Criminal justice stats and evaluations

We're the ideal place for homework help. If you are looking for affordable, custom-written, high-quality and non-plagiarized papers, your student life just became easier with us. Click either of the buttons below to place your order.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

see attachments 


LR003:

Applying Data and Statistics:

Use data and statistics to support the evaluation and improvement of criminal justice services, policies, and practices.

Written Response Submission Form and Rubric

Your Name: First and last

Your E-Mail Address: Your e-mail here

Instructions

This Competency includes a Written Response Assessment. Write your response to each prompt below in the space provided. The rubric that will be used by the Instructor to evaluate your responses is beneath the prompts. Carefully review the rubric rows associated with each prompt to provide a complete response.

When writing your response, begin typing where it reads “Enter Your Response Here.” Write as much as needed to satisfy the requirements of the prompt (as defined in the rubric). Be sure to support your responses with connections to professional sources.

Your responses require references (in APA Style) to support your thinking. You will list your references at the end of this template where “References” are noted. If you need additional information regarding how to correctly cite and/or reference sources, please visit the Walden Writing Center at
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/apa/citations.

To learn more about effective paraphrasing strategies, visit the Walden Writing Center at
http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence/paraphrase/effective.

Review the following example item and response for a sample that meets expectations.

Sample Prompt:

Choose a definition of
organizational culture, and explain whether you agree or disagree with the definition. Use examples from your own professional experience to support your response.

Response:

Whitehurst (2016) explained “organizational culture is defined by how people in an organization interact with each other” (para. 2). While I agree that this is one aspect of organizational culture, the definition does not capture the complex factors that contribute to organizational culture. When I started my first job after finishing my undergraduate degree in business, I worked for an organization whose main headquarters were in Dubai. When I traveled to Dubai for the first time, I realized that the culture of the Dubai office was largely influenced by the society’s culture in Dubai. I found that the organization lacked one cohesive culture and that, depending on regional locations, each office had its own culture. Watkins (2013) noted in his research that international organizations often face many challenges in maintaining a cohesive organizational culture. I found this observation to be true in my experience. For example, the Dubai office seemed to endow their employees with more allowance for self-direction when compared with our domestic offices. Although people’s interactions with one another contributed to the organization’s culture, there were other factors such as location, management style, and societal norms that impacted a business culture as well.

References (Note: These are included at the end of a Written Response Assessment but are included here as an example of an accurate APA citation.)

Watkins, M. D. (2013, May 15). What is organizational culture? And why should we care? Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/05/what-is-organizational-culture

Whitehurst, J. (2016, October 13). Leaders can shape company culture through their behaviors. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/10/leaders-can-shape-company-culture-through-their-behaviors


Read the Office of Justice Programs-sponsored case study “Improving Management of Jail Populations” (NCJ 250577, February 2017) and answer the following questions.

Item 1

· Why did the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department contact the Diagnostic Center? (2–3 paragraphs)

· Describe the Diagnostic Center in terms of who they are and what they do. (2–3 paragraphs)

Your Response

Enter your response here.

Rubric

0

Missing

1

Needs Improvement

2

Meets Expectations

Sub-Competency 1: Analyze working relationships of organizations in criminal justice

Why did the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department contact the Diagnostic Center? (2–3 paragraphs)

LO1.1: Explain why the police department and the Diagnostic Center are working together.

Explanation of why the police department and the Diagnostic Center are working together is not present.

Response does not include an explanation of why the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department contacted the Diagnostic Center.

Response does not include at least two issues the police department is currently facing.

Response does not include at least two positive outcomes the police department wants to accomplish from contacting the Diagnostic Center.

Response includes a short background of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, including two positive outcomes the department is currently experiencing.

Response includes an explanation of why the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department contacted the Diagnostic Center.

Response includes at least two issues the police department is currently facing.

Response includes at least two positive outcomes the police department wants to accomplish from contacting the Diagnostic Center.

Describe the Diagnostic Center in terms of who they are and what they do? (2–3 paragraphs)

LO1.2: Describe a Diagnostic Center.

Description of the Diagnostic Center is not present.

Description does not adequately describe the Diagnostic Center in your own words.

Response does not include a description of the Diagnostic Team.

Response does not include a description of at least three things the Diagnostic Team performs.

Description adequately describes the Diagnostic Center in your own words.

Response includes a description of the Diagnostic Team.

