ASSESSING THE PEFORMANCE OF ATTORNEYS AS ACTIVISTS AN EVALUATION OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION'S BASICS PROGRAM

• NCJ Number: 54104
• Author(s): C R HUFF; R F CONNER; G GEIS
• Date Published: 1977
• Length: 19 pages
• Sponsoring Agency: American Bar Association; Edna McConnell Clark Foundation
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: PRESENTED AT THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE EVALUATION, WASHINGTON, DC, FEBRUARY 22-24, 1977 -PANEL 27 - EVALUATING COMPLEX PROGRAMS - CROSS-SYSTEM EVALUATIONS

Annotation

RESULTS ARE REPORTED OF AN EVALUATION OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION'S PROCEDURE FOR GRANTING FUNDS TO LOCAL BAR ASSOCIATIONS FOR PROGRAMS IN CORRECTIONAL REFORM.

Abstract

THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION'S PROGRAM, BAR ASSOCIATION SUPPORT TO IMPROVE CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (BASICS), WAS ESTABLISHED TO AID CORRECTIONAL REFORM BY FUNDING LOCAL BAR ASSOCIATIONS IN REFORM PROJECTS IN THEIR JURISDICTIONS. A TWO-STAGE FUNDING PROCESS WAS EMPLOYED. THE FIRST STAGE GRANTED SEED MONEY TO MOST OF THOSE BAR ASSOCIATIONS WHO SHOWED AN INTEREST IN ESTABLISHING A PROGRAM PLAN FOR CORRECTIONAL REFORM IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. THE SECOND PHASE INVOLVED AWARDING MONEY TO THOSE ORIGINAL APPLICANTS WHOSE PLANS DEVELOPED WITH THE SEED MONEY WERE DEEMED WORTHY OF FUNDING. THIS REPORT PRESENTS THE FINDINGS OF AN EVALUATION DESIGNED TO ASSESS THE EFFICACY OF THIS FUNDING STRATEGY. OUT OF 106 INITIAL APPLICANTS, 77 RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 80 PLANNING GRANTS. THE EVALUATION INVOLVED THE USE OF QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS OF BOTH FUNDED AND APPLICANT/NONFUNDED BAR ASSOCIATIONS, ONSITE VISITS TO 20 OF THE SUCCESSFUL APPLICANTS, AND A SERIES OF INTERVIEWS WITH THE GRANT MANAGEMENT GROUP. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE EVALUATION INCLUDED THESE: (1) BASICS SHOULD ENCOURAGE BAR ASSOCIATIONS TO INVOLVE APPROPRIATE OUTSIDE GROUPS; (2) STRONGER EMPHASIS SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF MEASUREABLE CRITERIA OF ACHIEVEMENT; (3) SPECIAL ASSISTANCE SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO APPLICANTS WHOSE PROPOSALS, INITIALLY INADEQUATE, COULD BE IMPROVED AND RECONSIDERED; (4) THE SIZE OF THE GRANTS SHOULD BE MAINTAINED AT THE CURRENT LEVEL, BUT THE LENGTH OF THE PERIOD ALLOWED FOR PLANNING SHOULD BE EXTENDED FROM 3 TO 6 MONTHS; AND (5) WRITTEN CRITERIA STATING THE CONSIDERATIONS USED FOR ASSESSING BASICS PROPOSALS SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED TO ALL APPLICANTS. ADVANTAGES OF THIS FUNDING STRATEGY FOR EVALUATORS OF OVERALL PROJECT PERFORMANCE ARE BRIEFLY DISCUSSED. (RCB)