$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.”


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues