|
Vancouver Street Crime Working Group
Client: Attorney General’s Office of British Columbia, on behalf of the Vancouver Street Crime Working Group
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
Project: The Center for Court Innovation assisted the Street Crime Working Group in conducting a needs assessment in relation to street crime and disorderly behavior in downtown Vancouver, and in developing new criminal justice responses. The Working Group mandate included defining the nature and magnitude of street crime and disorderly behavior (with particular attention to chronic offenses, the mentally ill, drug addicts, etc.) and crafting recommendations to address these issues. While the initial focus was on the downtown area of Vancouver, part of the group’s mandate was to develop models for use in the rest of the city and province.
http://www.bcjusticereview.org/working_groups/street_crime/
media_release_10_12_05.pdf
Rhode Island Promoting Court Reform and Innovation Project
Client: Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Location: Rhode Island
Project: The Center for Court Innovation, in partnership with the Rhode Island Judiciary, was engaged in a nine-month planning project aimed at promoting ongoing innovation within the court system. The goal of this planning process was to examine the state courts, identify strengths and weaknesses, and develop a plan for how the Rhode Island Judiciary might create the infrastructure it needs to stay at the cutting edge of court reform. The process was organized into three steps:
Stakeholder Interviews. In order to solicit input and get buy-in from key players, the Center conducted a series of interviews with key stakeholders in Rhode Island, including court administrators, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, social service agencies, and community-based groups.
Focus Groups. The Center convened focus groups, including court users, attorneys and judges, to discuss possible alternative strategies for promoting innovation within the courts.
Implementation Plan. Drawing on the information gathered, the Center produced a feasibility study and an implementation plan that can be used by Rhode Island to recruit additional support and funding.
The final product is designed to serve as a foundational document by the Rhode Island Judiciary in obtaining needed financial and political support for its efforts.
http://www.courts.state.ri.us/pressreleases/03judicialaddress.htm
Victoria Center for Court Innovation/Neighborhood Justice Center
Client: Victoria Department of Justice
Location: Victoria, Australia
Project: In 2004, the Center was engaged to assist the Victoria Department of Justice in promoting a discussion among local stakeholders inside and outside the justice system about two key concepts:
the possibility of starting a Center for Court Innovation-type organization in Victoria as an engine to promote ongoing innovation there; and
the possibility of creating a Neighborhood Justice Center in Victoria to provide greater attention to low-level crime, coordination of services, and a multi-jurisdictional approach to delivering justice.
Following a week-long series of presentations and workshops conducted by Center staff in Melbourne, a formal proposal for funding was made to the Australian government for the creation of a Victorian version of the Center for Court Innovation and Neighborhood Justice Center.
http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/DOJ+Internet/
Home/The+Justice+System/Neighbourhood+Justice/
Transferability of Problem-Solving Principles and Practices
Client: California Administrative Office of Courts
Location: California and New York
Project: In a project originating with the Collaborative Justice Courts Advisory Committee of the Judicial Council of California, the Center for Court Innovation collaborated with the California Administrative Office of Courts to produce a research report that explores the extent to which key principles and practices fostered by collaborative justice courts (or, as they are known outside California, problem-solving courts) may be applied more widely throughout a state court system. The research team conducted four focus group sessions—in Burbank and San Francisco, California, and in New York City and Rochester, New York—and several individual interviews among a diverse group of judges with experience in drug courts, domestic violence courts, mental health courts, and other collaborative justice courts in those two states. In total, 35 judges participated in this exploratory research.
http://www.courtinnovation.org/_uploads/documents/CA Story_1.pdf
In early 2005 a second series of focus groups was conducted, this time among a range of other stakeholders. Researchers conducted two focus groups among justice system representatives (prosecutors, defense, the civil bar), one among reps of treatment/services (probation, substance abuse, employment services, etc), and one among policymakers.
http://www.courtinnovation.org/_uploads/documents/CA Phase II Report.pdf
Scottish Justice Reform
Client: Justice Department, Scottish Executive
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Project: In 2005, the Center assisted the Scottish Justice Department in helping to convene a broad-based discussion in Edinburgh and Glasgow about possible reforms to the Scottish system for summary justice, following up on site visits to Center demonstration projects in New York by the Scottish Minister for Justice and the Solicitor-General. In a follow-up project, Center staff was invited to Glasgow to make presentations on the community court model.
http://www.strathclyde.police.uk/index.asp?docID=2932
Scotland Community Justice Authorities
Client: Justice Department, Scottish Executive
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Project: In 2006, the Center facilitated over a dozen stakeholder meetings in connection with the introduction of eight Community Justice Authorities to coordinate the efforts of the justice system and community-based service providers to reduce re-offending in Scotland. The consultations gave each agency the opportunity to talk about the advantages and disadvantages of this new approach, and to offer suggestions on how the Scottish government can help make the program a success.
http://www.scottishlabour.org.uk/communityjusticeauthorities/
|
