Crime detection and prevention are two important duties performed by police on a daily basis. There is a fine line to observe when it comes to crime prevention and protecting an individual’s Constitutional rights. Advocates for implementing the crime control model would agree with routine enforcement of stop-and-frisk, as a proactive police response. On the other end of the spectrum, proponents of the due process model pose it is just another form of bias-based policing and racially motivated. This paper will discuss the concept of stop-and-frisk, while giving the reader an opportunity to determine if it is a proactive police response to crime or bias-based policing.
Suicide, “an inward-directed act of violence,” has been a consistent problem in the United States and internationally (Title & Paternoster, 2000). According to the 2016 National Center for Health Statistics Brief, “suicide is an important public health issue involving psychological, biological, and societal factors” (Curtin, Wagner, & Hedegaard, 2016, p. 1). Based on data between 1999 and 2013, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) places suicide as one of 15 leading causes of death for individuals between 10 and 64 years of age, especially among adolescents and young adults. In 2013, suicide was the second leading cause of death among all races and sexes for ages 10-24, and the fifth for ages 25-44 (see Figure 1.)
Evidence-based practices are accepted as the gold standard within criminal justice agencies. In some instances, what works on paper is carried out effectively in the field, whereas in others, barriers are met by the realities of the front line. In corrections, there are eight accepted principles believed to reduce recidivism of offenders: the use of risk assessments, the need to enhance motivation, targeting interventions, matching offender traits with interventions, use of cognitive behavioral therapy, strengthening pro-social influences, adhering to program principles, and the use of data to guide actions (NCSC, 2018). These principles and the challenges perceived to their implementation are discussed below, from the point of view of a practitioner working in an institutional correctional setting.
Community policing exists to enhance public trust in law enforcement officers. In contrast to the focus of traditional policing, community-oriented policing focuses on the community’s involvement in law enforcement’s efforts to prevent crime (Gill, Weisburd, Telep, Vitter, & Bennett, 2017). Community policing policy is always in progress. It was first implemented in the United States in the 1980s, and since then, the policy has changed very little (Adegbile, 2017). The focus remains on strengthening community-policing relationships. Community policing units are designed to respond to minor problems in the community, whereas the patrol officers are free to respond to calls regarding crimes. One of the objectives of the community policing approach is to make neighborhoods safer through cooperation with the public.
"We are pleased to announce that San Mateo County Probation has met the requirements for renewal of its status as a Certified Evidence-Based Organizations (CEBO).", said Sobem Nwoko, President, Joyfields Institute. Findings of the reCertification assessment determined the organization continues to demonstrate a number of strengths in the five key components of an Evidence-Based Organization (EBO). For recertification, an organization is subject to a rigorous organizational self evaluation overseen by an evidence-based expert evaluator. Specifically, the agency is;
Building knowledge and use of evidence based policies, programs, and practices
Demonstrating of effective leadership
Organizational culture and assessment
Strategic planning, performance measurement, and program evaluation
Welcome to your evidence based professionals monthly featuring your collection of relevant articles, webcasts, grant resources, and our upcoming events. This month we begin our shift toward focusing each issue of the newsletter on specific topic areas. For this issue we feature articles on;
1) data, its use for responding to pressing issues
EBP Society and Joyfields Institute To Hold Evidence-Based Pathways Conference
The EBP Society and Joyfields Institute jointly plan a San Diego Conference for human, social and justice services personnel. Joyfields will hold this conference November 28-30 for evidence-based professionals seeking to grow while getting accredited learning hours. The event, which will be held at DoubleTree by Hilton Mission Valley San Diego Hotel, will help attendees learn proven approaches for producing uncommon client success.
Substance abuse among adolescents is a growing public health concern within the United States. While adolescents account for roughly 8% of all substance abuse treatment admissions (SAMHSA, 2016), Winters and colleagues (2013) assert that only 10% of adolescents in need of drug therapy are actually receiving treatment. While illicit drug use extends across multiple age groups, initiation during adolescence can prove especially harmful to these youth. For adolescents, early substance use makes them more susceptible to drug addiction and dependence (Hurd, Michaelides, Miller, & Jutras-Aswad, 2013). In addressing this issue, national policies often center around two principle facets: drug education and applying standard treatment for teenage abusers. Unfortunately, current policies for these two facets are proving to be inferior and even ineffective when applied to this issue. Policymakers should reevaluate these policies and explore new avenues, particularly those in drug prevention and treatment. For adolescent substance abuse, superior policy alternatives exist that are better suited for adolescent substance abuse.