Week 1

Policies are often enacted in the aftermaths of current events and their media coverage. Societal
reactions on topics such as police use of force, prison reform, and rehabilitation vs. incarceration can
push policymakers to evaluate programs and policies and to make recommendations for change.  

For this discussion, review recent examples of current events in criminal justice that have sparked
conversations about policy changes. Choose one current event to research further as you answer the
prompts below.

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words: 

Providing some details regarding what are program goals, what does documenting program goals
include, and identify program strategies.

Program goals are statements of long range goals in which individuals desire to meet with their
respective program. These statements should identify a programs purpose, goals, and objectives in
which the programs curriculum should reflect. An example of this is Juvenile Probation Department
sending a juvenile to a placement facility in-order-to provide safety in their community. This juvenile will
receive therapeutic treatment for a duration of time until he/she can be released back into society.
Hence, the department objective was demonstrated by providing services to the juvenile as well as
providing the public safety from the juvenile delinquent.

Documentation of program goals are identifying and analyzing the success rate of the individuals that
were in the program. For example, a performance measurement chart evaluates all the programs
objectives from the respective program. A Flow model can assist with identifying poorly defined
program goals in which can help the evaluator improve the program’s success.

Program strategies are the activities designed to achieve the programs overall goal. The activities of the
program will reflect vision in which the program wants to go, values, focus of on what the program
hopes to achieve with the individual participating in the program, how the program will achieve their
goals, and how to measure the success of the programs recidivism.

Reference Page Entry

Kirchner, R. A. (1994). ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

PROGRAMS. https://www.jrsa.org/pubs/reports/handbook1.html

Goals of a policy can be improved to be more effective through implementation and review. Upon
identifying the need of a policy, the individuals will need to assess the activities of the program to
identify policies and procedures. Gathering of information is the step in which program leader’s look at
other programs that have implemented policies that align with your programs mission. Drafting of the
policy is presenting the new policy to the individuals that will be responsible for implementation of the
policy. Finally, implementing and assessing the policy. Assessing the policy after implementation will
allow administration to revise the policy to workout issues that were unforeseen in the planning stage.

Week 1

We often think about criminal justice policies from a larger, federal perspective, but there are far more
examples of policies and programs at the local and state levels. In this assignment, you research and
explore local policies and programs, including their impact on criminal justice organizations and
practitioners.

Use the weekly readings, the internet, and the University Library to find resources for your assignment.
Consider searching with the name of your community, city, or state; and with key terms such as:
criminal justice policy, criminal justice program evaluation, criminal justice current events, etc. 

Write a 500- to 700-word paper stating your knowledge, interests, and opinions of local and state-level
criminal justice programs and policies in your area. Address the following in your paper:

 Research types of criminal justice programs and policies existing in your city or state.

The programs that are offered at the Bill Logue Juvenile Justice Department located in Waco, TX
serve to deter juvenile delinquency in the community by using specialized officers in which
collaborate to meet the departments mission statement. The Electronic Monitoring Program
provides officers the ability to supervise juveniles by monitoring their GPS unit. Per the
department’s policy, juveniles that are not abiding by their curfew will be required to wear a
GPS unit. Also, Special Needs Diversionary Program collaborates with a local mental health clinic
to provide juvenile delinquents with mental health care services while on probation. Per the
department’s policy, juveniles that score high on the MAYSI-2 for mental health will be assigned
to the Special Needs Diversionary Program for the duration of their probation. Next, the
Intensive Supervision Program ISP provides a wraparound approach by using intensive
supervision coupled with electronic monitoring along with more interactions with your
probation officer in the community. Per the department’s policy, juveniles released from
placement will be required to participate in ISP for a minimum of 4 months. Lastly, the
Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program PRP is a residential program offered by the department in
which uses a therapeutic approach that provides early intervention for juveniles. This service is
offered to younger juveniles with the goal of providing the juvenile with early intervention with
the expectation of keeping the juvenile from further involvement with the department.

 Describe your current understanding of criminal justice programs and policies.

My understanding of criminal justice programs and policies at Bill Logue Juvenile Justice
Department is that the department provides safety to the community from juvenile delinquency
by catering services to their needs through intensive counseling and daily supervision from
probation officers. Also, by enforcing sanctions Bill Logue Juvenile Justice Department offers
 rehabilitative opportunities. This facility’s main priority is creating a safe and secure
environment that is conducive to change for each individual. 

 Explain the areas of criminal justice programs and policies that intrigue you the most. 

The Post-Adjudication Facility that Bill Logue Juvenile Justice Department offers their youth is
the Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program. Their Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program offers short-
term placement for delinquent youth in which therapeutic counseling services are offered.
Generally, PRP is offered to their younger youth at risk in which helps improve the chances of
family counseling that address their criminogenic needs. Therefore, by Bill Logue Juvenile Justice
Department offering a short-term placement program, the department can provide early
intervention to their younger youth.

