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. Dealing with explosive devices requires an understanding of how they are made and what they are made of. With the Department of Defense and the FBI, NIJ is piloting and evaluating a better way for law enforcement to diagnose these devices. One tool, the RTR-3, is a computer-based, portable x-ray system that permits real-time diagnosis or enables the x-ray images of the devices to be transmitted electronically for examination. The RTR-3 is being piloted in 28 State and local agencies nationwide. Training bomb disposal experts. To aid in the highly dangerous and delicate process of dismantling bombs, NIJ, along with the FBI, is developing a computer-based, interactive tool for training bomb disposal technicians. Packaged as a CD-ROM, it is intended as a refresher course, supplementing basic training. Preparing weapons team responses. Rescuing hostages, using force, clearing rooms and buildings, and dealing with threats to school security are simulated by an interactive technology, the Weapons Team Engagement Trainer (WTET). Trainees equipped with a range of simulated weapons respond to various scenarios that are projected on large screens and can be replayed for evaluation purposes. Originally developed for the Navy, WTET was commercialized for law enforcement use and has been installed in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. Briefing the Field: NIJ's Technology Institutes Transferring technology to law enforcement and corrections is the aim of the Technology Institutes NIJ has held to bring State and local agency officials up to speed on recent developments applicable to their fields. In two sessions held in 1998, one for law enforcement and another for corrections, the range of affordable, effective technologies currently available or in the pipeline was showcased. At each weeklong Institute, some 24 officials selected from a pool of applicants were briefed on technologies being developed by NIJ and other Federal agencies. The Institutes also served as forums where participants discussed the specific challenges they face and explored possible solutions. NIJ staff were on hand to direct them to further information. For More Information Visit the Law Enforcement Instructional Technology Information System Web site at http://www.leitis.com, for information about training curricula. Visit the Web site of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) at http://www.nlectc.org, for information about new products and technologies for law enforcement and corrections. Or contact NLECTC by phone (800-248-2742) or e-mail (nlectc@aspensys.com). Forensic Laboratories: Handbook for Facility Planning, Design, Construction, and Moving, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (NCJ 168106). New Technology Batteries Guide, NIJ Guide 200-98, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998. NIJ Standard 0112.03, Autoloading Pistols for Police Officers, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1998. NIJ Standard 0204.02, Fixed and Base Station Antennas, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998. ------------------------------- Exploring Issues of Special Concern Understanding Crime in Its Context: The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods What makes some communities relatively safe and lawful while others experience high rates of crime, violence, and substance abuse? How do individual personalities, family relationships, school environments, and type of community interact to contribute to delinquency and criminal behavior? What characteristics--of communities, families, and individuals- -enable citizens to lead crimefree lives even in high-risk neighborhoods? Using Chicago as a laboratory, researchers are attempting to answer such questions about the complex relationships among community, crime, delinquency, family, and individual development. The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods brings together experts from many disciplines to examine crime in the context of community. It combines two studies into a single integrated research effort. The first is an intensive examination of the social, economic, organizational, political, and cultural structure of Chicago's neighborhoods and the changes that take place in them over time. The second is a series of longitudinal studies assessing the personal characteristics and changing circumstances of a sample of children and adolescents. Researchers have conducted surveys among nearly 9,000 residents of 343 Chicago neighborhood clusters, more than 2,800 key community leaders, and a sample of 6,000 children and adolescents (from birth through age 18). The Chicago Project goes beyond previous studies by examining individuals and their communities--as well as individuals in their communities. NIJ is conducting the Chicago study in partnership with the Harvard School of Public Health. The Project is cofunded by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; the National Institute of Mental Health and the Administration for Children, Youth and Families of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; and the U.S. Department of Education. Understanding Community Influences Offers Practical Benefits The study's focus on the effects of community and neighborhood contexts on individual behavior offers a deeper understanding of human development and the role of changing social environments. Already, researchers have amassed a wealth of information that reveals significant ways in which the social environment of neighborhoods shapes and determines behavior and that identifies the developmental pathways that attract people to or deter them from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Preliminary analyses have provided new insight into the origins of some of the Nation's most serious problems: delinquency, substance abuse, and other forms of criminal behavior. This knowledge will help practitioners and policymakers develop effective strategies for prevention, intervention, treatment, rehabilitation, and sanctions. As the Project's researchers explore how communities influence individual development, they are addressing specific questions such as, "What role is played by the economic opportunities available in a community?" and "How are residents affected by a range of social factors operating in the community?" Another concept being explored is the "spheres of influence" or "nested contexts" within the larger community, which play important roles in human development. These influences range from social contexts, such as school and peer groups, to family relationships, to an individual's own health and temperament. The research produced by the Chicago Project has other useful applications. For example, the study is generating a substantial database of information about a major urban area--its people, institutions, resources, and their relationships within communities--along with a detailed description of life in the city's neighborhoods. This information should prove valuable to community agencies and leaders in Chicago and other large cities. Community Cohesion and Residential Stability Help Reduce Crime The Project's researchers have found that a community's cohesiveness offers insights into the social mechanisms that link neighborhood poverty and instability with high crime rates. This cohesiveness, or collective efficacy, is defined as mutual trust and a willingness on the part of neighborhood residents to help maintain public order where they live. Examples of collective efficacy include monitoring children's play groups; helping one another; and intervening to prevent juvenile truancy, street-corner loitering, and similar antisocial behavior. The researchers also found that collective efficacy is itself influenced by the extent of a neighborhood's residential stability. The study is devoting particular attention to early childhood and family economic conditions and the ways in which they are related to the services available in neighborhoods. The local environment plays a crucial role in a neighborhood's educational, recreational, and child care services; the question of why similar environments affect children differently, depending on their age, gender, and ethnicity, is being examined. Underlying factors, such as a child's temperament and social isolation, may produce problems for both parents and children. The researchers are looking at how these developments occur, hoping to generate findings useful in developing community initiatives to strengthen neighborhood-based service programs. For More Information Visit NIJ's Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. Click on "Program" and "Publications." Visit the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods' Web site at http://phdcn.harvard.edu for current Project information, including Project brochures, descriptions of funded grants, a list of recent scientific publications, newsletters, progress reports, press releases, and staff contact information. Requests to receive the Project's quarterly newsletter, "The Chicago Project News," can be made via the Web site. Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) Annual Report, November 1998. Available from PHDCN, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115; phone: 617-432-1227. Sampson, Robert J., and Dawn Jeglum Bartusch, Attitudes Toward Crime, Police, and the Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1999 (FS 000240); and Obeidallah, Dawn A., and Felton J. Earls, Adolescent Girls: The Role of Depression in the Development of Delinquency, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1999 (FS 000244). Sampson, R., S. Raudenbusch, and F. Earls. "Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy," Science 277:918-924; see also by the same authors, Neighborhood Collective Efficacy: Does It Help Reduce Violence? Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000203). Selner-O'Hagan, M.B., et al., "Assessing Exposure to Violence in Urban Youth," Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 39(2) (1998); see also by the same authors, Assessing the Exposure of Urban Youth to Violence, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1996. ------------------------------- Examining Youth and Crime Issues Overall arrests of juveniles have been declining since 1994, but persons under the age of 18 still accounted for an estimated 19 percent of all persons arrested and 17 percent of all violent crime arrests in 1997.[34] During 1998, with support from NIJ, the University of Chicago published a special volume in the Crime and Justice series devoted exclusively to youth crime issues.[35] The volume's 10 essays by highly respected scholars focus especially on youth violence. Other NIJ-funded research is examining the developmental sequences that lead some children to engage in antisocial behavior, safety in schools, gang-related violence, and transfers of youth to adult courts. Developmental Antecedents to Youth Violence A great deal of research has been done on the importance of early childhood in shaping later criminal behavior. A study of New York prison inmates found that 68 percent of the sample reported some form of child victimization and 23 percent reported experiencing multiple forms of abuse and neglect, including physical and sexual abuse.[36] Such findings have important policy implications for developing prevention programs for youth and providing treatment services for offenders. NIJ-funded research also has found that one of the most important influences in keeping violent crime low in urban neighborhoods is collective efficacy--that is, mutual trust among neighbors combined with a willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good, including supervision of neighborhood children.[37] (See "Understanding Crime in Its Context: The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods," page 44, for more details about these findings.) Safety in Schools As community institutions, schools can serve as the physical places and social networks where communities mobilize against violence. Although children are generally safer in school than they are elsewhere, the recent series of violent incidents has raised school crime and safety to the highest level of priority. According to the 1998 joint U.S. Department of Education/U.S. Department of Justice Annual Report on School Safety, key indicators show that few of the murders and suicides of youth occur at school and that most schools did not report any serious violent crimes to police in 1996.[38] Other major findings include the following: o The percentage of 12th graders injured in violence at school has not changed over the 20-year period, 1976-96, although the percentage threatened with injury showed a very slight overall upward trend. o In 1996-97, 10 percent of all public schools reported at least one serious violent crime to police. Another 47 percent reported at least one less serious violent or nonviolent crime. The remaining 43 percent did not report any crimes to police. o Elementary schools were much less likely than either middle or high schools to report any type of crime to the police in 1996-97. The NIJ-funded High School Youths, Weapons, and Violence: A National Survey examined the extent to which a national sample of male high school sophomores and juniors was involved in or otherwise affected by firearm-related activity and exposure to weapons in 1996.[39] Highlights of the survey findings include the following: o Fifty percent of the juveniles surveyed felt that they could obtain firearms relatively easily. o Family and friends were the primary sources of guns. o The majority of respondents who said they carry or possess firearms said they did so primarily for protection. o Most schools had implemented some violence-limiting measures. An assessment of one student-level problem-solving curriculum for 11th grade students found that the program was responsible for a significant drop in fear levels as well as a decline in actual incidents of crime and violence.[40] Classroom conditions improved as well; by the end of the year, the number of teachers reporting that they spent a majority of their time dealing with disruptive students had been reduced by half. The curriculum brings together students, teachers, administrators, and the police to identify problems and develop responses. The program's major components include regular meetings among faculty, administrators, and the police; problem-solving classes for students; and regular reviews by police and teachers to identify problem students. Replication of the program is needed in different school settings and regions of the country to determine the project's potential for positive outcomes. Gang-Related Violence In the area of gang violence, an NIJ-funded study corroborates previous findings that gang members are more likely to engage in serious and violent crimes. More significantly, however, the research identified windows of opportunity for intervention and revealed that, contrary to popular belief, reprisals suffered by those youths who resisted overtures to join a gang were often milder than the serious assaults endured by youths during gang initiation.