BJS Strategic Plan 2005-2008 - Bureau of Justice Statistics · The Bureau of Justice Statistics...

Introduction

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)was established on December 27,1979, under the Justice SystemsImprovement Act of 1979 as anamendment to the Omnibus CrimeControl and Safe Streets Act of 1968.Previous criminal justice statisticalefforts were authorized within the LawEnforcement Assistance Administrationcreated by the 1968 Act.

As the statistical arm of the U.S.Department of Justice, BJS is respon-sible for the collection, analysis, publi-cation, and dissemination of statisticalinformation on crime, criminal offend-ers, victims of crime, and the opera-tions of justice systems at all levels ofgovernment.

Since its inception, BJS has emergedas the principal criminal justice statisti-cal agency in the Nation. BJS' mostfundamental accomplishment is provid-ing accurate, timely, and objectiveinformation to Federal, State, and localpolicymakers, to assist them incombating crime and ensuring thatjustice is both efficient andevenhanded. Whether throughnational data collections or assistance to States and communities, BJS isdedicated to improving the quality ofour national intelligence on crime andenhancing the quality of the national discourse concerning criminal and civiljustice.

BJS is dedicated to developing,maintaining, and disseminating all of its statistics in accordance with thehighest professional and statisticalstandards. BJS has long maintainedthe strongest commitment to integrity

and objectivity while striving to produceimpartial, timely, and accurate statisticsas established in its governing statute.In carrying out its mission, BJSadheres to the principles and practicesestablished by the Federal statisticalcommunity.

BJS maintains over three dozen majorstatistical series designed to coverevery stage of the American criminaland civil justice system. BJS statisticsare published annually on the followingtopics: criminal victimization, popula-tions under correctional supervision,and Federal criminal offenders andcase processing.

In addition to its annual series, BJSmaintains periodic data series thatcover the following:• the administration of law enforcement agencies and correctional facilities • prosecutorial practices and policies• State court case processing • felony convictions• characteristics of correctional populations • criminal justice expenditure and employment • civil case processing in State courts• special studies on other criminal justice topics.

BJS provides financial and technicalsupport to State and local governmentsto develop their capabilities to providecriminal justice statistics. This BJSsupport targets the development ofinformation systems to foster Stateparticipation in national statisticalprograms — • implementing the National Incident-Based Reporting System• improving the accuracy, utility, andinterstate accessibility of criminalhistory records

• enhancing the availability andcompleteness of records of protectiveorders involving domestic violence andstalking • enhancing the availability of sexoffender records• improving automated identificationsystems and other State systemssupporting national records systemsand their use for background checks.

U.S. Department of JusticeOffice of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Strategic Plan FY 2005-2008April 2005

Principles and Practices for a Federal Statistical Agency

A clearly-defined and well-acceptedmission

A strong position of independence

Continual development of moreuseful data

Openness about the data provided

Wide dissemination of data

Cooperation with data users

Fair treatment of data providers

Commitment to quality and profes-sional standards of practice

An active research program

Professional advancement of staff

Coordination and cooperation withother statistical agencies.

Source: Principles and Practices for aFederal Statistical Agency, NationalResearch Council , (National AcademyPress, 3rd ed., 2005)

BJS provides technical expertise onissues relating to criminal recordspolicy, covering topics such as Statecriminal history record procedures andsystems, privacy and securitystandards, and interstate exchange ofcriminal history records for noncriminaljustice purposes.

Performance Mandate

In recent years, the Department, theOffice of Justice Programs, and theFederal Government in general, havebegun implementing performance-based management and budgeting. Atits core, performance-based manage-ment encourages organizations tofocus on their mission, agree on goals,and report results — a process whichis designed to guide organizationstoward improved performance. Congress has mandated performance-based management primarily throughthe enactment of the GovernmentPerformance and Results Act of 1993which requires agencies to identify theirstrategic goals and the outcomesnecessary to achieve these goals.

Organization of the BJS StrategicPlan

The BJS Strategic Plan includes fivecomponents:

I. Overview of recent crime andjustice trends for purposes ofidentifying and measuring theproblem

II. Statement of BJS’ mission, strate-gic goals, and performancemeasurement concepts

III. Description of each strategic goaland associated outcomes

IV. Measures of BJS’ operationalefficiency

V. Description of the role of professional review in strategic and program planning.

2 BJS Strategic Plan, FY 2005-2008

BJS Strategic Plan, FY 2005-2008 3

Section I. Overview of recent crime and justice trends: identifying and measuring the problem

ViolenceLaw EnforcementCourts and SentencingCorrectionsTribal JusticeFederal Criminal JusticeFairness in the Criminal Justice SystemJustice-Related Expenditure and EmploymentCriminal History Records

Objective: Produce statistics to guide Federal, State,

and local policy on crim e

G oal 1: P roduce statistics crim e and justice

G oal 2: Im prov e crim inal records

and local statistics

Goal 3: Ensure public access to data

and statistics

V ictim ization Statistics

Prosecution S tatistics

Law Enforcem ent Statistics

Law Enforcem ent Managem ent and Adm inistrative S tatistics

Police Use of Excessiv e Force S tatistics

National Prosecutors Surv ey

Im proving Crim e and Justice Statistics Locally

Im prov ing Crim inal History Records

BJS Assistance to Data Users

Publication and Dissem ination

National Crim e Victim ization Surv ey

Cybercrim e Statistics

State Justice S tatistics Program

National Crim inal History Im provement Program

Sourcebook of Crim inal Justice Statistics

Internet Developm ent Activ ities

In identifying sources of BJS inform ation

In interpreting statistical data

In working with public-use data tapes

BJS Clearinghouse

National Archive of Crim inal Justice Data

National C learinghouse for Crim inal Justice Inform ation System s

Federal Justice Statistics Resources Center

Infobase of State Activ ities and Research

Technical Assistance to State Statistical Agencies

National Incident-Based Reporting System and FBI Support

NCHIP Evaluation

NCHIP Technical Assistance

NCHIP S tatistics

Tribal Crim inal History Records Im provement Program

Courts and Sentencing

S tatistics

S tatistics on Victim ization of the Disabled

NCVS Autom ation

W orkplace Violence Statistics

NCVS Sam ple Redesign

S talking Statistics

Identity Theft S tatistics

School Crim e

Traffic Stops Statistics- Racial P rofiling Statistics

National Judicial Reporting Program

State Court Caseload Statistics

S tate Court Case Processing S tatistics

Dom estic Violence Case Processing S tatistics

Corrections S tatistics

T ribal Justice Statistics

Statistics on Drugs and Crim e

Federal Justice S tatistics

National Prisoner Statistics

Capital Punishm ent Series

National Corrections Reporting Program

Probation and Parole Statistics

Annual Survey of Local Jails

Surveys of Federal, State, and Local Inm ates

Censuses of Federal, S tate, and Local Correctional Facilities

Deaths in Custody

Federal Justice Statistics Program

Crim inal Victim ization in Indian Country Studies

Census of T ribal Justice Agencies

Annual Survey of Jails in Indian Country

Many ongoing BJS statistical series collect and analyze data on drugs and crim e

Prison Rape S tatistics

DNA Crim e Labs

Forensic Crim e Labs

M edical Exam iner and Coroner Offices

Statistics on International Crim e

and Justice

Im prov ing the Quality of Justice

Data

Em ploym ent and Expenditure

S tatistics

State Courts

Federal Courts

Em ploym ent and Expenditure Data Ex tracts

Justice Assistance Data Surv ey on Em ploym ent and Expenditure Data

ASA Advisory Assistance

Statistical Methodological Research Program

BJS Visiting Fellow Program

State Correctional Inform ation System s

NIBRS im plem entation study

Justice inform ation and policy issues

Data Quality Guidelines

Form al process to request data corrections

W orld Factbook of Crim inal Justice Statistics

Civ il Justice

W ork with UN and other countries on v ictim ization surv eys

Figure 1. Strategic Plan for the Bureau of Justice Statistics:Strategies to Achieve the Objective with Principal Series and State and Local Assistance Programs

I. Overview of recent crime andjustice trends

As the national repository for statisticalinformation on crime and the admini-stration of justice, BJS maintains dataon victimizations experienced by thepublic and the response of the nearly50,000 offices and agencies whichcompose the criminal justice system.

This section of the strategic plan brieflypresents key facts and nationwidetrends. BJS is a user of its own data incarrying out program planning, devel-opment, and implementation. In orderto successfully fulfill emerging dataneeds and build long-term statisticalseries for longitudinal and trend analy-ses, it is necessary to be informedabout the major developments in crimeand justice and challenges facing thejustice system.

Violence

Serious violent crime (murder, rape,robbery, and aggravated assault) hascontinued to decline as measuredthrough both victim accounts and thenumber of incidents reported to lawenforcement agencies. The number ofthese violent crimes experienced bythe public in 2003 was the lowestrecorded since 1973 when BJS initi-ated collecting data from crime victims.

The per capita rate of homicide in2002, about 5.6 per 100,000 persons,is one of the lowest recorded since themid-1960's.

In 2003, there were an estimated367,000 serious violent crimes in whichthe victim faced an offender armed witha firearm, accounting for about 7% ofall serious violent crime. In 2002, therewere an estimated 10,808 murders withfirearms, about 67% of all murders thatyear.

About 5% of murders in 2002 wereidentified as drug-related by local lawenforcement agencies. About 1 in 10victims of violence believed theoffender had been using drugs at thetime of the offense. Based on self-reports from probationers, jail inmates,and those serving time in Federal andState prisons, an estimated 20% ofconvicted offenders had been usingdrugs at the time they committed the

offense for which they were convicted.This translates into about 1.1 millionoffenders involved with the criminaljustice system nationwide. Offenderuse of alcohol at the time of the offensewas described about twice as often asdrug use by both victims and offenders.

School crime Data for the school yearending June 30, 2000, indicate thatthere were 32 school-associatedviolent deaths including 24 homicidesand 8 suicides.

During 2002, there were an estimated88,000 serious violent crimes againstschool children (ages 12-18) while atschool and an estimated 309,000 awayfrom school.

Drugs and crime About 5% ofmurders in 2002 were identified asdrug-related by local law enforcementagencies. (Source: Crime in the UnitedStates, 2002, FBI.) About 1 in 10victims of violence believed theoffender had been using drugs at thetime of the offense. Drug use at thetime of the offense was commonamong convicted offenders: 14% ofprobationers, 33% of State prisoners,22% of Federal prisoners, and 36% oflocal jail inmates self-reported that theywere under the influence of drugs whenthey committed their offense. Offenderuse of alcohol at the time of the offensewas described about twice as often asdrug use by both victims and offenders.

Law Enforcement

State and local law enforcement: In2000, approximately 18,000 State andlocal law enforcement agencies nation-wide employed over 700,000 full-timelaw enforcement officers.

In 2002, State and local law enforce-ment agencies made about 14 millionarrests; of these, nearly 1.5 millionwere for drug violations (11%), 621,000were for violent crimes (5%), and164,000 (1%) were for weapons viola-tions.

Federal law enforcement: In 2002Federal law enforcement agenciesemployed more than 93,000 personswith arrest powers and authority tocarry a firearm.

In 2001, Federal law enforcementofficers made almost 119,000 arrests;of these, 33,589 (29%) were for drugviolations, 6,007 were for weaponsoffenses (5%), and about 4,850 (4%)were for violent crimes.

Forensic crime laboratories: During2002, there were a total of 351 crimelabs in the nation: 203 state or regionallabs, 65 county, 50 municipal and 33federal labs in the U.S. with a total ofabout 9,400 full-time employees.


Four measures of serious violent crimeOffenses in millions

Total violent crime

Victimizations reported to the police

Arrests for violent crime

1973 1993 19981978 1983 19880

1

2

3

4

5

Crimes recorded bythe police

2003

Nationwide, crime laboratories receivedabout 2.7 million requests for forensiclaboratory services and were able toprocess just under 2.5 million of theserequests in 2002.

In 2002 the backlog grew from about290,000 pending requests for labora-tory services at the beginning of theyear to just over 500,000 at the end ofthe year — about two-thirds of thegrowth in backlogged requests wasdue to pending analyses to determinethe presence of a controlled substance.

Courts and Sentencing

Criminal case processing: State courtsconvict an average of about 1 millionpersons of a felony each year. Violentfelonies accounted for about 19% ofthe total conviction caseload, propertyoffenses comprise 31% of all felonyconvictions, drug offenses make up32% of those convicted of felonies, andweapons offenses are just over 3%.

An estimated 95% of personsconvicted of a felony pleaded guilty. InState courts, the average time betweenarrest and sentencing for a felonyoffense was 184 days.

Criminal sentencing: Of thoseconvicted of felonies, 41% aresentenced to prison, 28% to a term in alocal jail, and 31% receive a sentenceto probation. In 2002, the average(mean) prison term imposed by Statecourts after conviction for a felony was53 months — for violent offenses theaverage sentence was 84 months, forproperty offenses the averagesentence was 41 months, 48 monthson average was imposed after convic-tion for a drug felony, and weaponsoffenders received an average term of38 months.

Civil trials in State courts: Civil casesdisposed of by trial in State courts ofgeneral jurisdiction located in theNation’s 75 largest counties havedeclined 47% from 22,451 trials in1992 to 11,908 trials in 2001.

Corrections

Correctional population: At yearend2003, nearly 6.9 million people were onprobation, in jail or prison, or on parole.About 3.2% of all U.S. adult residents

or 1 in every 32 adults were undercorrectional supervision at yearend2003, compared to 2.7% of the popula-tion in 1995.

Prison population: The total number of prisoners under the jurisdiction ofFederal and State adult correctionalauthorities was 1,470,045 at yearend2003. From yearend 1995 to yearend2003 the Nation’s prison populationgrew on average 3.4% a year. Therewere an estimated 482 prison inmatesper 100,000 U.S. residents, up from411 at yearend 1995.

Capital punishment: The number ofprisoners under sentence of death at yearend 2003 decreased for the thirdconsecutive year, the first decreases inthis population since capital punish-ment was reinstated in 1977. Atyearend 2003, 37 States and theFederal prison system held 3,374prisoners under sentence of death,188 fewer than at yearend 2002.Eleven States and the Federal Govern-ment carried out 65 executions in 2003,6 fewer than the year before.

Jail population: In 2003, 691,301inmates were held in the more than3,000 local jails nationwide. From 1990 to 2003, the number of jailinmates per 100,000 U.S. residentsrose from 163 to 238. From midyear2002 to midyear 2003, the 12-monthincrease of 3.9% in the jail populationwas similar to the average annualincrease of 4.0% since 1995.

Probation and parole population: The1.5% growth in the probation andparole population during 2003 — anincrease of almost 73,574 during theyear — was about half the averageannual growth of 2.9% since 1995. Atthe end of 2003, among the 4,073,987offenders on probation, 49% had beenconvicted for committing a felony, 49%for a misdemeanor, and 2% for otherinfractions.

Among the 774,588 adults on parole,95% had served time for a felonyoffense and 5% for a misdemeanor.

Recidivism: BJS studied the rearrest,reconviction, and reincarceration of272,111 former inmates who weretracked for 3 years after their releasefrom prison. The former inmates,discharged in 1994 from 15 States,represent two-thirds of all prisoners released in the United States that year. Released prisoners with the highestrearrest rates were robbers (70.2%),burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%),motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or sellingstolen property (77.4%), and those inprison for possessing, using, or sellingillegal weapons (70.2%). Within 3 years2.5% of released rapists were arrestedfor another rape, and 1.2% of thosewho had served time for homicide werearrested for a new homicide.


As part of the study, BJS tracked 9,691male sex offenders following theirrelease from prison in 1994. Within 3years following their release, 5.3% ofsex offenders (men who had commit-ted rape or sexual assault) wererearrested for another sex crime. Compared to non-sex offendersreleased from State prisons, releasedsex offenders were 4 times more likelyto be rearrested for a sex crime.

Tribal Justice

American Indians experience violentcrime at a much higher rate thanmembers of any other racial groups in the United States. The averageannual violent crime rate among Ameri-can Indians from 1992 to 2001 (101per 1,000 persons age 12 or older) wasabout 2.5 times the national rate (41per 1,000 persons).

American Indians were victims ofaggravated assault (25 per 1,000persons age 12 or older), which is 2.5times higher than the national rate (9per 1,000), nearly double the rate forblacks (13 per 1,000) and 3 times thatof whites (8 per 1,000).

The majority (66%) of American Indianvictims of violent crimes described theoffender as either white or black.

Federal Criminal Justice

Criminal case processing: In 2002,U.S. Attorneys opened matters forinvestigation against 124,335 suspects.Of these, 31% were investigated fordrug offenses, 9% for weaponsoffenses, and 5% for violent offenses.About 14% of all suspects were investi-gated for immigration violations. About3 out of 4 suspects were referred forprosecution or disposed by U.S.Magistrates.

During 2002, criminal cases werecommenced against 87,727 defen-dants in district courts. Thirty-fivepercent of these defendants werecharged with a drug offense and 15%were charged with an immigrationviolation. Among Federal defendantswhose cases terminated during theyear (80,424), 89% were convicted.Among those convicted, 96% pleadedguilty or no-contest.

Criminal sentencing: Among convicteddefendants in 2002, 75% received asentence to imprisonment. Theaverage prison term imposed was 57months. Weapons felonies (84months), violent felonies (89 months),and drug felonies (76 months) receivedthe longest average sentences.

During 2002, the Federal Bureau ofPrisons received just over 50,400inmates from district courts and slightlymore than 17,000 from other sourcesincluding supervision violators. Federalinmates entering from district courtscould expect to serve 88% of thesentence they received.

Fairness in the Criminal JusticeSystem

In 2002 an estimated 45 millionpersons age 16 or older had a contactwith a police officer. About 40% ofthose contacts involved a traffic stop. The likelihood of being stopped bypolice in 2002 was about the same forwhite (8.7%), black (9.1%), andHispanic (8.6%) drivers. Following thestop, black and Hispanic drivers weremore likely to be searched or to havetheir vehicles searched than whitedrivers.

Comparison of what victims report inBJS surveys and what police reportin arrest data for the FBI reveal a closecorrespondence in the distribution of offender characteristics (race, sex,and age).

Justice-Related Expenditure andEmployment

In 2001 Federal, State, and localgovernments spent $167 billion foroperations and outlay of police protec-tion, corrections, and judicial and legalactivities. This represents a 366%increase from $36 billion in 1982 (a165% increase in constant dollars).

In 2001 the Federal expenditure of $30billion on the justice system accountedfor 18% of the total; in 1982 theFederal share was 12%.

The total number of justice-relatedemployees grew 81% between 1982and 2001. State governments had thelargest percentage increase (117%).

Criminal History Records

Between FY 1995 and FY 2004, BJSdistributed nearly $470 million to theStates to support improvements toState records systems which wouldpermit participation in nationalbackground check systems for point-of-sale firearms sales, sex offenderregistries, national protection orderfiles, and automated fingerprint identifi-cation systems.

At the close of 2003, States and theFBI maintained criminal history recordson approximately 68 million individuals.Of these, over 50 million records wereavailable for interstate backgroundchecks.

Since the initiation of the BJS NationalCriminal History Record ImprovementProgram (NCHIP) in 1995, the numberof criminal records has increased 35%,and the number of records which arenow shareable among the Statesincreased 97%.

BJS estimates that between March 1,1994, and December 31, 2003, about1.1 million, or 2.1% of all applicationsto purchase firearms have beenrejected from among the 53 millionapplications received.



Section II. Bureau of Justice Statistics:Mission and strategic vision

BJS MissionBJS Strategic GoalsPerformance Measurement

II. Mission and Strategic Vision

BJS Mission

The central purpose of BJS isdescribed in its enabling legislation (42USC §§ 3731-3735). This statutorystatement of purpose has been opera-tionalized by BJS into the followingmission statement:

It is the mission of BJS to collect,process, analyze, and disseminateaccurate and timely information oncrime and the administration ofjustice and to assist States andlocalities to improve criminal justicerecord-keeping.

BJS Strategic Goals

In fulfilling its mission, BJS producesstatistics and supports assistanceprograms which are used to guide andinform Federal, State, and local policy-making on crime and the administrationof justice. This encompasses thefollowing set of strategic goals:

Strategic Goal 1 To producenational statistics on crime and theadministration of justice that facili-tate measurement over time andacross geographic areas.

Strategic Goal 2 To improverecord-keeping by State and localgovernments and to improve theability of States and localities toproduce statistics on crime and theadministration of justice.

Strategic Goal 3 To ensure publicaccess to statistics and criminaljustice data.

Performance Measurement

According to a panel convened by the Interagency Council for StatisticalPolicy (ICSP), the consortium ofFederal statistical agencies, "therelationship between statisticalprogram outputs and their beneficialuses and outcomes is often complexand difficult to track." The panel notedthat there are primarily two kinds ofoutcomes associated with statistical

work, (1) identifying or tracking theperformance of indicators which areimportant for public policy, and (2)contributing to the decision-makingprocess with respect to the mission ofgovernment and the public.

The output of a statistical agency isinformation which, most often consistsof statistics, analyses, forecasts, orresearch. BJS performance measuresare conceptualized to satisfy threemajor elements or components to aninformation-generating activity: howwell was the activity operationalized,how well did the activity do in generat-ing the desired knowledge, and how

well did the activity meet the needs ofusers and policymakers. Each goal,therefore, has three sets of measuresassociated with it: measures of opera-tional outcome, measures of educa-tional outcomes, and measures ofevaluative outcome.

Measuring the output of a statisticalagency often entails both quantitativeand qualitative performance measures.While BJS’ performance measurestend to emphasize measurableachievements, there are many indicesdescribing performance which may notbe easily quantified. For example,citation of BJS data with respect tomajor legal issues and significant courtcases may be more important than thefrequency of such citations. Inaddition, issues of integrity and trust-worthiness associated with statisticaldata are not easy to measure. Finally,BJS data often play a direct role inpolicy development which cannot becharacterized with traditional quantita-tive methods for cataloguing perform-ance. BJS, along with other statisticalagencies, endorses the concept ofreporting the achievement of finaloutcomes by documenting examplesthat demonstrate use of agency data.An illustration of uses of BJS data canbe found in Attachments A and B.

In its largest single grant program activ-ity - the National Criminal HistoryImprovement Program (NCHIP) - BJS uses a large number of measurementactivities to provide estimates of theeffectiveness of the National InstantBackground Check System (NICS) instopping prohibited firearms purchas-ers.

In addition, there are collected in eachState numerous recurring measures ofrecord quality which identify progress inrecord improvement and serve as thebasis for subsequent year fundingallocations.


U.S. Department of Justice andOffice of Justice Programs: Mission Statements

By carrying out its fundamentalpurpose to provide accurate andobjective information to Federal,State, and local policymakers, BJSinherently supports the missions ofthe Department and the Office ofJustice Programs and the strategicgoals and objectives as establishedunder the Department's StrategicPlan.

Department of Justice

The mission of the Department ofJustice is "...to enforce the law anddefend the interests of the UnitedStates according to the law; toensure public safety against threatsforeign and domestic; to providefederal leadership in preventing andcontrolling crime; to seek just punish-ment for those guilty of unlawfulbehavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."

Office of Justice Programs

The mission of the Office of JusticePrograms (OJP) is "To providefederal leadership in developing thenation's capacity to prevent andcontrol crime, administer justice, and assist crime victims."

Other BJS grant activities encompasssupport to the States for the centraliza-tion of State statistical functions in aStatistical Analysis Center (SAC). BJSmonitors SAC program performance bytracking the research and evaluationportfolios maintained by the StateSACs. In addition, BJS provideslimited grant funds for a variety oftechnical assistance, privacy research,and other activities related to statisticalissues and concerns.

Measuring an agency’s achievementsrelated to providing public access of itsdata and statistics centers on thecreation of customer satisfaction — and the elimination of dissatisfaction —among all the audiences for BJSnumbers, as measured by continuoussurveys and monitoring of feedback.These consumers include the researchand academic community, all compo-nents of the media, State and cityofficials from jurisdictions of all sizes,and their Federal counterparts.



Section III. Strategic Goals and outcome measures

Goal 1. Produce statistics on crime and justice

1.1 Measures of Operational Outcomes Major statistical series conducted Levels of accuracy and operational coverage Levels of reliability and validity

1.2 Measures of Educational Outcomes Measuring data utilization Measuring report utilization

1.3 Measures of Evaluative Outcomes Measuring temporal change Measuring spatial variation

Goal 2. Improving criminal records and local statistics

2.1 Measures of Operational OutcomesStatus of criminal history records and interface between States and national systemStatus of National Incident-Based Reporting System implementation

2.2 Measures of Educational OutcomesProvide technical assistance for improved statistical reporting

2.3 Measures of Evaluative OutcomesEffectiveness of criminal history record system improvements

Goal 3. Ensuring public access to data and statistics

3.1 Measures of Operational Outcomes Products and services available

3.2 Measures of Educational OutcomesAddressing customer needs

3.3 Measures of Evaluative OutcomesMeasuring customer satisfaction

Figure 2. Strategic Plan for the Bureau of Justice Statistics: Goal 1 Outcome Measures

G o a l 1 : P ro d u c e S ta tis tic s o n c r im e

an d ju s tic e

M e a s u re s o f O p e ra tio n a l O utc om es

M e a s u re s o f E d u c a tio n a l O utc om e s

M e a s u re s o f E va lu a tive O u tc om es

M a jo r s ta t is t ic a l s e ries c o n d uc te d

L e ve ls o f re lia b ility a n d v a lid ity

L e ve ls o f a c c u rac y a n d

o p e ra tio n a l c o ve ra g e

R e s id e n t-le ve l re s p o n s e ra te

A g e n c y-le ve l re s p o n s e ra te

S am p lin g c o ve ra g e

S o u rc e s o f n o n -s am p lin g e rro r

E xte n t o f im p u ta tio n fo r m iss in g da ta

Iss u a n c es o f e rra ta n o tic es

R a tio o f e s t im ate d C V to a c tu a l C V in s am p le s urve ys

V a lid c om p la in ts re c e ive d u n d e r B J S D a ta Q u a lity G u id e lin es

M e a s u rin g re p o rt u t iliz a tio n

M e a s u rin g d a ta u t iliza t io n

M e a s u rin g s p a tia l va ria tio n

M e a s u rin g tem p o ra l c h a n g e

C o re an d re c u rrin g s e rie s c o n d uc te d

S p e c ia l a n a lys es c o n d u c ted

U s e o f o n -lin e d a ta s ys tem

D ow n lo a d s from B JS s p re a d s h e e ts

U s e o f th e B J S D ata A n a lys e s S ys tem a t C rim in a l J u s tic e D ata A rc h ive s

R eq u e s ts fo r p u b lic -u s e d a ta s e ts a n d d o c um e n ta tio n

E le c tro n ic a n d p a p e r c o p ie s c irc u la te d

B u lk o rd e r d o c um e n t re q u e s ts

R e p o rts p ro v id in g tem po ra l c h a n g e m e as u re s

R e p o rts e xa m in in g m u lti-ye a r d a ta a g g re g a tio n s

R e p o rts p ro v id in g s pa tia l va ria tio n m e as u re s

R e p o rts e xa m in in g g e o g ra p h ic d is a g g re g a tio n

Strategic Goal 1. Produce statistics on crime and justice

BJS carries out this goal through aseries of recurring statistical programscovering criminal victimization, lawenforcement, prosecution, courts andsentencing, corrections, Federaljustice, and tribal justice. BJS alsoprovides data needed by other OJPcomponents for use in formula-basedgrant programs or other program initia-tives involving State or local crime andjustice data.

Victimization statistics The NationalCrime Victimization Survey (NCVS)collects data from a nationally repre-sentative sample that contacts approxi-mately 42,000 households comprisingnearly 76,000 persons on the impact,frequency and consequences of crimi-nal victimization. Survey data, collectedthrough more than 100,000 interviewsannually, reveal the number of rapes,sexual assaults, robberies, assaults,thefts, household burglaries and motorvehicle thefts U.S. residents and theirhouseholds experience each year.

The NCVS provides details on victimsand offenders and the circumstancesunder which they come together andthe contingencies of crime, such asweapon use, place and time of occur-rence, costs of crime, and perceivedalcohol and drug use by the offender.

The NCVS enables BJS to conductsmall-area analyses and to studydiscrete population segments. Inaddition, NCVS serves as a nationalplatform for measuring school crime,workplace violence, racial profiling, andother topical concerns and has beenenhanced to capture data on hatecrime, computer crime, and crimeagainst the disabled. It provides thelargest forum for victims to describetheir experiences of victimization, theimpact of crime, and the characteristicsof violent offenders.

The public uses the informationprovided in these reports to betterunderstand the extent and nature ofcrime, to evaluate their susceptibility to

crime and to learn how to avoid placingthemselves into situations that mayincrease their vulnerability to crime.Policy makers use the data from thesereports to develop laws, policies, andprograms to combat or prevent crime.The media rely on NCVS data as oneof the most reliable sources of crimestatistics in the Nation, and researchersrely on these reports as benchmarksfor their own research findings. TheNCVS has been continuouslyconducted since 1973.

Law enforcement statistics Thisdata collection is the only source forcomplete national counts of lawenforcement personnel in the UnitedStates. It also provides information onthe primary duties and the operationsof law enforcement agencies andforensic crime laboratories across theNation.

BJS collects and analyzes sample datadrawn to represent over 18,000 lawenforcement agencies nationwide onthe organization and administration ofpolice and sheriffs' departments.Censuses of Federal, State, and locallaw enforcement agencies areconducted periodically, as well as asurvey of campus law enforcementagencies. These programs allow forthe examination of changes over timein staffing levels, minority and femalerepresentation among officers, officereducation and training requirements,operating budgets, salaries and specialpay for officers, UCR crime rates, typeof special units operated, drug enforce-ment activities, sidearm and armorpolicies, type and number of vehiclesoperated, and new technologies beingemployed. The data are used by lawenforcement agencies nationwide toprovide systematic comparativeinformation.

Surveys of DNA and forensic crimelaboratories provide national data onthe personnel, budgets and expendi-tures, workloads, equipment, andprocedures and policies of thesepublicly operated laboratories. Inaddition, BJS collects information from the public about the nature and

outcomes of their interactions with lawenforcement officers, including data on traffic stops and use of force. This program has been of signal importance to the COPS program, thebullet-proof vest program, and otherprograms across OJP which requiremanagement and administrative dataon the operations of these agencies.Data collected on traffic stops and useof force, as well as the operations oflaw enforcement training academieshave been used by Police Corps,COPS, and other components in theDepartment. The collection of adminis-trative data from law enforcementagencies began in 1986.

Prosecution statistics BJS collectsdata on resources, policies, andpractices of local prosecutors from anationally representative sample ofchief prosecutors who handle felonycases in State courts. These datacover a variety of topics including theuse of innovative prosecutiontechniques, intermediate sanctions,plea bargaining and work-relatedassaults and threats. This collectionprovides data on temporal change inthe administration of prosecution activi-ties and the emerging types of casesand knowledge now required (such asDNA and computer crime), and itdocuments the costs associated withprosecution activities. This data collec-tion has been ongoing since 1974.

Courts and sentencing statistics BJS provides data on the following:

State court sentencing of convictedfelons, including demographiccharacteristics of felons, convictionoffenses, types of sentences,sentence lengths, and length of timefrom arrest to conviction andsentencing (ongoing since 1986)

criminal justice processing ofpersons charged with felonies,including demographic characteris-tics, arrest offense, criminal justicestatus at time of arrest, prior arrestsand convictions, bail and pretrialrelease, court appearance record,rearrests while on pretrial release,


type and outcome of adjudication,disposition, and type and length ofsentence (ongoing since 1974)

State-by-State data on civil andcriminal workload in all State andlocal courts including case type, casefilings, case processing, disposition,and appellate opinions (ongoingsince 1975). In 2002 BJS, withfunding from the Office on ViolenceAgainst Women, began a statisticalseries to gather domestic violencecase-processing data.