 Explain why criminal justice programs and policies may need evaluation.

Criminal justice programs and policies need evaluation to measure the effectiveness of a
program and its success of the individuals that have completed it. Evaluation also contributes to
improved treatment and service provision given to individuals. Without rigorous evaluation, it is
unknown whether a program is providing any benefit to its participants. Ineffective programs
may even cause unintended harm to those who participate. There is increasing agreement that
criminal justice programming and practices should be grounded in scientific research to the
greatest extent possible (REICHERT, 2019).

 Introduction

The following information provided is from the Bill Logue Juvenile Justice Department located in
Waco, TX. This facility offers multiple programs for their youth in their community suffering from
mental health and delinquency issues. Also, the Bill Logue Juvenile Justice Department programs
and policies are geared towards rehabilitation of the youth based on their specific needs.
Therefore, the measurement of their program their programs success is by the completion of
their programs and recidivism rates.

The City of Waco has developed several programs through the Bill Logue Juvenile Justice Department to
aid in the help of juveniles throughout McLennan County. All these programs aim to reduce the
recidivism rate in juveniles by catering to the different needs of the juveniles. These programs are
intriguing because they seek to help juveniles during a crucial time in their lives. As time progress, some
criminal justice programs and policies will need to be reevaluated due to the lack of effectiveness. 

Reference Page Entry

Giancola, S. P. (2020). Program evaluation. SAGE Publications.

REICHERT, J. (2019). ILLINOIS CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION AUTHORITY CENTER FOR JUSTICE

RESEARCH AND EVALUATION. http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/articles/Demystifying
%20Evaluation.pdf
Van der Stouwe, T., Gubbels, J., Castenmiller, Y. L., van der Zouwen, M., Asscher, J. J., Hoeve, M., van der
Laan, P. H., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2021). The effectiveness of social skills training (SST) for juvenile
delinquents: a meta-analytical review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 17(3), 369–396.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09419-w

Week 2

As society and culture evolve and shape criminal justice perspectives, programs and policies need to be
evaluated and improved. In this discussion you explore and discuss the evaluation of these policies and
programs, including types of evaluation and methods of evaluating.

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words: 

 What does evaluation mean within the context of criminal justice programs?

 What is the difference between summative and formative evaluations for criminal justice
policies and programs?

 What approaches should evaluators use to build evaluation capacity among staff of the program
they are evaluating?

 Are qualitative or quantitative methods more effective for evaluation? What factors affect your
choice?

2C)

The two evaluation types that I are relative to my current position are process evaluation and outcome
evaluation. Process and outcome evaluations go hand-in-hand because their focus is on specific areas of
a program. Process evaluation is considered in the early stages of the program for implementation. So,
evaluators will assess whether or not their strategies worked as planned and if the expected outcome
from it was achieved by a new policy and procedure. Also, the outcome evaluation will tell evaluators
overtime if participation in this program led to changes for the individual in a positive/negative way.
Therefore, the outcome evaluation conclusion will be solely based on statistical data gathered rather
than a measurement.

Example, if juveniles in a placement facility are to receive one family night visitation (with contact) a
month based on their performance and behavior in the program, the output would be how many
juveniles did not receive a family night visitation (without contact) for failure in their performance and
behavior? If the number of juveniles receiving contact visits is high then the policy and procedure
established has achieved it goal.

Process- Family Night Visitation.

Outcome- Number of individuals that did not receive Family Night Visitation due to their behavior.

Goal- Improve behavior and performance by offering Family Night Visitation to juveniles in placement
with approved behavior and performance during the month.
Reference Page Entry

Reichert, J. (2019). DEMYSTIFYING PROGRAM EVALUATION IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE: A GUIDE FOR

PRACTITIONERS. http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/articles/Demystifying%20Evaluation.pdf

Yes, questions should be formatted in the evaluation to receive appropriate answers by having the
evaluation questions to determine the method. The question should help effectively collect data to
properly assess the programs progression. Thus, the evaluator must develop a clear problem statement
with inputs and activities identified, and with intended outcomes established will allow the evaluator to
develop logical evaluation questions. So, this will allow evaluators to understand whether or not the
program needs revisions. By starting off with clear and measureable goals this will allow for the linking
of activities and their outcomes.

Good morning Chasity, after reading your post I can see the similarities of Summative evaluation and
Outcome evaluation. As you stated Summative evaluations are less frequent in the measurement of
program goals, but outcome evaluation measures a programs activity from what I understand to see if
the activity is meeting its goal. So, with Summative evaluation measuring end goals of programs and
outcome evaluation measuring the programs activity I can truly see the collaboration of the two
evaluations to make a program great.

Week 2

Program evaluation is a vital part of the ongoing improvement and integrity in criminal justice processes
and policies. With many initiatives and programs being implemented within criminal justice
organizations, the evaluation process can help determine the effectiveness of the intervention and the
return on investment of public or private funding. In this summative assessment, you explore and
analyze the importance of evaluation for criminal justice programs by looking at a specific program in a
criminal justice organization.  

