Advancing Crime Prevention and Social Justice: The National Institute of Justice’s Priorities and Investments

Twenty-two years of federal investment in criminal justice research: The National Institute of Justice, 1968–1989

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Forensic Technology Center of Excellence, an NIJ program hosted a four-day symposium, January 11–14, 2022. The symposium included presentations and panel discussions on topics relevant to recent advances in firearm and toolmark examination with a focus on the future. The symposium brought together 685 criminal justice processionals to explore implementation of three-dimensional (3D) imaging technologies, best practices for forensic examination of firearm and toolmark evidence, federal initiatives, gun crime intelligence, black box studies on firearm and toolmark examination, legal challenges to the admissibility of current examination of firearm and toolmark evidence and engineering solutions that will be used in court in the future, implementation of Organization of Scientific Area Committee (OSAC) standards and reporting, uniform language in testimony and conclusion scales. The panel discussions and presentations and provided examples of how agencies implement new imaging technologies for firearms and toolmark examination, incorporate statistics to add weight to forensic comparisons, address legal issues, and operationalize forensic intelligence to improve public safety and share information with the justice community. The symposium also provided a platform to discuss a series of considerations for the forensic, law enforcement, and greater criminal justice community that could help support a successful national transition to incorporate statistics in forensic testimony and accelerate the adoption of imaging technologies for firearm and toolmark examination.

To assess the nature and extent of funding for randomized experiments in criminology and criminal justice from the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) since 2000. Based on data from official records of grant awards made by NIJ between fiscal years 2001 and 2013, we categorized awards based on whether they were for randomized experiments, non-experimental evaluation research, non-evaluation social science research, social science program support, forensic science and technology research, or forensic science and technology support. While the bulk of NIJ funding goes to forensic science and technology support, among the 800 social science awards we found a total of 99 awards for experiments. Support for the use of experimental designs increased during this 13-year period and was substantially greater than the support for the use of experimental designs in the 1990s. The awards for experiments between 2001 and 2013 went to a variety of researchers and research organizations and addressed a wide array of criminal justice program areas. Our findings document a marked increase in funding for experiments in recent years compared to the 1991–2000 period, when just 21 awards were made for experimental work. These findings suggest that NIJ has responded to a series of critiques regarding the methodological quality of funded projects by placing a greater emphasis on high-quality social science research.

Law enforcement agencies play a key role in protecting the nation from and responding to terrorist attacks. Preventing terrorism and promoting the nation's security is the Department of Justice's number one strategic priority. This is reflected in its technology development efforts, as well as its operational focus. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the national focal point for the research, development, test and evaluation of technology for law enforcement. In addition to its responsibilities in supporting day-to-day criminal justice needs in areas such as less lethal weapons and forensic science, NIJ also provides critical support for counter-terrorism capacity improvements in state and local law enforcement in several areas. The most important of these areas are bomb response, concealed weapons detection, communications and information technology, which together offer the greatest potential benefit with respect to improving the ability to law enforcement agencies to respond to all types of crime including terrorist acts. NIJ coordinates its activities with several other key federal partners, including the Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate, the Technical Support Working Group, and the Department of Defense.

Treating gun violence before the 911 Call*1

This study evaluates a modified National Institute of Justice (NIJ) body armor threat level scale as a method to classify the capacity for firearms lethality. This study classified 8,254 firearms confiscated by police officers in St. Louis, Missouri from 1992 to 1994 and compared the NIJ scale against six other measures of firearms lethality. This study finds that the NIJ scale is a valid measure of classifying threat. Studies that compare firearms use trends, compare offender populations, or regional differences in firearms use can utilize this modified scale to classify firearms lethality.

In an effort to locate potential law enforcement-related standards that support incident management, a team from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) contacted representatives from the National Institute of Standards-Office of Law Enforcement Standards (NIST-OLES), National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Secret Service, ASTM International committees that have a law enforcement focus, and a variety of individuals from local and regional law enforcement organizations. Discussions were held with various state and local law enforcement organizations. The NIJ has published several specific equipment-related law enforcement standards that were included in the review, but it appears that law enforcement program and process-type standards are developed principally by organizations that operate at the state and local level. Input is provided from state regulations and codes and from external non-government organizations (NGOs) that provide national standards. The standards that are adopted from external organizations or developed independently by state authorities are available for use by local law enforcement agencies on a voluntary basis. The extent to which they are used depends on the respective jurisdictions involved. In some instances, use of state and local disseminated standards is mandatory, but in most cases, use is voluntary. Usually, the extent to which these standards are used appears to depend on whether or not jurisdictions receive certification from a “governing” entity due to their use and compliance with the standards. In some cases, these certification-based standards are used in principal but without certification or other compliance monitoring. In general, these standards appear to be routinely used for qualification, selection for employment, and training. In these standards, the term “Peace Officer” is frequently used to refer to law enforcement personnel. This technical review of national law enforcement standards and guides identified the following four guides as having content that supports incident management: • TE-02-02 Guide to Radio Communications Interoperability Strategies and Products • OSHA 335-10N Preparing and Protecting Security Personnel in Emergencies • NIJ 181584 Fire and Arson Scene Evidence: A Guide for Public Safety Personnel • NIJ 181869 A Guide for Explosion and Bombing Scene Investigation In conversations with various state and local law enforcement officials, it was determined that the following National Fire Protection Association (NPFA) standards are generally recognized and tend to be universally used by law enforcement organizations across the country: • NFPA 1600 Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs • NFPA 1561 Standard on Fire Department Incident Management Systems • NFPA 472 Standard for Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents (2008 Edition) • NFPA 473 Standard for Competencies for EMS Personnel Responding to Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents (2008 Edition)

This is the last edition of THE JUSTICE PROFESSIONAL in its present format. Starting with Volume 16 #1, we will be known as CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDIES: A CRITICAL JOURNAL OF CRIME, LAW & SOCIETY, still published quarterly by Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, and refereed. We will be accepting articles that are both quantifiable and qualitative in all areas of criminal justice and related areas. See the back cover for further information. For the past decade, researchers have examined the differences between criminal justice and non-criminal justice students' attitudes to various criminal justice issues and problems. The one area left out, according to Christopher Hensley, Richard Tewksbury, Alexis Miller and Mary Koscheski, has been that of corrections. In their article, "Criminal Justice and Non-Criminal Justice Students' Views of U.S. Correctional Issues", using data collected from 570 students, they examine the difference in attitudes among criminal justice and non-criminal justice majors on various inmate related problems. Rick Ruddell and G. Larry Mays have co-authored an article entitled, "Research Note: Using the NIJ Threat Level Scale to Classify Firearms Lethality". Their study evaluates a modified National Institute of Justice (NIJ) body armor threat level scale as a method to classify the capacity for firearms lethality. Their study finds that the NIJ scale is a valid measure of classifying threat. The sovereignty of Native Americans makes Congress the ultimate arbitrator of Native American Affairs. In the work by Otis B. Grant, he points out that in any tribal criminal law enforcement action three distinct governments are involved: tribal, state and federal. He indicates in his article that to determine which government or governments has jurisdiction, police and prosecutors should conduct a three-step test to determine: (1) location of the crime; (2) supremacy of law issues; and (3) race of the offender and race of the victim. Identity theft is not what Hollywood has led us to believe. Or so says Katherine Slosarik in her work, "Identity Theft: An Overview of the Problem". It is not a James Bond type donning latex and wigs, essentially becoming someone else. The real identity theft is more subtle and far easier to accomplish. The identity thief does not even have to look like his/her victim. Only one thing is needed - a Social Security Number (SSN). In a special interview by Judith E. Sturges of Penn State at Fayette, Dr. Sturges has interviewed Dr. Kenneth Kerle, editor of the American Jails Magazine. The topic discussed is how the public's perception about the purpose of jails affects funding and programs. Dr. Kerle suggests that jail administrators take an active role in their communities to inform citizens about jail issues. Community support is needed as well in order to reduce the crime rates during the twenty-first century.

Mania and the law in California: understanding the criminalization of the mentally ill.

: The Law Enforcement Analysis Facility (LEAF) is a component of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center-Northeast (NLECTC-NE) Region. The LEAF provides a facility to test, evaluate, demonstrate, and facilitate the transition of technologies developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory-Information Directorate (AFRL-RI) and other research & development entities to the criminal justice community. This report outlines the major accomplishments of the NLECTC-NE/LEAF under the L-3 contract. Activities of L-3 described in this report are divided into three sections: Outreach activities, Technical Assistance and one special project, support to the Forensic Audio Video Image Analysis Unit (FAVIAU) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Digital Evidence Laboratory (DEL). FAVIAU support activities described in this report were funded by the FBI and routed through the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) under Interagency Agreement 2000-IJ-R-019 between the Office of Justice Programs - NIJ and AFRL/RI.

