Highlights
This article is available as a YouTube Podcast.
A guide to getting answers to crime and justice questions.
Most in state and local justice systems find USDOJ material difficult or impossible to find, read, and comprehend.
Getting answers to common crime questions is tough. This article explains why and offers solutions. Finding a trusted expert who will summarize the data and give you both sides of any issue seems to be the solution.
Author
Leonard Adam Sipes, Jr.
Former Senior Specialist for Crime Prevention and Statistics for the Department of Justice’s clearinghouse. Former Director of Information Services, National Crime Prevention Council. Former Adjunct Associate Professor of Criminology and Public Affairs-University of Maryland, University College. Former police officer. Retired federal senior spokesperson.
Former advisor to presidential and gubernatorial campaigns. Former advisor to the “McGruff-Take a Bite Out of Crime” national media campaign. Produced successful state anti-crime media campaigns.
Thirty-five years of directing award-winning (50+) public relations for national and state criminal justice agencies. Interviewed thousands of times by every national news outlet, often with a focus on crime statistics and research. Created the first state and federal podcasting series. Produced a unique and emulated style of government proactive public relations.
Certificate of Advanced Study-The Johns Hopkins University.
Author of ”Success With The Media: Everything You Need To Survive Reporters and Your Organization” available at Amazon and additional booksellers.
Sign up for notice of new articles on the front page of this site.
Daily news summations on crime, violent crime, law enforcement, and the justice system are offered under “Google Crime News” in the banner of this website.
A comprehensive overview of crime for recent years is available at Violent and Property Crime Rates In The U.S.
Background
I was the senior specialist for crime prevention for the Department of Justice’s clearinghouse, The National Criminal Justice Reference Service, and the director of information services for the National Crime Prevention Council. During my 35 years in media and public relations, I answered thousands of questions from the media. I wrote position papers for Presidents, governors, agency heads, and others.
The fundamental question is whether citizens, justice system professionals, or the media can receive impartial guidance on the best strategies to reduce crime and improve operations.
You’re a police, corrections, or judiciary professional and you need to know best practices. What’s the best policing strategy? Do offender rehabilitation programs work? Is there research about violence interrupters? Can prosecutors engage in trials instead of plea bargains?
You’re not interested in funds or technical support, you just want answers to questions.
After ten years of assisting inquiries for USDOJ-funded agencies and after 35 years of responding to media questions for state and national criminal justice agencies, I have come to realize that getting impartial answers to questions is a lot harder than it should be. There’s too much advocacy. If you are not getting both sides of an issue, the pluses and minuses, you’re not getting the whole story.
Warning. At the time of this writing, USDOJ websites are under review due to new administration policies. New or updated research is not being offered at this time.
Opinion
You contact advocacy groups about incarceration. Some will tell you that incarceration has no connection to rates of crime. The next group you contact tells you that there is a ton of good, solid research from the US Sentencing Commission and the Bureau of Justice Statistics connecting released offenders to a multitude of criminal offenses. Who’s right? How do you know who’s right?
The only way this works is by talking to an impartial expert who can summarize the data and send you relevant, well-done research. You need to find a qualified person who has the time to give you an honest overview. You don’t need advocacy. You simply need guidance.
Unfortunately, that’s a lot harder than it should be considering the nature of crime and its impact on our communities.
Reading studies is preferred but most practitioners do not have the time or expertise to wade through complicated research reports. The research community is not known for using plain language.
So you contact the US Department of Justice’s Office Of Justice Programs and related agencies through their clearinghouse about crime or policing or corrections or the judiciary or any other topic. You ask for the current state of the art on any topic. What do you get?
In all probability, you get a bibliography or a hard-to-read research document. Is that sufficient? No. Do you want more? Yes. How do you get more?
Department Of Justice Agencies Within The Office Of Justice Programs
The Community Oriented Policing Services of the Office of Justice Programs was designed to provide technical assistance and funds to improve law enforcement and other justice agencies. They employ seasoned veterans and program managers to provide guidance. The National Institute of Corrections does the same and I’ve taken emergency public affairs training from them. Research from the National Institute of Justice or the Bureau of Justice Statistics can be invaluable. Funding from the Bureau Of Justice Assistance is welcomed.