The data series provide the onlynational source of information onjudicial decision-making and themanner in which cases are managedand adjudicated as they traverse thejustice system.

Through this collection, BJS prospec-tively tracks felons from arrest throughfinal disposition in order to determinethe outcomes of case decision-makingat each decision-point in the justicesystem. Estimates are provided on thenumber of persons convicted of afelony in State courts nationwide duringthe year, the different types ofsentences they receive, thedemographic characteristics of theconvicted felons, and the sentencesreceived by type of offense.

This collection represents the onlynational data on time required fromarrest to conviction, on sentencing byjury and bench trials, and detailed infor-mation on defendants sentenced afterentering a plea.

Federal justice statistics BJSprovides annual data on workload,activities, and outcomes associatedwith Federal criminal cases collectedfrom the Executive Office of U.S. Attor-neys, the Federal Pretrial ServicesAgency, the Administrative Office of theU.S. Courts, the U.S. SentencingCommission, and the Federal Bureauof Prisons. The Federal Justice Statis-tics Program (FJSP) provides a keybenefit to DOJ in that it is the onlysource for combined data from both theExecutive and Judicial branches on the

handling of Federal offenders. Thesedata are heavily utilized by DOJ(particularly the Office of Legal Policyand the Criminal Division) for planninginitiatives, evaluating performance, andsetting budget priorities. The websitefor these data permits additionalcustomized analyses and has been acontinuing source of District-level dataon Federal justice. This statisticalseries has been ongoing since 1980.

Corrections statistics Information isprovided on correctional populationsand facilities gathered from Federal,State, and local governments, andcovers the major components of thecorrections system — probation, jails,prisons, and parole. The correctionsprogram consists of the following:

annual and midyear counts ofincarcerated persons in State andFederal prisons and local jails(ongoing since 1850 and 1933,respectively)

annual counts and characteristics of persons entering or exiting proba-tion and parole (ongoing since 1965)

annual statistics on personsadmitted to or released from Stateand Federal prisons and on personsreleased from parole supervision(ongoing since 1926)

annual counts and characteristics ofpersons sentenced to death (ongoingsince 1930)

data on deaths of offenders incustody (ongoing since 2000)

quinquennial surveys of prison andjail inmates and adult probationers(ongoing since 1974)

censuses of State and localcorrectional facilities and parole and probation agencies (ongoingsince 1970)

the study of recidivism of Stateprisoners (ongoing since 1983).

These series detail information on theresources and demand for correctionalsanctions and are highly valued by bothpolicymakers and the practitionercommunity for the capability to

introduce consistent measures ofcorrectional activity. These data havebeen used by every component in OJPand have been heavily used bydivisions of the U.S. Department ofJustice including the Criminal Divisionand the Office of Legal Policy.

Tribal justice statistics BJSsupports development of statistics oncrime and the administration of justicein Indian country. The work in tribalstatistics is designed to fill an informa-tional gap by pursuing diverse efforts,including the following:

Criminal victimization studies inthree American Indian jurisdictionswith special emphasis on the role ofalcohol in violent crime victimizationsand the characteristics of domesticviolence incidents.

Census of tribal justice agencies inIndian country is the first comprehen-sive data collection to identify tribaljustice in Indian Country, the servicesprovided by the agencies, and otherinformation concerning court systemsand law enforcement.

The annual survey of jails in Indiancountry obtains data from all 70confinement facilities, detentioncenters, and jails operated by tribalauthorities or the Bureau of IndianAffairs.

The Tribal Criminal History Improve-ment Program began in 2004 as apilot program. The program supportsthe development of complete,updated, and accurate criminalhistory records for individuals inIndian country.

Justice expenditure and employment BJS provides expendi-ture and employment data fromFederal, State, and local criminaljustice agencies nationwide. Thisseries includes National and State-by-State estimates of government expen-ditures and employment for thefollowing justice categories: policeprotection, all judicial functions (includ-ing prosecution, courts, and publicdefense), and corrections. The justice


employment and expenditure data arethe Nation's only source for trackingthe Nation's financial commitment tothe justice system. These data areused to support all major formulaprograms in OJP and by other byFederal, State and local officials toassess their relevant justice costs interms of financial and humanresources. This statistical series hasbeen ongoing since 1972.

International statistics Through theInternational Statistics Program, BJScooperates with other countries and theUnited Nations to improve the collec-tion of statistics on crime and criminaljustice systems. A long-term goal is toenable cross-national comparisons andexamination of the relationshipbetween crime trends in the UnitedStates and those in other countries.

World Factbook of Criminal JusticeSystems provides narrative descrip-tions of the criminal justice systems of45 countries. These descriptions, avail-able electronically through the BJSInternet site, are written to a commontemplate to facilitate comparisons.

Drugs, alcohol, and crime Many ofBJS' ongoing statistical data seriescollect drug and alcohol-related infor-mation, including data on victimperception of offender substance use;drug-related programs of State andlocal police agencies; adjudication andsentencing of drug offenders at theFederal and State level; and inmatepast drug and alcohol use, substanceuse at the time of the offense, andparticipation in substance abuse treat-ment programs. The Sourcebook ofCriminal Justice Statistics presentsdata on drug use in the general popula-tion, on public opinion toward drugs,and on enforcement of drug laws. Acomplete online reference to statisticson drugs and crime is accessible onthe BJS website.

Improving the quality of justice data BJS conducts, supports, and imple-ments methodological and statisticalresearch and initiatives designed to

improve the quality and coverage ofjustice statistics, records, and informa-tion systems. These activities includeassessing the technology and legisla-tive status of criminal history and otherrecord systems and participating in thedevelopment and implementation ofprivacy, security, and informationpolicies which impact on Federal andState operational and statistical activi-ties.

Statistical methodological researchUnder the aegis of the AmericanStatistical Association (ASA), BJSadministers a methodological researchprogram designed to foster improve-ments in the methods used to obtain,analyze, and report national level dataon crime and criminal justice. BJSsupports studies designed to yield newinsights to affect current practice inareas such as developing the methods,definitions, and protocols to obtainnationally representative data; analyz-ing longitudinal data to examine report-ing variations and their effects onestimates of national rates; andexamining new ways of addressingmissing and incomplete data.

The BJS Visiting Fellows Programselects researchers to come toWashington, D.C., to conduct crime-related studies using the agency's richarray of datasets and software. BJSVisiting Fellows interact with BJS staffand gain first-hand knowledge of someof the most recent developments in thefield of criminal justice statisticalresearch.

Justice information and privacy Technological development has raisednew questions about privacy policyrelevant to justice records andsystems. To meet these needs, BJShas for over 20 years supported aprivacy program to identify and analyzethe privacy impact of changes in thesystems environment, to provide aforum for the discussion of theseissues, and to develop standards whichmay be applicable to the collection,

maintenance, and dissemination ofcriminal record data. BJS providestechnical expertise to States in imple-menting privacy regulations governingaccess to criminal justice data.Primary emphasis is on accuracy andcompleteness of records, limitations ondissemination, commingling of juvenileand adult records, data auditingtechniques, and the interstateexchange of records. Technical exper-tise has been provided since 1972.

Strategic Goal 1. Produce statis-tics on crime and justice

1.1 Measures of OperationalOutcomes

I. Major statistical series conducted

BJS carries out over three dozenseparate data collection programscovering crime and the administrationof justice. These series generally recurat specific intervals in order to facilitatetrend analysis. In general, all BJSrecurring and core programs areconsidered to be a part of the statisticalportfolio, regardless of whether acollection is occurring in a particularfiscal or calendar year. The followingoutcome measures are used to assessthe implementation of these series:

Core and recurring series conductedThe number of data collection seriesscheduled to be conducted during aparticular calendar year and thenumber actually conducted.

Special analyses conducted BJSperiodically conducts special collec-tions or analyses for specific purposes,such as a collaborative effort with otherFederal agencies or fulfilling a congres-sional mandate. The number ofspecial analyses conducted ismaintained as an indicator of the utilityof specific datasets for unanticipatedrequirements.


II. Data quality and accuracy

BJS establishes standards and collec-tion protocols for each statisticalprogram. These methodologicalconsiderations are the best gauge ofthe quality of the data ultimatelyproduced. Outcome measuressystematically examined for eachstatistical program are:

Resident-level response rate Calcu-lated as the percentage of respondentswho voluntarily participate in the BJSdata collection activity. Changes inresponse rates indicate a change in thewillingness of respondents to partici-pate in the data collection program.Reductions in response rate may resultin increased project costs due to moreextensive follow-up to attempt tosecure participation.

Agency-level response rate Calculated as the percentage ofagencies which voluntarily participate in the BJS data collection activity.Changes in response rates indicate achange in the willingness of respon-dents to participate in the data collec-tion program. Reductions in responserate may result in increased projectcosts due to more extensive follow-up measures needed to secure adequateparticipation.

Sampling coverage The probabilityof being selected to be in a representa-tive sample. Changes in the probabilityof selection directly affect the size ofthe error associated with estimatesderived from sample data and keydeterminants of the reliability and preci-sion of the sample data. The samplemust also be evaluated to ensure itsrepresentativeness if it is to be consid-ered valid.

Sources of non-sampling errorNon-sampling error is attributable to awide variety of sources and BJS mustcontinually examine the impact onsample estimates of factors which areexternal to the data collection processbut which may affect estimates. Theability of respondents to recall or record

information, tendencies to telescopeincidents, or failure to be able todescribe certain contingencies of anincident in terms of the categoriesbeing asked are examples ofnon-sampling errors about which BJSmust be concerned. For example, theNCVS sampling procedures utilize apanel design which means that thesame households may be in samplefor up to 3 years. A source of non-sampling error would be conditioning of respondents not to describe victimi-zations because of their experiencethat such descriptions trigger a seriesof additional questions and a lengthierinterview.

Extent of imputation for missingdata When BJS establishes that areliable and valid data collection proce-dure has been used, it is necessary toaddress the problem of missing databecause not every respondent willcomplete every item on a data collec-tion inventory. Imputation is normallydone through a ratio adjustment wherethe distribution of known responses isapplied to the responses for which dataare missing. BJS must continuouslymonitor problems of missing data,ascertain the reasons, and determinethe optimal procedure for imputing thevalue to a case. The amount ofmissing data is an important indicatorof the quality and utility of the datacollected.