[41] These findings underscore the need for effective gang-resistance education programs directed at preteens, especially those prone to delinquent and violent behavior. In another NIJ study, interviews with 16- to 24-year-old males with violent histories revealed that young men saw violence as a way to achieve and maintain social power and dominance. It also was seen as a means to acquire flashy cars, control or humiliate others, defy authority, settle drug-related disputes, attain retribution, satisfy the need for thrills, and respond to challenges of one's manhood. The presence of guns, alcohol, or drugs also tended to influence social interactions leading to violence. The study identified several factors, such as the reaction of bystanders, that affect outcomes. Findings indicate that teaching negotiation and conflict avoidance skills under conditions that mimic the street can be effective.[42] Europeans are seeing a significant increase in juvenile crime, and the trends in juvenile violence in Europe appear to parallel the American experience. Although socioeconomic conditions such as rising unemployment and poverty were linked with increased juvenile crime rates, one study of European gangs revealed that an individual's family history of violence was a key indicator.[43] Juvenile Transfers to Adult Courts Several ongoing studies are examining the implications of the trend to adjudicate serious juvenile offenders in adult courts rather than through the juvenile justice system. According to the National Survey on Sentencing Structures, 35 States have made it easier to transfer juveniles to adult courts, and a larger number of youths are being sentenced as adults and incarcerated in adult prisons. Placing juveniles in adult facilities raises several issues: o Housing: Integrating youth with adult inmates exposes them to potential rape or assault; yet segregated housing may not be available, and isolation for protection may increase the risk of suicide. o Programming: Juveniles may be subject to mandatory education laws in addition to having different needs in terms of diet and physical exercise. Discipline methods for incarcerated adults may not be appropriate for juveniles. o Recidivism: The most common change in State juvenile laws in recent years has been in transferring juveniles to the adult court system.[44] However, the findings about how transferring juveniles to the adult criminal justice system affects recidivism rates are quite limited. Many States also have changed their laws with regard to confidentiality of a juvenile's criminal record and now are opening court proceedings to the public. Several States have created laws that make the juvenile's parents accountable for the child's crimes. For example, some States require parents to pay court or supervision fees. Legislation passed in 1995 in Idaho, Indiana, and New Hampshire requires parents to pay fees toward their child's custody in a State institution. For More Information Fagan, J., Adolescent Violence: A View From the Street, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1998 (FS 000189). Greenwood, P.W., Costs and Benefits of Early Childhood Intervention, OJJDP Fact Sheet, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, February 1999 (FS 9994). Huff, C.R., Comparing the Criminal Behavior of Youth Gangs and At-Risk Youth, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ 172852). Joint Justice Department and Education Department Report Shows Most Crime Against Students Occurs Away From Schools, BJS Fact Sheet, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1998 (NCES 98-251). Kaufman, P., X. Chen, S.P. Choy, K.A. Chandler, C.D. Chapman, M.R. Rand, and C. Ringel, Indicators of School Crime and Safety 1998, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, 1998 (NCES 98-251/NCJ 172215). Kenney, D., Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (FS 000224). Pfeiffer, C., Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, May 1998 (NCJ 167029). Sheley, J.F., and J.D. Wright, High School Youths, Weapons, and Violence: A National Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ 172857). Tonry, Michael, and Mark H. Moore, eds., Youth Violence, vol. 24 in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. Weeks, R., and C.S. Widom, Early Childhood Victimization Among Incarcerated Adult Male Felons, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000204). ------------------------------- Issues in Sentencing and Corrections The number of people incarcerated in the United States has more than tripled since 1980, and now tops 1 million.[45] And although the rate of increase seems to be leveling out, prison populations continue to rise. A significant portion of this growth is attributable to sentencing reforms, such as mandatory-minimum and three-strikes laws, and to changing policies on parole release. The challenge of managing the influx of offenders has given rise to new approaches based in the courts and elsewhere. It also has generated new ways of thinking about how to manage the increasing number of offenders who are released into the community after serving their sentence and how to deal with the public safety issues that accompany their release. Effects of Sentencing Reform The amount of time offenders serve in prison is almost always less than the time they are sentenced to serve.[46] According to some critics of sentencing practices, large differences between time sentenced and served--particularly for violent offenders--drive a conceptual wedge between public expectations of punishment and systems practice, eroding public confidence. To ensure that violent offenders serve larger portions of their sentences, Congress established the Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) program through the 1994 Crime Act. Through grants to States, VOI/TIS helps States to ensure that violent offenders are incarcerated with more certainty and with longer, more determinate sentences. NIJ has been working with the Justice Department's Corrections Program Office (CPO) to support research aimed at understanding the impacts of VOI/TIS. Collaborating with CPO and consulting with corrections practitioners, sentencing policymakers, and researchers, NIJ is evaluating programs funded under VOI/TIS and conducting related research that will improve the ability of State and local jurisdictions to achieve the goals of their violent offender and truth-in-sentencing programs. Rethinking Justice To explore sentencing issues in depth, NIJ and CPO launched a series of executive sessions on sentencing and its implications for corrections. Begun in 1998, the sessions bring together practitioners and scholars foremost in their fields to find out if there are better ways to think about the purposes, functions, and interdependence of sentencing and corrections. To better manage the flow of offenders, many jurisdictions are experimenting with specialized courts that streamline case processing and make services available to keep defendants from returning to court. Drug courts, for example, feature a treatment component, backed by the authority of the judge. NIJ-sponsored evaluations of drug courts in several jurisdictions are now under way, with preliminary findings showing reduction in reoffending by those sentenced. The issue of cost-effectiveness is of particular interest in these evaluations. Restorative justice, another fairly recent innovation, attempts to repair the harm caused by crime and rebuild relationships in the community. The victim's perspective is central to deciding how to repair the harm caused by crime. The sanctions imposed also depart from tradition, requiring offenders to accept responsibility and act to repair the harm they caused. NIJ has been active in promoting the understanding of restorative justice in a number of ways. Regional symposia, for example, have produced an online "notebook," which is available at NIJ's Web page (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/rest-just/index.htm). Like restorative justice, community justice aims to "restore" victim and offender, but is distinctive in its focus on the community. Local residents work on an equal footing with government agencies to identify needs and responses, with partnerships formed among the various stakeholders. Along with other Office of Justice Programs bureaus, NIJ cosponsored a major conference on community justice in 1998. Correctional Health Care Changing trends in the health of prison and jail populations have brought health care issues to the top of the corrections management agenda. NIJ continues its work with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to measure the extent of HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, and tuberculosis in prisons and jails. Surveys have identified high rates of infection. The most recent survey (1994-95) confirmed that AIDS is far more prevalent among inmates than in the overall U.S. population.[47] The results of the 1996-97 survey are expected in mid-1999. Federal courts have confirmed prisoners' constitutional right to adequate health care. Providing access to specialist physicians can be difficult because correctional facilities are often in rural areas where specialists are in short supply, and taking prisoners to specialists outside the prison poses security risks. Telemedicine, the remote delivery of health care via telecommunications, holds great promise as an alternative. This new mode of care has been successfully demonstrated and implemented in a correctional setting, under NIJ sponsorship.[48] It has the potential to contain costs while improving access to medical specialists not otherwise available. Women Offenders Managing and meeting the needs of female prisoners are issues that have come to the forefront because of the surge in their numbers in the past decade. Although women still account for a small proportion of the prison population, their numbers are increasing much faster than that of male inmates. Women's needs are distinct in part because of their disproportionate victimization from sexual or physical abuse and their responsibility for children. A Department of Justice update on women in criminal justice focused considerable attention on women offenders and female juvenile offenders. The report, which NIJ was instrumental in preparing, noted that the increased number of women offenders has not been matched by enhanced attention to specialized programs. In a separate study, correctional officials and administrators identified a number of needs related to women offenders: a greater number of alternatives to incarceration; classification and screening for needs related to childhood sexual abuse, spousal abuse, and offenders' children; management styles that differ from those used with men; and more drug treatment and mental health services. The corrections officials identified effective or innovative programs, citing those that offer strong female role models, the chance to form supportive peer networks, and attention to women's particular experiences as victims of abuse and as parents.[49] To further spotlight promising programs for women offenders, NIJ examined the New York City-based Women's Prison Association, which offers an array of services, including transitional assistance to women who are HIV-positive or at risk of contracting HIV.[50] Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Criminologists recognize that the high proportion of offenders who are substance abusers makes in-custody treatment appropriate for this population.[51] The 1994 Crime Act provided expanded funds for residential substance abuse treatment, encouraging the States to adopt comprehensive programs, including relapse prevention and aftercare. The Corrections Program Office of the Department of Justice, which administers the program, transferred funds to NIJ to evaluate these programs in several States. These process evaluations are now nearing completion. Reentry Communities face public safety and health concerns when large numbers of offenders are released and returned to their homes. In addition, ex-offenders need to secure jobs to reduce their risk of recidivism and increase the likelihood that their reentry will go smoothly. Health care after release. The health risk posed by inmates returning to the community suggests the need for collaboration between public health and corrections. In a study conducted with the CDC, NIJ found that virtually all correctional systems undertake some collaboration with public health agencies, but needs persist, especially in discharge planning and transitional services.[52] Working with the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, NIJ is identifying the health care needs of soon-to-be-released inmates, with the goal of generating evidence useful for informing public policy to better protect offender and community health. Academic and life skills programming. Finding a job can be a problem for released offenders because they often lack skills, have little or no job-seeking experience, and may encounter employers who refuse to hire people with criminal records. Prisons have long offered academic and life skills programs to help meet offenders' needs. NIJ, the National Institute of Corrections, and the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Correctional Education have cooperated on a number of projects addressing these job and educational needs. The Delaware Life Skills Program, for example, offers academic, violence reduction, and life skills training.[53] Although programs have not been rigorously evaluated, it is clear that certain components have been successful among some inmates. Case management. To aid in the reentry process, some jurisdictions have borrowed the case management approach of mental health and social service workers. Most often used by probation and parole officers, case management aims to deliver services geared to reducing recidivism and to address health care issues, including drug treatment, joblessness, and homelessness. NIJ examined several case management models and the major issues they raise. The greatest contribution of the approach to date has been to reduce recidivism and supervision costs for mentally disordered or developmentally disabled offenders.[54] For More Information Visit the Sentencing and Adjudication section of the NIJ Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/saap/welcome.html. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Correctional Populations in the United States, 1996, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 1999 (NCJ 171103). Ditton, Paula M., and Doris James Wilson, Truth in Sentencing in State Prisons, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1999 (NCJ 170032). Hammett, Theodore M., Public Health/Corrections Collaborations: Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS, STD's, and TB, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 169590). Lipton, Douglas S., The Effectiveness of Treatment for Drug Abusers Under Criminal Justice Supervision, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1995 (NCJ 157642). McDonald, Douglas C., et al., Telemedicine Can Reduce Correctional Health Care Costs: An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, March 1999 (NCJ 175040); and McDonald, Douglas C., Andrea Hassol, and Kenneth Carlson, "Can Telemedicine Reduce Spending and Improve Prisoner Health Care?" in NIJ Journal, April 1999 (JR 000239). Morash, Merry, Timothy S. Bynum, and Barbara A. Koons, Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (NCJ 171668). Office of Justice Programs, Women in Criminal Justice: A 20-Year Update, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1998 (NCJ 173416). ------------------------------- Appendixes Appendix A: Awards Made in Fiscal Year 1998 This appendix presents the grants, interagency and cooperative agreements, contracts, and fellowships awarded by the National Institute of Justice during fiscal year 1998. The awards reflect research, development, evaluation, training, dissemination, and technical support projects, including those supported by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime Act) and those conducted in partnership with other Federal agencies. An annual open solicitation for proposals invites investigators to initiate research and evaluation in broadly defined topic areas; more focused solicitations are issued throughout the year on specific topics and programs, including those emphasized by the Crime Act. Organization Of This Appendix The awards are listed alphabetically by project title within 16 major topic areas with additional subcategories. Listed under each project title are the awardee organization, principal investigator or contractor, award amount, and award number. Award numbers beginning with a number other than 98 identify previous years' awards that received supplements in 1998. An asterisk (*) before the project name means the award was made with funds appropriated under the Crime Act. For More Information The Institute's mission and approach to research is described in the NIJ Prospectus, Building Knowledge about Crime and Justice. For online access to this listing as well as information about publications, programs, funding opportunities, and other aspects of NIJ, visit NIJ's World Wide Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij, the Justice Information Center at http://www.ncjrs.org, or contact the National Criminal Justice Reference Service at (301) 519-5500 or (800) 851-3420. Corrections Addressing Sentencing-Related Changes in Correctional Health Care: Building a Researcher-Practitioner Partnership University of Texas Medical Branch Jacques Baillargeon $150,013 98-CE-VX-0022 *Baseline Psychopathology in Women's Prison: Its Impact on Institutional Adjustment and Treatment Efficacy University of Virginia Janet Warren $148,457 98-CE-VX-0027 *Building an Effective Research Collaboration Between the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and Temple University Temple University Jack R. Greene $159,801 98-CE-VX-0016 Case Classification in Com-munity Corrections: National Survey of the State of the Art University of Cincinnati Edward Latessa $59,559 98-IJ-CX-0008 *Changing Prison Strategies in Response to Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Legislation RAND Corporation Nancy Merritt $178,708 98-CE-VX-0023 *Community Jails Statewide Research Consortium University of Alaska, Anchorage Nancy E. Schafter $49,892 98-CE-VX-0014 *Crime, Coercion, and Communities: The Unintended Consequences of Removal on Community Organization Urban Institute William J. Sabol $166,827 98-CE-VX-0004 Effects of Change Over Time in Numbers and Composition of State Prison Populations on the Level of Crime University of New Mexico Bert Useem $21,551 98-IJ-CX-0085 Evaluation of the New Mexico Department of Corrections Work-Release Program University of New Mexico Bert Useem $199,816 98-CE-VX-0005 *Evolving Optimum Prison Classification Policies in the Implementation of Truth in Sentencing: A Dynamic Model South Carolina Department of Corrections Lorraine T. Fowler $149,585 98-CE-VX-0025 *Explaining Instability in the New Mexico Female Prison Population University of New Mexico Gary Lafree $51,458 98-CE-VX-0020 *Georgia Cognitive Skills Experiment: Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole University of Cincinnati Patricia Van Voorhis $143,861 98-CE-VX-0013 *Government Management of Prison Privatization Abt Associates Inc. Terence Dunworth $247,438 98-CE-VX-0002 Health Status of Soon-To-Be-Released Inmates National Commission on Correctional Health Care Robert Greifinger $500,000 97-IJ-CX-K018 Impact Assessment of Sex Offender Community Notification on Wisconsin Communities Marquette University Richard G. Zevitz $49,972 98-IJ-CX-0015 *Impact of Incarceration on Crime, Crime Patterns, and Crime Rates University of California, Berkeley Jose Canela-Cacho $149,998 98-CE-VX-0029 Nighttime Incarceration as an Intermediate Sanction: An Evaluation of the Oklahoma County Program University of Oklahoma Department of Public Safety Thomas E. James $167,114 98-IJ-CX-0011 *Unintended Consequences of Sentencing Policy: Key Issues in Developing Strategies to Address Long-Term Care Needs Pennsylvania State University Cynthia Massie $131,768 98-CE-VX-0011 Courts Are Hung Juries a Problem? National Center for State Courts Victor Flango $169,588 98-IJ-CX-0048 Community Justice Planning Grant County of Travis, Texas Chriss Wetherington $49,959 98-IJ-CX-0045 Domestic Violence Courts: Jurisdiction, Organization, Performance Goals, and Measures National Center for State Courts Susan Keilitz $124,170 98-WT-VX-0002 Evaluation of Post-adjudication Felony Drug Court University of Florida, Gainesville Ronald L. Akers $22,374 98-IJ-CX-0051 An Evaluation and Review of the Peacemaker Court of the Navajo Nation Temple University Eric Gross $3,990 97-IJ-CX-0039 An Evaluation of Safe Streets Now! Justice Research Center Jan Roehl $163,426 98-IJ-CX-0058 Impact of Community and Legal Context on the Adjudication and Sentencing Process Joint Centers for Justice Studies, Inc. Christopher D. Maxwell $24,973 98-IJ-CX-0023 Increasing Our Understanding of the Recovery Process Through Drug Court Narratives Syracuse University Mary Ann Holmquist $49,608 98-IJ-CX-0041 A Review of Specialized Courts: Key Issues in Handling Child Abuse and Neglect Cases Urban Institute Adele Harrell $75,243 97-IJ-CX-0013 Crime Mapping *Assistance in Crime Mapping and Analysis Technology for Enhancing Law Enforcement and Prosecution Coordination Hunter College Victor Goldsmith $63,648 98-LB-VX-0004 *Combining Police and Probation Research to Reduce Burglary Arizona State University Vincent Webb $224,118 98-IJ-CX-0059 Community Safety Information System Implementation U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division Nancy Sweesy $399,640 98-IJ-CX-A063 *Crime Hot Spot Forecasting: Modeling and Comparative Evaluation Carnegie Mellon University Wilpen Gorr $200,110 98-IJ-CX-K005 Crime Mapping Research Center Fellowship Program Julie D. Wartell, NIJ Visiting Fellow $90,857 98-LB-VX-0003 *Detection and Prediction of Geographical Changes in Crime State University of New York, Buffalo Peter Rogerson $221,520 98-IJ-CX-K008 *GIS Analysis of the Relationship Between Public Order and More Serious Crime University of Texas, Austin William R. Kelly $147,166 98-IJ-CX-K009 *GITS: Further Analyses Using Orange County's Multijurisdictional Gang Incident Tracking System University of California, Irvine James W. Meeker $103,060 98-IJ-CX-0072 Innovative Crime Mapping Techniques and Spatial Analysis: Phase II Hunter College Victor Goldsmith $249,821 97-LB-VX-K013 *Mapping Crime: Principle and Practice University of Maryland, Baltimore County Keith D. Harries $20,000 98-LB-VX-0009 Predictive Methods for Crime Analysis University of Virginia D.E. Brown, Visiting Fellow $139,043 98-LB-VX-0008 *Predictive Models for Law Enforcement University of Virginia D.E. Brown, Visiting Fellow $299,940 98-IJ-CX-K010 Using a High-Definition Geographic Information System to Enhance Community Policing on College Campuses Temple University George Rengert $248,662 98-IJ-CX-0001 Crime Prevention The Children-at-Risk Program: A Study of the Feasibility of a Longer Term Evaluation Urban Institute Adele Harrell $34,431 92-DD-CX-0031 Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education National Science Foundation Cheryl Eavey $25,000 98-IJ-CX-A050 Does Community Crime Prevention Make a Difference? Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority Carolyn Rebecca Block $138,067 98-WT-VX-0022 Effects of Casino Gambling on Crime and Quality of Life in New Casino Jurisdictions University of Nevada, Reno Grant Stitt $252,331 98-IJ-CX-0037 Labor Markets and Crime: Criminal Justice Policy and Research Issues Orlando Rodriguez, NIJ Visiting Fellow $115,764 98-IJ-CX-0047 *Process Evaluation of Maryland's Hot Spot Communities Program Urban Institute Jeffrey A. Roth $329,237 98-IJ-CX-0029 Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods Harvard University Felton J. Earls $2,200,000 93-IJ-CX-K005 Drugs and Crime Drugs and Crime, General Breaking the Cycle Research Demonstration Project Jacksonville (Florida) Judith A. Truett $3,000,000 98-IJ-CX-K013 Breaking the Cycle Research Demonstration Project Pierce County (Washington) Alliance Dean Wilson $3,000,000 98-IJ-CX-K011 Breaking the Cycle Research Demonstration Project University of Alabama, Birmingham L. Foster Cook $2,812,302 96-IJ-CX-0065 *Classifying Inmates for Strategic Programming Vera Institute of Justice, Inc. Douglas Young $128,240 98-CE-VX-0010 Evaluation of a Comprehensive Service-Based Intervention to Reduce Substance Abuse Yale University Denise Stevens $191,718 98-IJ-CX-0053 Evaluation of La Bodega de la Familia: A Family Drug Crisis Center Vera Institute of Justice, Inc. Douglas Young $159,980 98-IJ-CX-0049 A Life Course Model of Career in Crime and Substance Abuse University of Minnesota Christopher Uggen $45,903 98-IJ-CX-0036 Operation Drug TEST District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency Gerry Chapman $265,273 98-IJ-CX-A009 PharmChem Drug Testing Laboratory PharmChem Laboratories, Inc. Elizabeth M. Lison $36,000 98-IJ-CX-C010 Sacramento Batterer/Drug Intervention Experiment California State University, Sacramento Carole Barnes $99,905 98-IJ-CX-K014 Why Haven't Drug Prices Risen With Tougher Enforcement? Modeling the Behavior of Drug Markets University of Maryland, College Park Peter Reuter $260,730 98-IJ-CX-0040 Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring/Drug Use Forecasting Programs The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program, which was expanded from the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program in 1997, performs drug tests on samples of arrestees brought to booking facilities at 23 sites. The test findings indicate levels of drug use, determine what drugs are used in specific jurisdictions, and track changes in arrestees' drug use patterns. Dallas ADAM County of Dallas Pat McMillan $7,636 94-IJ-CX-A039 DUF Program: Assistance With Program Operations Aspen Systems Corporation Debra Hoffmaster $152,310 93-IJ-CX-C002 DUF--Washington, D.C. District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency Kathryn Boyer $9,010 95-IJ-CX-A024 Ft. Lauderdale ADAM Broward County Sheriff's Office Ron Cochran $12,293 94-IJ-CX-A030 Houston ADAM Houston-Galveston Area Council Brett Arkinson $31,965 95-IJ-CX-A008 Indianapolis ADAM Marion County Justice Agency Cindy Mowery $11,554 95-IJ-CX-A013 Los Angeles ADAM University of California, Los Angeles Douglas Anglin $48,157 97-IJ-CX-A007 Manhattan ADAM New York City Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Alcoholism Services Patricia Thomas $39,884 94-IJ-CX-A013 Miami ADAM Miami County Department of Human Services Raphael Martinez $9,734 98-IJ-CX-A012 *Rural ADAM Project University of Nebraska, Omaha Denise C. Herz $26,104 98-IJ-CX-0065 Support Services for ADAM Program Abt Associates Inc. D. Hunt $4,694,545 98-IJ-CX-C001 Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) Program *A Collaborative Evaluation of Pennsylvania's Program for Drug-Involved Violators Vera Institute of Justice, Inc. Douglas Young $59,989 98-RT-VX-K002 Evaluation of the Barnstable County Sheriff's Department's RSAT Program Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety Diane Brensilber $59,990 98-RT-VX-K006 *Evaluation of Jail-Based Treatment in Virginia University of Maryland, College Park Bruce Kubu $59,982 98-RT-VX-K001 *Evaluation of Wisconsin's Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program for Female State Prisoners University of Wisconsin, Madison D. Paul Moberg $59,864 98-RT-VX-K003 *Local Process Evaluation of the Michigan Department of Corrections RSAT Program National Council on Crime and Delinquency James Austin $60,000 98-RT-VX-K007 *Outcome Evaluation of Wisconsin Dual Diagnosis Treatment Program University of Wisconsin, Madison D. Paul Moberg $99,351 98-RT-VX-K005 *Process Assessment of Correctional Treatment Texas Christian University Kevin Knight $59,946 98-RT-VX-K004 Information Dissemination and General Support Annual Review of Justice Research Castine Research Corporation Michael Tonry $170,592 92-IJ-CX-K044 Committee on Law and Justice Core Support National Academy of Sciences Carol Petrie $210,000 98-IJ-CX-0030 Crime Atlas Justice Research and Statistics Association Joan C. Weiss $89,501 98-IJ-CX-K001 Criminal Justice Research Training Program University of Maryland, College Park Charles Wellford $25,000 95-IJ-CX-A033 Data Resources Program of the National Institute of Justice University of Michigan Paul J. Stemple $458,082 95-IJ-CX-C005 Developing Communications Initiatives in Criminal Justice CF Productions, Inc. Thomas V. Brady $52,000 98-IJ-CX-0076 Development and Production of Annual Reports and Other Materials Cygnus Corporation Todd Phillips $26,000 94-IJ-CX-C005 *Idaho Criminal Justice Statistics Idaho Department of Law Enforcement Robert C. Uhlenkott $50,000 97-MU-MU-K016 John B. Pickett Fellowship in Criminal Justice Policy and Management Harvard University Susan Michaelson $99,600 92-IJ-CX-0012 National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Aspen Systems Corporation Richard Rosenthal $10,889,355 94-MU-CX-C006 National Institute of Justice Publications Support Palladian Partners, Inc. Cate Timmerman $113,874 98-IJ-CX-C009 Policy Forums on Crime Issues for State Policymakers National Governors' Association, Center for Best Practices David E. Brown $70,000 98-IJ-CX-0054 Professional Conference Series Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. Edward F. Connors $129,400 94-MU-CX-C008 Research Application Contract Abt Associates Inc. Catherine Conly $1,156,371 94-MU-CX-C007 Scholarly Conference: "Why Is Crime Decreasing?" Northwestern University John P. Heinz $21,680 98-IJ-CX-0046 Technical Assistance for NIJ's Professional Conference Series Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. Edward F. Connors $1,200,000 98-IJ-CX-C002 *Technical Assistance and Support CSR, Inc. Edward J. Spurlock $6,313,071 96-MU-MU-C004 International Crime The Internet Studio: Building Technical Support Infrastructure for NIJ's International Program Rule of Law Foundation Sergey Chapkey $293,413 98-IJ-CX-0007 Links Between International and Domestic Sex Industries Coalition Against Trafficking Women Janice Raymond $188,677 98-WT-VX-0032 The Role of Local Law Enforcement in Controlling Illegal Immigration and Other Transnational Crime Georgetown University William F. McDonald $44,988 95-IJ-CX-0110 Transnational Organized Crime Workshop National Academy of Sciences Faith Mitchell $75,000 98-IJ-CX-0019 Policing Policing, General *COMPSTAT and Organizational Changes: A National Assessment Police Foundation David Weisburd $351,861 98-IJ-CX-0070 Curbing Police Brutality: What Works? Eastern Michigan University Liqun Cao $25,000 98-IJ-CX-0064 *The Force Factor: Measuring Police Use of Force Relative to Suspect Resistance University of South Carolina Geoffrey Alpert $270,173 98-IJ-CX-0018 Frontiers of Policing State University of New York, Albany David Bayley $49,994 98-IJ-CX-0017 *Identifying Correlates of Police Deviance: An Empirical Study of Police Corruption and Brutality in New York (1975-1996) Temple University Jack R. Greene $298,719 96-IJ-CX-0053 *Measuring the Effectiveness of the Police Corps Model Allegheny County Susan Allen $223,377 98-IJ-CX-0084 Monitoring and Modeling Impacts of Policing Initiatives National Development and Research Institutes, Inc. Bruce D. Johnson $212,999 98-IJ-CX-K012 The Phoenix Project: Predictors of Suspect Use of Force Charlotte Research Center Russell Johnson $24,991 98-IJ-CX-0071 Police Perjury: Deviance or Utilitarianism Michael O. Foley $17,125 98-IJ-CX-0032 *Process Evaluation of Police Restructuring in the District of Columbia Urban Institute Jeffrey A. Roth $440,803 98-IJ-CX-K007 *Reducing Nonemergency Calls to 911: Four Approaches University of Cincinnati Lorraine Green Mazerolle $399,919 98-IJ-CX-0067 *Responding to the Problem Police Officer: An Evaluation of Early Warning Systems University of Nebraska, Omaha Samuel Walker $174,643 98-IJ-CX-0002 *Structure of Large Municipal Police Organizations University of Nebraska, Omaha Mary Laura Farnham $177,159 98-IJ-CX-0003 *Supporting Police Integrity Temple University Jack R. Greene $221,589 98-IJ-CX-0066 *Turnover Among Alaska Village Public Safety Officers: An Examination of the Factors Associated With Attrition University of Alaska, Anchorage Darryl Wood $48,995 98-IJ-CX-0035 Update and Expansion of the RAND Survey Regarding State and Local Police Investigative Processes Michigan State University Frank Horvath $108,442 98-IJ-CX-0057 *Use of Force by the Montgomery County Police Department Joint Centers for Justice Studies, Inc. Joel Garner $76,034 98-IJ-CX-0086 *Women in Policing: Assessing the Work Environment New Traditions for Women, Inc. Donna Milgram $93,281 98-IJ-CX-0013 Community Policing *Building Effective Strategies for Community Policing State University of New York, Albany Raymond Hunt $140,991 95-IJ-CX-0081 *Community Policing Strategies: First National Survey Update Macro International, Inc. Billy Jones $39,972 96-IJ-CX-0045 Evaluating Community Policing in Public Housing: South Philadelphia Initiative Temple University Jack R. Greene $191,475 98-IJ-CX-0052 *An Evaluation of the Dallas Police Department Interactive Community Policing Program University of Texas, Arlington Charles H. Mindel $295,570 95-IJ-CX-0070 *Organizational Issues in Community Policing: Effects of Geographical and Staffing Models on Community Policing City of San Diego Donna J. Warlick $176,230 98-IJ-CX-0016 *Police Department and Police Officer Association Leaders' Perceptions of Community Policing University of Cincinnati Lawrence Travis $139,052 98-IJ-CX-0005 *Policing in a Community Context University of Cincinnati James Frank $373,971 98-IJ-CX-0063 *Problem Solving Strategies and Tactics for Community Policing City of San Diego Donna J. Warlick $213,119 98-IJ-CX-0080 *Transition: Creating a Culture of Community Policing University of New Mexico Marjorie Hudson $177,124 98-IJ-CX-0073 *Wave 4 Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Evaluation Urban Institute Jeffrey A. Roth $427,775 98-IJ-CX-0087 Corrections and Law Enforcement Family Support *Creating Positive Mentors: Provision of Supervisory Skills Training for Sergeants and Field Training Officers Miami Police Department Paul Sherpard $45,425 96-FS-VX-0003 *Corrections Officer Maintenance Program Connecticut Department of Corrections Robert Munroe $99,990 98-FS-VX-0003 *Law Enforcement and Corrections Family Support City of East Lansing (Michigan) Patricia E. Nowak $10,202 98-FS-VX-0001 *Law Enforcement and Family Support Program Iowa State University Eugene Deisinger $147,395 96-FS-VX-0006 Law Enforcement Family Support Project Michigan State Police, Forensic Science Division Gary Kaufman $41,422 98-FS-VX-0007 *Longview Police Department Prevention and Treatment of Stress Longview Police Guild (Washington) Jim Duscha $49,252 98-FS-VX-0006 *Modern Prison Work Southern Illinois University Jody Sundt $99,934 98-CE-VX-0021 Online Education, Resources, and Support for Law Enforcement Families Nashville-Davidson County (Tennessee) Lorraine Williams-Greene $99,559 98-FS-VX-0004 *Peer Support Program Fraternal Order of Police, Old Pueblo Lodge #51 (Tuscon, Arizona) Larry Morris $224,016 98-FS-VX-0005 Police Family Life Education Project Philadelphia Police Department Mitchell Yanak $73,447 98-FS-VX-0002 *Reaching Out to North Carolina's Law Enforcement Community North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, Governor's Crime Commission George S. Ake $67,020 98-FS-VX-0008 *Stress Reduction Program for Law Enforcement Personnel and Their Families City of Los Angeles Kevin J. Jablonski $89,785 98-IJ-CX-0010 Locally Initiated Partnerships, Policing Development of a Multiagency Research Partnership Involving the Chandler, Glendale, and Scottsdale, Arizona, Police Departments Arizona State University Vince Webb $113,240 98-IJ-CX-0006 *Implementing Community Policing in Los Angeles: A Partnership Between the Los Angeles Police Department, University of California, Los Angeles, and University of Southern California Training Research Corporation Wellford Wilms $179,560 95-IJ-CX-0060 *Institutionalizing the Use of Research in a Local Police Department: A Continuing Partnership University of Cincinnati Lawrence Travis $75,913 98-IJ-CX-0068 *Locally Initiated Research Partnership With Arlington County, Virginia, Police Department Urban Institute Elizabeth Langston $133,911 98-IJ-CX-0009 National Evaluation of Locally Initiated Research Partnerships I Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. J. Thomas McEwen $299,971 95-IJ-CX-0083 *Research Partnership Between Lexington, Kentucky, Division of Police and Eastern Kentucky University Eastern Kentucky University Larry Gaines $33,464 98-IJ-CX-0004 Policing Technology *Evaluation of Computers in Patrol Cars: Implications for the Community Policing Roles of Police Officers San Francisco State University Caran Colvin $255,000 98-IJ-CX-0012 *Impact of Oleoresin Capsicum Spray on Respiratory Function in the Sitting and Prone Maximal Restraint Positions University of California, San Diego Theodore C. Chan $128,176 98-IJ-CX-0079 *Multimethod Study of Police Special Weapons and Tactics Teams University of Houston David Klinger $187,364 98-IJ-CX-0081 Public Housing and Crime Community-Based Assessment of the Calexico Housing Authority's Drug Elimination Program San Diego State University Foundation Michael Sabath $131,357 98-IJ-CX-0055 Comparative Effects of High-Rise Public Housing for the Elderly Omaha Housing Authority Katy Salzman $131,063 98-IJ-CX-0075 Evaluating Community Policing in Public Housing: The South Philadelphia Initiative Temple University Jack R. Greene $191,475 98-IJ-CX-0052 An Evaluation of a Comprehensive Service-Based Intervention Strategy in Public Housing Yale University Denise Stevens $191,718 98-IJ-CX-0053 Evaluation of a Public Housing Drug Elimination Program Arkansas State University David Harding $74,182 98-IJ-CX-0061 Evaluation of a Truancy Reduction Program Metropolitan Development and Housing Authority Gerald F. Nicely $118,042 98-IJ-CX-0056 Fear of Crime in Two Public Housing Contexts North Carolina State University William R. Smith $63,052 98-IJ-CX-0050 Neighborhood Revitalization and Disorder: An Intervention Evaluation University of Utah Barbara Brown $236,195 98-IJ-CX-0022 Schools A National Study of Delinquency Prevention in Schools Gottfredson Associates, Inc. Gary D. Gottfredson $261,419 96-MU-MU-0008 Sentencing *Addressing Sentencing-Related Changes in Correctional Health Care: Building a Researcher-Practitioner Partnership University of Texas Medical Branch Jacques Baillargeon $150,013 98-CE-VX-0022 Attitudes Toward Crime and Punishment in Vermont: An Experiment With Restorative Justice Doble Research Associates, Inc. John Doble $94,757 98-IJ-CX-0028 Estimating the Impacts of Three Strikes and Truth-in-Sentencing on Correctional Populations University of California, Los Angeles Elsa Chen $34,997 98-IJ-CX-0082 *Evaluating the Development of an Empirically Based Risk Assessment National Center for State Courts Brian J. Ostrom $237,787 98-CE-VX-0009 *Examining the Effects of Ohio's Truth-in- Sentencing Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction Horst Gienapp $117,570 98-CE-VX-0019 *Impact of Determinate Sentencing Laws on Plea Rates and Court Delay Justec Research Thomas Marvell $110,387 98-CE-VX-0017 *Impact of Ohio's Senate Bill 2 on Sentencing Disparity University of Cincinnati John Wooldredge $149,194 98-CE-VX-0015 *Impact of Truth in Sentencing on Length of Stay in Prison Urban Institute William J. Sabol $212,491 98-CE-VX-0006 *Michigan Sentencing Guidelines: Integrating Intermediate Sanctions into Guidelines and Examining the Judicial Response National Center for State Courts Victor Flango $250,952 98-CE-VX-0008 *New Jersey No Early Release Act: Impact on Prosecution, Sentencing Rutgers State University of New Jersey Candace McCoy $1,124,219 98-CE-VX-0007 *Research on and Evaluation of Sentencing Reforms and Their Effects Oregon Criminal Justice Council Phillip Lemman $310,152 98-CE-VX-0030 Social and Economic Impact of Sentencing Practices Yale University Kathryn Dudley $93,481 98-CE-VX-0012 *Unintended Consequences of Sentencing Policy: Creation of Long-Term Health Care Obligations Abt Associates Inc. William Rhodes $127,077 98-CE-VX-0001 Technology Development Officer Protection and Crime Prevention *COPLINK Database Integration and Access for Law Enforcement Intranet City of Tucson Douglas F. Smith $200,000 97-LB-VX-K023 *Offender Wide-Area Continuous Electronic Monitoring Systems Lucent Technologies, Inc., Integrated Solutions Laura G. Tutterow $272,677 98-LB-VX-K005 *Proof of Concept and Demonstration for the Personal Alarm Telephonics Corporation Dennis Fortner $459,078 97-LB-VX-K021 *Technology Thrust Areas and Technology Solutions to Law Enforcement Raytheon TI Systems, Inc. Frank Bates $500,000 98-LB-VX-K001 Investigative and Forensic Science Forensics, General *Computational Assistance and Training in DNA Population Genetics for Forensic Science Laboratories University of Illinois R.E. Gaensslen $98,952 98-LB-VX-A018 *Detection of Date-Rape Drugs in Hair and Urine University of Illinois, Chicago Adam Negrusz $105,564 98-LB-VX-K020 Develop a Rapid Immobilized Probe Assay for the Detection of mtDNA Variation Rebecca L. Reynolds Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute $193,318 96-IJ-CX-0028 Forensic Accreditation Board: An Accreditation Program for Forensic Specialty Certifying Programs American Academy of Forensic Sciences Graham R. Jones $51,000 98-IJ-CX-0074 *Medicolegal Death Investigator Guidelines and Training Project Occupational Research and Assessment, Inc. Steven C. Clark $150,000 98-LB-VX-0007 National Center for Forensic Science University of Central Florida William W. McGee $1,047,992 98-IJ-CX-K003 *National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Columbia Barbara Anijikaiye $99,952 98-LB-VX-A049 *Pattern Recognition Techniques in Investigative and Forensic Sciences Institute for Linguistic Evidence, Inc. Carole E. Chaski $90,000 98-LB-VX-0065 *Support to the 15th Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Sciences 15th Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Sciences, Inc. Barry A.J. Fisher $49,920 98-LB-VX-0011 Teleforensic Demonstration Project New York State Police Gerald M. Zeosky $50,000 98-IJ-CX-A051 DNA 5-Year Research and Development Plan *Chip-Based Genetic Detector for Rapid Identification of Individuals Nanogen, Inc. Michael I. Nerenberg $499,882 97-LB-VX-0004 *Database of Y-Chromosome STR Loci in U.S. Populations Pennsylvania State University Mark Stoneking $110,384 98-LB-VX-0005 *Evaluation of New STR Markers for Forensic Analysis University of Cincinnati Ranjan Deka $220,359 98-LB-VX-0002 *Evaluation of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP's) for Human Identification Use University of Texas, Houston David Stivers $40,000 98-LB-VX-0010 *Improved Analysis of DNA STR's for Human Identification-Mass Spectrometry Genetrace Systems, Inc. Christopher H. Becker $301,999 97-LB-VX-0003 *Microchip DNA Fingerprinting Devices Oak Ridge National Laboratory J. Michael Ramsey $498,963 97-LB-VX-A063 *Microdevice for Automated, Ultra-High-Speed, and Portable DNA Forensics Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research Daniel J. Ehrlich $250,000 98-LB-VX-K022 *Rapid DNA Typing by Laser Desorption Mass Spectroscopy Oak Ridge National Laboratory C.H. Winston Chen $149,040 97-LB-VX-A047 *Validation of the Combined DNA Index System-Approved DNA Markers for Forensic Testing University of Texas, Houston Ranajit Chakraborty $49,741 98-LB-VX-K019 Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program Acquisition of CODIS Capabilities City of Tucson (Arizona) Walter K. Tannert $11,360 98-DN-VX-0026 Arizona DNA Analysis Enhancement Program Arizona Department of Public Safety Debra A. Figarelli $420,000 98-DN-VX-0014 Arkansas: Establishment of a DNA Data Bank Arkansas State Crime Laboratory Kenneth H. Michau $161,250 98-DN-VX-0019 California Statewide DNA Laboratory Improvement Program California Department of Justice, Bureau of Criminal Identification and Information Jan Bashinski $1,000,000 98-DN-VX-0013 Continuation and Expansion of "Fast Track" Forensic Indexing of Crime Scene Profiles City of Albuquerque (New Mexico) John F. Krebsbach $141,979 98-DN-VX-0009 Denver Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program Denver Police Department Greggory S. LaBerge $198,340 98-DN-VX-0010 Developing Criteria for Model External DNA Proficiency Testing University of Illinois, Chicago Joseph L. Peterson $249,926 96-DN-VX-0001 Development and Implementation of West Virginia Short Tandem Repeat Combined DNA Index System Database Marshall University Research Corporation Terry W. Fenger $2,000,000 98-DN-VX-K001 DNA Improvement of Data-basing and Forensic Casework Michigan State Police, Forensic Science Division Frank E. Schehr $457,015 98-DN-VX-0031 DNA STR Conversion Project Marion County (Indianapolis) Forensic Services Agency James E. Hamby $359,560 98-DN-VX-0004 Enhancement of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation's Forensic DNA Laboratory