In all of the above-cited agencies, experts can assist. Contact them and ask. You may have to be persistent.
Crime Solutions.Gov lists the programs that work but there are disagreements over what should be included and what constitutes acceptable research methodology. It’s a great idea but it’s hard to use by practitioners, yet it’s a good starting point.
Warnings-It’s Hard To Get Impartial And Factual Data
To get the best possible answers, those seeking data need to understand that both politics and advocacy enter the discussion. Note that nonpartisan groups are rare (if they exist at all). Advocates skew their responses. The media has lost most of their trusted, experienced, fair, and hard-bitten crime reporters.
Warning-The Politics Of Administrations
The first thing to understand is that the politics of any administration guides everyone within the agencies mentioned. Every President gets to appoint their Attorney General and their guidance affects the services offered by the Office Of Justice Programs.
The second item to consider is divergent philosophies. There are conservatives and liberals. There are progressives and those disagreeing with them. Both will claim that they are evidence-based. But just because there is “evidence” doesn’t mean that programs or strategies work or are in the best interest of society. It takes a much higher standard of good data done by independent researchers that’s replicated in other jurisdictions.
Democratic strategist James Carville said support from some on the left for the push to defund the police has become a major hindrance for the party’s candidates, including Vice President Harris during her presidential campaign. “We could never wash off the stench of it,” Carville said in an interview with The New York Times. He added that the phrase “defund the police” is “the three stupidest words in the English language.”
Yet when you asked “progressives” during the time of intense protests regarding the police use of force, they would support defunding or alternative efforts and offer data as to why.
The Office Of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, (part of the Office Of Justice Programs) urged all but the most egregiously violent juvenile offenders to be sentenced to community-based treatment facilities or sent home with supervision. All this happened concurrently with juvenile crime powering much if not most of the violent crime in large cities. OJJDP celebrated plummeting juvenile arrests during a time of violent crime growth. Juvenile offenders were clients to be treated. These positions were adamantly supported by staff and advocates but were not well received by the rest of the justice system.
Why bring this up? If you contacted OJJDP during the Biden administration, you would receive a good deal of advocacy that they would say is based on “evidence” while concurrently, cities were suffering mightily from a ton of juvenile violent crime, carjackings, and auto thefts. I’m sure there is evidence suggesting that young offenders do better emotionally while at home. OJJDP staff and advocates were adamant in their views and research.
Anyone contacting federal agencies or their contractors needs to understand that the politics of the current administration could (and probably will) enter the discussion. No one from the USDOJ tells employees or contractors to skew their responses but everyone there understands the dynamic.
Warning-Federal Research Is Hard To Comprehend
As much as I like the Bureau of Justice Statistics, their documents can be difficult to read. Want crime information? The average person can’t read a BJS document without hanging on every word and every footnote. Even knowledgeable insiders have issues reading their material. Yet they are a great starting point for understanding crime and how the justice system functions.
Crime data from the FBI? Their new National Incident-Based Reporting System is a wonderful improvement but their reports are difficult to find and read on their website. FBI data is based on crimes reported to law enforcement but the overwhelming percentage of what we call crimes are not reported.
The National Crime Victimization Survey from the Bureau of Justice Statistics is far more accurate but ignored. The FBI reports falling crime while the National Crime Victimization Survey reports the highest percentage growth in violent crime in the nation’s history.
And we ask non-academics, criminal justice practitioners, and the media to make sense of this? I studied the national crime issue for decades and I have a hard time understanding it at times.
USDOJ-funded research is written by academics who are not known for either getting to the point or offering practitioner-friendly overviews. Academics write for other academics, not people in the field.
Advocacy groups do a much better job of speaking plainly. If there is anything that I would change within the Office Of Justice Programs, it’s the insistence that every publication be written in plain language focusing on results rather than methodology.
Warning-Nonpartisan Organizations
There are an array of supposedly impartial organizations that will provide their answers but responses are mostly advocacy based on politics or philosophy. The US Department of Justice funds many of them through technical assistance grants.
