaluators presented their report and recommendations about Weed and Seed efforts in 10 communities in 8 different cities. Major findings and recommendations include: o Pre-existing community features--such as the strength of the social and institutional infrastructure, the severity of the crime problem, geographical advantages favoring economic development, and transiency of the population--may make Weed and Seed easier or more difficult to effectively implement. o The mix of weeding and seeding activities and the sequence in which these components are introduced appear to be important factors in gaining community support for the program. o Sites appeared to have greater success if they concentrated their program resources on smaller population groups, especially if they could channel other public funds into similar activities and leverage private funds. o The more successful programs tended to have the active and constructive leadership of key individuals in the community. o The most effective implementation strategies were those that relied on bottom-up, participatory decisionmaking approaches. Technology Development A significant portion of NIJ's portfolio of research and evaluation relates to the development and demonstration of better technology for law enforcement and corrections. In fiscal years 1996-98, Congress set aside 1 percent of Crime Act law enforcement funds to create, in each of these years, a $20-million fund at NIJ for investment in law enforcement and criminal justice technology. Congress also began funding a program to improve State-operated DNA laboratories (discussed on pages 6 and 7). In fiscal years 1997 and 1998, Congress also appropriated funds for the development of domestic counterterrorism technologies. Those funds have been used to expand technology development and demonstrations for State and local law enforcement and corrections agencies. NIJ has responded to this expanded mandate by creating an integrated mix of science and technology strategies. To make sure NIJ is addressing the needs of State and local agencies, the Institute regularly consults with practitioners, primarily the 150 members of the Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC). The priorities identified by the Council are translated into an agenda for funding science and technology research and development programs. The top technology needs of the law enforcement and corrections communities, as identified by LECTAC, include the following: o Concealed weapons and contraband detection. NIJ and the U.S. Departments of Defense and Transportation are the leaders in the development of relatively inexpensive, easy-to-use concealed weapons detection technology. o Vehicle-stopping technology. Research is under way on a variety of new and innovative technologies that can be used to safely and effectively stop a vehicle. In 1998, NIJ completed the process to commercialize the Road Spike [trademark] tire deflation device--a retractable strip designed to be carried in the trunk of a car and rolled onto the highway well in advance of a fleeing vehicle. The Road Spike [trademark] deploys retractable hollow metal spikes that will puncture, embed in, and release the air out of a tire in several minutes. This device prevents the driver from losing control of the vehicle and allows pursuit vehicles to quickly catch up and arrest the suspect. In a related area, NIJ supported the Pursuit Manage-ment Task Force, a multidisciplinary group that defined contemporary police pursuit practices and the role of technology in managing high-speed vehicular pursuits. The Task Force issued recommendations regarding the development and application of technology in pursuit management. In 1998, NIJ issued a solicitation for proposals to test electromagnetic devices designed to stop vehicles and completed a strategic plan for NIJ's vehicle-stopping program. o Investigative and forensic science initiatives. A major focus of NIJ's investigative and forensic science technologies portfolio is the identification and development of evidence to solve criminal cases. Among areas of interest in which NIJ is funding research are the following: DNA analysis, trace evidence, questioned documents examination, fingerprints, firearms, and teleforensics. Testing New Ideas and Technology Once research begins uncovering the cause-and-effect factors that contribute to certain social conditions, criminal behaviors, or phenomena, science can begin experiments that test the validity of various hypotheses. Testing and experimenting, however, must be accompanied by rigorous evaluation of the effects--intended and unintended--of the mechanisms employed to improve the situation, eliminate the behavior, or reduce the effects of the phenomenon. NIJ supported several important demonstration tests during 1998. Breaking the Drug Abuse-Crime Cycle. Since 1997, the Institute has supported a program in Birmingham, Alabama, that is testing the hypothesis that a systemwide effort to use drug testing, mandatory treatment, enhanced judicial involvement, and other interventions with all arrested adults with a history of illicit drug use will reduce drug abuse and criminal behavior. Much of the funding for this initiative was provided by the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy. During 1998, NIJ extended the program to two more sites and one juvenile justice site. At the end of 1998, NIJ awarded $3 million each to Jacksonville, Florida, and Tacoma, Washington, to implement jurisdictionwide intervention strategies designed to identify, supervise, and treat all adult drug-using defendants and $2 million to the Eugene, Oregon, site targeting juvenile drug offenders. The results of a process and impact evaluation will become available in 2000. Reducing Corrections and Police Officer Stress. Since 1996, NIJ has awarded 25 grants to support activities to better understand and reduce the harmful effects of stress on law enforcement and correctional officers and their families. Congress established the program under Title XXI of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Among other development activities, the program consists of demonstration and research grants awarded to State and local law enforcement and corrections agencies or their affiliated support organizations, such as unions and professional associations. The grants are being used to develop and promote education, training, and treatment programs at the local level. Several programs are comparing stress intervention methods, conducting research on the extent and nature of stress among officers, and examining critical incident stress debriefings. NIJ intends to publicize results from the innovative programs to reduce stress as the early findings become available. Developing Standards and Testing Products. In the realm of technology, NIJ pioneers efforts to find advanced technological methods of deterring, identifying, and apprehending criminals. It supports the exploration and creation of alternative techniques to improve criminal justice practice. The Forensic DNA Lab Improvement Program is a good example. The Program is increasing the capacity of State and local forensic laboratories to support criminal investigations involving biological evidence recovered from crime scenes. State and local labs are purchasing equipment, supplies, and training to both upgrade and standardize their forensic DNA labs. Improving old technologies and developing new ones introduces the need to develop standards against which to measure the usefulness of the technology. NIJ not only develops such performance standards for equipment and technology, it also supports testing of products against those standards. This way, law enforcement and corrections agencies can make more informed decisions about the equipment they purchase. NIJ does not recommend particular brands of products. Rather, it tests many brands and distributes lists of products that have passed the standardized tests showing the strength, endurance, and performance of a particular product. Testing and research have led to performance standards for more than 60 types of criminal justice equipment, including handguns, soft body armor, patrol cars, and handcuffs. NIJ's primary partner in the development of standards and the testing of products is the Office of Law Enforcement Standards at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce. Expanding the Horizons During this last decade, many economic and social phenomena-- including crime--previously confined by national boundaries have exploded across the globe. The globalization of financial markets and communications systems, the easing of international transportation, the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, and the collapse of the Soviet Union have all contributed mightily to an international and transnational crime problem. The illicit movement of people, money, goods, and services across national borders has created new challenges for law enforcement and the administration of justice. New kinds of crimes--such as human trafficking; cybercrime; international money laundering; and transnational trafficking in drugs, arms, and stolen autos--are confronting not only Federal authorities, but also State and local law enforcement. The impact of these developments clearly is being felt on the streets of America. NIJ created an International Center in 1997 to coordinate international activities within the Office of Justice Programs and NIJ, to help inform policymaking on transnational issues, and to promote the global exchange of criminal justice research information. The latter task involves both exporting American research and practice information abroad and importing the best research and practices from around the world. (See, for example, "ADAM Goes International.") The International Center's primary constituents are American policymakers, practitioners, researchers, and scholars. In 1998, the Center undertook a number of activities to fulfill its coordinating role and to facilitate comparative and transnational research, including the following: o Three international challenge grants were awarded to support research on (1) comparative juvenile justice processing in Denver, Colorado, and Bremen, Germany; (2) human trafficking from Fuzhou, China; and (3) the commercial sexual exploitation of children trafficked into the United States through Canada and Mexico. o Major research partnerships were begun with Israel, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. o An international visiting fellow was brought to NIJ from Russia to share knowledge about transnational organized crime in the former Soviet Union. o The international visitor program coordinated meetings with 117 visitors from 34 countries. In addition, work proceeded on the International Center's Web site, linking the World Justice Information Network and the National Criminal Justice Reference Service to provide an electronic network serving the worldwide criminal justice community. (See "NIJ's World Wide Web Presence.") The International Center is the vehicle for extending NIJ's research and development role onto the global stage. As the face of crime takes on an increasingly international cast, our level of understanding and ability to respond must change. It is the Center's mission to inform and enlighten that process. Sharing Knowledge One of NIJ's primary goals is to disseminate science-based findings and their related policy implications as widely as possible. One path involves traditional mechanisms--publications, conferences, and face-to-face meetings. The other path is an electronic one where information-sharing occurs instantly in cyberspace. Reaching Out Via Cyberspace Since NIJ's World Wide Web site was unveiled in 1997, it has continued to grow and be refined, especially in regard to content and ease of access. The site regularly posts newly released publications, which can be downloaded directly or requested through the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). The site also posts news about awards, grants, solicitations, upcoming conferences, and links to related sites. In addition, visitors can learn detailed information about NIJ's programs. The newest addition to the NIJ Web site is NIJ News. Launched in June 1998, the online newletter features articles from the director on current issues, along with coordinated articles, announcements, and links to related sites. The newsletter has been expanding its format to reach a broader audience and soliciting feedback on possible improvements. Like other segments of NIJ's Web site, the newsletter helps bridge the time gap of print media by making information available to audiences sooner. Several NIJ program areas have greatly expanded their presence on the Web during the past year, adding links to publications, announcements about events, other sites, and summaries of grants. (See "NIJ's World Wide Web Presence.") Reaching Out Via Traditional Means Even as electronic distribution and dissemination took on heightened visibility and intensity this year, traditional modes of dissemination continued to be highly popular with NIJ's audience. (See "Most Popular Publications Released in Fiscal Year 1998.") Publications. NIJ's published materials fall into three major categories: o Concise summaries of research or programs. These publications, which range from 4 to 32 pages, discuss findings from discrete projects or programs. Included in this category are several newsletters and the Research in Brief, Research in Action, Research Preview, and Program Focus series. This year, NIJ's newsletter TechBeat, which is issued quarterly and devoted to keeping readers up to date on technologies for use in law enforcement, corrections, and other criminal justice agencies, won two national publishing awards. o Longer discussions of the issues. This category of publications includes the Research Report series, which spans a wide range of topics; the Issues and Practices in Criminal Justice series, which features innovative programs designed to address critical topics of the day; and the Research Forum series, which highlights papers from NIJ-sponsored conferences. o The NIJ Journal. The Institute's quarterly journal contains feature articles on thought-provoking issues, new findings, or research questions of general interest to policymakers and practitioners. Cover stories during 1998 included articles on drug addiction as a brain disease (by Alan Leshner, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse); the challenges of conducting research on crime in public housing (by Jeffrey Fagan and colleagues at Columbia University); and Boston's interdisciplinary and multiagency approach to crime prevention (by David Kennedy, senior researcher at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government). o Crime and Justice. NIJ supports the Crime and Justice series, which provides comprehensive, authoritative, and balanced summaries of current knowledge, prior experience, and promising future inquiries in the field. Editor Michael Tonry and an 11-member editorial board of prominent scholars guide the series, which is published by the University of Chicago Press. Each annual volume contains essays from nationally acclaimed researchers and other experts. Occasionally, an issue with a single theme, such as youth violence or prisons, is published. A complete list of the publications produced in fiscal year 1998 can be found in appendix B. Meetings and Other Gatherings. NIJ uses conferences, panels, lectures, seminars, workshops, and other meetings to stimulate discussion, shape its research agenda, and resolve scientific controversies. Such face-to-face gatherings, which encourage frank discussions and debate, are one of the best ways to share information and shape future research activity. Far too many gatherings occurred in 1998 to list in this report. However, highlights include: o Technology fair. In March 1998, NIJ displayed an array of technology (both under development and commercially available) at a technology fair held in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill. Members of Congress and their staffs visited numerous booths examining state-of-the-art equipment for law enforcement and correctional officers and discussing the issues surrounding these new technologies. Equipment featured at the fair included telemedicine for correctional settings, thermal imagers (which resemble palm-size camcorders and allow officers to see in the dark), devices that allow officers to translate simple phrases from English into another language so they can communicate with non-English speaking citizens, and guns that can be fired only by an authorized user. o Perspectives lectures. To promote informed and rational discourse, NIJ established the first Perspectives on Crime and Justice series in 1996. Since then, NIJ has invited the Nation's most prominent scholars to share their policy perspectives with an audience of opinion leaders, congressional staff, Federal officials, journalists, policymakers, researchers, and criminal justice professionals. Speakers are asked to challenge conventional thinking, offer candid recommendations, and stimulate a robust debate. Their collected lectures are published in the Research Forum series. The 1998 series featured the following scholars: -- George Kelling, "Crime Control, the Police, and Culture Wars: Broken Windows and Cultural Pluralism," December 1997. -- Randall Kennedy, "Race, the Police, and 'Reasonable Suspicion,'" February 1998. -- David Musto, "The American Experience With Stimulants and Opiates," March 1998. -- Joan Petersilia, "A Decade of Experimenting With Intermediate Sanctions: What Have We Learned," April 1998. --Philip Cook, "The Epidemic of Youth Gun Violence," May 1998. o Annual research and evaluation conference. Every summer, NIJ cosponsors with other Office of Justice Programs offices and bureaus a conference for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers on the latest research and evaluation. The 1998 conference, titled "Viewing Crime and Justice From a Collaborative Perspective," focused on the rewards and challenges of collaborative endeavors with the community and other partners. More than 750 people attended. o National Academy of Sciences workshops. The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences is a key partner with NIJ in the effort to increase scientific understanding of crime and justice, identify new areas of research, and promote theory development. During 1998, the National Research Council, through its Committee on Law and Justice and with NIJ support, conducted workshops on transnational crime and pathological gambling. The transnational crime workshop focused on defining the issues and measuring the problem while considering the interface between legal and illegal activities and the implications of transnational crime for local law enforcement. The workshop's report, Transnational Organized Crime: Summary of a Workshop, edited by Peter Reuter and Carol Petrie, is available from the National Academy Press at http://www.nas.edu. The project on pathological gambling is studying data sources that can produce reliable measures of the prevalence of pathological gambling and its multiple impacts. The project also is examining the factors that cause or mitigate problem gambling and its social and economic costs. The National Research Council's Report, Pathological Gambling: A Critical Review, is available from the National Academy Press at http://www.nas.edu. o Executive sessions on corrections and sentencing. The effects of sentencing reforms, the continuing increase in the inmate population, and concerns about the effects of large numbers of former inmates returning to their communities have prompted NIJ and the Corrections Program Office to jointly sponsor a multiyear series of meetings at which a group of researchers and practitioners examine major issues surrounding sentencing and corrections. Using commissioned papers as the basis for their meetings, practitioners and scholars discuss a variety of topics. Five sessions are planned; three were held in fiscal year 1998. The papers will be published as they become available. o Technology Institutes. Since 1997, NIJ has brought State and local law enforcement practitioners together to introduce them to the array of tech- nology and technical assistance available from the Federal Government and teach practitioners about the many ways technology can help them confront current challenges. This year, NIJ introduced a Technology Institute designed especially for correctional practitioners. The 23 practitioners selected by NIJ visited several Federal agencies in the Washington, D.C., area to learn how they can improve the detection of drugs and contraband in facilities and among probationers and parolees, how to improve security in facilities, and how to exchange information and share their experiences and lessons learned. o Multinational peacekeeping missions. Civilian police are increasingly being used in multinational peacekeeping missions around the world. During 1998, NIJ, in conjunction with the Police Executive Research Forum and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, convened a workshop that brought together public safety specialists with experience in peacekeeping missions in Bosnia, Haiti, Somalia, and Central America. The group addressed a range of issues related to the limitations of the United Nations CIVPOL (civilian police) unit, particularly its inability to provide effective oversight and logistical support for field operations. NIJ published the proceedings of the conference.[9] o National Governors' Association and juvenile crime. NIJ and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention worked closely with the National Governors' Association's Center for Best Practices to develop three regional policy forums on crime prevention and the effective administration of juvenile justice and corrections. After each forum, the Center published an Issue Brief highlighting the issues, research findings, and best practices in the field.