Criminal Justice Standards and Goals for Michigan - A Case Study

• NCJ Number: 81100
• Author(s): D K Hunter; M R Tantimonaco
• Date Published: 1975
• Length: 68 pages
• Contract Number(s): J-LEAA-027-74
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice
• Corporate Author: Stanford Research Institute
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study traces the history of criminal justice standards and goals development in Michigan, one of the first States to begin this process, and was based on interviews with persons involved in these activities.

Abstract

Michigan's population, crime rates, and criminal justice system are described briefly, as are the comprehensive planning processes of its State planning agency -- the Office of Criminal Justice Programs. A chronology then highlights major events in the history of standards and goals development. The discussion of organizational structures focuses on the Michigan Commission on Criminal Justice created by the Governor in 1973 and charged with developing State standards and goals. Controversies which arose over the Commission's membership and selection of leaders are discussed, and members of its executive committee and six task forces are identified. The study notes that staffing became a problem because most project personnel were contributed by State and local criminal justice agencies, dividing their time between the parent agency and the project. Following a summary of the project's budget, the report reviews the methodology adopted by the Commission's task forces. Problems encountered in the formulation process are examined, such as maintaining the schedule, coping with the program's broad scope, and disagreements over the helpfulness of the model standards set by the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice. Public hearings held by the Commission are described, with attention to publicity, hearing procedures, and impact on standards development. Activities which led to final approval of the standards and goals are summarized, as are plans for their implementation. Suggestions for other States cover using commissions or task forces, conducting successful public hearings, selecting staff, narrowing the project's focus, and maintaining channels of communication. A list of persons interviewed by the study team, maps, and tables are included.