| How to Obtain
Documents |
| |
|
|
NCJ Number:
|
NCJ 219386
|
|
Title:
|
Final Report on the Evaluation of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration: Executive Summary
|
|
Author(s):
|
Adele Harrell ; Jennifer Castro ; Lisa Newmark ; Christy Visher
|
|
Corporate Author:
|
The Urban Institute
United States of America
|
|
Date Published:
|
06/2007 |
|
Page Count:
|
27 |
|
Sponsoring Agency:
|
|
|
Grant Number:
|
1999-WT-VX-K005 |
|
Sale Source:
|
The Urban Institute
2100 M Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037
United States of America
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America |
|
Document:
|
PDF |
|
Dataset:
|
DATASET 1 |
|
Type:
|
Program/Project Evaluation |
|
Language:
|
English |
|
Country:
|
United States of America |
|
Annotation:
|
This paper presents a summation of the federally supported Judicial Oversight Demonstration (JOD) evaluation with findings from all three JOD sites (Wisconsin, Michigan, and Massachusetts). |
|
Abstract:
|
The evaluation points to the need for research in several critical areas: building stronger linkages between courts and NGO victim service providers, motivating offender compliance and desistance from violence using sanctions and treatment combinations, and changing offender perceptions of the risks of future violence, and identifying and addressing victim needs to ensure their safety and well-being. Highlights of key findings on the impact of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration (JOD) are presented from three primary outcomes: victim well-being, offender accountability, and perceptions and revictimization. These highlighted findings include: (1) JOD increased community-based victim services, particularly in Michigan; (2) victims in all sites were generally satisfied with the response of police, prosecutors, and the court; (3) JOD increased victim contacts with probation agents; (4) JOD increased offender accountability, especially in Dorchester and Milwaukee; (5) JOD did not decrease perceptions of the fairness of judges and the probation departments; (6) JOD increased the perceived certainty or severity of penalties for violations of some court-ordered requirements; (7) JOD reductions in victim reports of repeat intimate partner violence (IPV) were stronger for some types of victims and offenders; and (8) offenders’ perceptions of legal deterrence predicted lower frequency of offender reports of repeat IPV. In 1999, the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence against Women selected three sites for the implementation of the JOD (Dorchester, MA, Milwaukee, WI, and Washtenaw County, MI). In each of the communities, criminal justice agencies and community-based agencies serving victims and offenders formed partnerships to work collaboratively to support an effective response to IPV incidents. The evaluation objective was to test the impact of JOD interventions on victim safety, offender accountability, and recidivism and to learn from the experiences of well-qualified sites who built collaboration between the courts and community agencies to respond to intimate partner violence. Tables |
|
Main Term(s):
|
Domestic assault prevention |
|
Index Term(s):
|
Program evaluation ; Public safety coordination ; Prosecution ; Victim services ; Program implementation ; Intervention ; Court reform ; Domestic assault ; Victim attitudes ; Judicial system development ; Risk management ; Victim program evaluation ; Offender attitudes |
|
Note:
|
For additional information see NCJ-219382-385. |
| |
|
| |
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=241178 |
* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents
not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.
|