Issuance of errata notices BJSmaintains a period of several weeksbetween report release and the finalprinting of a report. During that period,errors in text or data may be discov-ered which remained undetectedduring the verification process. Prior toprinting such errors can be corrected.Occasionally, errors may appear in afinal version of a report. In such cases,BJS issues an errata sheet and notesthe modification on the electronicversion of the report. Proper manage-ment of statistical releases requiresBJS to examine the reasons for sucherrors and verification improvementwhich may be needed.

III. Reliability and validity

BJS places a high emphasis on thereliability and utility of the datacollected. In addition, a core value ofBJS is that all data should be accessi-ble and replicable. Outcome measuresinclude:

Ratio of estimated coefficient ofvariation (CV) to actual estimates of error calculated from the sampledata At the time of sample develop-ment, BJS establishes a threshold forthe precision of the data collectionactivity to be undertaken. This decisionis a key determinant of the size of thesample needed. BJS must continu-ously evaluate year-to-year changes inCV to assess changing levels of preci-sion in sample surveys. Decreasingprecision, which is usually the result ofbudget reductions, is a major concernfor recurring estimates of both themagnitude and rate of occurrence ofwhat is being estimated.

Number of valid complaints receivedunder BJS Data Quality Guidelines BJS makes available a complaint facil-ity through our website for data andstatistics users to offer complaints andsuggestions indicating errors or otherpresentational problems or analyticnon-duplicability.


1.2 Measures of EducationalOutcomes

I. Measuring data utilization

BJS data releases are intended forwide distribution and use. Data andstatistics are made available in avariety of formats including traditionalpaper, electronic datasets and files,on-demand tabular presentations, andarchived data and spreadsheets. Inaddition, detailed files and analyticsetups are made available to ensurecomplete documentation of all public-use data. Outcome measures include:


Use of online data system Thenumber of user accessions to the BJSData Online are counted with a particu-lar emphasis on identifying user inter-est and priorities with respect tospecific data sources and collectionprograms.

Downloads from BJS spreadsheetsBJS currently maintains an inventory ofover 7,500 staff-generated spread-sheets covering current and historicaldata on crime and the administration ofjustice. The frequency of use forindividual spreadsheets are measuredto assess user interests.

Use of BJS Data Analysis System at the Criminal Justice Data Archive The Data Analysis System permitsusers to replicate and extend BJSreport findings. The Archive gatherssystematic data on customer use ofBJS datasets.

Requests for public use datasets/documentation Number of requeststo BJS or the Archive for datasets anddocumentation either directly viadownload or by other means.

II. Measuring report utilization

BJS reports, both electronic and inpaper, CD or other format, receive widedistribution. Current usage of thewebsite shows up to 20,000 users perday with multiple locations visited andmultiple document downloads occur-ring per user visit. Outcome measuresinclude the following:

Number of electronic and papercopies distributed BJS measuresthe distribution of reports annually.

Number of bulk order documentrequests Data on large user requestsprovide a measure of the distribution ofdocuments among primarily educa-tional users and institutions.


1.3 Measures of EvaluativeOutcomes

I. Measuring temporal change

A major responsibility for any statisticalagency is to generate measures ofvariables of interest over time.Prisoner counts, for example, havebeen conducted since 1850 by theFederal government. Outcomemeasures include:

Number of reports providing temporal change measures Thisrepresents a key measure of activity forBJS as describing changes over time inrates and levels of criminal events orworkload of the criminal justice systemis a basic responsibility.

Number of reports examining multi-year data aggregations Multi-yeardata aggregations or topical aggrega-tions represent a set of proceduresused by BJS with sample data forensuring periodic information on low-rate events or small subgroups of the population.

II. Measuring spatial variation

Geographic distributions of criminalactivity have long been a concern. Thefirst prisoners report in 1850 providedthe per capita rates of imprisonment foreach State and territory. Outcomemeasures include the following:

Number of reports providing spatialvariation measures This representsa key measure of activity for BJS asdescribing changes and differencesacross geographic areas in rates andlevels of criminal events or workload ofthe criminal justice system is a basicresponsibility.

Number of reports examininggeographic disaggregations BJS provides relevant data, where budgetpermits, for sub-national geographicunits. This may require the develop-ment of new procedures, such asrolling multi-year data from self-representing sampling units together,to be able to detect certain geographictrends and differences.


Strategic Goal 2. Improving criminalrecords and local statistics

BJS' enabling legislation focuses notonly on national statistics, but onsystems to support the development of data systems for states and localcommunities calling for "primaryemphasis to the problems of state andlocal justice systems." Thus theBureau recognizes the objectives ofimproving the quality and coverage ofsuch systems and supporting the entirestatistical research and developmentprocess for critical analysis and crimi-nal record utilization.

Improving Criminal History Records

BJS has been assisting States toimprove their criminal records since1972. In 1994, the Brady HandgunViolence Prevention Act provided anational grant program, the NationalCriminal History Improvement Program(NCHIP).

National Criminal History ImprovementProgram The goals of the NCHIPprogram are to ensure that accuraterecords are available for use in lawenforcement, including sex offenderregistry requirements, and to permitStates to identify ineligible firearmpurchasers, persons ineligible to holdpositions involving children, the elderly,or the disabled, and persons subject toprotective orders or wanted, arrested,or convicted of stalking and/or domes-tic violence. Recent emphasis hasbeen placed on anti-terrorism andhomeland security issues related to the use of criminal history records.

Direct funding and technical assis-tance are provided to States to:

improve the quality, timeliness, andimmediate accessibility of criminalhistory and related records

build their infrastructure to connectto national record check systemsboth to supply information and toconduct the requisite checks,including the FBI-operated NationalInstant Criminal BackgroundCheck System (NICS), the NationalSex Offender Registry (NSOR),and the National Protective OrderFile.

Technical assistance Direct assis-tance is provided to States to imple-ment programs, policies, and technolo-gies to upgrade criminal records andimprove interface with the FBI’snational systems. Technical assis-tance is provided through onsite visits,web training, telephone, trainingclasses, and workshops and confer-ences. Onsite technical assistancevisits are coordinated with the FBI to facilitate participation in FBIprograms such as the Interstate Identification Index (III).

Evaluation efforts A comprehensiverecord quality index is currently beingdeveloped which will evaluate State


Goal 2: Improve criminal records and local statistics

Measures of Operational Outcomes

Measures of Educational Outcomes

Measures of Evaluative Outcomes

Status of criminal history records and interface between States and

national systems

Status of National Incident-Based Reporting System implementation

States implementing NIBRS

Percentage of U.S. population covered by NIBRS reporting

Percentage of law enforcement agencies participating

Percent of Part I crimes reported in NIBRS-compliant format

Recent state records which are automated

Percentage of records accessible through III

Statistical research projects supported under the State Statistical Analysis Center Program

Recurring surveys of State-level participation in national systems

Monitoring of studies, reports, and databases developed

Percentage of applications for firearms transfers rejected primarily for presence of a prior felony conviction

Comprehensive Record Quality Index

Provide technical assistance for improved statistical reporting

Effectiveness of criminal history record and system improvements

Number of records available through III

States participating in III

States participating in IAFIS

States providing data to the FBI’s NSOR

States with automated interface between sex offender registry and other state systems/agencies

States participating in FBI protection order file

Figure 3. Strategic Plan for the Bureau of Justice Statistics: Goal 2 Outcome Measures

progress in record improvement andallow for comparison across states.

Statistical data collections BJSconducts several statistical series toproduce annual estimates of the resultsof the background checks and toascertain the quality of record-holdingsin each State to identify areas whereadditional resources or concentrationsof effort are required.

The Firearm Inquiry Statistics(FIST) series collects data on thenumber of inquiries processed byStates in connection with presalefirearm checks and the numberand basis for rejection of suchapplications. Data are alsocollected describing proceduresfollowed by each of the 50 Statesin connection with firearm checks.

The 50-State Survey of CriminalHistory Information Systemsprovides information on thetechnology, policy, and legislativestatus of criminal history records.

The National Instant BackgroundCheck (NIC) Survey collects datafrom the States to identify majorimpediments to dispositioncompleteness, with a primary focuson the linkage between criminalrecords repositories and the courtsand prosecutors.

Improving Local Data

State Justice Statistics (SJS) Programfor Statistical Analysis Centers In1972, BJS initiated incentives to theStates to create statistical centers ineach State and to provide liaison toBJS in the collection of data from Stateand local agencies. Under the BJSState Justice Statistics Program, allStates and most territories have estab-lished these Statistical AnalysisCenters (SACs) designed to centralizeand integrate criminal justice statisticalfunctions within the State. BJSprovides limited funds to each State tocoordinate statistical activities withinthe State, conduct research as neededto estimate impacts of legislative andpolicy changes, and serve a liaison role

in assisting BJS to gather data fromrespondent agencies within theirStates.

Technical assistance for SACs Technical assistance is provided tocoordinate statistical activities acrossthe States; provide training to all SACsin statistical and presentationalmethods; and foster shared knowledgeabout methodologies which have beenused across the States to addresscommon measurement concerns.

National Incident-Based ReportingSystem (NIBRS) ImplementationProgram The FBI's Uniform CrimeReporting (UCR) program, whichbegan in 1929, collects informationabout crimes reported to the police. In 1982 BJS and the FBI sponsored a study of the UCR Program with theobjective of revising it to meet lawenforcement needs into the 21stcentury. Since this time, BJS hasparticipated in the design and develop-ment of NIBRS and supports severalrelated efforts to encourage the use ofincident-based data.

The NIBRS Implementation Program isdesigned to improve the quality ofcrime statistics in the United Statesthrough technical support to States forimplementation of NIBRS-compliantsystems. The technical assistance andresearch program builds upon exten-sive previous efforts to review ongoingNIBRS activity and to identify impedi-ments to NIBRS implementation andrecommend solutions to theseproblems.

The Incident-Based ReportingResource Center This online resourcefor incident-based crime data seeks toput practical analytical information andtools into the hands of analysts whowant to work with incident-based data,and to provide a forum where analystscan exchange information and ideasabout using incident-based data.

Strategic Goal 2. Improve criminalrecords and local statistics


I. Measuring the status of criminalhistory records and the interfacebetween state and national systems

Since 1970, BJS has promoted boththe technical and conceptual improve-ments in the maintenance of informa-tion systems related to criminal historyrecords. Since 1995, BJS hasprovided substantial funding to theStates, largely as a consequence of theBrady Act, to upgrade these recordsand make them shareable for purposesof a background check prior to afirearms purchase. Such improvedrecord systems have substantial utilityfor other types of background checkapplications. BJS maintains on acontinuous basis, a variety of programperformance measures including:

Percentage of State records whichare automated Biennially, BJSconducts a data collection activityamong criminal records repositories toestimate the level of automation ofrecords.

