ILNews

County restores original service

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Rehearing

After the Indiana Department of Corrections switched in the summer of 2010 from one victims’ notification service to another as a cost-saving measure, one northern Indiana county has restored its program with the previous service provider.

Elkhart County Sheriff Brad Rogers announced Jan. 7 that the county had restored the Victim Information and Notification Everyday system, or VINE, which is a product of Louisville-based Appriss.

Appriss previously provided the victim notification system to Indiana counties and the state until the DOC made the switch to an in-house system, Indiana SAVIN, Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry, and Alert Notification Services on July 1, 2010.

The reasons the DOC switched to an in-house system were: to serve more and spend less; to personalize the notification process; to improve information flow to victims, law enforcement, and other justice partners; and to leverage current technology, according to Brent Myers, director of registration and victim services for the DOC.

At the time of the switch, Myers said the contract with Appriss cost about $1 million per year. He said the in-house program would cost $375,000 per year using the Microsoft program Information Strategies.

A spokesman for Appriss said that Elkhart was the only county to switch back to the Appriss notification system as of Jan. 11.

Victim notification services provide information to those who register for information on specific offenders, including when the offenders move to another facility, if the offender has a hearing scheduled, or if the offender is released.

Rehearing "State changes victim alerts" IL July 21-Aug. 3, 2010
 

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. I have had an ongoing custody case for 6 yrs. I should have been the sole legal custodial parent but was a victim of a vindictive ex and the system biasedly supported him. He is an alcoholic and doesn't even have a license for two yrs now after his 2nd DUI. Fast frwd 6 yrs later my kids are suffering poor nutritional health, psychological issues, failing in school, have NO MD and the GAL could care less, DCS doesn't care. The child isn't getting his ADHD med he needs and will not succeed in life living this way. NO one will HELP our family.I tried for over 6 yrs. The judge called me an idiot for not knowing how to enter evidence and the last hearing was 8 mths ago. That in itself is unjust! The kids want to be with their Mother! They are being alienated from her and fed lies by their Father! I was hit in a car accident 3 yrs ago and am declared handicapped myself. Poor poor way to treat the indigent in Indiana!

  2. The Indiana DOE released the 2015-2016 school grades in Dec 2016 and my local elementary school is a "C" grade school. Look at the MCCSC boundary maps and how all of the most affluent neighborhoods have the best performance. It is no surprise that obtaining residency in the "A" school boundaries cost 1.5 to 3 times as much. As a parent I should have more options than my "C" school without needing to pay the premium to live in the affluent parts of town. If the charter were authorized by a non-religious school the plaintiffs would still be against it because it would still be taking per-pupil money from them. They are hiding behind the guise of religion as a basis for their argument when this is clearly all about money and nothing else.

  3. This is a horrible headline. The article is about challenging the ability of Grace College to serve as an authorizer. 7 Oaks is not a religiously affiliated school

  4. Congratulations to Judge Carmichael for making it to the final three! She is an outstanding Judge and the people of Indiana will benefit tremendously if/when she is chosen.

  5. The headline change to from "religious" to "religious-affiliated" is still inaccurate and terribly misleading.

ADVERTISEMENT