[10] Reaching Out Through an Information Network The NCJRS is one of the most extensive sources of information on criminal and juvenile justice in the world, providing services to an international community of policymakers and professionals. Sponsored by NIJ, its Office of Justice Programs partners, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy, NCJRS functions as a dynamic information clearinghouse, responding to more than 5,000 requests each month from around the world. Its database of abstracts, available on the Web, contains summaries of more than 150,000 documents. The complete text of more than 1,500 documents is available on its Web site (http://www.ncjrs.org). ------------------------------- Selected Highlights Making Communities Safer, Taking Steps to Prevent Crime, Finding New Ways of Working Together, Exploring Issues of Special Concern Making Communities Safer Monitoring Arrestees' Drug Use Reveals Community Trends Research has firmly established the link between drug use and subsequent criminal behavior. NIJ has been tracking drug use among booked arrestees since 1987. Today, through the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program, community leaders and their research partners are following trends in the prevalence and types of drug use among arrestees in 35 locations around the Nation.[11] ADAM data, which are collected quarterly through voluntary and anonymous urine testing and interviews, allow State and local policymakers and analysts to view trends as they develop and make it possible to intervene earlier and in a more targeted way. ADAM offers communities a means to assess the breadth and characteristics of their particular drug abuse problems; evaluate, at low cost, programs and interventions that serve or target the criminally active population; and plan specific policy interventions appropriate for local substance abuse problems. Enhancements in 1998 NIJ has developed the capacity to test for a broader range of drugs than in the past, thus increasing a community's ability to detect important local variations in drug trends. Recent additions to the list of drugs that can be detected include LSD, inhalants, MDMA (ecstasy), and flunitrazepam (rohypnol). In addition, three sexually transmitted diseases--HIV, chlamydia, and gonorrhea--can be detected in urine. ADAM also has initiated several projects to improve drug testing procedures and make results more precise: o Analyzing the impact that specimen storage and handling procedures have on drug test results. o Confirming opiate test results to differentiate heroin use from medications containing opiate compounds. o Testing for metabolites and markers that indicate crack cocaine use, as opposed to powder cocaine use. ADAM's interview instrument was redesigned to concentrate on issues of interest to policymakers and practitioners. The new instrument increases the ability to calculate the prevalence of drug dependency, determine the prevalence of need for treatment, and illuminate drug market dynamics. Interest From Abroad ADAM has sparked international interest, and last year the program held its first gathering of representatives from other countries interested in following ADAM protocols. International ADAM is intended to create a research partnership among criminal justice organizations across the world. Drug surveillance or measurement systems in most countries are not compatible, making comparisons among countries difficult. I-ADAM addresses this limitation by introducing a standardized international surveillance system that will allow researchers to compare the prevalence of drug use among arrestees in different nations and assess the consequences of drug abuse both within and across national boundaries. Like the United States, many countries want to track drug use trends among their arrested population. I-ADAM can do this as well as collect information to gain a better understanding about the relationship between drugs and crime, sources of illegal income for arrestees, drug dependency, use of substance abuse treatment, age of onset of drug use, drug market dynamics, and certain public health topics. I-ADAM also can contribute to a better understanding of crime issues that cross national borders, such as organized crime. I-ADAM data are tools to help countries coordinate their drug control policies and resources. Identification of similar drug problems in different nations can give governments grounds for such coordination. In addition, spotting a growing substance abuse problem in a country's arrestee population can help predict a potential target for international drug trafficking. The Data Collection Process Sites collect data for a 2-week period, four times a year. Each site collects data on adult males, and all but two are currently collecting data on adult females. Juvenile collection occurs in 12 sites, but is expected to expand with the FY 2001 appropriations. A random selection of arrestees are asked to take part in the study. The interviews are anonymous and confidential, which contributes to the high proportion of individuals who consent to participate at most sites. Staff in individual sites may ask additional questions geared specifically to their community. Examples of such questions include: o Patterns of acquiring and using crack, powder cocaine, and heroin. o Patterns of acquiring and using methamphetamine. o Acquisition of and attitudes toward firearms. o Definitions of gang membership and participation in gang activities. o Attitudes toward and patterns of sexually risky behaviors. In January 2000, all ADAM sites will field a new interview instrument that will focus on three policy areas: drug use, dependency and need for treatment, and drug markets. These questions will serve to elicit information on the frequency and severity of drug use within each site, estimate the number of individuals dependent on drugs and in need of treatment, inventory treatment experiences to help assess how individuals attempt to access treatment, and show how drug market activity in a community responds to specific interventions. Local Outreach and Involvement ADAM represents an important partnership with and among local, State, and national policymakers. Officials at all levels can tailor aspects of the program to meet specific needs. For example, officials interested in gang activity can, together with their local data collection team, append gang-related questions to the main interview instrument. Such special studies can be done on a local, regional, or national basis, depending on who is interested in the topic. Such research needs are identified by local coordinating councils, which also play a big part in disseminating the data to local planners and policymakers. For More Information Visit the NIJ Web site at http://www.adam-nij.net. The ADAM annual reports for 1998: 1998 Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and Juvenile Arrestees (NCJ 175656). 1998 Annual Report on Cocaine Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175657). 1998 Annual Report on Marijuana Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175658). 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175660). 1998 Annual Report on Opiate Use Among Arrestees (NCJ 175659). ------------------------------- Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Although many law enforcement entities join forces with agencies in their communities to respond to crime, relatively few do so in a systematic, integrated way to analyze information and develop strategic plans to reduce a specific, targeted problem. Cities that have experienced the greatest reductions in crime, such as Boston and New York, have made remarkable efforts to collectively and comprehensively gather and analyze information from multiple agencies. Together, these groups analyze patterns and trends that define the precise nature of a problem, suggest strategic opportunities for interventions, and develop efficient ways to employ limited resources. The Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative, or SACSI, is a 2-year Department of Justice project intended to establish integrated and systematic approaches in five pilot cities: o Indianapolis, Indiana. o Memphis, Tennessee. o New Haven, Connecticut. o Portland, Oregon. o Winston-Salem, North Carolina. SACSI bolsters the use of a collaborative, knowledge-driven, problem-solving process through which groups can better identify and analyze their local problems and devise and implement strategies likely to reduce them. It builds on the knowledge gained from other comprehensive efforts, which have encouraged collaborations among Federal, State, and local agencies.[12] The Process The SACSI approach is unique in that the U.S. attorney takes on a new role--as community problem solver and proactive leader in reducing local crime. The U.S. attorney acts as a catalyst to the strategic approaches project, undertaking functions and activities not traditionally assumed by U.S. attorneys or their offices. The U.S. attorney convenes a team of local, State, and Federal criminal justice practitioners; representatives from relevant community agencies; and a research partner. This team meets frequently to develop, implement, and evaluate a crime prevention and reduction strategy focusing on a major crime problem facing the city. Team members then work to better utilize both Federal law enforcement and community resources, making every effort to coordinate around the identified problem and desired outcome. They build on existing coalitions that might include a broad spectrum of individuals and organizations, consider varying perspectives on the problem, and lay the foundation for specific strategies adopted later in the process. The research partner assists the group in analyzing information and devising a theory-based strategy to reduce the target crime problem. The research partner also takes responsibility for evaluating the effectiveness of the intervention, suggesting adjustments, and reevaluating the strategy. Academic partners unfamiliar with this type of "research in action" receive guidance and support from NIJ. Features of the Justice Department's Support Numerous components of the Justice Department are partners in the program: the Office of the Associate Attorney General, Criminal Division, Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, Intergovernmental Affairs, and the Office of Justice Programs, which includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Executive Office of Weed and Seed, National Institute of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, Office of the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. NIJ's ongoing support includes grants to local research partners, funding for project coordinators in the sites, technical assistance to help sites move toward their goals, and development and installation of a Community Safety Information System that will enhance the sites' ability to combine and analyze data across agencies. SACSI Takes Shape Initial formative meetings for SACSI took place during the spring of 1998. Working groups, researchers, and project coordinators were then identified in the summer of 1998. Subsequently, sites began building broad coalitions and have been gathering information to identify and better understand their targeted crime problem. Sites