Select a criminal justice program that would be subject to evaluation. It can be from any state, local, or
federal organization. Use the weekly readings, the internet, and the University Library in your search.
Examples of programs include a local bodycam initiative or state-level juvenile rehabilitation program. 

Write a 700- to 875-word paper in which you do the following: 

 Describe the criminal justice program you selected.

The Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program is a Post-Adjudication Facility located in Waco, TX. This
facility can provide treatment for 18 youth aged 10-17yrs old in a six-month period. McLennan
County Probation defines recidivism as a youth that has not been committed to the Texas
Juvenile Justice Department TJJD. Although, the definition of recidivism is a criminal act to re-
offend. The Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program is designed to offer early intervention services
to youth by prevention and aftercare services. Also, with these services the Progressive Re-
Sanctioning Program can address their criminogenic needs by equipping youth with the
 necessary tools to be successful individuals in society. So, the goal of the Progressive Re-
Sanctioning Program is to provide intervention/prevention services to delinquent at risk youth
earlier to curve future involvement with the department.

 Identify the purpose of evaluation for your chosen criminal justice program, including why it
would be of importance to the organization.

Generally, the purpose of evaluations is to evaluate the effectiveness in specific areas of a

program and determine the success of a program. Also, evaluations will help identify strengths
and weaknesses of policies and procedures implemented in which creates opportunities for
revisions. The purpose of the evaluation for the Progress Re-Sanctioning Program will be to
measure the success rate of youth completing the Progress Re-Sanctioning Program. The
success of this program can be determined by the recidivism rate of youths that did not re-
offend. Therefore, by evaluating the Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program re-offender rate will
measure the program’s effectiveness.

 Explain the impact of policy on your chosen criminal justice program.

The McLennan County Probation Departments’ criteria for youth being selected for this program
are age, medical conditions, and the charges the youth has obtained. The Progressive Re-
Sanctioning Program preferably admits 10-15yr old’s but will accept youth up to 17yrs old. Their
commitment towards the younger youth is to keep them in the county, so family counseling
sessions can be easily attended versus out of the county. Next, medical conditions can be youth
or the parent. Lastly, the youth’s charges are reviewed for potential admissions into the
Progress Re-Sanctioning Program.

 Describe the process for evaluating your chosen program.

The two-step evaluation process used to evaluate the Progressive Re-Sanctioning Programs’
success are process evaluation and outcome evaluation. The program has been temporarily
closed due to COVID-19. The first step of the evaluation looks at if the juvenile completes the
program. The second step looks at if the juvenile reoffends and is committed to the Texas
Juvenile Justice Department or any of their new facilities. The Progressive Re-Sanctioning
Programs completion rate of the program is 100% from 2018-2021. The number of youth that
re-offended and were placed in the Texas Juvenile Justice Department TJJD facilities were
28.57%. Youth that re-offended and was released back into the community were 14.28%. The
success rate of the 28 youth that completed the program to its entirety is 60.71%. Based on the
current evaluation process, this program is very successful.  

 Identify data to collect during program evaluation that would demonstrate the effectiveness
of your chosen program.

The McLennan County Probation Departments’ standard measures the rate of success by
determining if the youth has re-offended and is transferred to the Texas Juvenile Justice
Department. Youth that re-offended typically are released back into the community if their
violation is minor. Youth that re-offended with serious charges are recommended for treatment
at another facility or transferred to the Texas Juvenile Justice Department. Data that is collected
 for the completion of the Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program is evaluated and put in a
spreadsheet once a month. Evaluators will then assess if the program is achieving its intended
goals.  

 Describe what you may expect from an evaluation of your chosen program.

McLennan County’s Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program appears to haves a successful rate with
100% of their youth completing six months of residential treatment. Although, McLennan
County measures recidivism differently than other youth programs the Progressive Re-
Sanctioning Program has a 28.57% recidivism rate. Therefore, by McLennan County providing
their youth with early intervention and prevention techniques youth have returned to society
changed.

 Introduction

The program that will be discussed is McLennan County’s Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program
located in Waco, TX. This document will identify of the evaluation of the Progressive Re-
Sanctioning Program and the programs importance to its community. Explain the policies that
impact the Progressive Re-Sanctioning Programs success. Discuss the evaluation process the
Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program uses. Lastly, identify how data is collected to illustrate the
effectiveness of the Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program.

 Conclusion

The Progressive Re-Sanctioning Program is a Post-Adjudication program offered in Waco, TX.

This program is offered to a specific set of juveniles with hopes to lower their chances of
recommitting crimes. Evaluating this program offers many benefits. The policies put in place
help determine the qualifications for the juveniles placed in these programs.  This program, if
evaluated, would be expected to be successful.

Reference Page Entry

Giancola, S. P. (2020). Program evaluation. SAGE Publications.