Program Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Forensic Services Division William J. Darby, III $85,336 98-DN-VX-0002 Expanded Felon DNA Databank Program for the State of Alabama Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences John W. Hicks $374,900 98-DN-VX-0021 Expanded Forensic DNA Testing Program for the State of Hawaii Honolulu Police Department Wayne Kimoto $300,540 98-DN-VX-0020 Expanding DNA Analysis Capabilities: STR Implementation County of Bexar (Texas) Lonnie D. Ginsberg $171,310 98-DN-VX-0024 Expanding DNA Typing in Georgia Georgia Bureau of Investigation George Herrin, Jr. $380,950 98-DN-VX-0022 Expansion of DNA Analysis Capabilities Illinois State Police, Springfield Susan Hart Johns $150,000 98-DN-VX-0032 Expansion of DNA Services North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation Mark S. Nelson $73,000 98-DN-VX-0012 Florida Statewide Coordinated Forensic DNA Laboratory Program Florida Department of Law Enforcement Dale Heideman $900,000 98-DN-VX-0034 Forensic Development of STR Database and Comparison to Nonsubject Cases Maryland State Police Louis C. Portis $180,808 96-DN-VX-0002 Forensic DNA Enhancement Project for Texas Texas Department of Public Safety D. Pat Johnson $380,000 98-DN-VX-0001 Forensic DNA Laboratory Program Expansion Missouri State Highway Patrol T. J. Luikart $546,742 98-DN-VX-0025 Forensic DNA Program for Connecticut: PCR Technologies Connecticut Department of Public Safety Elaine M. Pagliaro $191,000 98-DN-VX-0017 Fort Worth DNA Laboratory Enhancement City of Fort Worth (Texas) D.E. Garrett $121,085 98-DN-VX-0027 Houston Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program City of Houston James Bolding $106,909 98-DN-VX-0005 Implementation of Automated Multiplex Short Tandem Repeats in Forensic Casework County of Dallas Timothy J. Sliter $151,068 98-DN-VX-0006 Improvement of Capability to Analyze DNA Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Deanne F. Dabbs $375,000 98-DN-VX-0018 Increasing STR Typing Capabilities in the Oregon DNA Laboratory Oregon Department of State Police Cecilia H. von Beroldingen $113,198 97-DN-VX-0013 Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department DNA Equipment Upgrade Kansas City Police Department John T. Wilson $163,700 98-DN-VX-0033 Maine Statewide DNA Laboratory Improvement Program Maine Department of Public Safety Timothy D. Kupferschmid $155,000 97-DN-VX-0008 Montana DNA Program Montana Department of Justice James Streeter $34,550 98-DN-VX-0008 North Dakota Department of Health Crime Laboratory Division DNA Project North Dakota Department of Health Hope R. Olson $73,774 98-DN-VX-0030 North Louisiana Crime Lab DNA Analysis Improvement Program North Louisiana Criminalistics Laboratory Patrick W. Wojtkiewicz $275,470 98-DN-VX-0003 Northern Illinois Police Crime Lab Forensic DNA Analysis Program Northern Illinois Police Crime Laboratory Jane M. Homeyer $266,669 98-DN-VX-0011 Prince Georges County Police Department DNA/Serology Laboratory Project Prince Georges County (Maryland) Government Michael Ricucci $222,290 98-DN-VX-0028 STR Conversion and Expansion of CODIS Database Minnesota Department of Public Safety Terry L. Laber $200,000 98-DN-VX-0023 STR Technology Update and Increased Combined DNA Index System Capacity New Jersey Division of State Police Linda B. Jankowski $297,381 98-DN-VX-0035 Tarrant County Forensic DNA Laboratory Enhancement Program County of Tarrant (Texas) Ronald L. Singer $89,520 98-DN-VX-0016 Upgrade of Serological Analysis to DNA Technologies Kentucky State Police Lucy A. Davis $231,570 98-DN-VX-0007 Validation and Implementation of PCR-STR Analysis and CODIS Site Establishment Baltimore County (Maryland) Police Department Karen L. Irish $119,300 98-DN-VX-0015 Washington State Patrol Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program, Phase III Washington State Patrol Donald C. MacLaren $300,000 98-DN-VX-0029 Less-Than-Lethal Incapacitation *Biomechanical Assessment of Nonlethal Weapons Wayne State University Albert I. King $148,276 98-LB-VX-K017 *Development of a Database of the Effects of Less-Than-Lethal Weapons Pro Tac International Ken Hubbs $84,770 98-LB-VX-K006 Evaluation of the Human Effects of a Prototype Electric Stun Projectile Pennsylvania State University Pamela R. Kauffman $99,600 98-IJ-CX-K006 *Evaluation of Vehicle Stopping Electromagnetic Prototype Devices U.S. Department of the Army E. Scannell $250,000 98-LB-VX-A099 Ring Airfoil Projectile System for Less-Than-Lethal Application Guilford Engineering Associates, Inc. David Findlay $249,303 97-IJ-CX-K019 Communication and Information Technology *Development of Advanced Wireless Technology Standards Association of Public Safety Communications Officials International, Inc. Craig M. Jorgensen $44,570 97-LB-VX-K002 *Development of a Community Access System for the Chicago Police Department Abt Associates Inc. Marianne Beauregard $474,418 98-LB-VX-0070 *Face Recognition and Intelligent Software Development Analytic Services, Inc. Tina M. Babin $3,749,998 98-LB-VX-K021 *Investigation and Evaluation of Voice Stress Analysis Technology U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory Sharon M. Walter $150,000 98-LB-VX-A013 *Law Enforcement/Criminal Justice Multijurisdiction Information System Study Phase II Center for Technology Commercialization, Inc. Thomas Kennedy $299,341 97-LB-VX-K012 *Southwest Border States Antidrug Information System Criminal Information Sharing Alliance Glen Gillum $7,918,174 97-LB-VX-K009 Telemedicine Network Prototype SPAWAR, Charleston Jerry A. Koenig $937,273 98-IJ-CX-A014 *Voice-Response Translator for Preprogrammed Law Enforcement Phrases Integrated Wave Technologies, Inc. John Hall $401,324 98-LB-VX-K023 Training and Simulation Technologies *Bomb Threat Training Simulator University of Houston Christopher A. Chung $131,075 98-LB-VX-K016 *Development of Computer-Based Training for Law Enforcement Advanced Systems Technology Barbara Hines $319,436 98-LB-VX-K018 *Law Enforcement Technology Training Needs Assessment Planning Sam Houston State University Larry T. Hoover $500,000 97-LB-VX-K020 *Training, Technology Development, and Implementation U.S. Department of Defense, Naval Air Warfare Center Janet Weisenford $507,944 97-MU-MU-A042 *Working With Technology in Corrections American Correctional Association John J. Greene $164,930 96-LB-VX-K004 Counterterrorism Technologies Assessment of Explosively Formed Penetrator U.S. Department of the Navy, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division Marc Magdinec $445,988 97-DT-CX-A074 Body Cavity Screening System Quantum Magnetics, Inc. Geoff Barrall $250,263 98-DT-CX-K005 Chemical/Biological Dosimeter Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration U.S. Department of Defense, Directorate of Research and Engineering Jasper Lupo $200,000 98-DT-CX-A073 Cybercrime Cyberterrorism Study Tennessee Valley Authority David J. Icove $65,000 98-MU-CX-A076 Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Support of the Joint-Program Steering Group (JPSG) U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency David Fields $349,985 97-IJ-CX-A025 Detection and Classification of Concealed Weapons Using Magnetic Gradient Measurements U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Jonathan Nadler $101,959 95-IJ-CX-A027 Development of an Inexpensive Radar Flashlight for Law Enforcement and Corrections Applications Georgia Institute of Technology E.F. Greneker $336,539 98-DT-CX-K003 Explosives Detection and Remediation Research and Evaluation U.S. Department of Defense, Office of Special Technology David Perkins $1,350,000 97-DT-CX-A068 Laser Dazzler Assessment U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory Chad Lindstrom $290,000 98-DT-CX-A040 Multisensor Portal Concealed Weapons Detection Chang Industry, Inc. Yu-Wen Chang $850,164 98-DT-CX-K001 Passive Millimeter-Wave Camera for Concealed Weapons Thermotrex Corporation Peter F. Black $299,942 98-DT-CX-K006 Portable Through-the-Wall Surveillance System Raytheon Company Larry Frazier $278,595 98-DT-CX-K004 Stand-Off Detection and Tracking of Concealed Weapons Quantum Magnetics, Inc. Peter V. Czipott $297,733 98-DT-CX-K002 Technical Support for the Concealed Weapons Detection and Through- the-Wall Surveillance Programs U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, Information Directorate David Ferris $1,499,076 98-MU-MU-A062 Technical Support to NIJ's Office of Science and Technology U.S. Department of Energy, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Steven W. Martin $157,546 97-DT-CX-A092 Program Assessment, Policy, and Coordination *Facilitation of Domestic and International Technology Partnerships Eagan, McAllister Associates, Inc. Robert Greenberg $428,589 96-LB-VX-K008 *Governance and Technology Delivery Processes for the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers and Their User Communities Pymatuning Group, Inc. Ruth M. Davis $498,204 98-LB-VX-0001 *Information Technology Acquisition Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. J. Thomas McEwen $499,869 98-LB-VX-K011 *Law Enforcement Technology, Technology Transfer, Less-Than-Lethal Weapons Technology, and Policy Liability Assessment SEASKATE, Inc. E.A. Burkhalter $255,828 96-LB-VX-K006 *Less-Than-Lethal Policy Assessment Panel SEASKATE, Inc. E.A. Burkhalter $352,866 96-MU-MU-K016 Public Acceptance of Police Technologies Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. J. Thomas McEwen $100,000 93-IJ-CX-K012 *Research Conference on Illicit Substance Detection Gordon Research Conferences Jimmie C. Oxley $20,000 97-LB-VX-0007 *Surplus Property Program Ultimate Enterprise Limited Michael Simpson $212,998 96-LB-VX-K002 *Systems Engineering and Evaluation Support for the National Institute of Justice Office of Science and Technology U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Support Office Carl F. Klele $1,298,898 96-LB-VX-A038 Standards and Testing Technology Assessment Program U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology Kathleen M. Higgins $3,827,375 94-IJ-CX-A004 Technology Assistance Technology Assistance, General *Oak Ridge Laboratory Technical Support to the National Institute of Justice Oak Ridge National Laboratory James A. Reafsnyder $250,000 98-LB-VX-A075 *Sandia National Laboratories Test Facility Sandia National Laboratories Debra D. Spencer $525,000 97-LB-VX-A004 National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers (NLECTC) offer centralized sources of product and technology information, assessment, and referral services to law enforcement, corrections, and other criminal justice professionals. NIJ also supports a Border Research and Technology Center that focuses on developing and enhancing border control. The following awards provide technical assistance and other resources in support of the Director of Science and Technology at NIJ through operation of the NLECTC. National--Rockville, Maryland: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center Aspen Systems Corporation David C. Shinton $2,649,943 96-MU-MU-K011 Northeast Region--Rome, New York: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center Air Force Research Laboratory Information Directorate John A. Ritz $2,670,000 96-IJ-CX-A032 Rocky Mountain Region Denver, Colorado: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center University of Denver, Colorado Seminary Deborah G. Bradford $1,786,004 96-MU-MU-K012 Southeast Region--Charleston, South Carolina: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center South Carolina Research Authority Gary A. Mastrandrea $1,839,697 97-MU-MU-K020 Southeast Region--Charleston, South Carolina: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center U.S. Department of the Navy, Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, Charleston Ronald L. Polkowsky $199,030 96-IJ-CX-A010 Western Region--El Segundo, California: National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center Aerospace Corporation Donald Peterson $1,624,793 96-MU-MU-K006 Operation of the Border Research and Technology Center SPAWAR, San Diego Chris Aldridge $244,250 96-IJ-CX-A036 Operation of the Office of Law Enforcement Technology Commercialization Wheeling Jesuit University Tom Burgoyne $2,800,000 98-IJ-CX-K002 Victimization and Victim Services Development of a National Study of Victim Needs and Assistance Victim Services, Inc. Ellen Brickman $379,193 98-VF-GX-0011 Evaluation of Victims of Crime State Compensation and Assistance Programs Urban Institute Blaine Liner $750,000 98-VF-GX-0016 Repeat and Multiple Victimizations: The Role of Individual and Contextual Factors Pennsylvania State University R. Barry Ruback $24,997 98-IJ-CX-0034 Victimization Outcomes: What Influences Victim Compliance, Injury, and Crime Completion? University of Maryland, College Park Catherine A. Gallagher $24,987 98-IJ-CX-0025 Violence Violence, General NIJ-NCOVR Partnership Carnegie Mellon University Patricia Edgar $526,342 98-MU-MU-0007 Patterns of Violence: An Analysis of Individual Offenders University of Nebraska, Omaha Julie Horney $86,172 96-IJ-CX-0015 Violence Against Women and Family Violence Beliefs and Perceptions About Domestic Violence State University of New York, Albany Alissa P. Worden $179,216 98-WT-VX-0018 *Children Exposed to Domestic Violence American Bar Association Laura Nickles $140,987 98-IJ-CX-0069 Conference: Co-Occurrence of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse University of Minnesota Jeffrey L. Edleson $24,975 98-WT-VX-0026 Development of Violence Against Women University of Houston Ernest N. Jouriles $86,054 98-WT-VX-0005 Developmental Antecedents of Violence Against Women: A Longitudinal Approach University of North Carolina, Greensboro Jacquelyn White $99,745 98-WT-VX-0010 Developmental Theory and Battering Incidents University of Cincinnati Paul Mazerolle $97,142 98-WT-VX-0007 Drugs and Alcohol and Their Connections to Domestic Violence University of New Mexico Paul Guerin $41,428 98-IJ-CX-0031 Ecological Model of Battered Women's Experience Over Time George Washington University Mary Ann Dutton $350,948 98-WT-VX-0023 Economic Distress, Community Context, and Intimate Violence: An Application and Extension of Social Disorganization Theory University of Tennessee, Knoxville Michael L. Benson $93,107 98-WT-VX-0011 Estimating the Population at Risk for Violence During Child Visitation Victim Services, Inc. Chris O'Sullivan $44,797 98-IJ-CX-0021 *Evaluation of a Coordinated Response to Domestic Violence San Diego Association of Governments Stuart R. Shaffer $62,526 98-WT-VX-K014 Evaluation of Efforts to Implement No-Drop Policies American Bar Association Laura Nickles $233,342 98-WT-VX-0029 *Evaluation of Special Session Domestic Violence: Enhanced Advocacy and Interventions University of Connecticut Cathrine M. Havens $74,999 98-WE-VX-0031 Family Violence: Building a Coordinated Community Response American Medical Association Larry S. Goldman $8,555 96-IJ-CX-0029 Field Testing Domestic Violence Risk Assessment Instruments Victim Services, Inc. Chris O'Sullivan $97,661 98-WT-VX-0019 Impact of Domestic Violence--Employment Experiences of Women on Welfare University of South Florida