have begun identifying possible interventions, and in some cases, they have started implementing their strategies. State, local, and community partners have experienced an unparalleled amount of cooperation from a diverse group of stakeholders. Partners have commented on the unprecedented involvement of U.S. attorney's offices in developing effective local crime reduction strategies. Specific crime problems being addressed in pilot cities include: o Indianapolis: homicide and gun violence. o Memphis: sexual assault. o New Haven: gun violence and community fear. o Portland: youth gun violence. o Winston-Salem: youth violence. Through careful observation of efforts in the pilot jurisdictions and feedback from the research partners, the process will be refined and information will be shared with communities across the country about how to plan their individualized crime control strategies. This rigorous, dynamic method of addressing crime recognizes that crime is local. Although specific problems and solutions will vary by community, SACSI is showing that when certain steps are included in a strategic planning and implementation process, the likelihood of success in fighting local crime rises substantially. For more information National Institute of Justice and Executive Office for Weed and Seed, What Can the Federal Government Do To Decrease Crime and Revitalize Communities? October 1998 (NCJ 172210). Coleman, Veronica, Walter C. Holton, Jr., Kristine Olson, Stephen C. Robinson, and Judith Stewart, "Using Knowledge and Teamwork To Reduce Crime," NIJ Journal, October 1999 (JR 000241): 16-23. Kennedy, David, "Pulling Levers: Getting Deterrence Right," NIJ Journal, July 1998 (JR 00236): 2-8. ------------------------------- Policing in the Community Policing in the United States continues to undergo dramatic transformation. Heightened focus on the characteristics and the role of the community has changed the manner in which many police agencies conduct business and has reshaped much of the thinking about the nature of law enforcement organizations and the policing strategies used to combat crime and disorder. As one author noted, "In well-informed and well-organized communities, police departments are increasingly expected to understand the community as a partner, prepare department personnel for their part in the partnership process, and support officers in the process."[13] The view that police departments and communities are coproducers of safety and public order is based on research showing that a coproduction strategy is more effective than a policing style that distances officers from the public by, in effect, relegating the community to the sidelines.[14] An advantage of encouraging closer police-community relations is highlighted in a discussion paper prepared for one of a series of policing meetings on "measuring what matters," sponsored by NIJ and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). Written by a police chief, the paper notes that police have begun to think about crime and violence within the context of neighborhood conditions, education, the economy, and other demographic factors. Some police departments, he wrote, "are beginning to look at these factors to determine the effect of initiatives aimed at neighborhood problems."[15] For example, a research study sponsored by NIJ and the Carnegie Corporation of New York observed that in one of the community-oriented police agencies studied, officers interacted positively on a daily basis with persons of all ages, including children. By interacting with children, "officers learn about family situations that can be ameliorated through referrals to specialized community agencies, and occasionally they may learn about activities, such as child abuse and drug offense activities, that require law enforcement action."[16] Defining "Community" As law enforcement agencies move closer to the populace and to their communities, many are defining "community" broadly to include the cultural, religious, and ethnic contexts as well as the residents, businesses, and nonprofit groups in the community.[17] When the concept of community is seen in this larger context, the mission of law enforcement expands from making the life and possessions of the individual safe and secure to also ensuring the safety and security of community life. Achieving the former is not necessarily the same as attaining the latter. Consider a 10-year-old child returning from school through a designated safety corridor patrolled by police backed up by an occasional safe house. Arriving home, with its fortified extra locks, grilles, and perhaps an alarm system, the child is safe. But community life is likely to be seriously compromised in such an environment. Safety corridors and other such reactive tactics are not enough to maximize community safety. The body of research about policing has demonstrated that proactive strategies are needed as well. The most effective proactive strategies result from various types of collaborative police-community interactions. These interactions flow, in part, from law enforcement's building trust among the public, forging police-community problem-solving projects and other partnerships, and gaining important insights into the community and its constituent groups through research. Building Trust To promote and maintain police-community coproduction of safety and public order, the community must trust the police. To build the public's trust, the police must engage the community in a manner seen as fair. Research shows that when individuals report that a police officer treated them fairly, their sense of fairness comes more from the quality of the officer's interaction with them than from the outcome of the interaction. For example, in one study, residents said that their beliefs and attitudes about the police had more to do with how the officer treated them than with the fact that the officer did or did not issue them a ticket.[18] Officer rudeness, aloofness, excessive force, lack of interaction and integrity, and the like foster distrust within the community and a sense of being treated unfairly, often entailing major adverse consequences.[19] Officer integrity, another trust-enhancing quality, also is a research area receiving NIJ funding. The Institute is sponsoring a variety of integrity-related studies, among them an examination of the citizen complaint review process, a review of early warning systems, a demonstration of organizational and leadership contributions to integrity, an exploration of the characteristics of model sergeants, and development of indicators of the status of corruption within a police agency. Understanding Community Characteristics Research also can help law enforcement agencies get closer to their communities by gathering data about a community's characteristics, attitudes, and opinions. One method by which to conduct such studies is systematic social observation (SSO), which systematizes field methods for teams of researchers who observe events as they see and hear them, in contrast to relying on others to describe or interpret the events.[20] Supported by NIJ and COPS, an SSO-based study (Project on Policing Neighborhoods) focused on how police and citizens interacted with one another in different neighborhood environments and the consequences the interactions had on the quality of neighborhood life.[21] These are among the findings in one of the two jurisdictions studied: o Officers serving particular beats tended to rate a range of neighborhood problems as more severe than did residents. o About half the residents reported that the police were "excellent" or "good" at working with the public to solve problems. o Older residents reported feeling less safe than did younger ones, and members of neighborhood organizations felt safer than nonmembers. Another study, based on interviews in Chicago, concluded that neighborhood context (such as socioeconomic status of residents and degree of neighborhood stability) appeared to be the crucial factor influencing attitudes and beliefs about crime and law. The researchers suggested that "to design more effective crime control strategies, policymakers and agents of the criminal justice system would do well to consider the role of community social norms."[22] This same study also found that "collective efficacy"--the presence of mutual trust among neighbors combined with a willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good, specifically to supervise children and maintain public order--not race or poverty, was the largest single predictor of the overall violent crime rate. Understanding collective efficacy, according to the researchers, better equips planners, policymakers, and community service organizations to work with residents in addressing community problems.[23] (See "Under-standing Crime in Its Context: The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods," page 44). Police-Community Problem Solving An example of a police department working out ways to engage the community in problem solving is the Chicago Police Department's Alternative Policing Strategy (CAPS), which is being evaluated with support from NIJ and others. Under CAPS, police and residents collaborate in identifying and prioritizing problems, devising ways to address them, and helping to marshal community resources to find solutions.[24] Under the police-community approach to coproducing safety--whether in Chicago or elsewhere[25]--police agencies, various components of the community, and a research partner participate in identifying problems and putting them in priority order. To define a problem, the problem solvers collect data, analyze incidents that may be related to the targeted problem, look beyond the individual incidents, and begin asking whether the incidents were triggered by a common underlying cause or condition that, if resolved, would prevent many of them from recurring. To foster greater collaboration with researchers, NIJ, with support from the COPS Office, has funded many projects (called locally initiated research partnerships) through which police and researchers share responsibility for jointly selecting a target problem, collaborating on a research design, interpreting findings, and implementing strategies for effecting change. In one jurisdiction, for example, the police department worked in concert with researchers from a nearby university to evaluate the department's community policing initiative and unearth factors that facilitated or hindered implementation.[26] ( For further discussion of NIJ's support for a major effort in five communities to institutionalize the data-driven, problem-solving partnership approach, see "Strategic Approaches to Community Safety," page 25.) Closer Is Better "Policing in the community" increasingly means a policing style fine-tuned to the community. That is the message of the quip "Law enforcement is not a game of cops and robbers in which the public plays the trees." And it is the message of this remark by a police chief: "We must get closer to the people we serve. Closer is better. Distance is danger."