Community Capacity Development Office Weed and Seed Indicator Project: Considerations for Implementing an Enhanced Performance Measure System

• NCJ Number: 221742
• Author(s): Laura Winterfield; Mark Coggeshall; Terence Dunworth
• Date Published: January 2006
• Length: 26 pages
• Sponsoring Agency: Justice Research and Statistics Association; US Dept of Justice, Office of Justice Programs
• Sale Source: The Urban Institute
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Program/Project Description
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Downloaded on February 27, 2008

Annotation

This paper describes the current performance measurement (homicide counts) and performance management approach of the Community Capacity Development Office (CCDO) and describes the examination of alternative performance measures for the Weed and Seed program.

Abstract

The Community Capacity Development Office (CCDO), formerly known as the Executive Office for Weed and Seed, current approach in the performance measure for the Weed and Seed program is based on a single indicator: year-to-year changes in homicide counts. In 2003, the Urban Institute began developing an enhanced performance measure that would be less volatile than the number of homicides, thereby moving beyond the simple calculation of homicide counts without increasing the reporting burden for the Weed and Seed sites. Several recommendations are made and presented by the Urban Institute on how the CCDO performance measurement system could be improved and expanded. Recommendation highlights include: (1) require sites to report counts of each of seven types of Uniform Crime Report Part I incidents, not just homicides; (2) require sites to report monthly incident counts for the 2 years preceding their awards and for each year of the Weed and Seed funding; (3) require site managers to set performance targets in each annual application for Weed and Seed funding; (4) incorporate a review of the targets, performance measures, and proposed adjustments from each site into the process of making funding decisions; (5) incorporate review of longer-term national crime trends into the development of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) PART targets (requiring the specification of a single overall target for crime reduction going forward); and (6) consider whether Weed and Seed PART targets should become asymptotic as crime rates hover near historic lows rather than continuing to be a set percentage of the previous year’s level. This paper provides an opportunity to think broadly about how best to measure crime control strategies that would account for variation in both crime prevalence and population affected. Figures, tables