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and its Forensic Technology Center of Excellence (FTCoE) hosted the National Opioid and Emerging Drug Threats Policy and Practice Forum on July 18–19, 2019, in Washington, DC. The forum explored ways in which government agencies and programs, law enforcement officials, forensic laboratory personnel, medical examiners and coroners, researchers, and other experts can cooperate to respond to problems associated with drug abuse and misuse. Panelists from these stakeholder groups discussed ways to address concerns such as rapidly expanding crime laboratory caseloads; workforce shortages and resiliency programs; analytical challenges associated with fentanyl analogs and drug mixtures; laboratory quality control; surveillance systems to inform response; and policy related to stakeholder, research, and resource constraints. The NIJ Policy and Practice Forum built off the momentum of previous stakeholder meetings convened by NIJ and other agencies to discuss the consequences of this national epidemic, including the impact it has had on public safety, public health, and the criminal justice response. The forum discussed topics at a policy level and addressed best practices used across the forensic community.

• Survey respondents said that domestic violence was the crime least reported. Sexual assault and gang violence were also thought more likely to go unreported. In a sample taken from immigrant The increasing influx of immigrants to the United States poses special challenges for the criminal justice system. Until recently, however, social science research has paid little attention to immigrants in the criminal justice system. A recent national assessment program survey conducted for the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) revealed that the issue of cultural diversity has become a concern of criminal justice professionals.

Research has shown that the nature of interactions with police can impact victim recovery from trauma, satisfaction with police, and cooperation within the criminal justice system. However, evaluations of police effectiveness often view crime prevention as the “bottom line” for successful policing while overlooking the socioemotive factors that are actually important to victims. Drawing on the attributional and blaming literature for conceptual guidance, the present research examines 1,865 police-victim encounters from a large-scale observational study in an attempt to better understand the relationship between victim characteristics and police comforting behavior. The findings indicate that a number of factors affect the likelihood of whether comfort will be offered by police officers to victims. More specifically, female and middle- to upper-class victims were more likely to be comforted by police officers, as were those exhibiting signs of injury or depression. However, those encounters involving officers with a college degree or more years of work experience were less likely to involve comforting behavior. The implications of these findings for theory and practice are discussed. This article is based on data from the Project on Policing Neighborhoods, supported by Grant No. 95-IJ-CX-0071 by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Criminology & Public PolicyVolume 3, Issue 2 p. 169-180 RESEARCH AND RELEVANCE: LESSONS FROM THE PAST, THOUGHTS FOR THE FUTURE FAYE S. TAXMAN, FAYE S. TAXMAN Dr. Faye S Taxman is the Director of the Bureau of Governmental Research and an associate professor in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland, College Park. As Director of BGR, Dr. Taxman is responsible for studies on various aspects of the criminal justice system including a 2 site randomized experiment testing the efficacy of a seamless system of drug treatment services for offenders (National Institute on Drug Abuse) and a four site study of drug treatment services offered in Drug Courts (with the University of Southern Maine and funded by the National Institute of Justice). She has published articles in many prominent journals such as the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency and Prison Journal. She received the University of Cincinnati award from the American Probation and Parole Association in 2002 for her contributions to the field. Her expertise covers research design, to training geared to the end users, to different interventions for offenders.Search for more papers by this author FAYE S. TAXMAN, FAYE S. TAXMAN Dr. Faye S Taxman is the Director of the Bureau of Governmental Research and an associate professor in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland, College Park. As Director of BGR, Dr. Taxman is responsible for studies on various aspects of the criminal justice system including a 2 site randomized experiment testing the efficacy of a seamless system of drug treatment services for offenders (National Institute on Drug Abuse) and a four site study of drug treatment services offered in Drug Courts (with the University of Southern Maine and funded by the National Institute of Justice). She has published articles in many prominent journals such as the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency and Prison Journal. She received the University of Cincinnati award from the American Probation and Parole Association in 2002 for her contributions to the field. Her expertise covers research design, to training geared to the end users, to different interventions for offenders.Search for more papers by this author First published: 07 March 2006 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2004.tb00033.xCitations: 1AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume3, Issue2March 2004Pages 169-180 RelatedInformation

Law enforcement agencies play a key role in protecting the nation from and responding to terrorist attacks. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the focal point for the research, development, test and evaluation of technology for law enforcement. NIJ and the Department of Homeland Security's Directorate of Science & Technology (DHS S&T) have related missions to support research and technology development for public safety. DHS S&T provides law enforcement agencies technology to respond to terrorist threats involving weapons of mass destruction, while NIJ focuses on technologies applicable across the spectrum of law enforcement needs. Investment in C3I technology offers perhaps the greatest potential benefit with respect to improving the ability to law enforcement agencies to respond to all types of crime including terrorist acts. Providing effective communications and information systems remains a key technology challenge, as does providing law enforcement responders accurate information that they can act on. Sensors and surveillance systems can play a key role in identifying terrorists and preventing or effectively responding to a terrorist attack.