Martha L. Coulter $429,068 98-WT-VX-0020 *Impact Evaluation of the Data Collection and Communication Systems Components of the Violence Against Women Act STOP Grant Projects: An Implementation Guide National Center for State Courts Susan Keilitz $199,582 96-WT-NX-0002 Impact Evaluation of a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Unit in Albuquerque, New Mexico University of New Mexico Cameron Crandall $262,853 98-WT-VX-0027 *Impact Evaluation of STOP Grant Programs for Reducing Violence Against Women University of Arizona Eileen M. Luna $239,072 98-WT-VX-K010 Impact Evaluation of STOP Grants Law Enforcement and Prosecution Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. J. Thomas McEwen $399,974 96-WT-NX-0007 A Longitudinal Study of Battered Women in the System University of Colorado, Boulder Joanne Belknap $234,934 98-WT-VX-0024 Male-Perpetrated Domestic Violence Boston University Barbara A. Cole $76,667 98-WT-VX-0031 National Evaluation of the Arrest Policies Program Under Violence Against Women Institute for Law and Justice, Inc. J. Thomas McEwen $624,650 98-WE-VX-0012 *National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program Cosmos Corporation Mary A. Dunton $369,953 98-WR-VX-K002 *National Evaluation of the Violence Against Women Act Grants Urban Institute Martha Burt $449,354 95-WT-NX-0005 Predicting Levels of Abuse and Reassault Among Batterer Program Participants Indiana University of Pennsylvania Alex Hackert $94,981 98-WT-VX-0014 Predicting Reporting and Nonreporting of Sexual Assault to the Police: A Multivariate Analysis Hawaii Department of the Attorney General Libby O. Ruch $32,227 98-WT-VX-0015 Prosecutors' Charging Decisions in Sexual Assault Cases University of Nebraska, Omaha Cassia Spohn $173,460 98-WT-VX-0003 Research and Evaluation on Violence Against Women King County Epidemiology, Planning and Evaluation Unit Sandy Ciske $119,346 98-WT-VX-0025 Research on Violence Against Women: Syntheses for Practitioners State University of New York, Albany Alissa P. Worden $349,484 98-WT-VX-K011 *Researcher-Practitioner Partnership: Evaluating the Domestic Violence Enhanced Response Team Program in Colorado Springs 21st Century Solutions Craig D. Uchida $75,000 98-WE-VX-K010 Researcher-Practitioner Partnership: Evaluation of Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence Pennsylvania State University Paul Antolosky $74,921 98-WE-VX-0032 *The Richmond/Police Foundation Domestic Violence Partnership Police Foundation Rosann Greenspan $199,098 98-WT-VX-0001 Risk Factors for Violent Victimization of Women: A Prospective Study Wellesley College Jane Siegel $67,035 98-WT-VX-0028 Secondary Data Analysis on the Etiology, Course, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence Against Poor Women Better Homes Fund Amy Salomon $108,962 98-WT-VX-0012 Sexual Violence and Intimate Partner Violence Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Ted Jones $500,000 98-IJ-CX-A026 Understanding the Intergenerational Transmission of Violence Michigan State University G. Anne Bogat $248,830 98-WT-VX-0021 Using a Longitudinal Data Set to Further Understanding of the Trajectory of Intimate Violence Over Time Michigan State University Cris Sullivan $99,117 98-WT-VX-0013 Violence Against Immigrant Women and Systemic Responses Kent State University Edna Erez $184,527 98-WT-VX-0030 Violence Against Women Wichita State University Jana L. Jasinski $85,206 98-WT-VX-0017 Violence Against Women--Population-Based Comparison of Assaultive Injury Pattern University of Pittsburgh Harold B. Weiss $184,917 98-WT-VX-0016 Violence Against Women: The Role of Welfare Reform California Institute for Mental Health Sandra Naylor Goodwin $516,842 98-WT-VX-0009 Violence and Threats of Violence Against Women in America Center for Policy Research Patricia G. Tjaden $250,000 93-IJ-CX-0012 Firearms Analysis of Title XI Effects: Assault Weapons Ban Evaluation Urban Institute Jeffrey A. Roth $301,826 98-IJ-CX-0039 The Effect of Gun Carry Laws on Crime and Injury Harvard University Deborah Azrael $26,138 98-IJ-CX-0042 Effectiveness of Denial of Handgun Purchase University of California, Davis Fay Yee $160,046 98-IJ-CX-0024 Police Problem-Solving Strategies for Dealing with Youth and Gang-Related Firearms Rand Corporation Peter Greenwood $397,789 98-IJ-CX-0043 Youth Youth, General *Assessing Mental Health Problems Among Serious Delinquents California Youth Authority Rudy Haapanen $310,345 98-CE-VX-0024 Boot Camps for Juveniles: A Multisite Study University of Maryland, College Park Doris MacKenzie $48,063 96-SC-LX-0001 Classification for Juvenile Corrections University of Cincinnati Lawrence F. Travis $187,437 98-JB-VX-0108 *Community Justice Conferences: Restorative Policing University of Maryland, College Park Lawrence Sherman $221,772 98-IJ-CX-0033 Evaluation of the Department of Correction Housing Program for Waived Juveniles in Ohio Abt Associates Inc. Dale Parent $191,976 98-CE-VX-0003 Exploring Youth Violence: Risk and Protective Factors in Three Settings University of Southern California Cheryl Maxson $124,935 98-IJ-CX-0020 Good Kids in Bad Circumstances: A Longitudinal Analysis University of Cincinnati Michael G. Turner $19,633 98-IJ-CX-0026 Impact of Juvenile Sentencing Guidelines University of Utah Russel Van Fleet $200,000 98-JB-VX-0111 *Longitudinal Analysis of Recidivism Rates in Three California Youth Authority Parole Release Cohorts California Youth Authority Norman Skonovd $137,450 98-CE-VX-0026 *Maryland Department of Juvenile Justice Partnership to Study Waiver Effects University of Baltimore Jeffrey D. Senese $146,267 98-CE-VX-0018 Neighborhood and Family Contexts of Adolescent Girls' Delinquency Harvard University Dawn A. Obeidallah $49,505 98-IJ-CX-0044 Process and Outcome Evaluation of Prosecutorial Waiver to Criminal Court in Virginia Urban Institute Sanjeer Sridharan $194,803 98-JB-VX-0107 Structured Decision Making for Alameda County Probation National Council on Crime and Delinquency Barry Krisberg $75,000 98-JB-VX-0109 Understanding Needs and Outcomes of Substance Abuse Treatment for Juvenile Offenders RAND Corporation Patricia Ebener $74,976 98-JB-VX-0112 Use of Risk Assessment in Achieving Accountability-Based Sanctions University of Michigan Rosemary Sarri $282,600 98-JB-VX-0110 *Youth-Police Interaction and the Implication for Coproduction of Safety in Chicago Chicago Alliance for Neighborhood Safety Warren Friedman $160,787 98-IJ-CX-0077 Gangs Assessment of the Community Impact of Civil Gang Injunctions University of Southern California Cheryl Maxson $398,728 98-IJ-CX-0038 Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T. University of Nebraska, Omaha Finn-Aage Esbensen $300,434 94-IJ-CX-0058 *Gang-Control Efforts in a Community Policing Environment: Developing Process and Impact Measures Police Executive Research Forum Deborah Weisel $229,484 98-IJ-CX-0083 *Police Problem-Solving Strategies for Dealing With Youth and Gang-Related Firearms RAND Corporation Peter Greenwood $397,789 98-IJ-CX-0043 *The Police Response to Gangs: A Multisite Study Arizona State University Charles Katz $163,532 98-IJ-CX-0078 Youth Groups and Gangs in Europe: A Joint American/ European Workshop University of Southern California Malcolm W. Klein $9,931 98-IJ-CX-0027 ------------------------------- Appendix B: Documents Published in Fiscal Year 1998 Most NIJ materials are free and can be obtained in several ways: o Download documents from the NIJ World Wide Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. o Call or write to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) at 800-851-3420 (outside the United States, call 301-519-5500), P.O. Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849-6000, or download documents from the NCJRS Web site at http://www.ncjrs.org. o Order Research Previews via fax-on-demand by calling 800-851-3420. o For many science and technology publications, call the National Law Enforce-ment and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) at 800-248- 2742 or download documents from the NLECTC Web site at http://www.nlectc.org. NIJ publishes several types of publications, including: o Research in Action: Overviews of specific topics and programs in research and practice. o Research in Brief: Summaries of recent NIJ research, development, and evaluation findings. o Research Reports: Comprehensive reports on NIJ-sponsored research and development projects. o Research in Progress Videotapes: Sixty-minute lectures with a question-and-answer segment presented by well-known scholars and accompanied by a Research Preview summarizing the salient points of the discussion. o Research Previews: Two-page fact sheets on research and evaluation findings and activities. o Issues and Practices: Reports presenting program options and issues for criminal justice managers and administrators. o Program Focus: Highlights of specific innovative State and local criminal justice programs. o Research Forum: Reports based on NIJ-sponsored conferences and lectures series. Corrections Chicago's Safer Foundation: A Road Back for Ex-Offenders, Finn, P., Program Focus, June 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 167575. The Delaware Department of Corrections Life Skills Program, Finn, P., Program Focus, September 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 169589. Managing Prison Growth in North Carolina Through Structured Sentencing, Wright, R.F., Program Focus, February 1998, 15 pages, NCJ 168944. The Orange County, Florida, Jail Educational and Vocational Programs, Finn, P., Program Focus, December 1997, 16 pages, NCJ 166820. Public Health/Corrections Collaborations: Prevention and Treatment, Hammett, T.M., Research in Brief, July 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 169590. Successful Job Placement for Ex-Offenders: The Center for Employment Opportunities, Finn, P., Program Focus, March 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 168102. Texas' Project RIO (Re-Integration of Offenders), Finn, P., Program Focus, June 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 168637. Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches, Morash, M., T.S. Bynum, and B.A. Koons, Research in Brief, September 1998, 11 pages, NCJ 171668. Courts and Sentencing Resolving Community Conflict: The Dispute Settlement Center of Durham, North Carolina, McGillis, D., Program Focus, September 1998, 15 pages, NCJ 172203. Crime Prevention Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, Kenney, D., Research Preview, August 1998, 4 pages, FS 000224. Kids, COPS, and Communities, Chaiken, M., Issues and Practices, June 1998, 67 pages, NCJ 169599. National Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T., Esbensen, F., and D.W. Osgood, Research in Brief, November 1997, 8 pages, NCJ 167264. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, Sherman, L.W., D.C. Gottfredson, D.L. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, and S.D. Bushway, Research in Brief, July 1998, 19 pages, NCJ 171676. Violence Among Middle School and High School Students: Analysis and Implications for Prevention, Lockwood, D., Research in Brief, October 1997, 12 pages, NCJ 166363. Visibility and Vigilance: Metro's Situational Approach to Preventing Subway Crime, La Vigne, N.G., Research in Brief, November 1997, 12 pages, NCJ 166372. Drugs and Crime Drug Courts and the Role of Graduated Sanctions, Harrell, A., Research Preview, August 1998, 4 pages, FS 000219. Rise of Hallucinogen Use, Hunt, D., Research in Brief, October 1997, 12 pages, NCJ 166607. Law Enforcement Community Policing in Action: Lessons From an Observational Study, Mastrofski, S., R.B. Parks, and R.E. Worden, Research Preview, June 1998, 4 pages, FS 000199. Measuring What Matters, Part Two: Developing Measures of What the Police Do, Brady, T.V., Research in Action, November 1997, 16 pages, NCJ 167255. Police Overtime: An Examination of Key Issues, Bayley, D.H., and R.E. Worden, Research in Brief, May 1998, 17 pages, NCJ 167572. Policing in Emerging Democracies: Workshop Papers and Highlights, Wirth, T., Research Report, October 1997, 108 pages, NCJ 167024. Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden, Research Preview, July 1998, 2 pages, FS 000223. Protective Intelligence Threat Assessment Investigations: A Guide for State and Local Law Enforcement Officials, Fein, R.A., and B. Vossekvil, Research Report, July 1998, 65 pages, NCJ 170612. Technology Forensic Laboratories: Handbook for Facility Planning, Design, Construction, and Moving, Office of Law Enforcement Standards, Research Report, April 1998, 71 pages, NCJ 168106. Helicopters in Pursuit Operations, Alpert, G.P., Research in Action, September 1998, 6 pages, NCJ 171695. National Guidelines for Death Investigation, National Medicolegal Review Panel, Clark, S.C., Research Report, December 1997, 57 pages, NCJ 167568. State and Local Law Enforcement Wireless Communications and Interoperability: A Quantitative Analysis, Taylor, M.J., R.C. Epper, and T.K. Tolman, Research Report, January 1998, 131 pages, NCJ 168961. The Unrealized Potential of DNA Testing, Weedn, V.W., and J.W. Hicks, Research in Brief, April 1998, 8 pages, NCJ 170596. Using Gunshot Detection Technology in High-Crime Areas, Mazerolle, L.G., Research Preview, June 1998, 4 pages, FS 000201. Wireless Communications and Interoperability Among Law Enforcement Agencies, Taylor, M.J., R.C. Epper, and T.K. Tolman, Research in Brief, February 1998, 12 pages, NCJ 168961. Victims Civil Protection Orders: Victims' Views on Effectiveness, Keilitz, S.L., C. Davis, H.S. Efkeman, C. Flango, and P.L. Hannaford, Research Preview, January 1998, 2 pages, FS 000191. Early Childhood Victimization Among Incarcerated Adult Male Felons, Weeks, R., and C.S. Widom, Research Preview, April 1998, 2 pages, FS 000204. Immigrant Populations as Victims: Toward a Multicultural Criminal Justice System, Davis, R.C., and E. Erez, Research in Brief, May 1998, 7 pages, NCJ 167571. Violence Adolescent Violence: A View From the Street, Fagan, J., Research Preview, January 1998, 4 pages, FS 000189. Batterer Intervention: Program Approaches and Criminal Justice Strategies, Healey, K.M., C. Smith, with C. O'Sullivan, Issues and Practices, February 1998, 201 pages, NCJ 168638. Batterer Programs: What Criminal Justice Agencies Need to Know, Healey, K.M., and C. Smith, Research in Action, July 1998, 12 pages, NCJ 171683. The Crime of Stalking: How Big Is the Problem? Tjaden, P., Research Preview, November 1997, 4 pages, FS 000182. Criminal Behavior of Gang Members and At-Risk Youth, Huff, C.R., Research Preview, March 1998, 4 pages, FS 000190. Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities: Trends, Context, and Policy Implications, Lattimore, P.K., J. Trudeau, K.J. Riley, J. Leiter, and S. Edwards, Research Report, November 1997, 144 pages, NCJ 167262. Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy Implications, jointly produced by NIJ and the American Bar Association, Research Report, July 1998, 89 pages, NCJ 171666. Neighborhood Collective Efficacy--Does It Help Reduce Violence? Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls, Research Preview, April 1998, 2 pages, FS 000203. Predicting Criminal Behavior Among Authorized Purchasers of Handguns, Wintemute, G., Research Preview, April 1998, 4 pages, FS 000198. Stalking in America: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, Tjaden, P., and N. Thoennes, Research in Brief, May 1998, 24 pages, NCJ 169592. A Study of Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities: An NIJ Intramural Research Project, Lattimore, P.K., J. Trudeau, K.J. Riley, J. Leiter, and S. Edwards, Research in Brief, November 1997, 12 pages, NCJ 167263. Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries, Pfeiffer, C., Research Preview, May 1998, 4 pages, FS 000202. Other Crime and Justice Atlas, Justice Research and Statistics Association, June 1998, 140 pages. Crime and Place: Plenary Papers of the 1997 Conference on Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation, Taylor, R.B., G. Bazemore, B. Boland, T.R. Clear, R.P. Corbett, Jr., J. Feinblatt, G. Berman, M. Sviridoff, and C. Stone, Research Forum, July 1998, 105 pages, NCJ 168618. Perspectives on Crime and Justice: 1996-1997 Lecture Series, Vol. I, Wilson, J.Q., P. Reuter, M.H. Moore, C.S. Widom, and N. Morris, Research Report, November 1997, 132 pages, NCJ 166609. NIJ Journal NIJ Journal, December 1997, No. 234, 44 pages, JL 000234. NIJ Journal, March 1998, No. 235, 40 pages, JL 000235. NIJ Journal, July 1998, No. 236, 35 pages, JL 000236. Solicitations for Research and Evaluation Building Safer Public Housing Communities Through Locally Initiated Research Partnerships (1998), January 1998. Communicating Research Findings: Assessing the Communication Strategies and Products of the National Institute of Justice, July 1998, SL 000299. Crime Mapping Research Center Fellowship Program, October 1997, NCJ 166375. Data Resources Program Funding for the Analysis of Existing Data, April 1998, SL 000278. Drug Court Evaluation II, December 1997. Evaluating Task Forces, Toll-Free Information Service Lines, and Drug Testing Programs: BJA/NIJ Evaluation Partnership for the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program (1998), August 1998, SL 000289. Evaluation of Vehicle-Stopping Electromagnetic Prototype Devices, Phase III: Engineering Field Testing, July 1998, SL 000298. Evaluation of Victims of Crime Act State Compensation and Assistance Programs, January 1998, SL 000242. Forensic Document Examination Validation Studies, June 1998, SL 000297. Guidelines for Submitting Proposals for National Institute of Justice-Sponsored Research, August 1998, NIJ 92737. Guidelines for Submitting Proposals for NIJ Investigator-Initiated Research, Rev. July 1998, NIJ 92737-4. Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program Research and Evaluation Solicitation (1998), April 1998, SL 000282. Juvenile "Breaking the Cycle" Evaluation, September 1998, SL 000308. Law Enforcement and Corrections Family Support Solicitation for Research, Evaluation, Development, and Demonstration Projects, March 1998, SL 000266. Local Evaluations of the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners Program, January 1998, SL 000252. National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program, March 1998, SL 000270. NIJ Request for Proposals for Comparative, Cross-National Crime Research Challenge Grants, April 1998, SL 000277. Reducing Nonemergency Calls to 911: An Assessment of Four Approaches to Handling Citizen Calls for Service, February 1998, SL 000264. Research and Evaluation on Violence Against Women, April 1998, SL 000279. Research on Violence Against Women: Syntheses for Practitioners, March 1998, SL 000271. Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships: Evaluations of Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence, May 1998, SL 000295. Selection of Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Site Management Teams, March 1998, SL 000258. Solicitation for the Forensic DNA Laboratory Improvement Program, Phase 4, September 1998, SL 000307. Solicitation for Investigator-Initiated Research (1998), March 1998, SL 000240. Solicitation for Policing Research and Evaluation: Fiscal Year 1998, May 1998, SL 000286. Solicitation for Research and Evaluation on Corrections and Sentencing (1998), April 1998, SL 000276. Annual Reports 1997 Annual Report to Congress, August 1998, 82 pages, NCJ 171679. Building Knowledge About Crime and Justice: The 1998 Research Prospectus of the National Institute of Justice, November 1998, 24 pages, NCJ 167570. Award Lists 1997 Research Portfolio (Interim), Research in Brief, November 1997, 38 pages, NCJ 166374. NIJ Awards in Fiscal Year 1997, Research in Brief, August 1998, 27 pages, NCJ 167576. NIJ Awards Issued in Response to Fiscal Year 1997 Solicitations, Research in Brief, November 1997, 20 pages, NCJ 167576. Catalogs of Publications NCJRS Catalog #36, September/October 1997, 24 pages, BC 000260. NCJRS Catalog #37, November/ December 1997, 24 pages, BC 000261. NCJRS Catalog #38, January/ February 1998, 24 pages, BC 000262. NCJRS Catalog #39, March/April 1998, 24 pages, BC 000263. NCJRS Catalog #40, May/June 1998, 24 pages, BC 000264. NCJRS Catalog #41, July/August 1998, 24 pages, BC 000265. The NIJ Publications Catalog, 1996-1997, November 1997, 72 pages, NCJ 166144. The NIJ Publications Catalog, 6th Edition, 1986-1996, November 1997, 25 pages, NCJ 167244. Electronic Publications NIJ News: An online newsletter that features articles from the director on current issues, along with coordinated articles, announcements, and links to related sites. Visit NIJ's Web page at http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij/newsletter. JUSTINFO: An electronic newsletter service sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs and published the 1st and 15th of each month. It provides the latest criminal justice news, information, services, and publications. Subscription information as well as back issues can be accessed at http://www.ncjrs.org/justinfo. ------------------------------- Endnotes 1. NIJ's authorizing legislation is the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended. 2. Mastrofski, Stephen D., Roger B. Parks, and Albert J. Reiss, Jr., Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From St. Petersburg, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, forthcoming. "Observing Police in Neighborhoods," in Annual Report to Congress, 1997, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (NCJ 171679). Mastrofski, Stephen D., Roger B. Parks, and Albert J. Reiss, Jr., Systematic Observation of Public Police: Applying Field Research Methods to Policy Issues, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1998 (NCJ 172859). 3. Tjaden, Patricia, and Nancy Thoennes, Stalking in America: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (NCJ 169592). Tjaden, Patricia, and Nancy Thoennes, Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1998 (NCJ 172837). 4. Feucht, Thomas E., and Andrew Keyser, "Reducing Drug Use in Prisons: Pennsylvania's Approach," NIJ Journal, October 1998 (JR 000241):10-15. 5. Elden, Max, and Rupert Chishol, "Emerging Varieties of Action Research: Introduction to the Special Issue," Human Relations 46(2) (1993): 121-41. 6. Sherman, Lawrence W., Denise Gottfredson, Doris MacKenzie, John Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn Bushway, Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, A Report to the United States Congress, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1997 (NCJ 165366). The full report was followed in 1998 with a condensed summary especially suited to policymakers and practitioners (Sherman et al., Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 171676). 7. Roth, Jeffrey A., and Christopher S. Koper, Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, March 1999 (NCJ 173405). 8. Burt, Martha, Lisa C. Newmark, Lisa K. Jacobs, and Adele V. Harrell, 1998 Report: Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants Under the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, July 1998. 9. Burack, James, William Lewis, Edward Marks, David H. Bayley, Robert M. Perito, and Michael Berkow, Civilian Policing and Multinational Peacekeeping--A Workshop Series: A Role for Democratic Policing, NIJ Research Forum, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (NCJ 172842). 10. The Issue Briefs are posted at http://www.nga.org. 11. ADAM is a geographically expanded and scientifically more rigorous version of NIJ's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program, which operated at 23 sites from 1987 to 1997. The program expanded to 35 sites in 1998. 12. Comprehensive efforts that contribute to the SACSI model include the Boston Gun Project, the Comprehensive Communities Program, and Weed and Seed. 13. Friedman, W., and M. Clark, "Community Policing: What Is the Community and What Can It Do?" in Measuring What Matters: Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings, Research Report, ed. R.H. Langworthy, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, July 1999 (NCJ 170610): 124. 14. Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden, Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (FS 000223): 2. 15. Stephens, D.W., "Measuring What Matters," in Measuring What Matters: Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings, Research Report, ed. R.H. Langworthy, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, July 1999 (NCJ 170610): 62. 16. Chaiken, M.R., Kids, COPS, and Communities, Issues and Practices, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1998 (NCJ 169599): 42. 17. Friedman, W., and M. Clark, "Community Policing: What Is the Community and What Can It Do?" in Measuring What Matters: Proceedings From the Policing Research Institute Meetings, 124. 18. Tyler, Tom, "Why Do Citizens Defer to Legal Authorities? A Comparison of European Americans, African Americans, and Hispanics," summarized in NIJ Journal, April 1999 (JR 000239): 34. 19. Allegations of excessive force, for instance, have led to riots. Reflecting its ongoing concern about excessive force, NIJ continues to sponsor many use-of-force research studies, including (1) an examination of the types of force used by a county police department, the frequency of incidents, the factors affecting use of force and the extent of injuries, and the characteristics associated with the frequency and type of force used; (2) a national assessment of early warning systems law enforcement agencies have developed to identify officers who receive high rates of citizen complaints and to provide remedial intervention to correct problem behavior; (3) a comparison of police officers who, because of force- or integrity-related matters, have been dismissed or compelled to resign to a random sample of colleagues to determine whether they differ on a variety of individual, organizational, and community characteristics; and (4) development and evaluation of less-than-lethal devices. 20. Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., R.E. Worden, C. DeJong, J.B. Snipes, and W. Terrill, Systematic Observation of Public Police: Applying Field Research Methods to Policy Issues, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1998 (NCJ 172859): vii. 21. Mastrofski, S.D., R.B. Parks, A.J. Reiss, Jr., and R.E. Worden, Policing Neighborhoods: A Report From Indianapolis, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (FS 000223): 2. 22. Sampson, R.J., and D.J. Bartusch, Attitudes Toward Crime, Police, and the Law: Individual and Neighborhood Differences, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, June 1999 (FS 000240): 2. 23. Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls, Neighborhood Collective Efficacy Does It Help Reduce Violence? Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000203): 1. 24. See Hartnett, S.M., and W.G. Skogan, "Community Policing: Chicago's Experience," NIJ Journal, April 1999 (JR 000239): 2-11. 25. In fiscal year 1998, NIJ added 10 research projects to its substantial portfolio of awards related to community-oriented policing. See Appendix A, page 59. 26. McEwen, Tom, "NIJ's Locally Initiated Research Partnerships in Policing Factors That Add Up to Success," NIJ Journal, January 1999 (JR 000238): 3. 27. Couper, D.C., "Seven Seeds for the Field of Policing," speech delivered in acceptance of the Police Executive Research Forum's leadership award, Washington, D.C., May 4, 1993. 28. An NIJ survey found that 36 percent of law enforcement agencies with 100 or more sworn officers are using some form of crime mapping. The figure for smaller agencies is 3 percent. Mamalian, Cynthia A., and Nancy G. LaVigne, The Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey Results, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (FS 000237). 29. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Vital Statistics Report, 47(9) (November 10, 1998): 67. 30. Uniform Crime Reports, "Law Enforcement Officers Killed, 1997," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, pp. 4, 15. 31. In 1995, transfers of funds from other agencies amounted to $11.1 million; by 1998 that figure had risen to $26.3 million. 32. National Guidelines for Death Investigation, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1997 (NCJ 167568). 33. Initially, the Attorney General requested that the law enforcement and corrections components of the Justice Department that conduct research and development meet regularly to share information about their programs. Subsequently, other Federal agencies joined TPC, creating an interagency council with representatives from several departments. 34. Snyder, Howard N., Juvenile Arrests 1997, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1998 (NCJ 173938). 35. Tonry, Michael, and Mark H. Moore, eds., Youth Violence, vol. 24 in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. 36. Weeks, R., and C.S. Widom, Early Childhood Victimization Among Incarcerated Adult Male Felons, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000204). 37. Sampson, R.J., S.W. Raudenbush, and F. Earls, Neighborhood Collective Efficacy-Does It Help Reduce Violence? Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000203); and Earls, Felton, Linking Community Factors and Individual Development, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, September 1998 (FS 000230). 38. U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice, Annual Report on School Safety: 1998. See also Kaufman, P., X. Chen, S.P. Choy, K.A. Chandler, C.D. Chapman, M.R. Rand, and C. Ringel, Indicators of School Crime and Safety 1998: Executive Summary, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, October 1998 (NCES 98-251/NCJ 172215). 39. Sheley, J.F., and J.D. Wright, High School Youths, Weapons, and Violence: A National Survey, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ 172857). 40. Kenney, D., Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1998 (FS 000224). 41. Huff, C.R., Comparing the Criminal Behavior of Youth Gangs and At-Risk Youth, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, October 1998 (NCJ 172852). 42. Fagan, J., Adolescent Violence: A View From the Street, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1998 (FS 000189). 