[27] For More Information Chaiken, M.R., Kids, COPS, and Communities, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998 (NCJ 169599). Hartnett, S.M., and W.G. Skogan, "Community Policing: Chicago's Experience," NIJ Journal, April 1999, 2-11 (JR 000239). Langworthy, R.H. Measuring What Matters: Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings, Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and Office of Community Policing Services, July 1999 (NCJ 170610). Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden, Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (FS 000223). Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., R.E. Worden, C. DeJong, J.B. Snipes, and W. Terrill, Systematic Observation of Public Police: Applying Field Research Methods to Policy Issues, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1998, vii (NCJ 172859). Sampson, R.J., and D.J. Bartusch, Attitudes Toward Crime, Police, and the Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1999 (FS 000240). ------------------------------- Minimizing Risk Through Less-Than-Lethal Technology Police, corrections officers, and concerned citizens have long expressed a need for public safety officers to have alternatives to using their hands, firearms, or batons when confronted by violent, uncooperative, or fleeing suspects. The development of less-than-lethal (LTL) technologies, including alternatives to high-speed pursuits, has consistently been among the top 10 priorities of NIJ's Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Advisory Committee. NIJ's LTL program identifies, develops, and evaluates new or improved devices and technologies that minimize the risk of death and injury to law enforcement officers, suspects, prisoners, and citizens. The program also contributes to reducing civil and criminal liability suits against law enforcement and corrections agencies. Because no single LTL technology accommodates all scenarios and fulfills all requirements safely and effectively, NIJ's program is designed to provide options that best fit various needs while meeting such criteria as community acceptance and safety. NIJ does so in the following ways: o Funding the development and improvement of existing LTL technologies. o Testing and evaluating the safety and effectiveness of LTL technologies. o Addressing the legal liabilities and social acceptability issues raised by LTL technologies. o Coordinating with other Federal and international agencies to leverage LTL research, testing, and technology development. o Providing information to law enforcement and corrections agencies about LTL technologies. The LTL Program Portfolio In 1998, NIJ's LTL portfolio consisted of six major project areas. NIJ has funded the development of some of these technologies as well as provided new and better information about several existing LTL weapons, such as pepper spray and shot bags. Blunt impact projectiles. NIJ is funding research on three types of projects: (1) modification of a ring airfoil projectile (RAP), originally developed (but not fielded) by the U.S. Department of Defense; (2) development of test devices and models that predict the probability of injury from blunt-impact projectiles; and (3) development of a database on the effectiveness of projectiles currently in use. RAP is a rubber ring weighing about 1 ounce and resembling a large napkin ring. Fired from an M-16A1 rifle equipped with an adaptor that makes the weapon nonlethal at the muzzle, RAP flies straight ahead at a constant velocity of 185 to 210 feet per second. A launching device suitable for use by law enforcement and corrections officers is under development, and modifications are being made to deliver pepper powder. Officers equipped with RAP will have a weapon that can be used at standoff range (30 feet--a sufficiently safe distance) when confronting violent suspects armed with weapons other than firearms. Chemicals. Pepper spray (oleoresin capsicum, or OC) is the primary chemical LTL weapon used by law enforcement and corrections agencies for one-on-one confrontations. NIJ is sponsoring a number of evaluations of its health effects and operational effectiveness. Electrical devices. An electric stun projectile, developed through NIJ's Joint Program Steering Group (a partnership between NIJ and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to jointly identify and fund projects), overcomes many of the limitations of currently available electric shock LTL devices, such as the stun gun and laser. The projectile is more effective because it allows the officer standoff distance from a suspect or prisoner and ensures electrical contact. Unlike earlier devices, there are no wires extending between officer and subject, and both electrical contacts are contained in a single device. The health effects of the stun projectile are being evaluated, with technical information from the developer forming the basis of the assessment. NIJ compared the effectiveness of stun guns and pepper spray against hands-on tactics. The study, conducted in a jail environment, revealed fewer injuries with pepper spray than with hands-on tactics, but more injuries occurred with stun guns than with hands-on tactics. Nets. Many practitioners and civilians view nets as particularly safe, noninvasive LTL weapons, preferable to chemical or electrical devices. One of the nets whose development was funded by NIJ was recently made available commercially. Another net design, unique in that it can be launched by a baton, is under development. Light. NIJ is supporting the development of a laser dazzler to disorient suspects or prisoners and is funding the safety certification of the device. Car stopping. With funding from the Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, NIJ has invested in two projects related to vehicle-stopping technologies: a Pursuit Management Task Force and a laboratory performance evaluation, which also received support from the U.S. Army Research Laboratory. The Task Force, consisting of senior law enforcement officers and other experts, identifies police practices and the role of technology in high-speed pursuits of fleeing vehicles. The full range of police pursuit issues has been explored by the Task Force. Its recommendations are being used to plan the development and demonstration of advanced vehicle-stopping devices and to provide a resource for law enforcement agencies that develop and implement policies and procedures related to situations involving fleeing vehicles. NIJ and the Army Research Laboratory evaluated a number of vehicle-stopping concepts and related hardware, assessing their performance, operational characteristics, and safety. These laboratory performance tests indicated that all devices met or could be modified to meet established standards for human safety. The evaluations also indicated that some devices could disrupt the engine performance of most vehicles tested. For some devices, more comprehensive testing is needed to determine effectiveness in operational scenarios; other devices need further development. For More Information Visit the JUSTNET Web site, at http://www.nlectc.org, where specific projects are described in more detail. Edwards, Steven M., John Granfield, and Jamie Onnen, Evaluation of Pepper Spray, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, February 1997 (NCJ 162358). Kaminski, Robert, Steven M. Edwards, and James W. Johnson, "Assessing the Incapacitative Effects of Pepper Spray During Resistive Encounters With the Police," Policing 22 (1) (1999):7-29. National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, Pursuit Management Task Force Report, Rockville, Maryland: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, September 1998 (NCJ 172200). ------------------------------- Taking Steps to Prevent Crime Mapping Out Crime The use of computer-generated maps showing precise details about a neighborhood is a well-established practice in the private sector when a developer, for example, makes a decision about the location of a new business or mixed-use development. But only in the last few years has mapping become more widely used by public safety agencies.[28] Those who use geographic information systems (GIS) technology are finding that they can use GIS not only to pinpoint the locations of crime by type, but also to add multiple layers of information--such as the location of schools, public transportation routes, residence of convicted sex offenders, and other neighborhood characteristics--so they can place crime in its context within the neighborhood and uncover the more subtle dynamics of crime and victimization patterns. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Department, for example, is integrating multiple sources of information using data collected by the office of public works, the tax assessor, and other city and county agencies. Mapping, with its rich data content and possibilities for viewing multiple scenarios, gives police greater capability to analyze criminal events more precisely, identify emerging high-crime areas (hot spots), develop solutions, and deploy resources. NIJ Participates in a Vice Presidential Task Force In 1998, NIJ participated in Vice President Gore's Task Force on Crime Mapping and Data-Driven Management, which aims to expand the use of crime mapping and data-driven management to improve law enforcement. Through the Task Force subcommittees, NIJ is working with State and local agencies to help them upgrade their technology and equipment and learn more about the various uses of crime mapping, especially with regard to integrating mapping with real-time data that supports community policing and crime prevention. In establishing the Task Force, Vice President Gore cited the power of technology to reduce crime by employing up-to-the-minute mapping, tracking, and strategic analysis of crime data combined with local accountability for results. Training and Assistance for Crime Mapping To realize the technology's full potential, law enforcement agencies say they need training and technical assistance on the use of crime mapping and GIS. This is one finding from a 1998 national survey on the extent to which law enforcement agencies use analytic mapping. Published in The Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey Results, the researchers' findings will help NIJ to develop a strategic plan that will respond best to law enforcement needs related to GIS hardware, software, training, technical assistance, other resources, and dissemination techniques. NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center (CMRC), established in 1997, serves as a central source of information about mapping research. NIJ also makes training and practical application assistance available through NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-Rocky Mountain Region in Denver. (See page 40 for more information about the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center.) In collaboration with police officers, crime analysts, and researchers, NIJ has developed a number of courses to train law enforcement personnel in using crime mapping. The courses range from an introductory overview to specific uses and