By the way, I chuckle when national advocacy organizations are described as centrist entities by the media. “Nonpartisan” agencies focusing on crime at the national level do not exist with the possible exception of Gallup and maybe a few others. They all have an agenda. If they take grant funding from the federal government or foundations, they will be guided by the administration in power or funding sources.
Yes, there are research organizations dedicated to keeping politics out of their studies but they are in the minority.
Warning-Advocacy Groups
There are advocacy organizations that are funded by federal agencies and foundations that are far more oriented to furthering a point of view than doing good, independent research. One is a Pulitzer Prize-winning media entity that skews everything. I’m not suggesting that they don’t do good research, they do. But they began their website with a statement that the justice system is terrible and they are going to correct it.
It’s my opinion that issues within the justice system are more of a problem of staffing, funding, and a lack of good research than philosophy.
I read everything advocates produce because some of their data and points of view are valuable as long as you realize it’s promotional. We can’t live in a bubble where the only data we are exposed to agrees with your point of view. You cannot be successful unless you have a holistic view of any problem.
If you are not interacting with federal agencies, you are likely dealing with advocacy organizations. Regardless of their insistence that they are nonpartisan, they’re not.
Warning-The Media
Most people get their crime and justice news from media articles or social media sites. Please note that the number of experienced journalists has been severely reduced over the last ten years and the days of knowledgeable crime reporters are almost over. Crime and justice issues are complex and most journalists are generalists which means that today they are dealing with crime and tomorrow, they are reporting on a local fire.
The mainstream media leans left (per Harvard and many others) and social media influencers lean right. Reporters have their favorite sources and many (if not most) get their crime and justice research news from advocacy groups. A lot of what I read from the mainstream media on crime policy is factually incorrect, incomplete, or lacks context.
There was a time when savvy veteran crime reporters knew practices and data better than most criminologists. They would stop silly or incomplete stories or bad data from reaching the public without context. They are mostly gone due to a massive media realignment. We have lost tens of thousands of reporters. I’m not suggesting that you should disregard research-based media stories. It’s my opinion you should engage them with a dose of skepticism.
So After All These Warnings, What’s The Solution To Getting Answers?
The secret is reaching out to a variety of agencies to get answers and the willingness to challenge what doesn’t make sense.
We already discussed agencies within the Office of Justice Programs of the USDOJ. However, I’m going to suggest that you do a bit of work before contacting them.
Artificial Intelligence: Can you trust Artificial Intelligence? I use Chat GPT daily. I asked CHAT, “What are the best strategies law enforcement can use to reduce crime?” and the answer was surprisingly accurate. Just note that any Artificial Intelligence entity scrapes the internet and uses long-form data-driven articles to answer questions and most lengthy overviews come from advocacy organizations and the media. I rarely use Chat GPT to write articles. I use it for research.
Artificial Intelligence can be incorrect but it’s a good starting point. I can tell Chat GPT that their answer is wrong and they provide another response and if that is incomplete, I challenge them again. You need to question Artificial Intelligence responses when necessary.
Sometimes it’s how you ask a question to Artificial Intelligence. There is guidance.
Interestingly, I asked Chat GPT “What are the most reputable organizations in the US for finding answers to crime and justice questions?” and I was referred to a wide variety of organizations that are guaranteed to give you advocacy-based answers. Why? Because, as stated, Artificial Intelligence prefers long data-driven articles which are generally created by progressive organizations.
Reputable Organizations: Second, I would go to reputable organizations like the Police Executive Research Forum, the American Correctional Association, the National Center of State Courts, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Sheriff’s Association, The National Policing Institute (formally known as the Police Foundation), the American Jail Association, the American Parole and Probation Association and the National Organization For Victim Assistance. They may offer a subject-oriented specialist to provide guidance or referrals.
Most of these organizations will be fair as to their assessments “but” some embrace advocacy. For example, there is no national consensus or an extensive literature review as to what parole and probation agencies could or should do beyond enforcing the dictates of the court or parole commission. Some want a social work approach and others want a law enforcement agency. Some want both. Yet some groups will firmly tell you that their philosophy works.