Response includes a description of at least three things the Diagnostic Team performs.

Item 2

· Identify and explain the three-step process used by the Diagnostic Center. (2–3 paragraphs)

Your Response

Enter your response here.

Rubric

Sub-Competency 2: Analyze data-driven evidence-based decision models

Identify and explain the three-step process used by the Diagnostic Center (2–3 paragraphs)

LO2.1: Explain the three-step process used by the Diagnostic Center.

Description of the three-step process used by the Diagnostic Center is not present.

Description does not identify the three-step process used by the Diagnostic Center.

Description does not explain the three-step process in detail.

Description does not explain why the three-step process is effective.

Description identifies the three-step process used by the Diagnostic Center.

Description explains the three-step process in detail.

Description explains why the three-step process is effective.

The three-step process is depicted in a chart.

Item 3

· What were the factors that contributed to the issue of jail population management? (3–4 paragraphs)

Your Response

Enter your response here.

Rubric

Sub-Competency 3:
Analyze jail population management

What were the factors that contributed to the issue of jail population management? (3–4 paragraphs)

LO3.1: Explain factors that contribute to jail population management.

Explanation of six factors that contributed to the issue of jail population management is not present.

Description does not identify six factors that contributed to the issue of jail population management for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.

Description does not explain the six factors in detail.

Description identifies six factors that contributed to the issue of jail population management for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.

Description explains the six factors in detail.

LO3.2: Analyze
violations and offenses in the jail populations.

Identification of highest and lowest types of violations or offenses in the jail population are not present.

Description does not identify the highest and lowest types of violations or offenses in the jail population.

Description does not explain why it is important to examine the types of violations or offenses for jail population management.

Description identifies the highest and lowest types of violations or offenses in the jail population.

Description explains why it is important to examine the types of violations or offenses for jail population management.

Response includes a comparison of the highest and lowest types of violations or offenses in jail populations of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department to another reputable study (or your current or past workplace).

Item 4

· What evidence-based programs and practices were recommended to address this issue? (3–4 paragraphs)

Your Response

Enter your response here.

Rubric

Sub-Competency 4: Analyze evidence-based programs and practices

What evidence-based programs and practices were recommended to address this issue. (3–4 paragraphs)

LO4.1: Analyze evidence-based programs and best practices for jail population management.

Description of evidence-based programs and best practices for jail population management is not present.

Description does not explain two evidence-based programs and practices recommended for addressing jail population management.

Description does not explain the recommended evidence-based programs and practices in detail.

Description does not include at least two positive outcomes of using evidence-based programs and practices for addressing jail population management.

Response is not relevant to the case study.

Description explains two evidence-based programs and practices recommended for addressing jail population management.

Description explains the recommended evidence-based programs and practices in detail.

Description includes at least two positive outcomes of using evidence-based programs and practices for addressing jail population management.

Response includes at least one additional recommendation to address jail population management not discussed in this case study.

Response is relevant to the case study.

Professional Skill Assessment

In this Competency-Assessment, you will be assessed on the following Professional Skills: Applied and Collaborative Learning, Information Literacy, and Interpreting Data and Quantitative Literacy. These skills count toward your achievement of the Competency and the Professional Skills.

Applied and Collaborative Learning:
Apply knowledge and skills in collaboration with others to solve authentic problems.

0

Not Present

1

Needs Improvement

2

Meets Expectations

LO1: Recognize how compromise, mutual respect, and shared responsibility help people achieve a common goal.

Evidence of recognition is not present.

Evidence of recognition is unclear or incomplete.

Response includes evidence that demonstrates recognition of how compromise, mutual respect, and shared responsibility help people achieve a common goal.

LO2: Apply collaboration skills to create workable solutions to complex problems.

Application is not present.

Response applies inappropriate collaboration skills or the collaboration results in inappropriate or unrealistic solutions.

Response generally applies relevant and appropriate collaboration skills to create workable solutions to complex problems.

Information Literacy:
Apply strategies to evaluate information in order to effectively analyze issues and make decisions.

0

Not Present

1

Needs Improvement

2

Meets Expectations

LO1: Identify and locate credible sources.

No sources or non-credible sources are present.

Sources are inconsistently credible, appropriate, and relevant to the topic and/or assessment.

Sources are mostly credible, appropriate, and relevant to the topic and/or assessment.

LO2: Analyze information sources.

Analysis is not present.

Analysis superficially applies aspects of sources that are most relevant to the topic and/or assessment and/or analysis is unclear.

Analysis thoroughly and clearly applies aspects of sources that are most relevant to the topic and/or assessment.

LO3: Synthesize information from multiple, credible sources.

Synthesis is not present.

Synthesis demonstrates a vague connection between multiple sources and/or the topic.

Synthesis demonstrates a clear and cohesive connection between multiple sources and/or ideas to support a given topic.

Interpreting Data and Quantitative Fluency:
Interpret quantitative data in order to analyze issues and make decisions.

0

Not Present

1

Needs Improvement

2

Meets Expectations

LO1: Identify conclusions from numeric information presented in narrative and/or graphic form.

No conclusions are made based on numeric information.

Connections between conclusions and numeric information are vague or inaccurate.

Conclusions identified are appropriately connected to the numeric information.

LO2: Use both narrative and graphic form to explain the same data.

Graphs and/or narrative is not present.

Supportive connection between narrative and graph is not clearly explained.

Narrative explanation of quantitative data explains the graph and the graph illustrates and clarifies the narrative.

LO3: Use quantitative data as evidence for a decision or recommendation.

Quantitative evidence is not used.

Quantitative evidence does not support or is superfluous to the recommendation or decision.

Argument for a decision or recommendation incorporates appropriate quantitative data as evidence.

Mastery Rubric

In order to achieve mastery of this Competency, you must achieve a “2” on every rubric row in addition to meeting the additional expectation indicated in the Mastery Rubric.

Mastery Rubric 

No 

Yes 

Exceeds Expectations: Uses data and statistics to support evaluation and improvement of criminal justice services, policies, and practices. 

LO1: Analyze research and data.

The written responses do not demonstrate a strong understanding of how to analyze research and data from evidence-based resources.

The written responses demonstrate a strong understanding of how to analyze research and data from evidence-based resources.

©2019 Walden University 4

image1.png

image2.png

image3.png

image4.png

For this Assessment, you will design a study that would allow you to determine the effects of a shared leadership initiative on police-community relations.

Be sure to include answers to the following:

· What question will you research?

· Who will be studied and how?

· How will you select a sample, and how big will your sample be?

· What variables will you control for?

· What are the limitations of your proposed study?

APA format, references as needed.

Improving Management
of Jail PopulationsC A S E S T U D Y

Location:
Las Vegas (Clark County), Nevada

Organization:
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department (LVMPD) and Clark
County Detention Center (CCDC)

Description of the
organization:
A joint city-county police force
for the city of Las Vegas and
Clark County, Nevada. LVMPD
has more than 5,000 employees
including 2,7941 sworn officers
and covers approximately 7,560
square miles with more than two
million citizens. LVMPD is also
responsible for the management
and staffing of the Clark County
Detention Facility.

Contact:
Richard Suey, Deputy Chief
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (702) 682-9497

Office of Justice Programs
Diagnostic Center
Phone: (855) 657-0411
Email: contact@
OJPDiagnosticCenter.com

1 http://www.lvmpd.com/Portals/0/pdf/Annu-
al_Report_2015.pdf, Annual report pg. 13

Overview
On July 1, 1973, Senate Bill 340 decommissioned the Las Vegas Police De-
partment and the Clark County Sheriff’s Department to establish the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department, consolidating services previously performed
by the local police agency and the county sheriff’s department. These consol-
idated services include police services to the City of Las Vegas and the unin-
corporated areas of Clark County and the administration and management of
the Clark County Detention Facility. As a result of the consolidation, the de-
partments increased purchasing power, improved communication between
departments and enhanced, overall efficiency delivering public safety services
to the residents of Las Vegas and Clark County.2

2 http://www.lvmpd.com/AboutLVMPD/HistoryoftheDepartment/Consolidation/tabid/158/Default.aspx

5,000

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,000

2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

CCDC Population Forecast

AD
P

Avg Daily Pop (ADP) Forecast

Ja
il

Po
pu

la
tio

n
&

Bo
ok

in
gs

Average Length of Stay (in days)

Bookings ADP ALOS Linear (ADP)

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

30.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Clark County Detention Center
Population Trends, 2015

Analysis predicts that CCDC’s jail population will continue to increase at an approximate rate of 0.61
percent per year. CCDC is at 97 percent of capacity; national standards suggest capacity remain between
85 and 90 percent for proper classification and safety.