intermediate-level analysis. During 1998, NIJ published jointly with the Police Executive Research Forum a volume to answer the question: "How do police agencies use crime mapping?" Crime Mapping Case Studies: Successes in the Field highlights successful efforts across the country that used mapping to identify suspects and prevent or reduce crime, from auto theft in Newark, New Jersey, to burglary in Shreveport, Louisiana, and murder in Lowell, Massachusetts. In the coming years, NIJ plans to continue reaching out to community safety agencies and providing assistance and technical expertise with mapping as a tool that can promote collaborative problem solving. For More Information Visit NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/cmrc, or call the Center at 202-514-3431. To subscribe to the listserv (Crimemap), send an Internet message to listproc@aspensys.com. Leave the subject line blank and in the body of the message type: subscribe crimemap,. For assistance from NLECTC--Rocky Mountain Region, visit the JUSTNET Web site at http://www.nlectc.org. Click on the "Rocky Mountain" center. Or contact the director of Rocky Mountain's Crime Mapping and Analysis Program, Noah Fritz, at 1-800-416-8086, or NIJ Program Manager James Williams at 202-305-9078. LaVigne, Nancy G., and Julie Wartell, Crime Mapping Case Studies: Success in the Field, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1998 (PERF product #834). Mamalian, Cynthia A., and Nancy G. LaVigne, The Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey Results, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (FS 000237). ------------------------------- Partnerships Promote the Safety of Women and Families The Violence Against Women and Family Violence (VAW/FV) Research and Evaluation program was launched in 1996 in direct response to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Crime Act). Over the past year, NIJ continued its ambitious research agenda in collaboration with many other Federal agencies, committing nearly $10 million during 1998 to determine the nature and scope of violence against women and to address gaps in family violence programs, policies, and practices. NIJ's VAW/FV program seeks to enhance the effectiveness of the criminal justice system's response to this type of violence and to improve the safety of women and their families. It achieves its goals through a multidisciplinary, collaborative research portfolio that is examining the causes and consequences of violence against women and family violence, evaluating prevention and intervention initiatives, and supporting field research that can be used to improve practice and formulate policy. The initiative addresses the following program objectives: o Describe the extent of violence against women and family violence. o Identify the reasons why violent behavior against women and within the family occurs and the factors required to end this type of violence. o Assess the effectiveness of prevention and intervention programs. o Provide research results to justice system practitioners, victim service providers, and policymakers. o Develop multidisciplinary partnerships to broaden research efforts. Collaboration Enhances Ambitious Research Program The foundation of NIJ's research on violence against women and family violence is built on a variety of intra- and interagency partnerships. Each partner enhances the depth and breadth of the program. NIJ's VAW/FV infrastructure is comprised of four components: o The NIJ Violence Against Women Research and Evaluation Agenda. o The NIJ/Violence Against Women Office Joint Program. o The NIJ/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration. o The Interagency Consortium on Violence Against Women. NIJ's Violence Against Women Research and Evaluation Agenda. NIJ has funded projects on such issues as domestic violence/intimate partner violence, sexual assault, and stalking. These studies fall under four major program areas: practitioner-researcher collaborations; evaluation of policies and programs, including experimental research designs; longitudinal studies of women's experience with violence; and basic research. NIJ and VAWO Joint Program. Together, NIJ and the Office of Justice Program's Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) are evaluating the effectiveness of four programs, plus the largest VAWO program, STOP (Services Training Officers Prosecutors) Violence Against Women grants program. A majority of STOP grants provide direct services to victims, with emphasis on providing assistance to underserved victims and building community capacity to combat violence against women. Nearly a quarter of the projects provide training for law enforcement and prosecution. Many grantees are developing policies and protocols or supporting specialized units within law enforcement or prosecution agencies. NIJ and CDC Collaboration. NIJ and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are collaborating on a 5-year effort to examine violence against women--why it occurs, how to prevent it, and how to increase the effectiveness of legal and health care interventions. The partners support joint publications, projects, conferences, meetings, and panels at professional gatherings. A major component of the NIJ/CDC collaboration is the National Violence Against Women Survey, which is described on pages 7-8. NIJ and CDC expanded their joint research efforts in 1998 with almost $1 million in funding for two new projects: a longitudinal examination of the effects of welfare system changes on domestic abuse among low-income minority women, and a study of partner violence among young, at-risk Mexican-American females to help develop culturally responsive, effective prevention programs. Interagency Consortium. In 1996, nine Federal agencies formed a consortium to examine violence against women using a multidisciplinary approach. The consortium brings together researchers from the mental health, public health and prevention, alcohol and drug abuse, and child development fields. Twelve research projects have been funded on a range of topics, including abuse of children and the elderly, partner violence, sexual violence, and perpetrators and victims of multiple episodes of family violence. Findings from the 12 projects are expected in 1999 and 2000. For More Information Visit NIJ's Violence Against Women and Family Violence Program Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/vawprog/welcome.html. Visit CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Web site at http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/fivpt. Burt, M.R., L.C. Newmark, L.K. Jacobs, and A.V. Harrell, Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants to Combat Violence Against Women, Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, July 1998. To access this report on the Urban Institute's Web page, go to www.urban.org, then click on "Researchers by Name," and then on "Burt." Chalk, R., and P. King, eds., Violence in Families: Assessing Prevention and Treatment Programs, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1998. Crowell, N.A., and A.W. Burgess, eds., Understanding Violence Against Women, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1996. Healey, K., C. Smith, and C. O'Sullivan, Batterer Intervention: Program Approaches and Criminal Justice Strategies, Issues and Practices, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, February 1998 (NCJ 168638). Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy Implications, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: American Bar Association and U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 171666). Tjaden, P., and N. Thoennes, Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1998 (NCJ 172837). ------------------------------- Enhancing Public Safety by Improving and Detecting Weapons Firearms were the cause of 34,000 deaths in 1996.[29] In addition, firearms killed 688 law enforcement officers (92 percent of those killed in the line of duty) from 1988 through 1997. Ten percent (or 62) of these officers were slain with their own firearm.[30] NIJ is supporting research and development activities that will lead to safer guns and better ways to detect concealed weapons. Developing Smart Guns NIJ's smart gun project supports the development and refinement of a firearm that will only fire for a recognized user. In 1994, NIJ sponsored research to determine the viability of a smart gun that would be effective enough for law enforcement officers to use. In 1995, Colt Manufacturing developed the first working smart gun prototype using radio frequency identification technology. When activated, Colt Manufacturing's smart gun emits a radio signal, which is received by a small transponder worn by the authorized user. The transponder returns a coded radio signal to the firearm. When the weapon hears the signal, the trigger is unlocked and the weapon can be fired. At a meeting convened in early 1998, NIJ demonstrated the product and solicited ideas for improvements from law enforcement and corrections officials. NIJ is supporting Colt Manufacturing's efforts to build Prototype II, which will contain more advanced features, including a smaller receiver that can fit on the back of a watch, in a bracelet, or be made a permanent part of a uniform. The rest of the components will be inserted in the grip of the gun. Other research, conducted by Sandia National Laboratories, suggests several existing technologies that also may be suitable for smart gun application, including touch memory, biometric technologies, and voice recognition. In addition to making a police weapon safer, the smart gun concept, once fully developed and tested, has the potential to greatly improve safety for private owners by reducing the potential for accidental shooting and the opportunity for a suspect to turn a homeowner's firearm against the occupant. Detecting Concealed Weapons Concealed weapons in the hands of criminals are serious threats to the safety of the public and to law enforcement officials. Recognizing the severity of the problem, President Clinton directed the Department of Justice to address it. In response, NIJ initiated a technology program to provide better tools to detect weapons. The Department of Justice/Department of Defense Joint Program Steering Group manages the concealed weapons detection program for NIJ, in collaboration with the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory in Rome, New York, and the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-Northeast Region. NIJ and the partner agencies are developing technologies to unobtrusively detect metallic and nonmetallic concealed weapons using imagery-capable and multiple technology-based systems. NIJ also monitors other promising technology developments, including low-power x-rays that penetrate clothing but do not penetrate the body. Instead, the device reflects x-rays back from the skin, subjecting individuals to the equivalent of about 5 minutes of exposure to the sun at sea level. Computer software creates a composite image of the person from the reflected x-rays. The color and shape of objects in