ILNews

$405,450 award aimed at improving state-funded criminal justice

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis research center is receiving a $405,450 award from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute to study and help improve the effectiveness of state-funded criminal justice initiatives.

The ICJI gave the award to the Center for Criminal Justice Research at IUPUI, according to a news release issued July 7.

Set-up as a two-year project, the CCJR will examine criminal justice efforts financed by 10 state funding streams and compare those to what is happening nationwide, then identify what works the best for Indiana and how it might be improved.

Designed as the state’s planning agency for criminal and juvenile justice, the ICJI is turning to the academic research center to synthesize the most current information both statewide and nationally and make sure Indiana is making the best data-driven decisions when distributing funds and establishing policies.

The first stage will identify those types of programs that have proven to be the most effective. In the second stage, the project will catalog existing criminal justice data to help make criminal justice decisions for the state. A key component of this second stage will be to identify gaps in available data that limit the state’s ability to make evidence-based criminal justice decisions.

Some of the types of initiatives that will be studied include police activities to determine if they are effective at preventing crime, substance abuse treatment programs, victims’ services, and various alternatives in the juvenile justice system.

“The goal is to help ensure the state’s allocation of criminal justice dollars is sound and based on cutting-edge research,” said Thomas D. Stucky, principal investigator and director of criminal justice and public safety programs at IUPUI’s School of Public and Environmental Affairs, where the center is housed. “When this project is complete, the state of Indiana will better understand how to distribute its criminal justice dollars most effectively.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT