Evaluation of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration: Findings and Lessons on Implementation

• NCJ Number: 219077
• Author(s): Christy A. Visher; Lisa C. Newmark; Adele V. Harrell
• Date Published: June 2008
• Length: 21 pages
• Publication Series: NIJ Research Report
• Grant Number(s): 99-WT-VX-K005
• Agencies: NIJ
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation

Annotation

This report (the second of a series on the Judicial Oversight Demonstration Initiative [JOD]) discusses the evaluation findings on implementing the JOD Initiative, which aims to improve comprehensive services to domestic-violence victims, increase victim safety, and hold offenders more accountable.

Abstract

Successful implementation strategies included a formal strategic planning process and a wide array of agencies as partners. The latter included community-based organizations and service providers and local defense attorneys. Other effective strategies were management of the collaboration with regularly scheduled meetings and a full-time project director, training and technical assistance by non-JOD partners with relevant expertise, and specialized staff dedicated to domestic violence (DV) cases. Among the problems encountered in implementing JOD programs were partner agencies' gaps in knowledge about the operations of other partners, unanticipated changes in the workloads of partner agencies, State and county hiring limitations that restricted recruiting for new positions, lack of adequate systems for sharing data across justice agencies and with community service providers, and overcoming obstacles to collaboration between justice agencies and community service providers. The impacts of JOD innovations included basic changes in the coordination between the judiciary and other justice and community agencies in managing DV cases, increased consistency in the justice system response to DV cases, and positive changes in the response to DV that extended beyond the time frame of the demonstration phase. The JOD Initiative tested the hypothesis that a coordinated, focused, and systematic response by the judicial system, law enforcement and probation agencies, and community service organization could improve DV victim safety and hold offenders more accountable while promoting change in their abusive behavior. The process evaluation involved site visits, collection of quantitative data, focus groups of offenders and victims, and interaction with site staff and national partners. 1 exhibit and 5 notes