Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report and STRATEGIC GOAL TWO: |
 |
To provide leadership in the area of crime prevention and control, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continually searches for ways to strengthen the criminal and juvenile justice capabilities of state, local and tribal governments. Three DOJ components are at the forefront of the Department’s efforts to fortify community safety across the nation. The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) administers formula and discretionary grant programs, as well as provides targeted training and technical assistance on a wide range of criminal and juvenile justice system improvements. In addition, OJP conducts research, evaluates programs and collects and publishes crime-related statistical information. The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) supports local efforts to hire and deploy additional police officers and adopt community policing practices. And finally, the Community Relations Service (CRS) assists state and local officials and civic leaders to prevent and resolve disputes and conflicts emanating from racial or ethnic tension. In support of this strategic goal, the Department’s OJP assists the state, local, and tribal governments through its Bureaus and Program Offices.
In support of Strategic Goal II, OJP works in partnership with federal, state, local and tribal governments to carry out its mission to improve the nation’s capacity to prevent and control crime, administer justice, and assist crime victims. Its five Bureaus administer a variety of activities:
The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) provides leadership and assistance in support of state, local and tribal justice strategies to achieve safer communities. Its program activities focus on reducing and preventing crime, violence and drug abuse and improving the overall functioning of the criminal justice system.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the statistical arm of the Department, collects and reports on a portfolio of statistics focusing on crime and the operation of the justice system. BJS, through its grant activities, also assists state and local governments with the development of justice information systems and the collection, analysis and dissemination of statistical data.
The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the principal federal agency for research on crime. Its role is to build knowledge regarding "best practices" and "lessons learned" and to develop tools and technologies to help the criminal justice community prevent and control crime.
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) provides national leadership, coordination and resources to develop, implement and support effective methods to prevent and respond to juvenile delinquency and child victimization.
The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) provides federal resources to support victims’ assistance and compensation programs around the country. OVC activities enhance the nation’s capacity to assist crime victims and provide leadership in changing the attitudes, policies and practices to promote justice and healing for all crime victims.
In addition, OJP’s six program offices administer program activities designed to assist state, local and tribal governments as follows:
The Corrections Program Office (CPO) provides financial and technical assistance to state, local and tribal governments to implement correction-related programs, including corrections facility construction and corrections-based drug treatment programs.
The Drug Court Program Office (DCPO) supports the development, implementation and improvement of drug courts by providing resources, training and technical assistance to state, local, and tribal governments, and courts.
The Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) coordinates the Department’s legislative and other initiatives relating to violence against women and administers a series of grant programs to help prevent, detect, and stop violence against women, including domestic violence, stalking and sexual assault.
The Executive Office for Weed and Seed (EOWS) helps communities build stronger, safer neighborhoods by implementing the Weed and Seed strategy, a community-based, multi-disciplinary approach to combating crime.
The Office for State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support (OSLDPS) is responsible for enhancing the capacity and capability of state and local jurisdictions to prepare for and respond to incidents of domestic terrorism.
The Office of the Police Corps and Law Enforcement Education (OPCLEE) provides college educational assistance and professional leadership training to students who commit to public service in law enforcement, and scholarships with no service commitment to dependents of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty.
MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES
There are no existing material weaknesses that will hinder the achievement of goals in this area in FY 2002.
However, the DOJ Office of Inspector General (OIG), in its December 2000 list of the ten most serious management challenges facing the DOJ, listed two issues related to this area:
Grant Management - The OIG states that the Department’s grant programs have a high risk for fraud given the large amount of money involved and the tens of thousands of grantees. Due to DOJ grant programs averaging slightly more than $900 million per year, the OIG highlighted the need for proper dispensation and monitoring of funds, including complete on-site monitoring reviews; grantee compliance with reporting rules; and appropriate methodologies for compensating applicants for grants. Note that since this challenge affects all aspects of mission in this area, it is reported under STRATEGIC GOAL SEVEN: Ensure Excellence, Accountability and Integrity.
Performance measures related to these management challenges are noted.
PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
Evaluation of the Services, Training, Officers and Prosecutors (STOP) Formula Grants - An evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants was completed and published during FY 2000. Over the course of the evaluation, with assistance of the STOP program, states have made great strides in implementing their own strategies for helping victims of all three areas of violence against women; domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Statistics on arrests, prosecution, and other justice system activities are beginning to show the impact of the changes stimulated by STOP.
The findings of the evaluation revealed significant achievements. With the assistance of STOP, grantees reported increases in the people they have served. In addition to serving more victims, practitioners reported that their jobs have been made easier by working together with agencies in their community. Many subgrantees noted that the receipt of funding is essential for continued improvements in services for victims of violence. In their view, if funding decreased, they would lose the progress they have made using STOP funding. STOP subgrantees perceive that their STOP funding has helped communities make major improvements in all three areas of violence against women mentioned above.
In reviewing the programs across the country that stand out as having accomplished the goals of STOP, several key elements emerge. There must be solid working relationships among all the players: law enforcement, prosecution, nonprofit victim service agencies, any victim witness assistance units that exist, and medical establishments (for sexual assault). There must be willingness to work together on every case unless there is a compelling reason not to, and participating agencies must develop and adopt protocols requiring them to contact the appropriate partner agencies in response to every call. In addition, protocol development must be a cross-disciplinary process from beginning to end. Law enforcement, medical personnel, and victim service providers should be on the team developing the prosecution protocol, and the same cross-disciplinary representation should be applied to developing protocols for law enforcement, victim services, and medical services.
Effective programs have transformed the way the criminal justice system handles domestic violence and/or sexual assault victims in their communities. The lessons learned from observing these programs may guide us in developing more comprehensive domestic violence and sexual assault services across the country.
Now that the shared qualities of accomplished programs have been extracted, we can begin to build the foundation for a structure to be used in guiding other programs to success. However, following this template is not enough. A critical starting point is to focus on increasing awareness among the state grantees about the prevalence of stalking offenses, their seriousness, and the existence of many programs that can be used as models for replication.
National Evaluation of the COPS Program - An evaluation of the first four years of the COPS program was completed during FY 2000, examining the following areas:
Client satisfaction
For many small jurisdictions, COPS was their first federal grant experience. A simplified application process and customer service orientation was successful with law enforcement agencies serving these smaller areas. Additionally, small and large agencies with prior federal grants experience found the COPS grants easier than others to request and administer. The grantees reported high levels of satisfaction with the application and administration processes.
Effect on level of policing
Preliminary findings by an external evaluator estimated that by 2003, the COPS program will have raised the level of policing to a figure between 62,700 and 83,900 full-time officers. The report noted, however, that preliminary count estimates "should be treated with extreme caution." The COPS Office has expressed its concerns about some of the methodology used to develop that projection. The COPS Office’s internal survey of grantees indicated that as of August 2000 there were 73,692 COPS funded officers on the street. Unlike the evaluator, who contacted 800 grantees and extrapolated results based on FY 1998 data, COPS contacted every grantee at least twice. This current data provides strong support for the COPS Office projection that all 100,000 officers will be on the street by FY 2002.
The COPS program accelerated transitions to locally defined versions of community policing in at least two ways. First, COPS funds stimulated a national conversation about community policing and provided training and technical assistance. With the assistance of the COPS program, the idea of adopting an approach labeled community policing was very enticing to chief executives. Second, COPS hiring funds and innovative policing grants provided the opportunity to chief executives to add new community policing programs without immediately having to cut back other programs, increase response time, or suffer other adverse consequences.
