session-3_data_handout_final

Supported by

Criminal Justice Support for New State Administrations

Using Data to Inform Decision-Making Enacting research-informed policies and evidence-based practices in criminal justice requires state leaders to have access to and understand data collected by state agencies. This can be a challenging prospect because the data needed to inform policy often resides across different agencies and levels of government and may be incomplete. The office of governor has the ability to break down those silos and empower agencies to use data to implement policy and practice that works.

Julie Micek, Director of Parole Supervision, Nebraska Board of Parole Dave Roberts, Executive Director, SEARCH Group, Inc. John Wetzel, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections Bree Derrick, Chief of Staff, Idaho Department of Corrections (moderator) 4 Investments New Administrations Should Consider to Improve Data Accessibility for Decision-Makers 1. Public data reporting and visualization mechanisms, such as real-time data dashboards, allow state leaders to quickly digest and understand key performance indicators for the criminal justice system, including the fiscal and public safety impact of particular polices and current outcomes for people on community supervision and reentering from prison.

2. Decision-makers need dedicated research staff to analyze data, project population growth, and provide updates to state leaders to help determine the best course of action to move forward.

3. Many states’ outdated information technology (IT) systems lead to duplication of efforts across different agencies and wasted resources. Governors can help states implement technological upgrades to link IT systems and encourage data sharing efficiencies.

4. To help criminal justice agencies accurately record and publish timely recidivism measures, governors’ offices should encourage use of state identification (SID) numbers that are unique to each person across state agencies and IT systems. When all agencies across the criminal justice system use SID numbers, researchers can match the numbers to identify whether a person returns to the system, regardless of their entry point.

10 Questions New Administrations Should Ask to Use Data to Drive Recidivism Reduction 1. What measures does your state track and publish for people leaving prison? How does your state measure recidivism?

2. What upgrades to data systems are necessary to report on all three measures of recidivism for people leaving prison (rearrest, reconviction, and reincarceration)?

3. Are there other barriers to reporting on all three measures aside from technology?

4. What additional measures does your state need to track and publish for people starting probation?

5. What upgrades to data systems are necessary to report on all three measures of recidivism for people starting probation?

6. If probation is county run, how can your state support probation departments’ efforts to report on all three measures?

7. How frequently does your state track and publish arrest, conviction, and incarceration data for people on supervision?

8. Does your state track and publish revocation data on a monthly, quarterly, and/or annual basis?

If not, what barriers exist to publishing such data?

9. Last year, what percentage of people were revoked from supervision for violating conditions of their supervision, and not for committing a crime?

10. Does your state use a state identification (SID) number? What data system upgrades are necessary to ensure a SID number is used across the criminal justice system?

9 Questions New Administrations Should Ask to Develop Data-Driven Policy Options to Improve Public Safety 1. What measures are agencies currently tracking, and what new measures must be tracked to analyze the impacts of reforms?

2. What data sharing agreements exist between relevant criminal justice agencies/entities in your state? Where would data agreements be useful in achieving desired policy outcomes?

3. What IT upgrades or new systems need to be created to enable the collection and reporting of new measures and metrics?

4. Do agencies have qualified personnel responsible for tracking and analyzing data that is collected?

5. Are agencies currently required by statute, administrative rule, executive order, or other means to publish regular reports on performance and outcomes?

6. Is there an established collaborative oversight body responsible for monitoring data and results to inform policymaking?

7. How are performance and outcome data on reforms currently shared with criminal justice stakeholders and the public?

8. Has the state invested in developing a data dashboard or issued publications to regularly share performance data with the public?

9. Does the state have a strategy in place to inform and engage the public on reform efforts and gather feedback?

Criminal Justice Support for New State Administrations | 2