Percentage of records accessiblethrough the Interstate IdentificationIndex (III) of the FBI The III is thenational system for sharing criminalrecords. On a near-monthly basis, BJSkeeps track of the status of each Statewith respect to participation.

Number of records shareablethrough the III The number of IIIrecords maintained by the Statesversus those maintained by the FBI isan important measure of the ability todecentralize the background checksystem.

Number of States participating in IIIThis is an important measure of thequality of criminal records in each Stateand the extent to which they may beconforming to national record qualitystandards.


Number of States participating inthe FBI's Integrated AutomatedFingerprint Identification System(IAFIS) This measures the transitionamong the States to digitized finger-print systems from rolled and inkedprints.

Number of States providing data tothe FBI's National Sex OffenderRegistry (NSOR) This importantcomponent of the background checksystem is based upon State submis-sion of data on sex offenders meetingregistry requirements.

Number of States with automatedinterface between sex offenderregistry and other State systemsand agencies This is primarily aconcern in Point-of-Contactbackground check States where theState-conducted check must integrateState sex offender information.

Number of States participating inFBI National Protection Order File This important component of thebackground check system is basedupon State and local submission ofdata on protection orders issued bylocal courts.

II. Measuring the status of NationalIncident-Based Reporting System(NIBRS) implementation

In 1984, BJS designed NIBRS as thenext-generation of law enforcementagency data on crime. The FBI and itsAdvisory Policy Board have embracedthe transition to NIBRS by the Nation's18,000 law enforcement agencies.BJS has played a supportive role to theFBI through occasional funding andongoing technical assistance.Outcome measures include thefollowing:

Number of States implementingNIBRS States must first become certi-fied as NIBRS-compliant prior to thesubmission of data to the FBI.

Percentage of U.S. populationcovered by NIBRS reporting Anongoing measure of the reach ofNIBRS statistical information and an

annual change indicator on growth inparticipation.Percentage of law enforcementagencies participating in NIBRS Anongoing measure of the reach ofNIBRS statistical information andcoverage among agencies nationwideand an annual change indicator ongrowth in participation.

Percent of Part I crimes reported in NIBRS-compliant format Since1930, annual measurement of Part Icrimes has been available; thismeasure will document the transitionfrom summary UCR-based data toNIBRS data.

Strategic Goal 2. Improve crimi-nal records and local statistics


I. Provide technical assistance forimproved statistical reporting

Since its initiation, BJS has alwaysperceived the production of statisticaldata on crime and justice as theproduct of its partnership with the50,000 agencies, offices, and institu-tions which compose the criminaljustice system nationwide. To facilitatethat relationship in order to generatethese data, BJS has continuouslyprovided assistance to the States tocentralize and give impetus to thecollection and analysis of data at theState level. Over this period, theawareness of and recognition of theneed for data-driven policies andpractices has become an importantelement of the improvement in theadministration of justice.

Number of statistical projectssupported under the State StatisticalAnalysis Centers (SAC) ProgramBJS has encouraged a wide range ofstatistical and methodological researchand development in the States and hasencouraged the exchange of findingsthrough the Infobase System.

Recurring surveys of statewideparticipation in national systemsThe SAC program often requires Statecenters to assist BJS by conductingsurveys within their States to addressemerging national policy issues or newlegislative mandates.

Monitoring of studies, reports, and databases developed. BJS annuallycollects information via the SACprogram concerning new State andlocal databases that are developed orenhanced with BJS funds. BJS alsomonitors the studies, reports, projects,and analyses that are generated as aresult of SAC funding.

Strategic Goal 2. Improve crimi-nal records and local statistics


I. Effectiveness of criminal historyrecord and system improvements

With the appropriation of funds to buildthe infrastructure to support the NICS,BJS simultaneously initiated the use ofmeasures of the most importantoutcomes sought in terms of firearmschecks and the upgrading of recordsnationwide to facilitate a wide range ofadditional types of checks associatedwith employment and licensing, sex offenders, stalkers, domestic violenceoffenders, and non-citizens.

Percentage of applications forfirearms transfers rejected primarilyfor the presence of a prior felonyconviction history BJS hasmaintained the Firearms InquiriesStatistical System (FIST) sincepassage of the Brady Act. This statisti-cal series measures the results of theNICS checks conducted.

Comprehensive Records QualityIndex for comparisons across StatesThis statistical effort measures anumber of variables related to thecompleteness, timeliness, and share-ability of records by producing acomposite index for each State ofperformance measures.


Strategic Goal 3. Ensuring publicaccess to data and statistics

BJS' audience is primarily the entirenation — every institution and individualconcerned with any aspect of crimeand the response to crime — as well asan international one. The potential poolof customers and constituents isendless. The objectives are to provideuseful, timely products, increaseelectronic access and online capabili-ties, and assist users in understandingBJS' interpretations and underlyingmethodologies.

Publish, disseminate, and facilitateelectronic access BJS publishesapproximately 40-50 reports annuallyand produces thousands of electronicspreadsheets. The BJS website hasbecome the principal vehicle fordissemination. It receives up to 20,000users per day with downloads ofthousands of reports each day and

hundreds of datasets weekly. Over thelast several years, BJS has recordednearly 7 million visitors to the BJSwebsite, utilizing the data or statisticalreports.

BJS Internet World Wide Web site Providing information on the Internethas proven to be the most timely,efficient, and cost-effective way BJScan make its data accessible. BJSinformation is updated continuously.The site provides:

summary findings including statisti-cal graphics, publications, selectedstatistics, and related sitespresented by crime and justicetopicevery BJS report produced by BJSsince 1994 is availableelectronicallydata for analysis, including spread-sheets, datasets, and onlinetabulation capabilitiesdescriptions of BJS data collec-tions and assistance programs.

From 2003 to 2004, BJS website usageincreased nearly 30%. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statis-tics This compilation, maintained bythe State University of New York atAlbany, is available online at<www.albany.edu/sourcebook> withcontinuously updated data from morethan 150 sources. Annual editions ofthe Sourcebook with over 600 tablesare also available on CD-ROM.

Clearinghouses and archives BJSmaintains national archives of data andreports for dissemination and direct,interactive access by the public. Thispermits any researcher or member ofthe public to replicate any numberpublished by BJS.

Reference Service The NationalCriminal Justice Reference Service(NCJRS) provides information aboutcrime and justice statistics. The clear-inghouse offers products and servicestailored to the needs of the criminaljustice professional and serves as theprimary repository for BJS products fordistribution.


g gGoal 3 Outcome Measures

paper version publicationselectronic version only on websiteCD rom only

Publications of findings

data collection questionnairesBJS reportscharts and supporting material

Electronic products available on-line

Electronic datasets made available

Media releases on newswire

Outreach activities

Products andServices Available

Measures of Operational Outcomes

Electronic subscribers to JUSTSTATS

Subscribers to BJS distribution lists

BJS website usage

Inquiries to ASKBJS service

Internet sites linking to BJS homepage

Media citations of BJS data

Federal and State court case opinions citing BJS data

Journal articles in the social sciences citing BJS data

AddressingCustomer Needs

Measures ofEducation Outcomes

Customer Feedback Surveys

Website usability testing

Website user log analysis

Analysis of ASKBJS questions/responses

MeasuringCustomer Satisfaction

Measures ofEvaluative Outcomes

Goal 3: Insure public accessto data and statistics

Figure 4. Strategic Plan for the Bureau of Justice StatisticsGoal 3 Outcome Measures

By referral from BJS, NCJRS handlesmajor distributions as needed for WhiteHouse and DOJ events and attendsmajor conferences representing thestatistical products available from BJS.

National Archive of Criminal JusticeData (NACJD) The Archive, locatedwith the central staff of the Inter-university Consortium for Political andSocial Research (ICPSR) in the Insti-tute for Social Research at the Univer-sity of Michigan, maintains data files,documents them and makes themavailable to researchers, scholars,journalists and other users.

The data from most BJS statisticalseries — more than 300 individual datasets — are held by the archive anddistributed through electronic and tradi-tional means, including downloadingfrom NACJD Internet site, datatapes,CD-ROM or diskettes. Online dataanalysis can now be conducted fromthe NACJD website. The NACJDprovides all data management servicesfor BJS and public access for the repli-cation and secondary analysis of BJSstatistics and findings. The NACJDproduces the required documentationfor data users and provides electronicaccess to source data for public datausers around the world.

National Clearinghouse for CriminalJustice Information Systems Theclearinghouse operates an automatedindex accessible through the Internet ofmore than 1,000 criminal justice infor-mation systems maintained by Stateand local governments throughout theNation, issues technical publications,provides technical assistance and train-ing for State and local governmentofficials, and operates the JusticeTechnology Resource Center. Theclearinghouse provides linking servicesfor BJS data users to all accessiblepublic information systems. Thisvehicle promotes the cross-jurisdictionuse of data and permits localities tosystematically examine the types ofinformation systems and capabilitiesfor data management present in otherjurisdictions.

Federal Justice Statistics ResourceCenter (FJSRC) The Federal JusticeStatistics Resource Center maintainsthe BJS Federal Justice StatisticsProgram database which containsinformation about suspects and defen-dants processed in the Federal criminaljustice system. Data are currentlyobtained from the U.S. MarshalsService, U.S. Attorneys, Federal Judici-ary, U.S. Sentencing Commission, andthe Federal Bureau of Prisons. Thesedata are available for online query andanalysis.

Infobase of State Activities andResearch (ISAR) The ISAR databasecontains current information about theresearch, activities, and publications ofthe State Statistical Analysis Centerswhich conduct research and analyzestatistics concerning criminal justiceissues of State interest. The ISAR issearchable by State, keyword, and dateand includes over 4,000 researchprojects, publications, and other state-level products and activities.

BJS Support for Data Users

BJS staff provide direct assistance tousers by identifying sources of BJSinformation, interpreting statistical datafrom BJS statistical series and datacollections, and providing technicalassistance related to methodologies ofBJS surveys.

BJS Clearinghouse staff who specializein BJS statistical resources assistusers in locating data that best meettheir particular information needs. BJSspecialists also have access to avariety of other criminal justice dataand can direct users to thoseresources.

National Archive staff supply technicalassistance in analyzing data collectionsand selecting the computer hardwareand software for analyzing dataefficiently and effectively and offertraining in quantitative methods ofsocial science research to facilitatesecondary analysis of criminal justicedata.



BJS provides a wide array of productsand services each of which can becounted and measured in terms ofcustomer demand and use. Theseoperational activities are designed toplace statistical findings, prepareddata, and datasets for public use in thehands of the public, including themedia, policymakers, students, andresearchers. Publication of findings The numberof paper reports, electronic reports,and CD-ROMs made available to thepublic and the number requested ordownloaded.

Electronic products available online BJS has been expanding the numberof products available on the BJSwebsite to address growing demand forelectronically formatted questionnaires,tables, charts, and spreadsheets. Themeasure tracks the number and typesof products that BJS makes availablevia its website.