Analysis concludes that detention center population length of stay trends are increasing—contributing to
smaller decreases in daily population averages. Seventy three (73) percent of the detention center
population awaiting trial in the month of December 2015, which is above national averages.

Data-driven Programs and
Practices Recommended to
Address the Issue

• Adopt an evidence-based pretrial risk
assessment to guide decision-making

• Establish a Criminal Justice Coordinat-
ing Council to evaluate and implement
ongoing justice reform efforts

Improving Management of Jai l Populat ions | 1

Improving Management of Jai l Populat ions | 2

Since 2013, CCDC experienced an increase in its average daily population and average length of stay, despite decreases in
admissions. In 2014, the average daily population reached an all-time high of 3,907 per day and an average length of stay of
23.3 days, while the operating capacity was at 2,563 partially attributed to central CCDC facility renovations and unfunded
bed space in a separate facility. This situation posed significant challenges for CCDC staffing efforts to deliver detention
services in a safe and secure environment.

Former Deputy Chief, Charles Hank contacted the Diagnostic Center in August 2015 requesting training and technical
assistance from the Diagnostic Center with the goal of improving management of CCDC’s population to reduce overcrowd-
ing and enhance pretrial decision-making to minimize public safety risks and maximize resource utilization. The Diagnos-
tic Center was tasked with identifying model practices to inform decision-making on how best to manage the CCDC pop-
ulation to enhance public safety.

The Diagnostic Center
The Diagnostic Center is a technical assistance resource provider designed to build community capacity to use data to
make short- and long-term evidence-based decisions about criminal justice and public safety. Diagnostic Center engage-
ments enhance the ability of public safety executives to collect and use local data to understand the jurisdiction’s issues,
make decisions about programs and practices and support efforts to integrate data and evidence into policies. The
Diagnostic Center invests in what works by bridging the gap between data and criminal justice policy at the state, local
and tribal levels.

The Diagnostic Center Process
After being contacted by the LVMPD, the Diagnostic Center began its three step process to help the department better
understand the factors contributing to increases in the jail population. During the Diagnose Phase, the Diagnostic Special-
ists collected and analyzed local data to assess the issue and then aligned findings to promising practices with demon-
strated success in managing jail populations. That analysis identified six factors contributing to challenges in jail popula-
tion management.

Factors Contributing to the Issue
1. No evidence-based decision-making practice for pretrial release.

The vast majority of the jail population (73 percent as compared with a 62
percent national average) is comprised of pretrial defendants and there is
no evidence-based decision-making process for pretrial release.

2. Lack of formal interagency coordination.
No ongoing formalized structure to enhance interagency coordination and
collaboration for the implementation of system-wide improvements.

3. Limited alternatives to incarceration to meet service demand.

4. Insufficient data for pretrial and incarceration decisions.
Current system lacks an evidenced-based pretrial risk instrument to guide
decisions on release and there is no clear impact assessment of changes in
bail schedule on lengths of stay.

69%

21%

5%

4%

1%

Gross Misdemeanor
Misdemeanor
Warrant
Felony
Other

A significant portion of the jail population are charged
with misdemeanor offenses and misdemeanor probation
violations; evidence suggests that a portion of the
population may be better suited for alternatives to
incarceration.

• Diagnostic Center convenes
community stakeholders and
subject matter experts to:

– define problem and desired outcomes

– identify sources of data that
illuminate strengths and challenges
in the community

• Diagnostic Center helps the
community:

– examine the evidence-based data

– identify and implement data-driven
programs

• Diagnostic Center helps the
community adopt data collection
strategies to measure the
effectiveness of the programs
put in place during the
engagement

DIAGNOSE IMPLEMENT ASSESS

Improving Management of Jai l Populat ions | 3

5. Insufficient resources for specialty court defendants.
Clark County does not have enough resources to support specialty court defendants, who can be held in custody while
awaiting bed space in treatment facilities.

6. Limited ability to share data.
Disparate data systems inhibit analysis and information sharing across justice system.

Descriptions and Details of the Recommended Evidence-based Programs
and Practices
Pretrial risk assessment
The pretrial risk assessment instrument is a researched-based questionnaire with weighted responses to inform court
decisions on release for defendants in custody awaiting trial. A pretrial risk assessment provides a data-driven framework
to enhance the decision-making process around pretrial release. Formulating decisions with the assistance of a pretrial
risk assessment serves to:

• Minimize unnecessary detention of pretrial defendants
• Provide quantifiable metrics to identify low, medium and high risk defen-

dants
• Reduce failures to appear in court
• Maximize resources of the criminal justice system
• Support release and detention decisions
• Improve public safety for all

Leveraging existing models, national best practices and other risk
assessment instruments, the Diagnostic Center supported the cus-
tomization and tailoring of an instrument to meet the specific needs
and data requirements of the Clark County criminal justice system.

This effort generated statewide interest and complemented the work of
the Supreme Court of Nevada Judicial Council Committee to Study Evi-
dence-based Pretrial Release, established and spearheaded by the Chief
Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court. The Diagnostic Center engaged other
county-and municipal-level jurisdictions to collect data to inform tool customization
to test and pilot the pretrial risk assessment. The Diagnostic Center provided guidance
on tool implementation and delivered accompanying training to judges, court administrators, prosecutors, defense attorneys
and law enforcement officials across four pilot sites throughout the state of Nevada.

Interagency coordination
Clark County stakeholders demonstrate a strong willingness to collaborate to address specific challenges within the justice
system, but currently lack a formalized structure to support reform implementation. A Criminal Justice Coordinating Council
(CJCC) is the term used “to describe a body of elected and senior justice system leaders that convene on a regular basis to
coordinate systemic responses to justice problems.”3 A formalized multi-disciplinary entity, such as a CJCC, charged with the
review, evaluation and the implementation of justice-focused reforms serves to identify and develop strategies to address
factors contributing to changes in the jail population as well as other short- and long-term challenges in the justice system.

The Diagnostic Center supported the delivery of technical assistance in strategic planning to formalize partnerships across
components of the Clark County criminal justice system to identify and prioritize key issues in the justice system for im-
provements. The Diagnostic Center intends to support a peer exchange with the CJCC of Washington, DC to witness first-
hand interagency coordination processes under the CJCC framework. Leveraging existing models and lessons learned
from the National Network of CJCCs, Clark County stakeholders can maximize resources and increase efficiencies to
enhance their capacity to implement justice reforms.

3 http://www.jmijustice.org/network-coordination/national-network-criminal-justice-coordinating-councils/

Se
nt

en
cin

g P
rocesses Pretrial and Incarceration

Decisions

Agency Coordination and

Information Management

Key Elements
to Improve

Management of
Jail Populations

Improving Management of Jai l Populat ions | 4

Community’s Response
Multiple stakeholders from all facets of the Clark County criminal justice system engaged in the Diagnostic Center
process. Stakeholders included representatives from the Clark County Manager’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, Office
of the District Attorney, Las Vegas Justice and District Courts, Nevada Department of Corrections, Parole and Probation,
Pretrial Services Division, the House Arrest Program and the Police Departments of Henderson and North Las Vegas.
Cross-coordination, communication, data collection and information sharing improved among these stakeholders as a
result of them working together to collectively reform elements of the criminal justice system.

The Clark County stakeholders recognize the value of a pretrial risk assessment tool as well as a formalized working group
to address ongoing challenges with the rising jail population. The County, and consequently the State of Nevada, adopted
a customized pretrial risk assessment that is being implemented on a pilot basis across various jurisdictions throughout
the state of Nevada.

In addition, the County is working to establish the Clark County CJCC and anticipates receiving ongoing technical assis-
tance to develop and implement a strategic plan that prioritizes additional justice-focused reforms and identifies accom-
panying outcome metrics.

Impact and Outcome
In the brief time since the Diagnostic Center provided LVMPD with its Diagnostic Analysis, LVMPD stakeholders have
preliminarily reported:

• Improved coordination among justice partners
• The adoption of a tested, validated, evidence-based pretrial risk assessment
• Improved capacity to collect data and share information across justice components
• Reduction in the jail population for pretrial defendants

Insights Gained
• Jail management requires a coordinated, system-wide approach that incorporates all components of the criminal

justice system
• Data-driven and research-based tools can serve to improve detention decisions while relying on less costly and more

service-based alternatives for those posing minimal risk

Writerbay.net

Do you need academic writing help? Our quality writers are here 24/7, every day of the year, ready to support you! Instantly chat with a customer support representative in the chat on the bottom right corner, send us a WhatsApp message or click either of the buttons below to submit your paper instructions to the writing team.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper
Writerbay.net