Effects on organizational and technological innovation
The COPS application produced a foundation that was crucial to the success of the COPS program. The application required specification of a community policing strategy, thereby offering an occasion for engaging broad segments of the agency and community in planning that strategy. Additionally, COPS resources allowed agencies the opportunity to add new modes of policing without drawing resources away from existing priorities.
Effects on crime
Although the program is too young to determine its effect on crime, the adoption of new policing tactics by so many agencies presents an opportunity to investigate which tactics had beneficial effects on crime rates. By statistically relating local crime trends to the adoption of new tactics, it should be possible to identify promising strategies that are more likely than not to reduce crime more rapidly than the national average.
In conclusion, until promising strategies are identified, a series of site observations should prove helpful in distinguishing between effective and ineffective uses of these promising strategies.
Evaluations expected to be completed during FY 2001:
Violence Against Women Act - Evaluation of Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program - The Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies evaluation will examine processes related to program implementation, and will assess the impact of programs in the states of Arizona, California, New York, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin.
Byrne - Tribal Strategies Against Violence Initiative - The Tribal Strategies Against Violence Initiative evaluation will document the processes used by tribal communities to develop and implement strategies to reduce violence in seven sites, analyze and document differences and similarities related to the development and implementation of local strategies, and report local and national findings.
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) Assessment - The evaluation will examine local problems targeted by the original five HIDTA gateways; Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, and the Southwest Border (Texas to California). The assessment is examining local problems targeted by these gateways and will address the approaches adopted to resolve problems and progress to date.
COPS - 311 Evaluation - This evaluation will study program participation and implementation to assess the extent to which there is a reduction in the volume of inappropriate emergency calls for service as a result of implementing the 311 alternative.
COPS - Youth Firearms Violence Initiative Evaluation - This evaluation will include a number of case studies assessing the effectiveness of targeted enforcement in reducing youth firearm violence, reducing violent gang activity, and firearms related drug offenses.
Operation Drug Test Evaluation - This evaluation will include an examination of the processes involved in implementation, context, resource needs and allocations, and evaluation of programs nationally. Also included in the assessment will be the impact of changes in local policy and practice, and changes in characteristics of the defendant population.
Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing Grants Evaluation - This evaluation will examine legislative actions, sentencing patterns, correctional populations, system costs, and crime rates in all 50 states. Seven states have been selected for an in-depth examination of sentencing and correctional reforms: California, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas and Virginia.
During FY 2002, NIJ will be involved in the following program evaluations:
Violence Against Women Act - This will include an evaluation of grants to combat violent crimes against women on campuses (the evaluation will analyze the program characteristics and effectiveness) and an evaluation of the Civil Legal Assistance program. This study will document local programs funded, examine grantee planning and implementation, evaluate the need for and adequacy of special conditions pertaining to victim confidentiality, and determine the effectiveness of these programs.
Community Prosecution Initiative - NIJ will undertake a national evaluation examining both the process of how this major initiative is being implemented, and the impact of community prosecution on local crime problems. Findings in best practices and lessons learned will be disseminated to the field. The process evaluation was recently funded and the outcome will follow by FY 2002.
COPS School Resource Officer (SRO) Program Assessment - This national assessment will provide a description of various models implemented under the SRO Program and measurement of the impact of various SRO programs on selected indicators of school safety.
| STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2.1: LAW ENFORCEMENT Improve the crime-fighting and criminal/juvenile justice system capabilities of state, tribal, and local governments. |
| Annual Goal 2.1: Improve the crime-fighting and criminal/juvenile justice system capabilities of state, tribal, and local governments. |
STRATEGIES
|
OJP continues to invest significant resources in establishing partnerships with state, local and tribal governments and, through its program activities, provides federal leadership regarding matters of crime and the justice system.
For example, the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program provides grants to the states and territories, which, in turn, allocate funds to the local level. Funds awarded under this program can be used in one or more of the program’s 28 purposes areas including: demand reduction education programs; multi-jurisdictional task forces; and innovative programs that demonstrate new and different approaches to enforcement, prosecution, and adjudication of drug offenses and other serious crimes.
Another example of how OJP’s programs have evolved to respond to the needs of state, local, and tribal governments is the program work being done with respect to domestic terrorism. While the federal government plays a major role in preventing and responding to terrorist incidents, the state and local public safety community serve as our nation’s "first responders." Unfortunately, most state and local governments lack the specialized equipment and skills needed to respond effectively -- especially to attacks involving chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. In coordination with its federal partners, such as the FBI’s National Domestic Preparedness Office, OJP sponsors basic and advanced first responder training, provides targeted technical assistance and grants to help states and localities obtain needed equipment and participate in situational exercises.
Advances in technology have greatly increased criminal intelligence, information sharing among jurisdictions, and the ability to track and analyze local crime trends. In addition, technology has provided valuable tools to help criminal justice agencies enhance their ability to lower crime and improve their operations. For example, with OJP’s assistance, schools across the nation are enhancing safety by implementing concealed weapons detection systems and surveillance technologies. In addition, OJP is developing other law enforcement applications, including investigative and forensics tools, less-than-lethal devices, crime mapping, and vehicle stopping devices. Through OJP programs, states and local jurisdictions have interstate and national access to criminal records and have improved the quality of data maintained by and submitted to these systems. Accurate state data helps to improve the FBI administered national criminal record systems, such as the Interstate Identification Index, the National Protection Order File, the National Sex Offender File, and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which provides pre-sale record checks pursuant to the Brady Act. OJP is also promoting integrated criminal justice information technology and design to facilitate and assist state and local integration efforts. The goal is to achieve a national integrated justice information environment that will facilitate the development of information sharing systems by federal, state, and local criminal justice agencies.
OJP is working to ensure that tribal governments are included in efforts to improve access to and integration of criminal justice and information technology. To do this, OJP has increased its efforts to channel justice-related resources to make existing programs, traditionally available to states and local entities, more relevant to the needs of tribal governments. A DOJ priority is to assist tribal governments in building comprehensive and effective law enforcement and public safety systems to provide a foundation for healthy communities through comprehensive problem-solving based on indigenous justice practices and systems. For example, the goal of the Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement Project is to enhance tribal governments’ response to public safety and to improve the quality of life in three tribal communities.
| MEANS - Annual Goal 2.1 |
Dollars/FTE
|
Appropriation |
FY 2000 |
FY 2001 |
FY 2002 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
$ mil |
FTE |
$ mil |
FTE |
$ mil |
FTE |
|
|
Tribal Prison Grants |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
35 |
0 |
|
Tribal Courts |
5 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
|
Byrne Formula Grants |
487 |
0 |
499 |
0 |
500 |
0 |
|
Byrne Discretionary Grants |
59 |
0 |
78 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Community Policing |
270 |
15 |
311 |
20 |
387 |
20 |
|
Local Law Enforcement Block Grants |
591 |
0 |
522 |
0 |
400 |
0 |
|
Correctional Facilities Grants |
646 |
0 |
685 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Cooperative Agreement Program |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
35 |
0 |
|
Violence Against Women Act Programs |
288 |
0 |
274 |
0 |
375 |
0 |
|
State Criminal Alien Assistance Program |
12 |
0 |
399 |
0 |
265 |
0 |
|
Crime Control - State & Local Law Enforce. |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Crime Control - Federal |
0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
|
PSOB – Disability and FLEDA Programs |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
PSOB – Death Benefits |
29 |
0 |
33 |
0 |
33 |
0 |
|
Asset Forfeiture Fund – Permanent Bud. Auth. |
463 |
0 |
619 |
0 |
432 |
0 |
|
Telecommunications Carrier Compliance |
262 |
0 |
201 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
FBI Salaries and Expenses |
223 |
3215 |
256 |
3,112 |
265 |
3058 |
|
FBI Construction |
6 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
National Institute of Justice |
51 |
0 |
70 |
0 |
55 |
0 |
|
Bureau of Justice Statistics |
26 |
0 |
29 |
0 |
32 |
0 |
|
Regional Information Sharing System (OJP) |
21 |
0 |
25 |
0 |
25 |
0 |
|
White Collar Crime Information Center |
9 |
0 |
9 |
0 |
9 |
0 |
|
Crime Control Program |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Counterterrorism (OJP) |
77 |
0 |
220 |
0 |
220 |
0 |
|
Management and Administration (OJP) |
39 |
551 |
23 |
626 |
28 |
637 |
|
Drug Demonstration |
2 |
0 |
11 |
0 |
11 |
0 |
|
TOTAL |
3569 |
3781 |
4283 |
3,758 |
3121 |
3715 |
Skills
| OJP requires skilled administrators with expertise in program development, grant administration, technical assistance, evaluation and implementation. In addition, OJP seeks staff with expertise in social science research including the collection and analysis of statistical data. |
Information Technology
| FBI programs in this area rely upon: NICS (a national name check system that compares the identity of firearm purchasers against several databases to determine eligibility for firearm purchase), IAFIS (identifies individuals through name, date of birth, and fingerprint comparisons), QSIS (tracks all training conducted at Quantico). The OJP program is supported by the NCJRS system. OJP relies upon data from the Program Accountability Library (PAL), which is an internal, automated grant cataloging system. |
|
| 2.1A Support Local Criminal Justice |
Background/ Program Objectives:
The Byrne Law Enforcement Assistance Program is composed of two grant programs: the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program and the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Discretionary Grant Program (which will be discontinued in FY 2002. The Byrne Formula Grant Program assists states and units of local government in carrying out programs that offer a high probability of improving the functioning of the criminal justice system, with a special emphasis on nationwide and multi-level drug control strategies and violent crime prevention. The states, in consultation with local officials, develop statewide drug and violent crime strategies and funding priorities to address and to improve the functioning of their criminal justice systems, while supporting national priorities and objectives. Grantees may direct the funds received under the Byrne Formula Grant Program in one or more of the 28 program purpose areas authorized by the law. While the discretionary program was intended to provide competitive funding for innovative programs, unrequested, non-competitive projects here significantly eroded its flexibility.
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: Byrne Programs Exhibiting High Probability of Improving the Criminal Justice System
Target: 50 Actual: 50
Discussion: Each year, BJA awards funds to 56 eligible states and territories based on a formula specified in the legislation, unless an applicant fails to comply with statutory program requirements. These funds are used to develop and implement projects that improve the functioning of the criminal justice system. States use their own planning process and subgrants funds to local criminal justice agencies for use within 28 purpose areas. Each grant is for a period of three years with the possibility of additional extension. The funding results in hundreds of projects throughout the United States. Each year, BJA grant managers conduct on-site visits that identify exemplary programs. At least one on- site visit to each state and territory was conducted in FY 2000. In addition, states are required to submit Annual Reports to BJA that provide program accomplishments as well as reports on any evaluations conducted that year. Through review of these reports, BJA grant managers identify other projects that may be exemplary.
Public Benefit: The Byrne Formula Grant Program assists states and units of local government in carrying out programs that improve the functioning of the criminal justice system with an emphasis on drug control and violent crime aimed at improving public safety.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 goal. In FY 2001, BJA will begin planning and development activities for conversion from a paper-based grants administration process to an Internet based, end to end grants management system. The new system will include performance reporting components that will assist BJA in tracking exemplary programs.
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, the Byrne State and Local Law Enforcement Formula Assistance Program will continue to support programs that exhibit improvement of the criminal justice system. This effort will be accomplished by conducting extensive outreach and regional conferences for grantees. Also, through monitoring visits, OJP will continue to identify exemplary programs that show a high probability of improving the functioning of the criminal justice system throughout the 50 states and six territories. The OJP will continue to sponsor conferences which will provide training and technical assistance in the areas of criminal justice planning, address emerging trends and issues, discuss changes in program requirements, and allow opportunities for feedback from grantees. No funding is requested for the discretionary program.
Crosscutting Activities:
The BJA program activities involve on-going coordination by BJA and other DOJ staff members, as well as state, local, and tribal units of government.
| 2.1B Reduce Crime and Improve Criminal Justice Systems and Operations in Indian Country |
Background/ Program Objectives:
Under the Tribal Resources Grant Program, the COPS office awards grants that fund additional law enforcement officers, training, and equipment. OJP established the Tribal Court Program as one method to reduce crime and improve the criminal justice systems and operations in Indian Country. Tribal courts have existed in one form or another for several hundred years. However, in the last ten years there has been an unparalleled growth in their vitality, importance, and workload. This growth is due to a number of factors including economic development on many reservations, which has increased the need for reliable means of settling disputes that arise in the ordinary course of business. For example, the need for annual adjudication in tribal courts is spurred by managing complex issues such as: regulation of gaming, air and water pollution control, mining, banking, and toxic waste disposal.
![# of Grants Provided to Indian Tribes [COPS]](GrantsProIndTribes-COPS.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: Number of Grants Provided to Indian Tribes
Target: 250 Actual: 199
Discussion: COPS fell short of the targeted performance due to lack of funding. While the target was based on a budget request of $45 million, only $40 million was received. COPS will continue to award grants to tribal agencies contingent upon the amount received.
Public Benefit: American Indians are more likely to be the victim of a crime than the average U.S. resident. The grants awarded by the COPS office provide tribal agencies with funding that allows them to provide higher quality law enforcement services to their community; which contributes to a better quality of life.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, COPS does not expect to achieve the corresponding FY 2001 target, due to the funding shortage mentioned above.
![Tribal Courts [OJP]](TribalCourts-OJP.gif)
Performance Measure: Tribal Courts
Target: 10 new, 38 Enhancements
Actual: 41 new, 33 Enhancements
Discussion: BJA developed and issued a competitive program solicitation that was mailed to 1,224 eligible tribes in May 1999 and funded 41 planning grants, 33 enhancement/implementation grants and 7 other tribal court grants. Although the target for enhancements was not reached, the total number of grants far exceeded the original estimate. This program will be continued through FY 2002 and FY 2000 funds will be awarded in FY 2001.
Public Benefit: Tribal courts help Native American communities to develop the capability to address their own crime problems within their communities rather than having agencies outside Indian Country impose a criminal justice system upon them.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 goal. However, BJA
=s target numbers for FY 2001 and beyond are contingent entirely on Congressional appropriations, as well as applications received from tribal organizations.Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
COPS will continue to award grants to tribal agencies in FY 2002. The funding provided, combined with technical assistance, will give grantees the tools they need to continue the level of service delivery to the community.
