enhancing relationships with state and local agencies · enhancing relationships with state and...

Justice Research and Statistics Association720 7th Street, NW, Third FloorWashington, DC 20001


Enhancing Relationships with State and Local Agencies

Justice Research and Statistics Association1000 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 450Washington, DC 20005

David Roberts, SEARCHDavid Usery, URL Integration

May 23rd, 2018



Session Focus• Gaining Access to Data

– Traditional Criminal and Juvenile– Non-traditional Criminal Justice– Behavioral Health

• With Access - Integrating the Data– Traditional Methods– Big Data



Getting Access• Is this an issue?

– Any area more than others?– What can you get but have difficulty using?

• Political challenges• Personality challenges• Technical challenges



Culture of Government• Not set up for interagency cooperation• Artificially divided communities of interest• Agency directions not necessarily in concert

with one another• Agency culture shapes people• Preservation is through risk avoidance



Data Sources• Traditional Criminal Justice

– Criminal History (CCH)– Courts– Corrections– Probation

• Non-traditional uses of Criminal Justice data– Combining NIBRS with other sources– Other police system aggregators

• Behavioral Health



Political Challenges• What agency are you in and what is its mission

– Perceived agenda– Trust

• Inherent and developed conflicts• Past perceived misuse of data• Safekeeping (data, agency)• Politics

– R v D– Legislature v Executive– Supreme Court v either – State v Local (rural v urban)



Personality Challenges• Difficult Gatekeepers

– Passive aggressive– Like picking up mercury– Avoidant– Intimidating– Technobabble

• Agency culture shapes• Government culture shapes• Blame others – vendor, central IT



Technical Challenges• Technical Challenge – Data Source

– Is what is available – what you need– Digestible file structures, IT resources to extract– Making sense of data

relationships/codes/consistencies – Code abuse

• Technical Challenge – SAC– IT support for preprocessing files– Ability to discuss tech issues with agency IT

resource



Behavioral Health Data Challenges• HIPAA - Statute policies dictate - consent and usage• Confidentiality more of an issue with adults than in criminal• What are you looking for?

– Diagnosis (at what level)– Treatment (type, participation, compliance)– Continuity of care

• What will you do with the data (MOUs)– Correlation with criminal behavior

• Sources – State agencies responsible for behavioral health / health– Corrections– Jails, Detention Centers– Community Mental Health



Tip # 1 Leverage What Exists

• Existing data transfers• Existing committees / communities• Existing relationships• Existing mandates• Existing motivations



TIP # 2 Understand Dynamics• Individual agency narratives• Where and who is resistance coming from• What is the verbalized concern and what is

non-verbalized– Just a pain– Data is disorganized and embarrassing– Agency protection– Constituent protection



Tip # 3 Build Trust• Advisory Committee• Clear understanding of the purpose for and

use of the data• Expectations (how often refreshed)• Who sees what before it is released• What is in it for them (individually or

community)



Tip # 4 Get Support• Build alliances• Persistence • Develop champion

– Wants it most– Wants it and has pull

• Institutionalize• Realign communities to include behavioral health• Is coercion an option?



Data Integration Challenges• Usual suspects

– Name– DOB– SSN (?)– State ID (fingerprint)

• Data warehouse– Traditional database, based upon common highly

confident links– Need to know in advance what you have



TIP # 5 Data Standards

• Operational Standards in Criminal Justice– NIEM vocabulary and model– Code Lists used between agencies

• Agencies would at least need to map in and out of standards

• Health / Behavioral Health has own set of standards– Justice to Health emerging



Tip # 6 Big Data• Unstructured or less structured• Pattern matching• Quickly analyze large amounts of data• K-means clusters• Non-traditional data sources

– Driver’s license– Vehicle registration– Other statewide person data sources


• The 2016 survey—the 14th in a series since 1989—was published February 2018

• The survey provides a snapshot of data, trends, improvements, and practices spanning repository and particularly criminal history operations in each state

Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, 2016


Translating the Detailed Survey…


into a Series of Blogs Providing Insight & Operational Context


Number of Subjects in State CCH Files


Noncriminal Justice Queries Expands


Disposition Reporting w/in 24hrs

In jurisdictions where 90–100 percent of court dispositions are reported electronically to state repositories, felony dispositions are typically reported to the

repository within 24 hours of adjudication and, in turn, those electronic dispositions are recorded by the repository in the state criminal history database within 24 hours


State Planning to Replace CCH


• Exploiting the research value of CCH Records• Process Measures, related to operational

reporting volumes, workflow, data quality, timeliness, etc.

• Research Measures, related to assessing changes in the active offending population, first-time arrestees, risk assessment, recidivism, redemption, criminal careers.

Computerized Criminal History AnalyticsProof of Concept


• Working with the SEARCH Membership Group to identify and define universal process metrics– Trend analysis

• Changes in volume of arrests and dispositions• Changes in time elapsed between arrest and

dispositions– Anomaly detection

• Early problem identification• Potential data quality issues

Developing Prototype Metrics


• Identify first-time arrestee cohorts

Research Metrics

From CCH Surveys 2010 2012 2014 2016

Number of Subjects Added 95,960,700 100,596,300 105,569,200 110,234,200

Biennial Growth 3,631,100 4,635,600 4,972,900 4,665,000


• Profile active offending populations• Profile discharge cohorts• Criminal career development• Recidivism and Risk Assessment• Assess variations across states and interstate

criminality. – FBI reported in the 1980s that about 30% of

persons in their CCH files had arrests in more than one state

Research Metrics

enhancing relationships with state and local agencies · enhancing relationships with state and...

Documents