the image enable everyday items, like keys, to be distinguished from suspicious items. The major advantage of this device over current walk-through portals, like those found at airports and courthouses, is that it can detect weapons with no metal content. The device was successfully demonstrated in a Federal courthouse in Los Angeles and at a State correctional facility in North Carolina in 1997 and at the U.S. Capitol in April 1998. The second product is a walk-through portal developed by the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory of Idaho Falls, Idaho. This device uses fluxgate magnetometers to detect changes in the earth's magnetic field caused by the magnetic material in weapons carried by individuals walking through it. It can detect weapons with even a small ferrous content. Another advantage it holds over current portals, besides improved sensitivity, is that it is not as likely to issue an alert for innocuous objects like keys, which usually do not contain ferrous material. This technology is almost ready for commercialization. A prototype is in operation in the Bannock County, Idaho, courthouse. In addition to portal devices, NIJ has a number of handheld weapons detectors in development. These devices are intended to allow law enforcement officials to scan individuals for illicit weapons at a safe distance. NIJ is pursuing multiple technical approaches to increase the chance of producing one or more devices that are highly effective. Two of these approaches use different types of radar and a third uses ultrasound. Each approach has different advantages and limitations. The ultrasound device is the least expensive and the most readily developed. On the other hand, ultrasound does not penetrate clothing as well as radar. The ultrasound device was demonstrated in 1998 for the California Border Alliance Group, where it was well received. Three prototypes of this device were delivered to the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory's Rome research site for evaluation. If the prototypes perform as expected, NIJ plans to demonstrate them with law enforcement agencies. Also in development are two portable devices used for scanning groups of individuals for illicit weapons. One uses radar; the other is a hybrid system using both radar and infrared (heat-detecting) sensors. Both appear promising. NIJ is developing a weapons detector that will mount to the front of patrol cars. It is intended to allow law enforcement officials to screen individuals standing 10 to 15 feet away for concealed weapons made of metal, like handguns and knives, from inside a patrol car. Finally, NIJ is funding an effort to develop a device for noninvasive body cavity screening using magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, a technology perhaps best known for its use in medicine. Although NIJ's weapons technology and detection capability programs have only existed for 4 years, they have been remarkably successful in their endeavors to develop promising technologies. For More Information Visit the Web site of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers at http://www.nlectc.org. "Making Guns Smart: The Next Step," TechBeat, Winter 1999: 3. ------------------------------- Finding New Ways of Working Together Partnerships--Multiplying Perspectives and Resources Recognizing that no single organization or field of study has the answer to reducing and preventing crime, NIJ joins with other government agencies, as well as with professional groups and other organizations, to work on issues collaboratively. The Institute also encourages the partnership approach at the local level. Partnerships bring together multiple perspectives, skills, experiences, and types of knowledge, increasing the chances of devising effective solutions and avoiding duplication of effort. They also help to ensure the involvement of all stakeholders. The Rationale Partnerships make sense for criminal justice because many issues that touch the field of criminal justice also affect other disciplines. Substance abuse, perceived as both a public health and criminal justice problem, is perhaps the best example. Health concerns also intersect with criminal justice concerns in corrections. This conjuncture prompted NIJ's partnership with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is conducting surveys on the prevalence of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases in prisons. Violence against women, also a concern of both health and criminal justice professionals, prompted a partnership between NIJ and CDC aimed at understanding the extent of the problem and finding effective responses. In recent years, Congress has made it possible for partnerships among government agencies to flourish. Following passage of the 1994 Crime Act, for example, NIJ formed partnerships with the offices created to administer the Act to evaluate the innovative programs established at the State and local levels. Partnerships have greatly expanded NIJ's research capacity. Funds transferred to NIJ from other government agencies have more than doubled since 1995.[31] Partnerships make strategic sense when criminal justice agencies at different levels of government come together in a single community to focus their collective skills on a common problem. At several sites nationwide, the Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative (SACSI) is targeting problems like gang violence through a team approach that combines the efforts of U.S. attorneys, researchers, and local agencies and organizations to build the necessary infrastructure of research and technology for precise definition of problems and promising countermeasures. (See "Strategic Approaches to Community Safety," page 25.) Researchers and Practitioners--Equal Partners SACSI is only the most recent way in which NIJ has encouraged collaboration. Since 1995, the Institute has been promoting a new way for researchers to work together with criminal justice practitioners in law enforcement and other fields. In the locally initiated research partnerships program, the partners work as equals on pressing local problems. The collaborative approach is viewed by NIJ as such a valuable tool that it was selected as the theme of the 1998 criminal justice research and evaluation conference. Police departments have long worked with researchers, but the traditional approach has been for the researcher to identify the topic of study and for the agency to provide access to data and staff. NIJ's locally initiated research partnerships are a departure from that model in that the law enforcement agency and the researchers together identify the problem to be studied and work side by side to develop strategies to deal with the problem. The two collaborate on the research design and its implementation and on the interpretation of study findings. In the long term, NIJ anticipates that the partnerships will extend beyond the life of the initial project to become ongoing collaborations that build practitioners' research capacity. The 41 researcher-practitioner partnerships in policing are the subject of a national evaluation of both process and impact, with the final report expected early in the year 2000. From their beginnings in policing, the partnerships have been extended to other areas, including research on inmate substance abuse, crime in public housing, and violence against women (see "Partnerships Promote the Safety of Women and Families," page 34.) Drug Treatment for Prisoners--Partnerships Extended Because large proportions of arrestees are substance abusers, treatment offered in the correctional setting holds the potential for reducing drug use as well as recidivism. The Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) program, authorized under the 1994 Crime Act, offers funds to the States to develop such programs in prisons and jails. States are encouraged to adopt comprehensive approaches that include relapse prevention and aftercare. With support from the Corrections Program Office, NIJ is evaluating selected RSAT programs. The evaluations are patterned on the researcher-practitioner model. Researchers based in local universities or other research institutions are encouraged to collaborate with the State agency whose program is being assessed. Again, the immediate aim is to measure program effectiveness, while the long-term goal is to build the research capacity of the agency. A national-level evaluation, covering programs in all States that have RSAT programs, is also under way. In 1998, NIJ awarded many additional evaluation grants. Joining Forces for Safer Public Housing Some public housing communities across America experience disproportionately high levels of crime. NIJ has established a partnership with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to help local public housing authorities (PHA's) reduce crime. In one partnership effort, NIJ is developing measurable indicators of the impact of HUD's Public Housing Drug Elimination Program (PHDEP) so that public housing officials and residents will have empirically based evidence for deciding whether a program supported by PHDEP should be continued, modified, or discontinued and whether it can or should be replicated. Another NIJ-HUD partnership effort brings together researchers, local PHA's, residents, and law enforcement officials. As with all research partnerships, NIJ sees this effort as helping to develop and sustain local research capacity. Researchers work with the PHA's and residents to design technically sound strategies for evaluating the impact of a program, with a built-in feedback loop that allows for midcourse correction. Alternatively, the partnership can first identify problems related to drug abuse and trafficking and other crime, then design and implement solutions and evaluate their impact. For the researchers, the projects afford the opportunity to apply their knowledge in a real-world setting where it can make a difference. Eight researcher-practitioner partnerships are now under way in Calexico, California; Jonesboro, Arkansas; Omaha, Nebraska; Nashville, Tennessee; New Haven, Connecticut; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Raleigh, North Carolina; and Salt Lake City, Utah. For More Information McEwen, Tom, "NIJ's Locally Initiated Research Partnerships in Policing: Factors That Add Up to Success," NIJ Journal (January 1999): 2-10 (JR 000238). Viewing Crime and Justice From a Collaborative Perspective: Plenary Papers of the 1998 Conference on Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation, Research Forum, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1999 (NCJ 176979). ------------------------------- Consulting the Experts in Science and Technology A paramount concern in developing new equipment and technology is uncovering and understanding the needs of those who will use it. Equally important is making sure a product is the best tool for the job and has received the imprimatur of the experts. Lives are on the line every day-- law enforcement officers, corrections personnel, and citizens. That reality is the driving force behind NIJ's creation of an array of