McLennan County. (2021). Post-Adjudication Facility. https://www.co.mclennan.tx.us/286/Post-

Adjudication-Facility

Yearwood, D. L., & Abdum-Muhaymin, J. (2007). Juvenile Structured Day Programs for Suspended and
Expelled Youth: An Evaluation of Process and Impact. Preventing School Failure, 51(4), 47–61.
https://doi.org/10.3200/PSFL.51.4.47-61
Week 3

Program and policy evaluation and improvement are closely tied to ethical guidelines and
responsibilities. Often ethical concerns are the impetus for improving a program or policy. 

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words: 

 What is the impact of ethical responsibilities on criminal justice policymaking?

 Share an example of an ethics concern that could impact future policy decisions. You can use an
example from your professional or personal experience, or an example you’ve heard about in
the media.

Ethics in general, is a person(s) behavior in which they conduct themselves. So, ethics in reference to
program and policy evaluation is that good ethical practices ensure that good decision making is not
made by personal opinion for monetary gains. Hence, evaluators must be able to provide information
based solely upon the evidence and not based on their beliefs. Also, evaluators must possess
professional integrity dealing with sensitive information and respect the rights of all individuals involved
due to their vulnerability.

Having ethical guidelines ensure that research is being conducted on humans that minimize harm and
risk by respecting, human dignity, privacy, and autonomy in a collaborative setting in which promotes
trust, accountability, and mutual respect for the individuals participating. Thus, by protecting the
research group will ensure their safety from unethical practices. By being ethical in program evaluations
ensures information collected is from good faith in the support of knowledge being gained from the
research. Therefore, this will maximize the benefits the research being conducted by ensuring safety of
the individual(s) being tested.
Week 3

Criminal justice issues are often closely related to ethical principles of our society. So, as you work to
evaluate programs designed to impact justice-served individuals, you must consider the ethical
guidelines and legislation related to the issue at hand, as well as the ethical responsibilities of
organizations and their evaluators. Problem-solving models can help you identify and address these
considerations in your evaluation. In this assignment, you reflect on the intersection of problem-solving,
evaluation, and ethics. 

Research ethical considerations when problem solving with criminal justice policies and programs.

Research problem-solving models and consider how you could use these models to evaluate criminal
justice issues or programs.

Select a specific criminal justice issue or program, as well as a problem-solving model that could be used
for evaluation.

Write a 750- to 1050-word paper explaining how your selected problem-solving model would be used
for evaluation, with an emphasis on ethical considerations related to the issue or program. Address the
following in your paper:

Criminal justice programs and laws often sometimes conflict with ethical viewpoints. This paper seeks to
identify a criminal justice issue and evaluate it through the Embedded Evaluation Approach.  The ethical
implications will also be addressed in this paper. The war on Drugs Started with President Richardson
Nixon during the 1970s.

Describe your selected criminal justice issue or program.

Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentences Laws were implemented during the War on Drugs to deter
individuals from using drugs and selling drugs. So, by the implementation of Mandatory Minimum Drug
Sentences, sentencing was taken out of the judge’s hand. Therefore, an individual’s sentences were
determined by the number of drugs and the type of drug the individual was caught with. For example,
the mandatory sentence for marijuana is six months to two years imprisonment if the amount is
between five and fifty pounds. Another example for cocaine is, the individual faces ten years for the first
offense if there are fifty grams or more.  Mandatory Drug sentences were also implemented to
encourage others not to commit crimes. This approach however took on the “lock them up and throw
away the key” and this did more harm than good.

Identify the problem-solving model for evaluation of the issue or program.

Criminal Justice Programs and laws can be evaluated for several different reasons. The most helpful
evaluation is those that promote continued growth within the program and the laws. A good approach
for this method is the Embedded Evaluation. This evaluation is made up of five different steps. The first
step is defining the program. The second step is planning. Planning refers to how you plan on carrying
out an evaluation. The third step is implementing the plan developed in step two. Step four is to
interpret the results. Analyzing the data is a crucial part of this evaluation. Step five is two-part. The first
part is to inform and the second part is to refine. Step five is where you determine what needs to be
changed and how to approach change.  The Embedded Evaluation can be used not only in Criminal
Justice practices but also across the board in any program that wishes to evaluate if a particular program
works and if changes need to be made to a program to strengthen its success. 

Explain how you would use the problem-solving model to evaluate the specific criminal justice issue
or program. 

