skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 219384   Add to Shopping cart   Find in a Library
Title: Final Report on the Evaluation of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration Volume 3: Findings from Focus Groups with JOD Victims and Offenders
  Document URL: PDF 
  Dataset URL: DATASET 1
Author(s): Lisa Newmark ; Christine Depies DeStefano ; Adele Harrell ; Janine Zweig ; Lisa Brooks ; Megan Schaffer
Corporate Author: The Urban Institute
United States of America
Date Published: 06/2007
Page Count: 99
  Annotation: This federally supported report presents findings from established focus groups on perceptions of fairness of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration (JOD) initiative in each of the JOD sites: Massachusetts, Michigan, and Wisconsin with both victims and offenders in the improvement of victim safety and offender accountability in intimate partner violence cases.
Abstract: Findings across the focus groups and the Judicial Oversight Demonstration (JOD) sites for both victims and offenders indicate the importance of procedural justice concepts when individuals reflect on their intimate partner violence (IPV) cases, services and related outcomes. In particular, issues of voice, impartiality, neutrality, accuracy, and consideration were demonstrated in several sites for several types of JOD partners. Individuals involved in IPV cases, whether victim or offender, want to feel as though they have been heard, that they have been treated fairly, and that they have been treated with respect and consideration. Understanding procedural justice issues and reflecting such themes in service practices may lead to improved offender compliance with case outcomes, and improved satisfaction and safety for victims. Highlights from victim focus groups by type of agency participating in the initiative are presented, followed by findings from offender focus groups by type of agency. These summary highlights identify the key areas in which victims and offenders evaluate their treatment by agencies, whether positive or negative, and identify practices that indicate high procedural justice and key areas in which participants would like to see improvements in practice. This report presents Volume 3 of the JOD evaluative study. The purpose of this report is to document the results of a series of focus groups conducted with victims and offenders in each of the JOD sites (Dorchester, MA, Milwaukee, WI, and Washtenaw County, MI) as part of the formative and process evaluation portion of the study. The JOD’s goal was to improve victim safety and offender accountability and reduce recidivism in intimate partner violence cases. Achieving these goals was through a strong judicial response, combined with coordinated community services and integrated justice system polices in IPV cases. References
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
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
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
Type: Program/Project Evaluation
Country: United States of America
Language: English
Note: For additional information see NCJ-219382, 383, 385 and 386.
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:

* 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.