measures to make sure these issues are fully addressed. Identifying the Needs of the Field Input from the people who work on the front lines comes to NIJ via a group of practitioners organized as the Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Advisory Council (LECTAC). In essence, LECTAC members are the voice of State and local practitioners who will be the end users of NIJ-developed products, services, standards, guidelines, and publications. They work through the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers (NLECTC), NIJ's one-stop technology education, assessment, and referral source for law enforcement and corrections agencies. LECTAC pinpoints needs and NIJ passes the information on to researchers, scientists, and engineers. Major imperatives are affordability, safety, effectiveness, and limited liability. A Smart Gun (a gun that can be fired only by recognized users); through-the-wall surveillance systems (which can detect movement behind concrete walls); and advanced body armor inserts (lighter than the vests now used, they also protect against assault rifles) are among the products being developed on the basis of LECTAC recommendations. Deciding on Priorities Promising technologies and related policy issues are reviewed for NIJ by experts from the private sector and various Federal agencies. These knowledgeable representatives constitute the Technology and Policy Assessment Panel, whose primary function is presenting different perspectives on the best approaches to getting new technologies into practitioners' hands in both the short and long term. Legal, social, and other problems that might arise in developing a specific product are examined in depth. One of the Panel's subcommittees is dedicated to investigating liability, a recurring issue for criminal justice agencies. It was the Panel that recognized the potential to adapt for law enforcement use some of the products developed for the military; the result has been a vigorous Justice-Defense Department collaboration on a number of products, including the ring airfoil projectile, a nonlethal deterrent device initially developed for use by the National Guard; a laser dazzler, which uses laser light to temporarily immobilize suspects; and an explosives diagnostic system that detects bombs and similar devices. Refining and Standardizing Procedures The work of law enforcement and corrections agencies encompasses a vast array of issues. These agencies operate best when they have access to the most advanced techniques and proven practices. Through a process involving technical working groups (TWG's), each dedicated to a specific discipline or practice, NIJ helps to identify the best techniques and practices, develop standardized procedures, and draw on community opinion in the shaping of its long-range policies. The goal of each TWG is to produce objective, comprehensive, verifiable guidelines and procedures. TWG's are established in response to community-articulated issues and in response to requests from the criminal justice community. A key component is a resource pool of organizations and experts in the field for which a TWG has been established. The guidelines for death investigations, recently published by NIJ, were developed through the work of a TWG.[32] In recent months, NIJ has set up TWG's to develop procedures for investigating bomb and explosive evidence, crime scenes, and arson; using eyewitness evidence; and responding to electronic crime. The guidelines for each procedure will be developed by surveying representatives of all relevant disciplines and arriving at a consensus that reflects their diverse perspectives. Coordinating the Work of Federal Agencies The Justice Department is only one of several Federal agencies that work on research and technology development that could be useful in law enforcement and corrections. For example, advances in communications and transportation could be adopted or adapted for police use. To avoid costly duplication, the many Federal agencies that conduct these types of activities now share information through the Technology Policy Council (TPC).[33] One way TPC maximizes the value of investments in research and development is by tracking Federal initiatives under way in all participating agencies. As the executive agent for TPC, NIJ maintains a list of initiatives, which currently contains more than 150 projects at some stage of development. Community Acceptance--An Essential Component The technology tools developed under NIJ sponsorship must not only meet the tests of scientific soundness, cost-effectiveness, and responsiveness to practitioner needs, they also must be socially acceptable. That is, they must reflect community perceptions of appropriate and valid use. Social acceptability is particularly important when unfamiliar technologies, such as new methods of nonlethal incapacitation, are proposed. Ensuring that the community has the opportunity to become familiar with proposed tools and technologies is the work of the Community Acceptance Panel, through which NIJ asks representatives with highly differing points of view to express their views and concerns. A typical panel, for example, might be composed of representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union, Hand-Gun Control, the National Rifle Association, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, neighborhood public housing associations, and crime watch groups. New and proposed technologies are presented to the panel by experts and criminal justice practitioners. NIJ uses the Panel's reactions to improve the way the technology programs are presented to the public and, if necessary, to modify the programs or specific products. The Community Acceptance Panel is not the only way NIJ receives public input about a new technology, but it is the most structured way, and every effort is made to achieve a balanced public perspective. For More Information Visit the Web site of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center at http://www.nlectc.org. Visit the Web site of the National Institute of Justice, Office of Science and Technology at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/sciencetech. ------------------------------- Guiding the User of State-of-the-Art Technology Criminal justice agencies face the same imperative for ongoing technological advancement as do other organizations. For that reason, NIJ has spearheaded technology-related research and development to produce life-saving equipment and devices that promise to prevent crime and improve criminal justice. NIJ also develops performance standards for equipment, tests equipment against them, and issues guidelines for using the equipment. In 1998, standards and guidelines were developed in several areas, and a number of training and technical assistance initiatives were undertaken to familiarize prospective users with the new technologies. Measuring Performance, Issuing Standards In law enforcement and corrections, where lives are on the line every day, equipment needs to meet rigorous and exacting standards for safety, dependability, and effectiveness. For more than 25 years, NIJ has developed standards for commercial equipment and tested it to help officials make informed decisions when purchasing such items as protective clothing, vehicles, weapons, and communications systems. In 1998, NIJ released standards for several types of equipment, among them: o Antennas used by law enforcement in radio communication. The revised standard covers newer antennas, at base stations or other fixed sites, that use new frequency bands. o Pistols used by law enforcement officers. Performance requirements were set for new weapon designs and calibers, and testing procedures were revised. Guidance for Technology Users Guidelines, as distinct from standards, present information in nontechnical terms and reach a wide audience. For example, NIJ developed guidelines for death investigations in conjunction with the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the booklet has been one of NIJ's most frequently requested publications. Other guidelines issued in 1998 include: o Batteries used by law enforcement. Vehicles, flashlights, mobile radios, laptop computers, and cell phones all require batteries. The guidelines cover performance advantages and disadvantages, cost-effectiveness, and handling and maintenance. o Designing and building forensics laboratories. Developed with the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors, the guidelines are a resource for building or refurbishing a laboratory. Safety, security, and adaptability to changing technologies were the main considerations in developing the guidelines. Demonstrating Safe, Effective Riot Control in Prisons A mock prison riot held at the West Virginia penitentiary showcased emerging technologies useful for rapid, safe response. Some 300 observers watched several scenarios set up to depict real-life riot situations. They included a stabbing and hostage-taking during a basketball game, an uprising in the prison chapel, cellblock takeovers, and high-speed escapes by boat and automobile. The basketball game scenario featured a range of equipment used for restraint and communication. An electronic fence foiled an attempted escape, and other inmates were prevented from fleeing when their vehicle was disabled by a road spike. During the simulated hostage negotiations, a voice translator was used to talk with inmates who could not speak English. Participants used a biometric device to verify the identities of staff and inmates and an ion tracker to detect explosives in the facility. Other scenarios demonstrated the capabilities of night-vision devices, security systems, officer protection products, drug detection systems, and location/tracking systems. Telemedicine technology was used to respond to staged injuries. Saving Resources Through Technology-Based Training Using advanced technologies as training tools can be a relatively low-cost alternative or supplement to conventional classroom learning. NIJ is developing several training tools in a number of areas of interest to law enforcement and corrections and has created an Internet-based database, the Law Enforcement Instructional Technology Information System, to catalog training curricula that use advanced technologies. Handling bomb threats. Bomb threats are among the most frightening and dangerous situations public safety officers face. Under NIJ sponsorship, the University of Houston is developing an interactive multimedia package that trains first responders to conduct bomb threat assessments that cover evaluating the situation, searching, and evacuating. Because the Bomb Threat Training Simulator (BTTS) is in CD-ROM format, it requires only a multimedia-equipped computer and enables trainees to learn at their own pace, saving travel time, class time, and money. An evaluation of the initial version of BTTS showed it to be more effective than conventional bomb threat response training. On the basis of reviews by experts, NIJ provided additional funds to develop BTTS for actual field use, with rollout scheduled for mid-2000. Analyzing bombs