The problem-solving model used to evaluate the Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentences Laws is the
Embedded Evaluation Approach. The Embedded Evaluation Approach is a comprehensive continuous-
improvement-centered, theory-based, utilization-focused approach; a framework to build evaluation
into the design and operations of a program, making information and data the basis upon which the
program operates and thus fostering continuous improvement Giancola, S.P.(2020). The Embedded
Evaluation Approach is a five-step approach: Step 1: Define, Step 2: Plan, Step 3: Implement, Step 4:
Interpret, and Step 5: Inform and Refine. This evaluation process can be used to evaluate Drug
Mandatory sentences. Step 1: Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentencing. Step 2: These can be evaluated by
determining the success rate of the laws. First, one must establish what success looks like with the law. 
The goal just to lock individuals up or is the goal to rehabilitate. Step 3: In most cases, some kind of data
will have to be analyzed to determine the progress of the program.  Step 4: Based on the data, the
effectiveness of the program will be determined and if and where changes can be made will be
identified. Step 5: This is where changes and adjustments will be made to Drug Mandatory Minimum
Sentences Laws.

Describe the role of ethics guidelines and legislation as they relate to your selected problem-solving
model and criminal justice issue or program evaluation.

There are several ethical issues with Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentences Laws. Drug Mandatory
Sentencing was implemented as a way to tackle the War on Drugs and to act as a deterrence to others
considering committing the same crime. These sentences have several different ethical issues. The first
ethical issue is punishing people to prove a point to others. Forcing people to stay in prison or imposing
sentences on a general basis instead of on an individual’s basis. The next ethical issue faced with these
laws is the overcrowding that came with this law. Forcing others to be let go free, due to the
overcrowding. This allowed criminals to be let go that may have not been ready to be released back into
society. These are just a few ethical issues associated with Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentencing.

Analyze the ethical responsibility of the individuals and organizations involved with the issue or
program that you are evaluating.  
The government, lawmakers, correction departments, prisons, mental health institutes, and judges have
the power to make changes when it comes to Drug Mandatory Sentencing. These people are not only
responsible for the general public safety but also inmates affected by the Drug Mandatory Sentencing.
These groups of people should care about the inmates released back into a society that more than like
have violent charges incarcerated a targeted group of people. This in return puts the general public in
harm’s way. This means holding in most cases non-violent crimes to a higher standard than violent
crimes.  These are only some of the ethical issues surrounding Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentences
Laws.

Describe how you might implement ethics guidelines and responsibilities in your future role in the
criminal justice field.

The criminal justice field should be approached just like the medical field, on the case by case basis. To
general evaluate every person that commits a crime on the same level is not very productive for society
or the individual. Each defendant should be sentenced on an individual basis to allow for the
opportunity to allow for growth within the individual. This allows for a chance of rehabilitation and not
just confinement. These are just a few changes that can be made within Criminal Justice to positively
implement change.

Drug Mandatory Minimum Sentences Laws can be evaluated using the Embedded Evaluation Approach.
The evaluation has five simple steps. These steps are very simple but very important when it comes to
evaluating the success of the program. These laws present several ethical issues as listed above but
there are changes that can be made to combat these issues.

Giancola, S. P. (2020). Program evaluation. SAGE Publications.

Kurth, E. (2020). Drug Conspiracy Sentencing and Social Injustice. University of Colorado Law
Review, 91(4), 1216–1246.

MARK HANSEN. (1999). Mandatories Going, Going...Gong: Support for minimum drug sentences hits
new low. ABA Journal, 85(4), 14.
Week 4

Planning, design, and implementation are all key steps in the evaluation process. In this discussion, you
explore the process of evaluating criminal justice programs. 

Research an example of a criminal justice program evaluation or choose an example of this process in
which you have participated.

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words: 

4B

 Providing details, describe why prioritizing evaluation questions is important.

When prioritizing evaluation questions, it is important to keep in mind the purpose of the
evaluation. For a comprehensive evaluation, there should be at least some measurement in all
three categories: implementation of strategies, short-term/intermediate objectives, and long-
term goals. In doing this, you will be addressing process, formative, and summative evaluation
needs Giancola, S. P. (2020). Prioritizing evaluation questions ensures evaluator’s questions
meet all the criteria of stakeholders. Questions should be tailored to time, money, usable
information, and stakeholders needs. The questions should reflect goals and objectives
stakeholders intend to meet with their program. Also, this will provide feedback
positive/negative in which stakeholders can make revisions to their program. Evaluators should
gage their questions based upon how much usable data can be generated from it.
 What might happen if an evaluator does not prioritize evaluation questions?
Issues that may arise from not prioritizing evaluations questions are: Not getting enough
information from the generated question, unintentionally overlooking important program
issues, and a fruitless evaluation. By evaluators not prioritizing their questions, stakeholders
programs may suffer setbacks as shown in an Austrian study. Due to the lack of prioritization of
questions many of the participants suffered from unnecessary strain.

References:

Giancola, S. P. (2020). Program evaluation. SAGE Publications.

Week 4

Part of building a culture of continuous improvement is planning, designing, and implementing effective
evaluations that will provide meaningful answers. Another aspect is using the findings of the evaluation
to revise programs or design new policies that will correct problems or fill in any identified gaps. In this
summative assessment, you plan and design a criminal justice policy or program evaluation, including
how the evaluation would be implemented; and you present proposed changes to the policy or program
based on the hypothetical evaluation results. 