Social Media: Going to social media platforms (gasp) and asking members questions is always interesting. Just understand that many responses will be ideological. I would stick to LinkedIn groups and police-oriented sites listed in the right column of this website.
Most on social media are progressive entities (especially Reddit) and you have to expect very harsh opinions on social issues (yet their technical sites are quite useful). But it’s always interesting (sometimes distressing) to get the perspective of other people.
The USDOJ: Finally, once you have done some digging, go to the US Department of Justice’s National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Just be prepared to get either a bibliography or a research-based document.
There are good and knowledgeable people within USDOJ agencies and if you press them, they can often refer you to a subject-level expert or a program manager who will take the time to assist you.
The Best Studies In Crime Research?
To my knowledge, there are two programs with hundreds of high-quality studies on crime, proactive policing and criminal rehabilitation. Proactive policing showed reductions in crime but there were questions as to the degree of success. Criminal rehabilitation programs mostly failed to reduce recidivism and when they did, the results were very small.
The proactive policing study (a literature review) was offered by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in 2017. It was financed by the US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. The criminal rehabilitation study (another literature review) was offered by Vanderbilt University in 2019 and, again, it was funded by the US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice (NIJ). NIJ-funded research carries robust quality controls.
The trick is to find additional literature reviews (or a meta-analysis) based on a variety of good, well-constructed research that uses independent researchers and has been replicated in other jurisdictions. Just because a research project claims progress without replication doesn’t mean it is successful. Some initiatives claim wonderful results that fail upon further examination when implemented in other jurisdictions.
Note that data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics is very informative and answers many research-based questions. You just have to carefully examine their results. Their readability is challenging.
Conclusions
The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice in the late 1960s promised us a glorious new path through criminal justice research. Through a variety of reports, they collectively stated that a state of the art didn’t exist and that through new research and assistance programs, we would climb out of the dark ages and provide the justice system with the data and guidance they needed.
In summary, that didn’t happen or it didn’t happen sufficiently. So after half a century, what works? Not much. We need a ton of additional high-quality data.
I find it interesting that the criminal justice system I entered as a police cadet is mostly the same system I left after retirement as a senior spokesperson for the federal government. Police respond to calls for service and provide routine patrols. Corrections incapacitates. The judiciary finds guilt or innocence. That’s essentially the same system I entered decades ago.
It’s as if thousands of research reports never existed because they are too hard to read or comprehend or are too political or advocacy-based. We were promised a golden age of good research to make the lives of Americans safer and better.
You may have your opinions and the advocacy group of your liking and your governor, mayor, director, or professor may have their preferences but there is very limited evidence conclusively stating that anything works beyond constitutional proactive policing.
We disagree as to whether national violent crime rates are falling or rising (US Department of Justice data says it’s both). We don’t have a clue as to the efficacy of violence interrupters based on good data. We state that we need to do something about the root causes of crime when we are not even sure what they are beyond poverty (I believe the primary root cause is massive child abuse among offenders, see the data on brain injuries and sexual abuse of women offenders as children by people they know).
If you ask questions as to the state of the art in justice system practices, you must be willing to go to multiple sources. You must be able to wade through complex reports (academics can’t write plainly to save their lives). Just understand that there are few if any strategies embraced by all.
Advocacy organizations are the best for putting complex topics in plain language (something that the US Department of Justice needs to embrace) but they are going to give you the answers favored by their funders.
Note that the primary function of criminal justice agencies is to stay within their budgets and take directions from their political representatives so whatever agencies or contractors say is obligated to those two principals.
Unfortunately, there’s nothing simple about understanding crime and the justice system.
Finding a trusted expert who will summarize the data and give you both sides of any issue seems to be the solution.
Privacy Policy
We do not collect your personal information. See our privacy policy at “About This Site.”
See More
See more articles on crime and justice at Crime in America.
Most Dangerous Cities/States/Countries at Most Dangerous Cities.
US Crime Rates at Nationwide Crime Rates.
National Offender Recidivism Rates at Offender Recidivism.
The Crime in America.Net RSS feed (https://crimeinamerica.net/?feed=rss2) provides subscribers with a means to stay informed about the latest news, publications, and other announcements from the site.