In FY 2002, the Tribal Court Program will continue to award development, implementation, and enhancement grants to continue operations of the tribal judicial systems. The Tribal Court Program will provide: financial and technical assistance for federally recognized Indian Tribal governments to further development; enhancement for continued operation of tribal judicial systems (enhancement grants are designed to increase or improve the value and quality of existing programs for no more than two years); education and training for tribal court personnel; and promote cooperation among tribal justice systems and the federal and state judiciary systems.
Crosscutting Activities:
OJP is responsible for programs affecting Indian Country and meets on a regular basis with representatives from the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs and DOJ’s Office of Tribal Justice.
| 2.1C Improve Domestic Preparedness |
Background/ Program Objectives:
While the federal government plays an integral role in the prevention and response to terrorist threats, the state and local public safety community serves as our nation’s first responders. Unfortunately, most state and local governments lack the specialized equipment and expertise needed to effectively respond to and manage terrorist attacks. In 1999, the OJP established the Office of State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support (OSLDPS) to provide state and local first responders with the most comprehensive training and support available to combat terrorist attacks, especially those involving weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
The OJP’s OSLDPS has made great strides in developing comprehensive training programs for our nation’s first responder community by providing technical assistance and grants to states and localities for the purpose of procuring appropriate basic level first responder equipment. A key feature of this program is the Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP), which is a "live agent" training facility that offers advanced level counterterrorism courses to a full spectrum of first responder personnel, including firefighters, emergency medical personnel, hazardous material units, and law enforcement officials. OSLDPS also provides funds to the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium, a five member consortium that brings a unique set of assets to OJP’s domestic preparedness initiative and delivers specialized training to the emergency response community.
In FY 2000, $8M was distributed to states for the development of comprehensive state plans. The goal is to have each state take full inventory of their state of readiness. These plans will be used by OSLDPS to make future funding decisions with respect to training, technical assistance, equipment and exercises.
![# of First Reponders Trained (CDP and Consortium) [OJP]](FirstResTrained-OJP.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: Number of First Responders Trained
Target: 2,000 Actual: 8,856
Discussion: OSLDPS provided state and local governments with the opportunity to train their first responders in a variety of courses on domestic preparedness. The program strategy will continue with new courses being developed to expand the range of training offered.
Public Benefit: OSLDPS has trained a large portion of the nation
=s first responders through an array of courses dealing with weapons of mass destruction and domestic preparedness. The strategy has increased state and local governments= ability to prepare for weapons of mass destruction terrorist incidents.FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to exceed the projected FY 2001 target, with a current estimate of 9,200.
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, based on the specific needs identified in each state plan, OJP will provide targeted training programs to first responders and grants to assist state and local emergency response agencies to procure equipment critical to an effective response capability.
Crosscutting Activities:
The OSLDPS coordinates with the FBI’s National Domestic Preparedness Office. These offices are responsible for coordinating domestic preparedness programs and activities throughout the Federal Government to ensure that a robust crisis and consequence infrastructure is established nationwide to address the threat posed by terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction. In addition, OSLDPS works with the DOD, NSC, FEMA, and DOE in carrying out its mission to better serve state and local governments.
| 2.1D Improve Response Time to Crime |
Background/ Program Objectives:
The FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) was developed to enahnce the FBI's mission to provide identification services to the Nation's law enforcement community and to organizations where criminal background histories are a critical factor in consideration for employment. The IAFIS provides ten-print, latent print, subject search, and criminal history request services, document submission, and image request services to federal, state, and local law enforcement users. IAFIS was procured as three segments: the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) segment, the Interstate Identification Index segment, and the Identification, Tasking, and Networking segment. Each segment provides discrete capabilities and works in conjunction with the other segments to support FBI Service Providers and external users in their law enforcement capacities.
Interstate availability of complete computerized criminal records is increasingly vital for criminal investigations, prosecution, sentencing, correctional supervision and release, and community notification. This information is also necessary to conduct thorough background checks for those applying for licenses, firearm purchases, and work involving the safety and well-being of children, the elderly, and the disabled.
The OJP’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) provides direct technical support to states through the National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP). The goal of NCHIP is to improve the quality and accessibility of the nation’s criminal history records and records of protective orders involving domestic violence and stalking; support the development and enhancement of state sex offender registries; and promote the capability and participation in national systems including the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), Interstate Identification Index (III), and the National Sex Offender Registry. Currently, all states receive funding for automating their state criminal justice records.
The Police Corps Program is a leadership and training program that provides educational scholarships and training opportunities to highly qualified young people. In return, Police Corps participants agree to serve cities and counties as police officers and sheriff’s deputies for four years after graduation. These graduates are placed in state and local police departments in geographic areas with the greatest need for additional police officers.
![Average Response Time (Hours) for Fingerprints Identification Under IAFIS [FBI]](AvgResTimeFingerId-FBI.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: Average Response Time for Fingerprint Submissions Under IAFIS (hours)
Target: Criminal: 2 hours Civil: 24 hours
Actual: Criminal: 13 hours Civil: 8 hours*
* Only six months of data was available (March – September 2000)
Public Benefit: The actual response time data provided above for criminal submissions is much higher than the targeted response time. This average response time is skewed dramatically by a small percentage of submissions that have taken a long time to compute. Although the number of submissions requiring manual intervention may be small, they have a significant effect on the average response time. Some of these submissions have taken months to resolve. Unfortunately, only limited data exists from which to extract submission response time reports for FY 2000. The figures shown for March through September 2000 represent the best available data. A new manual system will better capture the needed information beginning in March of 2001.
The response times for criminal electronic submissions is higher than civil electronic submissions for a number of reasons. The criminal submissions require additional processing steps (both automated and manual). One of the biggest factors affecting the response times on criminal submissions is the amount of manual effort involved in processing those requests. For example, in FY 2000 approximately 63% of the criminal submissions "hit" on an existing record. While only approximately 10% of the civil submissions "hit" on an existing record. When a criminal or civil submission "hits" on an existing record, the submitted fingerprints must be compared against the existing fingerprint record to determine whether they are identical. This comparison is completed by a fingerprint examiner. If the fingerprint examiner considers the two to be identical, the records are forwarded to another fingerprint examiner to "verify" that the submitting fingerprints and the existing fingerprint record are identical. Since approximately 10% of the civil submissions, in comparison to approximately 63% of the criminal submissions, require additional manual intervention, the average response time for civil submissions is much lower than the average response time for criminal submissions.
Also, the FBI's target response times for electronically submitted criminal and civil fingerprints were established without the expectation of some of the current factors that affect the actual results such as: 1) identifications to subjects with a manual arrest history, 2) search activity involving sensitive subjects, 3) search activity involving subjects with missing file data, 4) submissions whose workflow has been interrupted by a transient system anomaly, and 5) occasional workload spikes.
The FBI's original concept was that the manual arrest histories would be converted to automated records by the start of IAFIS. Due to the large backlog of fingerprint submissions experienced by the FBI in the years prior to IAFIS, available personnel were shifted from converting the criminal history records to processing fingerprints in an effort to reduce the backlog. With IAFIS, this backlog has been eliminated and the FBI has begun to address the remaining manual criminal history records. The continued conversion of the manual arrest history records will reduce the percentage of submissions requiring manual intervention.