Research and select a criminal justice policy or program for evaluation. 

Complete Parts 1 and 2 below.

Part 1: Evaluation of a Criminal Justice Policy or Program

Write an 875- to 1,050-word paper describing the plan, design, and implementation of your evaluation.
Address the following in your paper:

 Describe the criminal justice policy or program to be evaluated, including its goals, objectives,
strategies, and activities.

The criminal justice program that was selected is the Sex Offender Registration and Notification
Act. Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act is a registration and notification system used
to notify the public of sexual offenders in their immediate area and to prevent crime. Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act registration system allows for the monitoring of sex
offenders by local law enforcement and federal authorities. Sex offender notification and
registration processes may differ from state to state. For example, the State of Texas; requires
the offender adult or juvenile to register with the local law enforcement agency and provide a
picture, name, and address. The primary goal of Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act is
to monitor sexual offenders in the community and provide the public information of sexual
offenders living and working in their area.

 Describe the importance of the proposed evaluation for this policy or program.

The importance of the evaluation of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act will be to
determine if this program is effective at preventing known sexual offenders from re-offending.
Thus, exploring the errors found in Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act registries i.e.
offenders names and addresses are listed wrong on the registries in which questions the
accuracy of the registries. Also, it is estimated that Sex Offender Registration and Notification
Act cost taxpayers $488 million in the first year of implementation. Sex Offender Registration
and Notification Act and local laws can become counterproductive rather than encouraging
public safety as the program is intended to do. Furthermore, sex offender registries do not help
victims get over being assaulted and young offenders find themselves on a registry that is
inaccurate and is not effective at preventing the crime from happening again.
 Identify the questions that the evaluation should answer.

This evaluation seeks to answer several questions.  Safety is the biggest goal of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act but is this goal being met. The following questions should be
answered through the evaluation of this program: Is the sex offender registration actually
working at preventing sexual crimes? How accurate is Sex Offender Registration and Notification
Act information that is collected? Answering these questions will help determine the success of
the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act.

 Identify a problem-solving model for the evaluation.

Criminal Justice Programs and policies will be evaluated for many different causes for positive or
negative reasons. The evaluation tool that encourages continuous development of a program
will be the most helpful. The Embedded Evaluation method appears to be the best approach to
evaluate Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. The Embedded Evaluation consist of
five different steps in which will help define the program, plan how to carry out the evaluation,
implementation of the plan, interpret results, and analyze the data collected. By using the
Embedded Evaluation method will help identify if Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
program is effective and prevents future sexual assault crimes.

 Determine the evaluation methods that should be used.

The evaluation method that will be used is the Embedded Evaluation Approach. The Embedded
Evaluation Approach is a comprehensive continuous-improvement-centered, theory-based,
utilization-focused approach; a framework to build evaluation into a programs design and
operations, making information and data the basis upon which the program operates and thus
fostering continuous improvement Giancola, S.P.(2020). The Embedded Evaluation five step
approach for Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act: Step 1. Define the program- Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act, Step 2. Plan- Is the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act program effective at preventing and deterring future sexual assault crimes, Step
3. Implementation- Sex offenders are reoffending with the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act program, Step 4. Interpret- Sex offenders are still committing sexual assault
crimes or not registering for Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act when released from
prison, Step 5. Inform and Refine- Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act is a prevention
aid to help deter sexual offenders from reoffending, and also keep the public informed of these
individuals in their neighborhood; but the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
program has many flaws in which sex offenders still reoffend.

 Explain how the evaluation will be implemented, including how data will be collected and
analyzed.

The data for the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act should be easily accessible. The
data can then be evaluated to answer some of the questions stated above. First, the data will be
examined to determine how many offenders that completed their prison sentence showed up to
complete their registration with their local law enforcement agency. These numbers will then be
charted to be analyzed. Next, the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act data will be
evaluated to determine how many sex related crimes Sex Offender Registration and Notification
 Act prevents if any. This data will also be placed in the chart and analyzed. This combined data
will be used to measure the success of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
program.

 Propose a way of organizing and analyzing the data to best answer the evaluation questions. 

The evaluation seeks to determine the effectiveness of the Sex Offender Registration and
Notification Act. Also, the evaluation will uncover factors that hinder the effectiveness of the Sex
Offender Registration and Notification Act. By placing the data in a chart form the data should
be easily viewed.

Cite at least 2 sources to support your paper.

Reference Page Entry

Giancola, S. P. (2020). Program evaluation. SAGE Publications.

Justice Policy Institute. (2015). What will it cost states What will it cost statesto comply with the Sex to
comply with the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act? https://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-
library/resource_840.pdf

Texas Department of Public Safety. (2021). Texas Sex Offender Registration Program.

https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/crime-records-service/texas-sex-offender-registration-program

Format your paper according to APA guidelines.

