Upload
loren-gallagher
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SAVIN Performance Measures & Victim/User Feedback
Michael Dever & Elizabeth Zwicker, BJA; Anne Hamilton, OVW;
Debbie Allen, NC SAVAN; Travis A. Fritsch, MBF, Ken Ogden, AR Corrections
SAVIN Measures: Goal To increase attendees’ awareness about the:
Purposes of SAVIN measures
Performance measures set forth by funding sources
Capabilities of Computer Assisted Telephone
Opportunity for collaborative information-sharing with SAVIN conference attendees
Purposes of Performance Measures & Victim/User FeedbackPerformance Measures Describe service types &
usage Time specific & trends
Accountability to funding sources & public
Assessment of service capabilities and needs
Alerts to potential problems or critical events
Victim/User Feedback Assess status of victim/user
safety & confidentiality Assess if SAVIN service
implementation is operating as intended, especially for victims
Collect reports of how SAVIN is/is not working for all users
Collect recommendations on how SAVIN can be changed “Must have” & “would like to
have”
Michael Dever, Policy AdvisorElizabeth Zwicker, Program Specialist
Statewide Automated Victim Information & Notification (SAVIN)
Performance Measures
Performance Measure #8 Data Grantee Provides:
8.a) As of the last day of the reporting period, what was the total number of subscribers enrolled in program?
8.b.) As of the last day of the reporting period, what was the total number of new subscribers who enrolled during the previous six month reporting period?
Measure: Percent increase in program subscribers
Performance Measure #9 Data Grantee Provides:
9.a.) Number of Facilities in your state that participate in SAVIN?
9.b.)Total number of facilities in your state?
Measure: Percentage of progress towards full statewide SAVIN
implementation
Performance Measure #10 Data Grantee Provides:
As of the last day of the reporting period, how many user-initiated notifications were there for the previous six month reporting period?
Measure: Percentage of user-initiated notifications
Performance Measure #11 Data Grantee Provides:
As of the last day of the reporting period, how many notifications triggered by change in offender status were there for the previous six month reporting period?
Measure: Percentage of notifications triggered by change in offender
status.
Performance Measure #12 Data Grantee Provides:
As of the last day of the reporting period, how many notifications required operator assistance?
Measure: Percentage of notifications requiring operator assistance. Total number of notifications is gathered by adding Measures
10+11+12
BJA Contact Information Senior Policy Advisor David Lewis
Phone: 202-616-7829
Policy Advisor Michael Dever Phone: 202-616-9188
Program Specialist Elizabeth Zwicker Phone: 202-514-9380
State Policy Advisors: http://www.ojp.gov/BJA/resource/stcont.pdf
Definitions Facility: a prison or jail
Notification: the act of informing the subscriber(s) of a status update for the offender. A notification is triggered by a change in offender status or by request from subscriber and made via internet, telephone or mail.
Notifications triggered by change in offender status: these may be automatic outbound calls, emails or correspondence that is sent to subscribers as a result of a change in offender status. Notifications can be automated or may require assistance from operators or other trained personnel
Definitions continued: Operator assistance: assistance from trained operators
that is available to users who need additional information.
Reporting period: the six month BJA reporting period, either from January 1 – June 30; or July 1 – December 31.
Subscriber: a person who signs up to be notified of offender status updates. A subscriber may be a victim, victim’s family member or member of society at large.
Definitions continued: User: a person who contacts the SAVIN system for
information or other assistance (e.g. referrals, searches, calls). A user may not have a subscription to SAVIN and may be a member of the broader criminal justice community.
BJA Contact Information Senior Policy Advisor David Lewis
Phone: 202-616-7829
Policy Advisor Michael Dever Phone: 202-616-9188
State Policy Advisors: http://www.ojp.gov/BJA/resource/stcont.pdf
Office on Violence Against Women
Ms. Anne Hamilton, Program ManagerOffice on Violence Against Women
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Purpose of VAWA
Role of the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW)
Relevant VAWA Funding Options Services, Training, Officers and Prosecutors (STOP) Grants to Encourage Arrests & Enforcement of Protective
Orders (GTEA) Rural Domestic Violence, dating Violence, Sexual Assault and
Stalking Assistance Program (Rural) Technical Assistance (supports all OVW grantees)
VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative (MEI) Purpose of VAWA MEI
To assist in fulfilling the Department’s responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), Public law 103-62 applicants who receive funding under any OVW Solicitations must provide date that measures the results of their work.
Core data elements will be reported by all OVW-funded initiatives, but each grant program has data elements tailored to reflect the work and impact of that specific program.