Since FY 2000 was the first complete fiscal year of operation, the data presented above contains a high number of scheduled and unscheduled maintenance periods which is not unusual for a new system the size and complexity of IAFIS. The FBI has developed a comprehensive plan addressing system components that have the greatest potential to cause service disruptions and have outlined feasible and practical action to reduce service disruptions. Steps taken to date have shown steady improvement during the year 2000. For the first 25 days of March 2001, the new data indicates approximately 93% of electronic criminal answer required submissions are being responded to within two hours. The new data also indicates that approximately 99.7% of the civil electronic submissions are being responded to within twenty-four hours.
![Police Corps Graduates Serving One Year Community Patrol [OJP]](PolCorpGrad1YrComm-OJP.gif)
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: We expect to achieve the corresponding FY 2001 target.
Performance Measure: Police Corps Graduates Serving One Year Community Patrol
Target: 350 Actual: 345
Discussion: The FY 2000 target was not met because training classes lost participants as a result of removal or resignation. In the future, to reduce removals and resignations, we are encouraging careful selection processes to correct the problem. Although the FY 2000 goal was not met, we will continue to coordinate with participating state Police Corps programs, review and revise state plans, and negotiate budgets. The past strategy of recruiting and providing technical assistance by phone, through site visits, and during national conferences has proved successful and will continue to be utilized.
Public Benefit: The Police Corps addresses violent crime by helping state and local law enforcement agencies increase the number of officers with advanced education and training assigned to community patrol. The program motivates highly qualified young people to serve as police officers and sheriffs' deputies in the municipalities, counties, and states that need them most.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we do not expect to achieve the corresponding FY 2001 goal. Current estimates project that 444 police corps graduates will serve one year community patrol.
![Discontinued Measure: Awards Made During the Fiscal Year to Assist States & Territories [OJP]](DisMeaAwaMadeFY-OJP.gif)
Performance Measure: Awards Made During the Fiscal Year to Assist States and Territories – Discontinued Measure
Target: 50 Actual: 48
Discussion: In FY 2000, BJS made grant awards to 48 states under the NCHIP program. Two states, Idaho and New Mexico, did not receive awards in FY 2000. Idaho did not submit an application for funding in FY 2000 because Idaho had adequate funds to continue activities supported under the NCHIP program. Due to state-level delays in submitting a revised application, New Mexico received its FY 2000 grant award in early FY 2001. Although the target was not met, due to external factors, BJS does not characterize these results as problematic to the effective administration of the NCHIP program and will not seek changes in implementation strategy. However, it was determined that this measure was too workload/output oriented. In addition, it does not adequately measure the performance of the NCHIP program, as all 50 states and territories are eligible to apply and receive annual funding under this program; therefore, it will be discontinued.
Public Benefit: The goal of the NCHIP program is to improve public safety by improving the accuracy and availability of the criminal records including records of domestic violence, sex offender data, and protection orders. Interstate access to complete and accurate criminal records are necessary to support the immediate identification of persons prohibited from firearm purchases or holding positions of responsibility involving children, the elderly, or the disabled. Reliable criminal history records are also necessary to ensure officer safety and to support criminal justice decisions on pretrial release, career criminal charging, sentencing, and correctional assignments. Background checks for national security and related purposes are also dependent upon the quality of the records on which they are based.
![% of Computerized State Criminal Records [OJP]](CompStateCrimRec-OJP.gif)
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, the FBI will maintain quick response times for fingerprint identification under IAFIS. In addition, the FBI Academy’s Field Police Training Program will serves as the foundation for the FBI's comprehensive training assistance to local, county, and state law enforcement. This program provides training in the investigative, managerial, technical, and administrative aspects of law enforcement.
In FY 2002, BJS will continue to support the NCHIP program through technology-based criminal justice information grants to improve state computerization efforts. This includes efforts to continue automating state criminal records and conducting state-level surveys every two years to ensure the states are making progress in their automation goals. OJP will also continue to support the Police Corps Program by providing resources to states for the purpose of providing educational scholarships and specialized leadership and training opportunities to Police Corps participants.
Crosscutting Activities:
A major goal of the NCHIP program is to assist states in supporting the FBI administered national information systems which include: the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the Interstate Identification Index, the National Protective Order File, the National Sex Offender Registry, and the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System. As part of this effort, BJS works closely with the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and with key representatives of the state law enforcement and court systems.
| 2.1E Provide Support to Law Enforcement |
Background/ Program Objectives:
The FBI Academy is located on the United States Marine Corps Base at Quantico, Virginia, and is responsible for providing five general areas of training. One area is the National Academy Program, which serves as the foundation for the FBI's comprehensive training assistance to local, county, and state law enforcement. This is a ten-week program that targets law enforcement managers; its goal is to render training assistance regarding investigative, managerial, technical, and administrative aspects of law enforcement. The FBI Academy also provides in-service training to local, county, and state law enforcement in many areas, such as forensic science. FBI police instructors located in field offices throughout the country also provide, upon request, education and training programs, thus, contributing to the enhanced professionalism in American law enforcement.
Through support of BJA, the National White Collar Crime Center provides a national resource for the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of multi-jurisdictional economic crimes. This center provides a wide range of technical assistance, including a national training and research institute focusing on economic crime issues. The National Cybercrime Training Partnership, part of the National White Collar Crime Center creates a national network of law enforcement trainers and specialists in computer crime related investigation and prosecution.
OJP’s long standing relationship with state and local law enforcement facilitates our ability to provide a variety of resources to assist in capacity building. NIJ’s Crime Lab Improvement Program (CLIP) is one example of how OJP resources are supporting law enforcement efforts to more efficiently manage crime. In the short-term, CLIP provides funds to assist states to rapidly accelerate the analysis of the DNA samples of convicted offenders across the nation. This accelerated process will allow states to provide Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) compatible data for state and national DNA databases so that law enforcement has access to critical investigative information in a timely manner. In the long-term, CLIP will help improve the technological capabilities and capacity of state and local forensic DNA labs to support the investigation and prosecution of violent crime. The NIJ’s successes in this program include: development or establishment of forensic DNA testing capabilities in state and local forensic laboratories; improvements in the abilities of state DNA labs to meet national standards for DNA quality assurance and proficiency testing; and fostering cooperation and mutual assistance among forensic DNA laboratories by funding laboratory compliance with CODIS.
![Crime Labs Developing New Forensic DNA Technology Capabilities [OJP]](CrimeLabDevDNATech-OJP.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: Crime labs developing new forensic DNA technology capabilities
Target: 144 Actual: 144
Discussion: A major goal of the Crime Lab Improvement Program (CLIP) is the development of crime labs capable of using the latest in DNA Forensic technology. The funding level provided through Congressional appropriation has enabled the number of labs utilizing new technologies to increase at a steady rate with only minor setbacks.
Public Benefit: Given the increased emphasis law enforcement has placed on the use of forensic sciences in solving crimes, the demand for technologically sophisticated lab analysis work has never been greater. The CLIP program is a follow-on program to the DNA Identification Act program and was created to improve the capabilities and capacity of state and local forensic DNA laboratories to support the investigation and prosecution of violent crime. It is closely associated with the need to establish and improve DNA analysis. The number of laboratories successfully updated through this program continues to grow, thereby improving law enforcement
's ability to solve crime.FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to fall short of the projected FY 2001 target with a current estimate of 146.