43. Pfeiffer, C., Trends in Juvenile Violence in European Countries, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, May 1998 (FS 000202). 44. 1996 National Survey of State Sentencing Structures, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, September 1998 (NCJ 169270). 45. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Correctional Populations in the United States, 1996, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, April 1999 (NCJ 171103):iii. 46. Ditton, Paula M., and Doris James Wilson, Truth in Sentencing in State Prisons, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 1999 (NCJ 170032). 47. The incidence of AIDS among State and Federal inmates in 1994-95 was 518 per 100,000, and among city and county inmates 706. By contrast, the incidence in the U.S. population (1993 data) was 41 per 100,000. Hammett, Theodore M., et al., 1994 Update: HIV/AIDS and STD's in Correctional Facilities, Issues and Practices, Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, December 1995 (NCJ 156832). 48. McDonald, Douglas C., et al., Telemedicine Can Reduce Correctional Health Care Costs: An Evaluation of a Prison Telemedicine Network, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, March 1999 (NCJ 175040). 49. Office of Justice Programs, Women in Criminal Justice: A 20-Year Update, Special Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1998 (NCJ 173416); and Morash, Merry, Timothy S. Bynum, and Barbara A. Koons, Women Offenders: Programming Needs and Promising Approaches, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, August 1998 (NCJ 171668). 50. Conly, Catherine, The Women's Prison Association: Supporting Women Offenders and Their Families, Program Focus, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, December 1998 (NCJ 172858). 51. See, for example, Lipton, Douglas S., The Effectiveness of Treatment for Drug Abusers Under Criminal Justice Supervision, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, November 1995 (NCJ 157642):2-3. 52. Hammett, Theodore M., Public Health/Corrections Collaborations: Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS, STD's, and TB, Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, July 1998 (NCJ 169590). 53. Finn, Peter, The Delaware Department of Correction Life Skills Program, Program Focus, Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice and National Institute of Corrections, August 1998 (NCJ 169589). 54. Healey, Kerry Murphy, Case Management in the Criminal Justice System, Research in Action, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, February 1999 (NCJ 173409). ------------------------------- NIJ's Intramural Research Program Since its creation in 1968, NIJ has engaged researchers through a diverse, multidisciplinary extramural research program that involves a highly competitive award process. Beginning in 1994, NIJ's science, evaluation, and program development staff began infusing the agency with knowledge gained through their independent intramural research studies. During 1998, staff-authored papers and reports were published or presented on the following topics: o International comparisons of drug use among arrestees.[1] o The use of geocoding and geographic analysis within law enforcement agencies.[2] o The role of women in the criminal justice system (as offenders, victims, volunteers, and professional personnel).[3] o Victimization and personal fraud.[4] o The effects of pepper spray.[5] 1. Taylor, Bruce, and Trevor Bennett, Comparing Drug Use Rates of Detained Arrestees in the United States and England, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1999 (NCJ 175052). 2. LaVigne, Nancy, and Julie Wartell, eds., Crime Mapping Case Studies, Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1998 (product #834). Mamalian, Cynthia A., and Nancy G. LaVigne, The Use of Computerized Crime Mapping by Law Enforcement: Survey Results, Research Preview, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1999 (FS 000237). 3. Office of Justice Programs, Women in Criminal Justice: A 20-Year Update, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1998 (NCJ 173416). 4. Titus, Richard, "Victimization by Personal Fraud," paper presented at the 1998 Economic Crime Summit, St. Louis, April 28, 1998. Titus, Richard, "Personal Fraud: Who Are the Victims and What Are the Scams?" paper presented at the American Society of Criminology 1998 Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., November 11, 1998. 5. Kaminski, Robert, Steven M. Edwards, and James W. Johnson, "The Effects of Oleoresin Capsicum on Assaults Against Police: Testing the Velcro-Effect Hypothesis," Police Quarterly 1(2) (NCJ 176335). ------------------------------- ADAM Goes International An international component of the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program held its first strategic planning meeting in Miami, Florida, in April 1998. In attendance were representatives from: o Eight nations (Australia, Chile, England, the Netherlands, Panama, Scotland, South Africa, and Uruguay). o Two international organizations (Organization of American States and the United Nations Drug Control Program). o Experts in the field of drug testing systems. o NIJ staff. o Representatives of U.S. Federal agencies (such as the Justice Department's Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services' National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism). In total, 40 people attended the conference. With its launching, International ADAM (I-ADAM) became one of only a few international drug prevalence measures and the only international drug testing system for monitoring the drug use rates of arrestees. I-ADAM's development is important because the existing drug surveillance systems differ from one another to such an extent that comparisons among countries are difficult. From its inception, I-ADAM was designed to be a standardized international system that will use similar instruments, sampling, training, and other protocols. By 1999, six of the eight strategic planning countries--Australia, Chile, England, the Netherlands, Scotland, and South Africa--will have started collecting I-ADAM data. Comparative data will be analyzed and the results will be published as they become available. Visit the ADAM Web site at http://www.adam-nij.net. ------------------------------- NIJ's World Wide Web Presence In addition to NIJ's Home Page (http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij), several of NIJ's programmatic and topic areas have their own Web presence: o The Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program tracks trends in the prevalence and types of drug abuse among booked arrestees in an urban network of sites across the United States and several international sites (http://www.adam-nij.net). o Breaking the Cycle is a systemwide intervention designed to identify and treat all defendants in need of substance abuse treatment. The approach focuses on maintaining continuous treatment as the defendant moves through the system (http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij/brekprog.htm). o The Corrections and Law Enforcement Family Support program is discovering innovative ways to prevent and treat the negative effects of stress experienced by law enforcement and correctional officers and their families (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ nij/clefs/welcome.html). o The Crime Mapping Research Center promotes the research and development of GIS (geographic information systems) and crime mapping to identify, solve, and monitor crime problems in communities (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/cmrc). o The Data Resources Program ensures the preservation and availability of research and evaluation data collected through NIJ-funded research. Datasets collected through NIJ-funded research are archived and made available to other scientists to support new re-search to replicate original findings or test new hypo-theses (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/dataprog.htm). o The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence posts announcements and transcripts of meetings and summaries of working group meetings. The site will post the Commission's forthcoming report and recommendations (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/dna/ welcome.html). o The Sentencing and Adjudication program announces funds for research, including fellowship and NIJ-funded grant awards in the areas of judicial decisionmaking, courts management, specialized courts, prosecution, defense, impact of legislation, sentencing outcomes, structured sentencing, and the general topic of sentencing (http://www.ojp.usdoj. gov/nij/saap/welcome.html). o Technology Development Portfolios describe programmatic areas related to crime prevention, officer protection, less-than-lethal weapons, investigative and forensic sciences, information sharing and analysis, counterterrorism, training, and simulation (http://www. ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/sciencetech/welcome.html). o The Violence Against Women and Family Violence program features research on the safety of women and family members and the effectiveness of the criminal justice system's response to these crimes (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/vawprog/ welcome.html). In addition to NIJ's programmatic Web sites, the Institute supports several additional Web sites: o JUSTNET is a gateway to information on new technologies, equipment, and other products and services available to the law enforcement, corrections, and criminal justice communities. The JUSTNET site contains news and information services, interactive chat lines and topic boards, data and publications, and links to related sites (http://www.nlectc.org). o The Partnerships Against Violence Network (PAVNET) is a database on violence prevention programs, curricula, and funding. With more than 500 subscribers, the PAVNET listserv is an important online source of information for professionals and volunteers in the violence prevention, education, treatment, and enforcement fields (http://www.pavnet.org). o The World Justice Information Network (WJIN) is a multilingual communications tool and a professional forum for concerned citizens worldwide. Through a partnership with Globalink, WJIN members can instantly translate documents, send e-mail, and chat online in French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish, with other languages to be added in the future (http://www.wjin.net). ------------------------------- Most Popular Publications Released in Fiscal Year 1998 (as measured by orders for copies, requests for more information, and inquiries from the media) o National Guidelines for Death Investigation, by the National Medicolegal Review Panel, Research Report, February 1998 (NCJ 167568). o Crack, Powder Cocaine, and Heroin: Drug Purchase and Use Patterns in Six U.S. Cities, by K. Jack Riley, Research Report, March 1998 (NCJ 167265). o Kids, COPS, and Communities, by Marcia R. Chaiken, Issues and Practices, April 1998 (NCJ 169599). o Stalking in America: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, by Patricia Tjaden and Nancy Thoennes, Research in Brief, June 1998 (NCJ 169592). o Protective Intelligence and Threat Assessment Investigations, by Robert A. Fein and Bryan Vossekuil, Research Report, July 1998 (NCJ 170612). o ADAM: 1997 Annual Report on Adult and Juvenile Arrestees, by K. Jack Riley, Research Report, July 1998 (NCJ 171672). o Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising, by Lawrence W. Sherman, Denise Gottfredson, Doris MacKenzie, John Eck, Peter Reuter, and Shawn Bushway, Research in Brief, July 1998 (NCJ 171676). o Crime in the Schools: A Problem-Solving Approach, by Dennis Kenney, Research Preview, August 1998 (FS 000224). o Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, by Patricia Tjaden and Nancy Thoennes, Research in Brief, November 1998 (NCJ 172837). ------------------------------- ADAM Tracks Drug Use Trends in 35 Sites Although most of the 35 ADAM sites in the United States are referred to by the name of the largest city in the area, the boundaries (or catchment areas) of most sites are substantially larger than the city. In most cases, the catchment area is the county. (The New York City site, for example, includes all of the city's five boroughs.) The 35 sites are: Albuquerque New Orleans Anchorage New York Atlanta Oklahoma City Birmingham Omaha Chicago Philadelphia Cleveland Phoenix Dallas Portland (Oregon) Denver Sacramento Des Moines St. Louis Detroit Salt Lake City Ft. Lauderdale San Antonio Houston San Diego Indianapolis San Jose Laredo Seattle Las Vegas Spokane Los Angeles Tucson Miami Washington, D.C. Minneapolis In addition to the ADAM sites listed above, ADAM staff provide scientific assistance to domestic and international affiliated sites, including Albany and Buffalo, New York; Australia; Chile; England; Scotland; and South Africa. ------------------------------- Crime Mapping Research Awards NIJ's Crime Mapping Research Center awarded nine major grants for crime mapping research in 1998: o Assistance in Crime Mapping and Analytic Technologies for Enhancing Law Enforcement and Prosecution Coordination, Hunter College of the City University of New York. o Combining Police and Probation Research To Reduce Burglary: Testing a Crime-Analysis Problem-Solving Approach, Arizona State University. o Crime Hot-Spot Forecasting: Modeling and Comparative Evaluation, Carnegie Mellon University. o Detection and Prediction of Geographical Changes in Crime Rates, State University of New York at Buffalo. o A Geographic Information System Analysis of the Relationship Between Public Order and More Serious Crimes, University of Texas at Austin. o Identification, Development, and Implementation of Innovative Crime Mapping Techniques, Hunter College of the City University of New York. o Predictive Models for Law Enforcement, University of Virginia. o The Social and Economic Impact of Sentencing Practices and Incarceration on Families and Neighborhoods, Yale University. o Variation in Community Policing Activities Across Neighborhoods, University of Cincinnati. ------------------------------- Members of the Interagency Consortium on Violence Against Women o Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. o National Institute on Aging. o National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. o National Institute on Drug Abuse. o National Institute of Justice. o National Institute of Mental Health. o Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (at the National Institutes of Health). o Office of Child Abuse and Neglect. o Office of Research on Women's Health (at the National Institutes of Health). ------------------------------- For more information on the National Institute of Justice and to obtain an electronic version of this report, please visit the NIJ World Wide Web site at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij or contact: National Criminal Justice Reference Service Box 6000 Rockville, MD 20849-6000 Phone: 800-851-3420 Phone: 301-519-5500 E-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org ------------------------------- NCJ 177617