Ex: Arrest Program - number and percentage of arrests relative to the number of police responses to domestic violence instances; Rural Program - number of referrals between child protective service workers and victim advocates.
OVW Reporting Requirements Narrative Progress Reports – submitted twice a year for
the periods of January – June and July - December. This captures basic performance measures and funding specific activities.
Financial Status Reports – submitted quarterly to report unobligated funds and drawdown amounts.
Audit requirements – submitted yearly to the Audit Clearinghouse.
Computer Assisted Telephone InterviewsPractitioner & Victim/User Feedback
Ms. Debbie J. Allen, M.S.W. SAVAN Coordinator
North Carolina Governor’s Crime Commission
Evaluating NC SAVAN:
Impact & Recommendations
SAVAN Study - Purpose 2004 Program Evaluation
NC SAVAN Network Activity and Usage Establishing and Maintaining the System
Impact Victims Criminal Justice Agencies
SAVAN Study - Method Evaluation Instruments
22-item Paper Survey: Sheriffs’ Offices (N=29) District Attorneys (N=18)
Random Telephone Survey: 83 completed
court notification group (N=41) offender movement group (N=42)
SAVAN Study - Findings Paper Survey
Respondents were asked to rank SAVAN on 11 process measures.
On a scale from 1 (poor) to 10 (outstanding), the average score of these factors was 7 or greater. Findings:
Technical Assistance (x = 7.56) Responsiveness of SAVAN Operators (x = 7.35) Accessibility of Services (x = 7.29)
SAVAN Study - Findings Telephone Survey
80% of victims in the court notification sample group revealed that using the SAVAN system provided them with a sense of safety & security.
85% of victims in the custody status sample group reported that knowing the custody status of a specific offender gave them a: greater degree of security; and, more pronounced level of perceived safety.
SAVAN Study: Recommendations & Outcomes
Greater and more intensified PR campaign
Study frequency and magnitude of technical problems
Introduce legislation for sustained SAVAN funding 86% of all respondents favored legislative support
Quantitative & Qualitative Victim/User Feedback
Ms. Travis A. Fritsch, Mary Byron FoundationMr. Ken Ogden, Arkansas Dept. of Corrections
Purposes of Performance Measures & Victim/User FeedbackPerformance Measures Describe service types &
usage Time specific & trends
Accountability to funding sources & public
Assessment of service capabilities and needs
Alerts to potential problems or critical events
Victim/User Feedback Assess status of victim/user
safety & confidentiality Assess if SAVIN service
implementation is operating as intended, especially for victims
Collect reports of how SAVIN is/is not working for all users
Collect recommendations on how SAVIN can be changed “Must have” & “would like to
have”
Victim/Survivor Feedback Victim safety and confidentiality issues
Human Subject Protection Institutional Review Boards and other protective oversight
Types of information needed Prioritize and condense Most basic language(s) Make this a 2-way opportunity for exchange of information
Collaboration w/ victims’ advocacy community and other service providers Development of the assessment instrument & protocols Collaboration on analysis and reporting
General Data Categories & SignificanceSAVIN Usage to determine: the nature and extent of SAVIN usage how and which services are utilized, who may be using the services (generically), and what types of additional activities are performed on behalf of victims/users and
practitioners
General Outbound Data Registrations
Cautions: confidentiality complications Notifications
Cautions: confirmed v. successful
General Inbound Data Calls and callers Types of usage (computer, operator) Operator response activities
Programmed into the SAVIN system for reporting that is comprehensive, accurate and near real-time.
Other Victim/User FeedbackSurvey Opportunities
Automated survey as SAVIN component of notification
Automated survey as part of another victim/public assessment
Hard copy survey instrument(s) provided at various points throughout the justice or service process
Direct victim/user interaction Organized
Focus Groups Face-to-Face interviews
On-going Collaboration with victims’ advocates and
justice professionals and vendor Clarification on how data will be shared
and applied e.g., action plans for reform
Basic to all Victim/User Feedback
Human subject protection With or without Institutional Review Board
Put yourself in the shoes of the person(s) who will be responding!
Outreach to traditionally underserved populations
Confidentiality (data, participants)
Collaboration throughout process
Strive to develop data consistent with national assessment standards while tailoring as needed for unique needs
Timely and appropriate dissemination of data/findings
Availability of support resources, if needed
Performance Measures &Victim/User Feedback
Open Collaboration OpportunityFull Panel & Conference Attendees
In Memory of . . . Mary Byron Bertie Jefferson BJ Jacobs Officer Bobby Palmer Cammie Pigman Oease Cornett Deputy Regina Nichols Linda Culp Lt. Brenda Cowan Officer Eddie Mundo, Jr Karen Duncan