![Discontinued Measure: Research, Evaluations & Reports Provided (Millions) [OJP, NIJ, BJS]](DisMeaResEvaRepProv-OJP.gif)
Performance Measure: Research, Evaluations and Reports Provided in Millions – Discontinued Measure
Target: 2.4 Million Actual: 2.3 Million
Discussion: This target relates to traditional means of dissemination, such as requests being filled by the Clearinghouse or mailing paper versions. The reduction in the actual number provided is attributable to a decrease in the customers’ use of these traditional methods of dissemination (i.e., mailing paper versions) and an increase in the use of electronic dissemination, such as the Internet, which has seen a 55% increase in the average number of user sessions per month. At the time these targets were set, BJS underestimated the amount of time it would take to see the level of use decline in these categories. In addition, this measure will be discontinued as it does not effectively demonstrate the performance of either BJS or NIJ. This measure is composed of 24 separate indicators from BJS and NIJ describing many dissimilar activities. For instance, included in the 2.4 million figure are measures describing product/service use through a multitude of various dissemination mechanisms, research and technology grant awards, and forensic operational test sites. These activities are fundamentally different therefore cannot be combined to represent one indicator.
Public Benefit: The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the Nation
's primary source for statistical information on crime, criminal offenders, victims of crime, and the operation of justice systems at all levels of government. These data are critical to federal, state, and local policymakers in combating crime and ensuring that justice is efficient and fair. BJS supports the information needs and operational demands of policy and decision-making officials of OJP, the Department of Justice, the Administration, and Congress. It provides financial and technical assistance to States in developing and improving capabilities in justice statistics and information systems. In addition, BJS provides customers with access to statistical information through both paper and electronic media.
![Law Enforcement & Regulatory Personnel Trained [FBI, OJP]](LawEnfRegPerTrained-FBI.gif)
Performance Measure: Law Enforcement and Regulatory Personnel Trained (NOTE: We have modified this indicator to include FBI training in the field at state, regional, and local training facilities).
Target: 2,000 trained in computer crime
Actual: 1,451
Target: 3,556 trained at the FBI Academy
Actual: 4,944
Target: Trained in the field -Not projected-new measure
Actual: 120,233 trained in the field
Discussion: While we fell short on our training target for computer crime, we exceeded our target for the FBI Academy. During FY 2000, National White Collar Crime Center realized they would only be able to conduct fifty-three classes with a maximum capacity of 30 students in each Computer Crime class. Numbers of training participants were further limited by the fact that, some students who registered were unable to attend. In addition to the 4,944 trained at the Quantico Academy, the FBI trained an additional 120,233 state and local law enforcement officials in state, regional and local training facilities. The FBI's ability to train its own personnel and state and local law enforcement has met expectations consistently over the past several years.
Public Benefit: This program directly benefits state and local enforcement and prosecutorial agencies by enhancing the effectiveness of the investigation and prosecution of computer crime. More effective management of these cases, in turn, translates to lessening the effects of economic crime on our citizens; not just monetary losses, but also the demoralizing effects that deplete the quality of life.
The FBI provides instruction for state and local criminal justice practitioners, both at the FBI Academy and throughout the United States at state, regional, and local training facilities. These training sessions cover the full range of law enforcement training topics such as hostage negotiation, computer-related crimes, death investigations, violent crimes, criminal psychology, forensic science, and arson. During FY 2000, 120,233 criminal justice personnel received training at state, regional, and local training facilities from FBI instructors. In addition, because of the increasingly global nature and mandate of many of the FBI's investigative initiatives, the FBI has in recent years emphasized the need to train its foreign law enforcement partners through the International Training and Assistance Program. In 2000, the FBI provided training to 7,709 international police officers and executives representing 161 countries.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000 for training in computer crime, we do not expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 target of 3,000, Current estimates indicate that we will only train 1,800. However, we do expect to achieve our corresponding FY 2001 targets for FBI training efforts in this area.
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, BJA will continue to support the National White Collar Crime Center by providing technical assistance and training to local law enforcement and regulatory personnel. NIJ will continue to support CLIP efforts that improve technology capabilities and capacity of state and local forensic DNA labs through the development or establishment of forensic DNA testing capabilities in state and local forensic laboratories; monitoring improvements in the ability of state DNA labs to meet national standards for DNA quality assurance and proficiency testing; and fostering cooperation and mutual assistance among forensic DNA laboratories by funding laboratory compliance with the Combined DNA Index System.
Crosscutting Activities:
IAFIS represents a partnership among the FBI state, local, and other federal law enforcement agencies faced with the problem of criminals changing jurisdictions and their identities to avoid apprehension. OJP, in coordination with other federal agencies and state and local justice departments, provides training and assistance in implementing statewide strategies to improve criminal justice systems. This includes interactions with the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center system and the National Cybercrime Training Partnership.
| 2.1F Expand Programs to Reduce Violence Against Women |
Background/ Program Objectives:
OJP’s Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) administers a combination of formula and discretionary grant programs that support the Violence Against Women Act and are designed to stop domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking of women. The VAWO works with victim advocates and law enforcement in developing programs that support a wide range of services for women, including: advocacy, emergency shelter, law enforcement agencies protection, and legal aid. Additionally, the VAWO is leading efforts nationally and abroad to intervene in and prosecute crimes of trafficking in women and children and is addressing domestic violence issues in international fora.
The VAWO’s Services, Training, Officers, and Prosecutors (STOP) formula grant program provides resources to assist in creating a coordinated justice approach to violent crimes against women. STOP grant funds may be used to train police officers, prosecutors, and other criminal justice practitioners to enable them to respond more effectively to violent crimes against women; the creation or enlargement of special units of police officers and prosecutors to handle cases involving violence against women; the creation or enhancement of services for victims; the development and implementation of more effective police and prosecution policies and procedures, protocols, orders, and services specifically dedicated to preventing, identifying, and responding to violent crimes against women; and the creation of programs addressing stalking.
The VAWO, under the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement Protection Orders Program, provides discretionary grants to ensure victim safety and offender accountability by encouraging state, local, and tribal governments to treat domestic violence as a serious violation of criminal law. If arrests are to be an effective response to domestic violence, police, pretrial service professionals, prosecutors, judges, probation and parole officers, and victim advocates and service providers must be poised to follow through in a coordinated and integrated manner to enhance the safety of victims and hold offenders accountable for their violent behavior. One way of accomplishing this is through the implementation of mandatory arrests or pro-arrest programs and policies in police departments, for protection order violations that will enhance the safety of victims and hold offenders responsible for their violent behavior.
Under the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Program, VAWO provides an opportunity for law enforcement and prosecution agencies, the courts, non-governmental victim services agencies, community organizations and businesses in rural communities and Indian Nations to collaborate in creating protocols and strategies tailored specifically to meet the needs of rural populations. The goals of this program are to: develop and implement policies, protocols, and services designed to promote the early identification, intervention, and prevention of domestic violence, and child victimization; increase victims’ safety and access to treatment and counseling; enhance the investigation and prosecution of domestic violence and child abuse cases; and develop and implement comprehensive strategies that draw on a rural jurisdiction’s unique characteristics and resources to enhance community understanding of violence.
![States, Localities, Tribal Gov't w/Justice Programs STOP [OJP]](StateLocTribGovProg-OJP.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: States, Localities, Tribal Gov
'ts with Coordinated Justice Programs (STOP)Target: 157 Actual: 157
Discussion: To achieve this goal, VAWO provided grants and technical assistance. VAWO
's strategy focused on issues of domestic violence, stalking, and sexual assault through establishing coordinated community responses.Public Benefit: STOP Violence Against Women Grants are awarded to states, territories, the District of Columbia and tribal governments to support comprehensive and coordinated responses to sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking crimes. STOP grantees develop and implement victim-centered strategies by encouraging collaboration among law enforcement, prosecution, the judiciary, pre-trial services, probation and parole, as well as with private, nonprofit victim service providers and victims advocates.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 goal.
![Grantees with Mandatory or Pro-Arrest Policies [OJP, VAWO]](GrantManProArrPol-OJP.gif)
Performance Measure: Grantees with Mandatory or Pro-Arrest Policies
Target: 60 Actual: 60
Discussion: To achieve this goal, VAWO provided grants and technical assistance. This program, renamed Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection Orders Program under the VAWA II legislation, will continue at the same funding level. As a result of the legislatively mandated program, VAWO will continue to encourage policies that view treatment of domestic violence as a serious criminal offense.
Public Benefit: The benefits of these grant programs are the implementation of mandatory arrest or pro-arrest programs and policies in police departments, including mandatory arrest programs or pro-arrest programs and policies for protection order violations. Additional benefits extend to: improved tracking of cases involving domestic violence; centralization and coordination of police enforcement, prosecution, probation, parole, and the judiciary; coordination of computer tracking systems to ensure communication among police, prosecutors, and criminal and family courts; strengthening legal advocacy service programs for victims of domestic violence, improved judicial handling of domestic violence cases through education of judges and others responsible for judicial handling of domestic violence cases in criminal, tribal, and other courts.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: We expect to exceed the original target projected for FY 2001. We are currently on track to have 176 grantees with pro-arrest policies in place at the close of FY2001. Due to this enhanced performance and increased appropriations, we established the FY 2002 target at 256.
![Jurisdictions Providing Services in Rural Areas Previously Under-Served [OJP, VAWO]](JurProSerRurAreaUnd-OJP.gif)
Performance Measure: Jurisdictions Providing Services in Rural Areas Previously Under- Served
Target: 60 Actual: 60
Discussion: To achieve this goal, VAWO provided grants and technical assistance. This goal is accomplished through a discretionary grant program to implement, expand, and establish cooperative efforts and projects between law enforcement officers, prosecutors, victim advocacy groups, and other related parties to investigate and prosecute incidents of domestic violence and child abuse; and to work in cooperation with the community to develop education and prevention strategies directed toward such issues.
Public Benefit: The ultimate goal of the program is to reduce domestic violence and child abuse in rural areas. This goal provides obvious benefit to the abused in the community.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 goal.
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, the VAWO will continue leading the national effort to stop domestic violence through its grant programs to support state, local and tribal governments. In addition, the STOP program will strengthen tribal law enforcement and prosecutorial strategies to combat violent crimes against women and develop and enhance services for the victims of such crimes.
The Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement Protection Orders Program will continue to support mandatory or pro-arrest policies to shape and solidify a unified, coordinated response to domestic violence including aggressive enforcement of protection orders, arrest and prosecution of batterers, appropriate supervision of and intervention with batterers in the community, and legal and support services for domestic violence victims.
Additionally, VAWO will continue to target grant funds to rural areas to help eliminate obstacles such as fewer law enforcement resources, shortage of victim services, lack of privacy in tight-knit communities, geographical isolation, and an inability to keep locations of shelters confidential. Program resources will augment available resources by developing partnerships with nonprofit and governmental agencies, as well as local volunteers to enhance the capacity of rural jurisdictions to respond to domestic violence.
Crosscutting Activities:
VAWO works to examine the causes, treatment and prevention of violence against women and violence within the family along with several components within the Department of Health and Human Services. VAWO also coordinates within DOJ and has regular contact with other organizations such as the Legal Services Corporation, HUD, OPM, DOD, DOL, STATE, and the USIA.
| STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2.2: JUVENILE JUSTICE Reduce youth crime and victimization through targeted programs that emphasize both prevention and enforcement. |
| Annual Goal 2.2: Reduce youth crime and victimization through targeted programs that emphasize both prevention and enforcement. |
STRATEGIES
|
The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) will continue to help states and communities implement initiatives to prevent, intervene in, and suppress crime by juveniles, as well as to protect youth from crime and abuse. OJP’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) works to address youth crime through a comprehensive program of research, evaluation, program development, and information dissemination. This multi-faceted approach targets youth who experience risk factors for delinquency, as well as youth arrested, processed, and sentenced in the juvenile justice system. OJP also focuses on status offenders and juvenile offenders who have been diverted from the system into alternative programs. OJJDP also addresses juvenile offenders who have been waived or transferred out of the juvenile justice system into adult criminal court, typically for the most serious and violent crimes. OJJDP's Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders is the foundation of much of OJP's juvenile justice programming to assist state, local, and tribal communities in addressing juvenile delinquency.
| MEANS - Annual Goal 2.2 |
Dollars/FTE
|
Appropriation |
FY 2000 |
FY 2001 |
FY 2002 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
$ mil |
FTE |
$ mil |
FTE |
$ mil |
FTE |
|
|
Missing Children |
24 |
0 |
23 |
0 |
23 |
0 |
|
Management and Administration (OJP) |
9 |
154 |
10 |
173 |
9 |
173 |
|
Juvenile Justice Programs |
253 |
0 |
185 |
0 |
184 |
0 |
|
Title V (At-Risk Children’s Grant Program) |
0 |
0 |
95 |
0 |
95 |
0 |
|
Victims of Child Abuse |
0 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
|
Juvenile Account Incentive Block Grants |
239 |
0 |
249 |
0 |
249 |
0 |
|
Victims of Child Abuse* |
13 |
0 |
14 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
|
TOTAL |
538 |
154 |
584 |
173 |
583 |
173 |
*
Includes Court Appointed Special AdvocateSkills
| OJP requires skilled administrators with expertise in program development, grant administration, technical assistance, evaluation and implementation. OJP also seeks staff with expertise in social science research including data collection and statistical data analysis. |
Information Technology
| OJP relies on data provided by its Program Accountability Library (PAL), which is an internal automated grant cataloging system. |
|
| 2.2A Improve Juvenile Justice Systems |
Background/ Program Objectives:
OJJDP provides national leadership, coordination, and resources to develop, implement, and support effective methods to prevent juvenile victimization and respond appropriately to juvenile delinquency. This is accomplished through prevention programs and a juvenile justice system that protects public safety, holds juvenile offenders accountable, and provides treatment and rehabilitative services based on the needs of each individual juvenile. In order to be eligible to receive a formula grant, a state must follow specific guidelines that include committing to achieve and maintain compliance with four core requirements outlined in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974. These statutory core requirements include: de-institutionalizing status offenders (a juvenile who has committed an act that would not be a crime if committed by an adult), confining juveniles separately from adults, taking steps on the state level to reduce the proportion of juveniles detained or confined in secure facilities who are members of a minority group, and removing juveniles from adult jail and lockup.
In addition, OJJDP administers the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) Program. The CASA program funds local programs to support court appointed special advocates in their efforts to assist overburdened court officials and social workers. This program not only serves as a safety net for abused and neglected children, but also as an essential ally in delinquency prevention. Research shows that abused and neglected children are at increased risk of repeating the same violent behavior they experience, and are therefore at increased risk of becoming delinquents and adult criminals.
![State/Territories in Compliance with the Four Statutory Core Requirements [OJP]](StatTerrComp4StatCorReq-OJP.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: States/Territories in Compliance with the Four Statutory Core Requirements (of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974, as amended.)
Target: 56 Actual: 45
Discussion: Although 11 states did not fully meet all four of the core requirements of the JJDP Act, seven of those sates did receive 75% of their FY 2000 Formula Grants allocation. As a result, 52 states and territories actually received funding under the Formula Grants program in FY 2000. Two states were determined to be ineligible for funding due to current state statutes and judicial policies, and two states’ Formula Grant Plans remain under review.
States that have been determined to be ineligible to receive any or all of their Formula Grant allocation, receive ongoing technical assistance on procedures and strategies to help them attain and maintain compliance with the JJDP Act. All states participating in the OJJDP Formula Grants program are required to submit an annual Compliance Monitoring Report. A state receives 25% of its fiscal year allocation for compliance with each of the four core requirements.
Public Benefit: The primary purpose of the four core requirements of the JJDP Act is to ensure the safety of children in the justice system, while being responsive to the expressed needs of states and localities.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 goal.
![Children Served by the CASA Program [OJP]](ChildSerCASAProg-OJP.gif)
Performance Measure: Number of Children Served by the CASA Program
Target: 180,000 Actual: 207,000
Discussion: The National Court Appointed Special Advocate Association (NCASAA) administered 107 awards to local programs in FY2000. It provided 45 monitoring sites, 57,616 technical assistance consultations to programs nationwide as well as 134 training opportunities to its grantees. The number of CASA volunteers increased to 52,760 thus increasing the number of children represented. Through this process, the NCASAA successfully met its goal of increasing the number of abused and neglected children receiving quality representation in dependency hearings. For 2000, the actual number of children served was 207,000, an increase of 35,000 children since 1998.
Public Benefit: Children who are victims of abuse and neglect receive effective and quality representation in dependency hearings, thus ensuring that the child
's best interest is given appropriate consideration by the court and the child welfare system. CASA volunteers work to ensure that children under the supervision of a court and the child protection system receive the services and attention as detailed in statutory mandates. These efforts assist court and child protection systems that are often overburdened. This program acts as a safety net for abused and neglected children and also supports delinquency prevention as abused and neglected children are at increased risk of delinquency and adult offending.FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to exceed the corresponding FY 2001 target. Current estimates indicate that 248,000 children will be served by the CASA program.
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, formula grant funding to states that comply with statutory core requirements related to juveniles will continue. However, OJJDP will continue to monitor compliance through on-site monitoring visits and audits of states’ compliance monitoring system at least once every five years.
In addition, OJJDP will continue to provide grants to local programs supporting court appointed special advocates. The CASA program will continue to provide grants nationwide in the areas of: (1) new program development; (2) urban program expansion; (3) program expansion of state organizations; and (4) demonstration grants. Through the grant award process NCASAA will select existing CASA organizations that demonstrate continuing community need and support, and quality administrative and management practices, in order to build the capacity to recruit, train and supervise CASA volunteers as well as start-up programs that demonstrate the need for a CASA program in terms of under-served children and the capacity to implement a program. The NCASAA will also continue to administer funds to the selected grantees and provide training and technical assistance, both on-site, via phone and email consultation, and through training.
Crosscutting Activities:
OJJDP coordinates with other OJP Bureaus and Program Offices as well as COPS, the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the National Academy of Public Administration, and the Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators.
| 2.2B Support Early Intervention and Prevention Programs Focused on Youth Crimes |
Background/ Program Objectives:
Research has shown that early intervention and positive adult support make a difference in the lives of juveniles. Among the intervention and prevention activities supported by OJJDP are mentoring programs that link at-risk youth with responsible adults to provide guidance, promote personal and social responsibility, discourage gang involvement and encourage participation in community service and activities. Also included are programs to reduce the illegal use of tobacco, alcohol and drugs, decrease truancy, and increase healthy child development. The mentoring program is designed to support youth at risk of educational failure, dropping out of school, or involvement in delinquent activities, including gangs and drug abuse.
At the end of 1998, OJJDP completed a Report to Congress on the Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP) including preliminary results from an evaluation of the JUMP program, which will continue through the year 2001. The preliminary results indicate that JUMP shows promise as a preventive measure to reduce delinquency and give participating youth a better chance at success. OJJDP also funded a National Mentoring Center that provides training and technical assistance to mentoring programs through a variety of service, resources and conferences. In addition, OJJDP supports mentoring through the Safe Futures initiative, which assists communities in combating delinquency by developing a full range of coordinated services and formula grant funding to individual states.
![Total Number of Mentoring Programs Implemented [OJP]](TotNumMentProgIm-OJP.gif)
FY 2000 Actual Performance:
Performance Measure: Total Number of Mentoring Programs Implemented
Target: 192 Actual: 203
Discussion: OJJDP issued a revised solicitation in FY 2000, and as a result of an increased Congressional appropriation for mentoring, was able to exceed the target in FY 2000. These programs represent a cross-section of the nation, including rural, urban, suburban and tribal areas. After funding this effort for three years, it was apparent that the programs required a tremendous amount of support and guidance in order to implement their programs. In an effort to address barriers and challenges involved in implementing a mentoring program, OJJDP funded The National Mentoring Center. The Center provides training and technical assistance, dissemination of publications and bulletins, and conducts regional training to strengthen the ability of JUMP programs and other mentoring programs around the country.
Public Benefit: Studies have shown that the presence of a caring adult in the life of a child can have a major impact on a youth's ability to succeed and have a positive effect on reducing negative behaviors and risk factors. Mentoring has been seen as a promising approach. More than 9,500 youth have received one-to-one mentoring, in 46 states and two territories. Two hundred and three (203) programs have been funded under this effort. JUMP forges supportive, collaborative relationships between schools and public agencies and/or private nonprofit organizations that cause the entities to work together for the benefit of the school, community and youth. In addition, youth that are involved in mentoring relationships are less likely to get involved in drugs and alcohol, have poor school attendance, to drop out of school and experience problems with family and peers.
FY 2001 Performance Plan Evaluation: Based on program performance in FY 2000, we expect to achieve the projected FY 2001 goal.
Strategies and Initiatives to Achieve the FY 2002 Goal:
In FY 2002, JUMP will continue to link at-risk youth with responsible adults to provide guidance, promote personal and social responsibility, increase educational participation, and discourage use of illegal drugs, violence, and other criminal activity. In addition, the mentoring training and technical assistance program will continue to provide technical training visits; on-site assistance to struggling mentoring programs with significant program operational needs; as well as training conferences at the local, state, regional, and national levels. In addition, Information Technology International, has completed a Self-Evaluation Workbook for JUMP projects. The purpose of this document is to provide projects with evaluation tools to collect data on project operation and effectiveness. This document has just been published and should be disseminated in the next several months. Training will be available to grantees on how to utilize the workbook.
Crosscutting Activities:
OJP is coordinating with internal program offices as well as with the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
| 2.2C Support Programs to Counter Youth Violence |
Background/ Program Objectives:
Responding to youth gang violence, OJP’s OJJDP launched the Comprehensive Response to America’s Youth Gang Problem. This effort included five major components: 1) the National Gang Center; 2) a multi-site demonstration of the Comprehensive Comm