Part 2: Policy or Program Changes Based on Evaluation Results

Create a 6- to 8-slide Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation in which you propose changes to the policy or
program based on hypothetical evaluation results. Address the following in your presentation:

 Explain the expected findings of the evaluation.

Is the sex offender registration actually working at preventing sexual crimes? SORNA, alone
cannot prevent sexual crimes from happening again from an offender. SORNA, is used as a
deterrent for previous offenders while informing the public upon their release back into the
community. How accurate is SORNA information that is collected? The information collected to
be put in SORNA is subject to human error at times and at other times the offender can abscond
in which their information is never entered into the system. How much does it cost to maintain
SORNA? SORNA cost by state is determined by their population size. Virginia spent an estimated
$12 million in the first year of implementation of SORNA. Consistently, the software in 2014
averaged cost was nearly half a million dollars to be installed and $100,000 annually for
maintenance of the program.

 Based on your expected findings, suggest at least 2 possible revisions to the policy or program.
 Will be holding the offender and local law enforcement agency accountable for check-ins.

 Describe how you would design and implement your suggested updates.

Accountability- Making some responsible to ensure these individuals are registering.

Reliability- Process to verify the individual returning the community from prison to fix errors
associated with wrong addresses and name spelling.
Week 5

In this course, you have explored how policies and programs are evaluated, including the planning,
design, and implementation of evaluations. But how can the effectiveness of the policies or programs be
measured? In this discussion, you explore the processes involved in outcome evaluation.

Research an example of a criminal justice policy evaluation with outcomes.

Respond to the following in a minimum of 175 words: 

5C

 Providing some details, how can we use evaluation results for program improvement?

Evaluation for program improvement can improve multiple areas for stakeholders: improve
programs management, planning, decision-making for policies, highlights areas that need
improvement, improve monitoring, and assists in training. Also, this allows for stakeholders to
validate their programs success by the collection of data.
 Is using evaluation results for accountability important? Why or why not?

Evaluations ultimately generate information. Dependent upon how ethically the information
was collected and obtain dictates whether or not the results. If the evaluation is done ethically
the information obtained will be fruitful to the validation of the programs direction. Thus,
allowing stakeholders the ability to identify where revisions are needed.
 What formal methods can we use to influence use of evaluation findings?

Identify intended users by establishing the intended use of the evaluation early on. So, identify
problem areas in the forefront. Anticipate barriers when trying to obtain information for the
purpose of implementation. Identify key processes and times when findings are needed. So,
report findings as they become available. Holding information may cause issues for decision-
making that may be in the best interest for the program’s success. Formal methods should be
easy to read and understand and should be tailored to the audience that is receiving the
evaluation findings.

The importance for categorizing stakeholders allows for the following:

Time Management- How much time is needed to spend with each stakeholder. Prioritize- Focus on the
most important issues for each stakeholder. Classification- Focus is on the level of the stakeholders
concerns.
This strategy allows you to be organized and effective to stakeholders. Also, this allows for clear
communication when it is time for updates or progress meetings. Therefore, categorizing stakeholders
gives you the opportunity to learn and understand your stakeholder’s interests.

Week 5

The industry standards that guide operational improvement of criminal justice programs provide a
framework for evaluation and measurement of outcomes. This structure helps to ensure validity,
reliability, and comparability between programs, evaluations, and evaluators. 

In this summative assessment, you look at how industry standard techniques and methods guide
organizational improvements in a specific policy or program evaluation. The concepts you have learned
in this course will help you collect information, deliver a solution with measurable outcomes, and
develop a design approach.

Select an example of a new or previously discussed policy or program evaluation. You may choose one
of the case studies on this week’s University Library page, or research another policy or program
evaluation.

Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper in which you do the following for your chosen policy or program
evaluation: 

 Identify the set of industry standards to guide the evaluation. 

As time has changed, so has the industry standards tend to change. What were once acceptable
standards or practices are no longer accepted. Mass Incarceration at one point and time was the
industry standard if the street were safe. Mass Incarceration started particularly due to the War
on Drugs, but it somehow spiraled out of control due to other policies and law reform. The
industry now requires being proactive to crime instead of being reactive. This approach requires
that you police each crime-driven area according to its needs. With this information, an
extensive evaluation will have to be created. The data collected will have to be carefully
analyzed to provide effective help.

 Analyze how the industry standards provide the framework to guide the evaluation. 

The industry is now requesting a more personalized or tailored criminal justice reform instead of
generalized plans that may have shown effective in some areas but not all. These standards
require more of an indebt look at the data gathered rather than just a surface or generalized
approach. The indebt evaluation seeks to contact offenders with resources that better fit their
needs. The only way that this can be done is by an indebt study that studies more than just
offenses of the offenders. An indebt study of the offender’s lifestyle in and out of prison must be
 completed. This will evaluation will also help shed light on ways the offenders entered the
Criminal Justice System. This information will aid in helping deter others from committing
crimes.

