Policy Monitoring vs. Policy Evaluation Comparison

Throughout the years law enforcement, legislation, courts, researchers, criminologists, and many more have all asked the question, “What works in crime control policies and practices?” I too have asked myself this question, and believe all criminal justice professions have asked themselves this question at one point in their career. Throughout my education as a criminal justice student I have learned many different crime control measures, some that appear to be beneficial and some that appear to not be effective. I feel my knowledge will be a great attribute to the Maricopa County Sherriff’s Office, as a Maricopa County Sherriff. I wrote this paper to show you what I have learned and what I can bring to the department. Throughout this paper

Crime measurement and statistics for police departments are very important when it comes to money allotment, staffing needs or termination and it is also used to determine the effectiveness of new laws and programs. There are three tools used to measure major crime in the United States: Uniform Crime Reports, National Crime Victimization Survey and the National Incident Based Reporting System- which is currently being tested to replace the Uniform Crime Reports. Although there different tools used to measure crime, crime rates can be deceiving. Each different tool reports a different type of rate, crime rates, arrest

Policy evaluation applies accepted social science research methods to public programs. The same research designs used in laboratory experiments are not always practicable in the field, but the same principles can guide the planning and execution of policy evaluation.

Since the beginning of time, the United States’ Criminal Justice System (CJS) has been scrutinized and will continue to be. If significant changes were to occur within the CJS it could potentially take decades. Different persons, institutions, governments, and even departments within governments have different views; it is a natural occurrence. Thus, as with any subject matter, there are always controversies that cause disruption within society. Often, the controversies stem from the lack of understanding and the historical patterns of unsupported data.

Criminal justice policy over the past 50 has evolved. The key issues of criminal justice policies were gangs, drugs, juvenile, root causes of crime, and gun control. Currently, the key issues are terrorism, illegal immigration, and global organized crime. Traditionally, criminal justice policies were issued by state and local governments. However, the federal government plays an important role in implementation of criminal justice policy. The federal government provides grants to local and state governments to support these criminal justice policies. Criminal justice agencies

In 1967, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice called for a revolution in the approach to crime. As a result, the commission developed seven specific goals that are relevant in the twenty-first century: prevent crimes, adopt new ways of dealing with offenders, eliminate injustice and unfairness, upgrade personnel, conduct research to find new and effective ways to control crime, appropriate the necessary funds to accomplish the goals, and involve all elements of society in

Agencies must critically analyze the investment and long-term payoff. There can be a vast difference in the technologies available in different areas because of varied funding across the nation (Saint Joseph University). The lessons of the New Criminal Justice are to keep a sharp focus on the problem at hand, be strategic in planning interventions, use date to

Policy making in criminal justice can be broken down into two main focal points; monitoring and evaluation. During the monitoring phase, this is where factual information about policy goals are monitored. During the evaluation phase, this is where the question arises; did the monitoring phase address the potential outcome of the intended objective? In criminal justice, the formal evaluation model would benefit these types of policies. This paper will summarize the formal evaluation model and explain why it is the most effective evaluation process in criminal justice. This paper will also look at a policy involved with criminal justice and provide reasoning

The criminal justice system is forever adjusting to protect and serve a changing society. The paper evaluates, identifies and assesses recent future and current trends affecting the criminal justice system. Lastly, it defines the values of the system in a changing society.

CompStat allows police agencies to examine individual neighborhoods, or police precincts, and determine what problems need to be solved. CompStat involves the public by seeing them as the stakeholders (Cronkhite, 2013). The stakeholders, or public, are then involved in determining what the problems are in their area. CompStat then holds the commanding officer accountable for what is occurring in the areas under his command. CompStat also helps decentralize police command by empowering precinct commanders the freedom to solve the problems. This leads to new ideas and innovations that was not possible when decisions were made by a centralized command structure. Park and Barthe (2015) see CompStat as part of the SARA process being an integral part of identifying problems. CompStat has made police aware that statistics do have a place in policing and used correctly can lead to a reduction in crime and client satisfaction. Police officers in departments using concepts of problem oriented policing were found to be able to solve problems in their area by giving them the freedom to analyze problems and develop solutions (Park & Bathe,

Part 1: Nature, Extent, Impact of Crime Policy on Crime & the Administration of Justice in the U.S.

I have come to the conclusion after reading this article that the intended audience is anyone involved in the criminal justice system. Police officers, lawyers, judges, probation officers and everyone in between can find use in the article and its comparing and contrasting of the crime control model and due process model.

This paper is a review of Chapters 1, 2 and 3 in Patton, Sawicki, and Clark, (2012) third edition, Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning. Chapter 1 discusses problem review, the analysis of difficult problems, the complexity of problems and how the decision makers will make their decisions (Patton, 2012, p. 2, 3). Chapter 2 examines the policy analysis process, the types of policy analysis, the role of the analyst and ethical considerations. Chapter 3 discusses the gathering of data, interviewing, statistical analysis and communicating results. This paper contains (1) an overview of the chapters, (2) summarize the key points, (3) summary of the reading, and (4) underscore some implications/applications for policy and practice at a local, state or national context.

For most law enforcement agencies, a crime analyst main objective is to provide information in order to accomplish their mission of prevention and suppression of criminal activities(Canter, n.d.). Furthermore, crime analyst effect how policies are implemented, justify budget request, and aids in identifying and understanding

Last but certainly not least comes policy evaluation as the final process of policy making. In the policy evaluation process, institutions, organizations or in this case, the government concludes whether the policy implemented was successful in achieving its primary goal. The policy evaluation stage differs from the previous policy stages because the institution, organization or government tries to reassess whether the policy in placed worked or not. This gives the government, institution, or organization an opportunity to determine if the policy is working, and if not, what can be done in order to fix it. Once the policy has been evaluated, and it has been determined the current policy has not been functioning the way it was designed, it