Electronic datasets made available Datasets with supporting documenta-tion are made available in a variety offormats ranging from online directelectronic access to traditional orderingof datasets or remote mounting ofdatasets through the National Archiveof Criminal Justice Data’s University ofMichigan terminal system. BJS countsthe number of accessions of each typeto measure data usage.


Media releases on newswire BJSreleases reports and other announce-ments directly to the media via thenewswire. BJS keeps track of thenumber of releases to the media andthe number of accessions to electronicversions of press releases andannouncements on the BJS website.

Outreach activities BJS makessubstantial effort to ensure that newaudiences for reports and data arecontinuously developed. Measures ofthe number of conferences attendedand the number of BJS reports distrib-uted and requested are maintained.



Among the most important measuresof accomplishment for BJS is the useof BJS data in promoting a betterunderstanding of crime and the admini-stration of justice. Among themeasures indicative of the public’saccess to BJS data are:

Electronic subscribers to JUSTATS This database of interested data usershas grown dramatically since it wascreated by BJS. Counts of bothmembership and items requested orused are maintained by BJS in order toassess utilization.

Subscribers to BJS distribution listsBJS maintains listings of persons whohave indicated a particular topical inter-est and who would like copies ofreports on those topics. The number of such subscribers is another measureof utilization of BJS products andservices.

BJS website usage BJS maintainsdetailed information on web users andtheir method of entry to the BJSwebsite as well as their level and typeof activities while visiting the site.

Inquiries to ASKBJS service TheBJS website provides a portal to BJSstaff for users to inquire about findings,methods, and additional information.BJS maintains detailed logs of thesetransactions with the public and usesthese data to evaluate the quality andresponsiveness of staff to these exter-nal requests.

Internet sites linking to BJShomepage BJS, in its analyses of webusage, can ascertain the number ofwebsites linking to the BJS homepage.The number of such links is an impor-tant measure of the utility other webusers have attributed to the BJSwebsite.

Media citations of BJS data BJSmeasures the frequency and use ofBJS data by the media. BJS calculatesan estimated number of media citationsbased on — the number of pressreleases issued by BJS multiplied byfifty percent (for a conservative figure)of the total daily newspapers on the APnewswire; and the number of pressreleases issued by BJS multiplied byfifty percent of registered radio stationsand television stations (also a conser-vative figure of those likely to pick upAP news stories).

Federal and State court opinionsciting BJS data BJS tracks theappearance of reports and findings incase decisions using Lexis/Nexis andWestlaw database searches.

Journal articles citing BJS data BJS tracks the citations of BJS reportsand findings in social science periodi-cals, law reviews, criminal justicejournals.

Congressional Record and testi-mony citing BJS data BJS monitorsthe citation of BJS data in the Congres-sional Record and in testimony givenby and tot he U.S. Congress.



Measuring customer satisfaction withBJS products and services is anongoing process. Learning about thecustomer’s ability to navigate thewebsite is, in many ways, as importantor more important than the data orinformation they sought to acquire.BJS uses a variety of techniques formeasuring customer satisfactionincluding:

Customer feedback surveys BJSperiodically conducts surveys amongthose using both electronic and printmaterials. The findings of thesesurveys are regularly published on theBJS website.

Website usability testing BJSutilizes a vigorous program of usabilitytesting prior to initiating any change inthe content or presentation ofweb-based BJS materials orinformation.

Website user log analysis In orderto optimize access to the most sought-after BJS information, BJS maintainsdata on user sessions to identify areasmost frequently visited.

Analysis of ASKBJS questions/responses Apart from measuringwhether a response was given and howtimely the response was, BJSexamines the content of all questionsand replies to identify opportunities fordata needed by the public which arenot currently being collected.



Section IV. Measures of BJS’ operational efficiency

Efficiency GoalsBJS’ Index of Operational Efficiency

Measures of BJS’ OperationalEfficiency

Because it is important to BJS that theagency is able to determine whetherthe achieved results justified the costand resource burden, a set of efficiencyindicators have been developed toreview the operational contingencies ofperformance.

Efficiency indicators typically representproductivity relative to resourcesexpended; however, efficiency indica-tors also represent operational goals. BJS utilizes an efficiency index which iscomparable to the Dow-Jones Index ofbell-weather stocks to integrate GPRA

performance measures with data onappropriations and staff resources.

This performance barometer is referredto as the BJS Index of OperationalEfficiency. It combines a variety ofproductivity indicators into a convenientindex for monitoring performanceacross operational goals and tasks. These measures are then combinedinto an Index of Operational Efficiency,described more fully below.

Efficiency goals:1. Reduce staffing required per collection unit2. Increase customer contact and data access per staff member

3. Increase customer access to analytic facilities per staff

member4. Increase conversion from paper- based products to electronic products5. Reduce cost of providing data services per user

Annualized performance metrics withrespect to the five efficiency goals aredefined by creating a set of measuresestablishing the value of each datacollection activity, the numbers of usersof each BJS-provided service (e.g.,publications, datasets, spreadsheetsfor download, and interactive dataanalysis features), and the


Index of Operational Efficiency 1996-07change

1996 2000 2004 20071996 2000 2004 2007

0

20

40

60

Index value

0

5

10

15

Index value

Public contacts score

0

5

10

15

Index value

Analytic accessibility score

Distribution score

1996-07change

+27%

+31%+28%

+36%

0

5

10

15

Index value

Collection unit score

+5%

0

5

10

15

Index valueCost score

+41%

0

5

10

15

Index value

1996 2000 2004 2007 1996 2000 2004 2007

1996 2000 2004 20071996 2000 2004 2007

appropriations and staff resourcesrequired to accomplish the mission ofthe agency.

The result is a set of five efficiencymeasures: (1) number of staff percollection unit, (2) number of publiccontacts per staff member, (3) numberof unique analyses produced or madeelectronically accessible per staffmember, (4) the number of paperproducts disseminated per 100 usersor customers, and (5) the agencyappropriation per user/customer.

The five annualized efficiencymeasures have been generated for theyears 1996 to 2004 and have beenforecasted for 2005 – 2007.

For the first efficiency goal, BJS staffper collection unit has declined since1996 by an estimated 17% reflectingfewer employees doing more work.

For efficiency goals 2 and 3, substan-tial improvements in the numbers ofusers and customers have also beenmade relative to the number of BJSauthorized staff since 1996.

Efficiency goal 4 evidences a 90%reduction in the use of paper peruser/customer indicating the enormousgrowth in electronic distribution of data. Finally, the calculation of performancewith respect to efficiency goal 5 showsa 65% decrease in the cost of BJSservices per customer/user –from $23.76 in 1996 to $8.27 in 2004(in constant dollars).

Standardizing these efficiencymeasures for purposes of indexing canbe accomplished by generating a distri-bution of deviations from the averageperformance over the 10-year period.

To eliminate negative values for thesedeviations (as would occur in belowaverage years), a constant value (inthis case +10) is added to eachefficiency deviation unit in each yearand the total score is summed across

the five measures. The higher theaggregate score, the better theperformance above the averageefficiency measured over the period.

Index of Operational Efficiency

The Index of Operational Efficiencygives equal weight to each of the 5efficiency goals. The Index shows thatsince 1997, BJS has experiencedannual increases in efficiency. Relativeto the average efficiency for the periodsince 1996, BJS is estimated to be30% more efficient in 2004 than it was in 1996. Over the period, the greatestimprovement occurred in the reducedcost per user of BJS services andproducts – a 40% higher level ofefficiency in 2004 than in 1996.

In addition to obtaining the underlyingdata and deriving an historical 10-yearindex for examining operationalefficiency trends, BJS is evaluating thefeasibility of developing an index ofdata quality to identify those statisticalprograms from among the more than 3dozen conducted by BJS which yieldthe smallest non-response/missingdata adjustments and those whichgenerate larger adjustments or lessprecise estimates. These dataefficiency measures will ultimatelyserve as a complement to the Index ofOperational Efficiency and should helpdata users to obtain a more systematicunderstanding of the distribution ofdata quality.

In particular, measures of dataefficiency may serve as estimators ofthe extent of changes in data qualityassociated with revised samplingmethods and other data collectionmodifications (such as non-responsefollow-up) which are a direct conse-quences of changes in Appropriations.



Section V. Importance of a professional review process in strategic and program planning

Internal AssessmentsExternal AssessmentsPublic Access and Replicability of Findings

Importance of a Professional ReviewProcess

The Principles and Practices for aFederal Statistical Agency, issued bythe National Academy of Sciences(NAS), documents the importance ofemploying various mechanisms forobtaining both internal and externalreview of a statistical agency’s datacollection program and methodologies.

Data programs, analysis, and statisticalreports are subject to thorough internalreviews to monitor and maintain theirquality. These varied vehicles ofprofessional peer review are conductedto maintain the quality of agencyprograms and to ensure that users andother experts can have an impact onthem.

BJS maintains a stringent oversightprogram for its national statisticalprograms. As with many other statisti-cal agencies, BJS’ programs aretypically subject to ongoing andperiodic professional reviews byexperts to ensure validity andrelevance. BJS meets with externalgroups to review current programs,solicit input on program initiatives,suggest new products, and recom-mend changes. Program managersfrequently meet with academicresearchers, government data users,government policy experts, practitio-ners, and other stakeholders, to reviewand evaluate products, programs, andtechnical methodology.

Through a variety of peer review activi-ties as described below, BJS maintainsthe quality and utility of programs, andencourages data users and otherstakeholders to contribute to theagency’s data collection and dissemi-nation program. Brief written state-ments summarizing these activities andtheir impact on agency programs serveas performance indicators.

Internal Assessments

On a continuous basis, BJS staff andmanagers examine emerging dataneeds as expressed through AttorneyGeneral priorities and Congressionalmandates. BJS staff regularly evaluate

new legislative initiatives and requiredreporting programs to ensure confor-mity with data collection and reportingrequirements imposed. In addition,BJS staff meet regularly with Federal,State, and local officials to identifyemerging data needs or desirablemodifications to existing collection andreporting programs.

Finally, where available, BJS carriesout systematic comparisons acrossboth BJS and non-BJS data series; forexample, BJS posts on our website therelationship between FBI-recordedcrime data gathered from State andlocal police departments and NCVSdata on reporting the same crimes tothe police as described by victims.

BJS staff maintain a rigorous verifica-tion procedure to ensure accuracy andreplicablility for all published numbersand estimates. In addition, all analyticroutines and protocols are independ-ently verified and tested.