 Identify the necessary data to perform an evaluation.

The first part of the evaluation will take a look at offenders’ current crimes. These can be broken
down into serval different categories such as drugs, family violence, violence, prostitution, and
violation of probation crimes. For repeat offenders, efforts should be made to determine what
most likely leads to being rearrested. The offender’s living situation should also be identified.
The location of the offender should also be noted. The next thing the evaluation will seek is to
evaluate the history of the offenders. The history means how many crimes the offender has
been arrested for, how many crimes the offender has been convicted of, and whether he has
committed the same crimes over again. The evaluation will also look at if any social services
have been provided. These include housing aid, food stamps, mental health services, and other
services that may be offered in the community. The offender’s language will also need to be
known in order to make sure they get the help in their first language. It will also be important to
identify if acts of violence have ever been committed towards offenders. The survey will also
seek to understand the offender’s family dynamics upon release from incarceration. If the
offender doesn’t have a family some kind of support system post-incarceration will need to be
identified. These new industry standards require a more holistic approach and not each area on
its own.

 Describe how the data should be interpreted.

The data should be interpreted and analyzed both individually and together with different
categories put together. The data should be reviewed based on geographical location. This helps
identify the specific help that a geographical area. It is very important because one area may
have drug problems, whereas another area has issues with gangs. These two areas will require
different help. The data should analyze when offenders first encountered violence, whether it
be them committing the crime or them being a victim of crime. The current crimes should also
be analyzed to determine if there were underline circumstances for the offender to commit the
crime. For example, if someone is arrested for stealing but they are homeless this will need to
be noted in an effort to help identify resources that may help the offender upon release.
Interpreting the data correctly is very important because this will determine the resources
provided to a geographical area.

 Describe how you will measure outcomes based on industry standards in evaluation. 

The data seeks to understand what community factors lead an offender to commit a crime and
to determine the proper resources an area will need. The evaluation will provide a large amount
of data. This data will be used to determine the resources needed in the community. Any area
scoring over fifty percent will indicate that the community needs help in these areas. The
different areas include but are not limited to drugs problems, housing assistance, vocational
assistance, and more. The data will measure what lead the offenders to commit a crime will help
create programs to prevent crimes. If the score in this section is over forty percent, programs
 will be put into place in an effort to prevent and deter crime in areas. This data will also be
looked at based on the geographical area.

 Explain how the program can be improved and how the results will be utilized for improvement. 

“The distinction between prearrest and post-arrest interventions, which the commission
downplays, is important for understanding how these suggestions would actually be
implemented. (Kurti and Shanahan 2018)” Industry standards are now calling for community-
based crime prevention efforts. The industry also suggests not just focusing on adults but also
juveniles. Mass Incarceration can be tackled on three different fronts. These programs are
Enhanced Probation, Justice Hubs, and Community-Based Alternative to Incarceration.
Enhanced Probation requires that the probation department take more than just fees seriously.
The industry is now requesting that jobs, housing, and other social services be taken seriously. If
offenders are found to be lacking in this area proper resources should be provided to the
offender in this area. Justice Hubs is suggested to be an area for civic unity. These areas will
allow for areas to house the community-based resources. Community-Based Alternative to
Incarceration suggests that alternatives to incarceration should be provided. These programs
should help decrease mass incarceration rates.

 Describe the evolution of this policy through continual evaluation.

These policies and programs should evaluate to determine if there is a different need in the
community. As the programs progress, there may be a need for more programs, or some
programs may need to be taken away. The programs implemented should be evaluated every
five years. You don’t want to evaluate the program too often because you have the program’s
time to work.

Intro

Mass Incarceration can be defined as “the entire regime of managing social crisis by means of
police, courts, and prisons. This means social management using violence, incarceration, and
surveillance. Mass Incarcerations can be contributed to serval laws implemented throughout the
years. (Kurti and Shanahan 2018)” Mass Incarceration is not only being seen in prisons but also
in Jails. New York City is a great example of this. Now there has been a call for some reforming
of these policies by people from all walks of life. This includes judges, nonprofit originations, and
mental health providers. There have been serval different ideas proposed on how to do this.

Conclusion

The industry is now calling on everyone to stop mass incarceration. An evaluation can be
completed to determine the resources needed in the community to prevent mass incarceration.
The programs implemented in the community will be unique to specific geographical areas.
These programs will need to be evaluated every five years to determine the impacts of the
community resources.
Dang, J. (2021). Uprooting Mass Incarceration: From Restoration to Transformation. Kansas Journal of
Law & Public Policy, 30(2), 234–280.

Giancola, S. P. (2020). Program evaluation. SAGE Publications.

Kurti, Zhandarka, and Jarrod Shanahan. 2018. “Rebranding Mass Incarceration: The Lippman
Commission and Carceral Devolution in New York City.” Social Justice 45 (2/3): 25–49.
https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=i3h&AN=137039924&site=ehost-live&scope=site.