Transcript Slide 1

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