External Assessments

BJS utilizes a variety of external organi-zations to regularly critique ongoingstatistical programs and series. American Statistical Association Fornearly 30 years, BJS has utilized theASA to review and critique statisticalprograms through a Technical Commit-tee established to address Law andJustice Statistics. The Committee,composed primarily of academic statis-ticians and criminologists, providestechnical advice and methodologicalevaluations to BJS and identifiessubstantive and methodological issuesthat BJS should address.

In addition, the ASA sponsors aprogram of research designed to taphigh-quality researchers to periodicallystudy issues of interest to BJS relatingto methodology and/or analyses drawnfrom our statistical series. Forexample, BJS has had a growing inter-est in the problem of survey non-response and missing data; BJS andASA jointly sponsored a meeting tobetter understand the reasons forgrowth in non-response and techniquesfor ameliorating the problem. Through

this relationship, ASA ensures that BJSactivities and procedures are regularlyreviewed and evaluated before receiv-ing the organization's imprimatur.

Office of Management and Budget BJS, as one of the ten principal Federalstatistical agencies, adheres tocommon policy and practice expecta-tions defined by OMB's Office of Infor-mation and Regulatory Affairs as wellas the notice and review requirementsunder the Paperwork Reduction Act. Inthis regard, BJS practices are continu-ally subject to the review of the ChiefStatistician of the U.S. located in OMB.BJS collection programs are regularlysubject to OMB and public scrutiny asset forth in OMB regulations governingFederal statistical series and the opera-tions of statistical agencies. The Committee on National Statistics(CNSTAT) of the National Academy ofSciences, National Research Council CNSTAT works to improve the under-standing of national issues throughimprovement to the statistical methodsand information on which importantpublic policy decisions are based. BJShas had a long standing relationshipwith NRC to systematically evaluate thesuitability of BJS findings and data forinclusion in reports on crime-relatedissues. BJS staff frequently present orserve on NRC panels and submitpapers for inclusion in NRC publishedreports.

Interagency Council on StatisticalPolicy BJS is a member of the Inter-agency Council on Statistical Policy(ICSP), a council of federal statisticalagency heads that is chaired by OMB.Since its inception, the ICSP has beenan important vehicle for coordinatingfederal statistical agencies and theirpractices, particularly when statisticalactivities and issues overlap or cutacross agencies. The ICSP has alsofacilitated the exchange of informationabout agency programs and activities,and has provided advice and counselto OMB on statistical matters.


FedStats To ensure one-stopshopping for the public as users of BJSstatistical data, BJS seeks to conformits data dissemination and distributionprocedures to the requirements ofFedStats — an electronic window on afull range of official statistical informa-tion available to the public from theFederal Government. BJS statisticalprograms, analytic procedures, andreports and datasets made available tothe public are all continuously evalu-ated in terms of these external require-ments and standards. BJS has been amajor contributor to those Federalinitiatives devised to ensure greateraccess to such data.

Public Interest Organizations BJSregularly seeks the advice and input ofpublic interest groups and organiza-tions with respect to collection instru-ments, collection procedures, andpublications. Among the organizationsthat are regularly solicited for theirassessments of our products are: Inter-national Association of Chiefs of Police,National Sheriff's Association, American Correctional Association,Association of State CorrectionsAdministrators, American Jail Associa-tion, American Probation and ParoleAssociation, National District Attorney'sAssociation, Administrative Office ofthe U.S. Courts, and the ExecutiveOffice for U.S. Attorneys.

BJS also utilizes periodic focus groupscomposed of experts, both from thepractitioner and academic communi-ties, to evaluate new initiatives andongoing programs. In addition, theBJS Visiting Fellows program affordsstaff the opportunity to obtain additionalexternal review and comment.

Council of Professional Associations onFederal Statistics COPAFS has beenan ongoing partner to BJS in assuringthe utility and value of BJS statistics fora wide variety of user communities.COPAFS, as a consortium of manydozens of member and affiliate organi-zations relying upon Federal statisticaldata, provides a superb sounding-board for BJS initiatives. In particular,BJS has asked COPAFS for commentson the usefulness and usability of theBJS website. BJS staff have madepresentations at COPAFS meetingsdesigned to elicit evaluative criticismand such exchanges have proven to behelpful and constructive opportunitiesto gather feedback on how to improvethe utility of the BJS website.

Public Access and Replicability of Findings

Another element of the evaluationprocess within BJS is the self-imposedrequirement to make all datasets andaccompanying documentation availableto the public as oon as possible afterthe release of a report from thatdataset. This is perhaps the mostimportant evaluation tool as everyreported finding should be replicable bythose external to BJS. BJS facilitatessuch use of the data by providinganalytic tools directly to users.

Through use of our two main onlinedata repositories, the National Archiveof Criminal Justice Data and theFederal Justice Statistics website, BJShas provided both access to BJS dataand easy-to-use software whichpermits any user to conduct analysesfrom the data without prior training inthe use of the software. In this fashion,even an untrained user of BJS datacan challenge a number in our reportsand ascertain whether the number canbe reproduced.


The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice.Lawrence A. Greenfeld is director.

The FY 2005-2008 BJS StrategicPlan was prepared under the direc-tion of Lawrence A. Greenfeld.Maureen A. Henneberg, AssociateDirector, managed the implementa-tion of the planning process. PeterBrien and Lara Reynolds preparedthe Strategic Plan for publication.Tom Hester and Marianne Zawitzassisted in production.

Attachment ABJS Data – An invaluable resource to policy makersand the criminal justice community

Those responsible for determining or operating the criminal justice process – legislators and their staff, policy makers, police, prosecutors, andcorrections officers – rank among the most frequent users of BJS statistics. The following represents a small sampling of requests for data peryear.

To expand the scope of the United States Trustees database

To assist a project to reallocate U.S. attorneyresources nationwide

To provide statistical support in broadening the analytical Scope of the warrant information database

To provide data for the “Report to Congress from AttorneyGeneral John Ashcroft on U.S. Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons in FY 2003”

To compare the Federal government’s expenditures oneducation and prisons

To determine if the Gastonia PD’s 90% requirement should bechanged

To compare the Massachusetts DA’s salaries with otherjurisdictions

To determine the prevalence of intimate partner violenceagainst women who present to emergency departments

To examine state policies regarding the exupungement ofcriminal records

To provide a foundation for the development of a tacticalsecurity force

To compare Level 2 retention holsters for duty with Level 3holsters

To determine where the Denver County Jail in Denver, COranks among large jails in the U.S.

To prepare educational materials

To prepare for an academic conference on prison privatization

To prepare for a lecture

To compile information on how to measure, assess andenhance climates for integrity in law enforcement agencies

To develop a grant proposal

To answer a request made to the coalition

To determine whether the use of Post Traumatic StressDisorder as a mitigating factor at trial led to reduced sentencesfor veterans after 1980

Statistical trends in Federal bankruptcy fraud

Statistical tabulations and Federal criminal caseprocessing statistics

In-depth analysis of warrant information databaseto describe fugitives

Statistical trends in human trafficking

Federal expenditure on prisons in 2000

Local police departments that require a 90%or better qualification score for hire

District Attorney salaries

Intimate partner violence rates in hospitalemergency departments

State policies on criminal record expungement

Statistics on accidents involving less-lethalmunitions and diversionary devices employedby Tactical Operations teams

Statistics on officers injured or killed while onduty where the officer’s weapon was taken away

The top 50 largest local jail jurisdictions

Data on the number of sworn officers in State andlocal agencies

Statistics on prison overcrowding in the UnitedStates from 1970 to present

HIV and AIDS incidence in the prison population incomparison to the general population

Data on the number of agencies placed underconsent decree for ethics and integrity issues

Statistics on the prevalence of gang activity

Statistics on female sex offenders in cases wherethere are multiple offenders

Data on the number of veterans who have beenincarcerated for homicide in PA since 1980

Federal:

U.S. Trustee Program

DOJ, Deputy Attorney Generals Office

DOJ, U.S. Marshals Service

DOJ, Office of Legal Policy

Department of Education, National Libraryof Education

State and local:

Gastonia, NC Police Department

Massachusetts District AttorneysAssociation

Michigan Department of CommunityHealth

Pennsylvania State Senate

Military Department of Tennessee,Tennessee State Guard

Burnsville, MN Police Department

Denver Sheriff’s Department

Educational/Institutions

Old Dominion University - Department ofSociology

University of Cathilique de Lille

Binghamton University (SUNY) –Department of Psychology

Community Organizations:

Center for Society, Law & Justice

Boys and Girls Clubs of America

WA Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs

Pennsylvania Prison Society

PurposeType of dataBJS Data requester

Attachment B

Recent Federal and State court cases citing BJS statistics

Death penalty statisticsState v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Tennessee

Parole population statisticsDoe v. State ex rel.Mississippi Dep’t ofCorrections

Supreme Court of Mississippi

Domestic violence data from “Violence Against Women: Estimates from the Redesigned Survey”

State ex rel. Hope house,Inc. v. Merrigan

Supreme Court of Missouri

Data on sexual assault trends from “Sex Offenses andOffenders”

People v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of Illinois

Violent crime rate trendsPeople v. GoldstonSupreme Court of Michigan

Data on the underreported nature of rape crimes from“Rape and Sexual Assault: Reporting to Police andMedical Attention, 1992-2000”

People v. BryantSupreme Court of Colorado

Data from “Incarcerated Parents and their Children”B.C. v. Florida Dep’t ofChildren and Families

Supreme Court of Florida

Prevalence of imprisonment from “Prevalence ofImprisonment in the U.S. Population, 1974-2001”

U.S. v. GreenUnited States District Court forthe District of Massachusetts

Data on violence by inmates from “Census of State andFederal Corrections Facilities, 2000” and data onprisoner petitions from “Federal Habeas Corpus Review:Challenging State Court Criminal Convictions”

Kane v. WinnUnited States District Court forthe District of Massachusetts

Data indicating that rape is an underreported crime,from “Rape and Sexual Assault: Reporting to Police andMedical Attention, 1992-2000”

Pulinario v. GoordUnited States District Court forthe Eastern District of New York

Recidivism of state prisoners from “Recidivism ofPrisoners Released in 1994” and the number of federalprisoners released on parole from “Offenders Returningto Federal Prison, 1986-1987”

U.S. v. CrawfordU.S. Court of Appeals for theNinth Circuit

Data on the number of offenders under correctionalsupervision from “Probation and Parole in the UnitedStates, 2003”

U.S. v. KincadeU.S. Court of Appeals for theNinth Circuit

Data on the size of the state prison populationSchriro v. SummerlinU.S. Supreme Court

BJS data citedCaseCourt

BJS Strategic Plan 2005-2008 - Bureau of Justice Statistics · The Bureau of Justice Statistics...

Documents

Transcript of BJS Strategic Plan 2005-2008 - Bureau of Justice Statistics · The Bureau of Justice Statistics...