Transcript PAT MAYHEW DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS PHASE 3 – POLICE TRAINING Pristina, 22nd – 24th September.

PAT MAYHEW
DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING
INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW
ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE
WESTERN BALKANS
PHASE 3 – POLICE TRAINING
Pristina, 22nd – 24th September 2010
With funding from the
European Union
DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR
JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN
THE WESTERN BALKANS 2009-2011
Phase three – Training
SESSION 1
• Introductions
• Where this training fits into the CARDS Project
• How the sessions are organised
MY BACKGROUND
• Now retired – freelance consultant
• Previously Director of Crime and Justice Research Centre, Victoria
University of Wellington, New Zealand
• Consultant Criminologist, Autralian Institute of Criminology
• Research Fellow, National Intitute of Justice, USA
• Most of career – Home Office Research, Development and Statistics
Directorate
 Managing and doing research
 Ran the British Crime Survey
 Responsible for statistics on police-recorded crime
 And other police figures - e.g. detections, arrests, police manpower
INTRODUCTIONS FROM PARTICIPANTS
STRENGTHENING JUSTICE & HOME AFFAIRS STATISTICS IN
THE WESTERN BALKANS
• Objective: to strengthen response to crime and corruption by
bringing national statistics justice and home affairs towards
compliance with international standards and EU acquis
• Project funded by the EU under the CARDS programme with
additional funds from Germany
• Started in 2009, ends in 2011
• Three phases
7 countries / territories
Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, FYROM, Kosovo (under
UNSCR 1244), Montenegro, Serbia
THE THREE PHASES: PHASE 1 (RESEARCH)
• Set out relevant international standards and EU acquis
• Picture of the strengths & weaknesses of data collection systems
• Identify gaps and needs of statistical systems
It involved:
 Desktop research
 7 research missions
One output:
 Technical Assessment Reports for 7 countries / territories
PHASE 2: GUIDELINES
• To identify common data collection challenges
• To discuss and adopt specific draft programme guidelines
• To agree a set of regional indicators
• To prioritise training needs and adopt outlines of training
programmes
It involved:
 Preparation of draft Programme Guidelines
 Feedback from project countries / territories
 Discussion and adoption at First Regional Workshop
One output:
 Programme Guidelines adopted
PHASE 3: TRAINING
• To design and deliver targeted training activities
• To improve national capacities to record and report JHA statistics
in line with international standards and EU acquis
• To identify areas for further work and improvements
It involves:
 Training to be carried out by international experts together
with national focal points and national counterparts
 Training delivered to police, prosecution, courts, and
institutions in areas of migration / asylum / visa
FIRST REGIONAL WORKSHOP (SKOPJE, MAY 2010)
Goals
• To present the technical assessment reports
• To identify common data collection challenges
• To adopt specific draft guidelines
• To prioritise training needs
• To adopt the outlines of the training program
• To agree on a set of regional indicators
CONCLUSIONS: CHALLENGES FOR CCJ STATISTICAL
SYSTEMS IN WESTERN BALKANS
• Developing person-based systems
• Developing better computerised systems to record data
• Assigning a unique Integrated File Number (IFN) to personrecords in order to track persons across the whole CCJ system
• Defining clear written counting rules to record crime incidents
• Training all responsible staff with regard to implementation
• Enhancing statistical analysis of the data collected
• Improving public dissemination of the data collected
I WILL DEAL WITH SOME BUT NOT ALL OF THESE ISSUES
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PROGRAMME
GUIDELINES
See Handout # 1
Rec.
#1
Written recording and counting rules
Session 3
#2
Offender-victim relationships and records of Session 4
recidivism
#3
Organised crime ‘marker’
Session 4
#8
Reporting on the characteristics of
offenders and victims
Session 4
#9
Analysis and interpretation
Session 6
SESSION 2: OVERVIEW OF REPORTS OF POLICE DATA
AT INTERNATIONAL & NATIONAL LEVEL
• The need for valid data and common standards – some
preaching!
• Main international compilations of police figures
• Two examples of national reports
 England & Wales
 New Zealand
• Introduction to suggested Regional Indicators and Pilot Data
Collection Exercise
 introduction only – to be discussed in Sesssion 5
THE NEED FOR VALID STATISTICS
• For knowledge-based crime policy....
You need to know ‘the facts’
• To interpret your knowledge....
You need to compare across years, and across countries
• To compare....
Your data need to be comparable within your own jurisdiction
over time, and – ideally – with other jurisdictions
• To be comparable....
Means that common standards have been applied – within the
jurisdiction, and over time, and – ideally – the same as other
jurisdictions
Based on Kauko Aromaa (HEUNI)
COMMON STANDARDS
• Work developing fast within the UN and the EU
 Guidance manuals from the UN and EU (massive!)
• But there are considerable difficulties in reaching comparability
because of:
 Different legal frameworks and definitions of offences
 Different policing and prosecutorial arrangements
 Differing capacities in criminal justice agencies
 Different operational requirements that the statistics serve
 Different counting rules (Session 3)
INTERNATIONAL REPORTS
•
Not very long-standing
•
All come with substantial caveats
•
World Health Organisation – covers violence (probably least
comparable)
•
United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operation
of the Criminal Justice System (UN – CTS)
•
European Sourcebook
•
Eurostat: Statistics in Focus – Crime and Criminal Justice
UNITED NATIONS
•
Latest edition 2010 (covering data
from 1996 – 2006)
•
Data available
•
Kosovo has not provided data
•
Covers more than police-recorded
crime - e.g., CJS personnel and
prisoner numbers
•
Data requirements have been
simplified over time
http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/Crimestatistics/International_Statistics_on_Crime_and_Justice.pdf
EUROPEAN SOURCEBOOK
•
Latest edition 2010
•
About three previous editions
•
Data available
•
Kosovo has not provided data
•
Much work done on improving and
documenting comparability
http://www.europeansourcebook.org/ob285_full.pdf
EUROSTAT
•
Latest edition 2009
•
Modelled on Sourcebook
•
Limited commentary, but good notes
•
Kosovo has not provided data
•
Seven crime types
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total crime
Homicide
Violent crime
Robbery
Domestic burglary
Theft of motor vehicle
Drug trafficking
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-09-036/EN/KS-SF-09036-EN.PDF
NATIONAL REPORTS
•
Massive variety of styles
•
Usually annual
•
Sometimes with other criminal justice system information;
sometimes not
•
Sometimes with special topics; sometimes not
•
USA – ‘Index’ crimes only
•
Nearly all publically available
•
Now also usually available on the web
•
Data sometimes downloadable
ENGLAND & WALES
•
Publication has changed over time
•
Now covers British Crime Survey (BCS)
and police figures
•
Produce additional reports - e.g.,
homicide
•
Also quarterly bulletins
•
Publication tightly controlled by Office
of National Statistics rules
ENGLAND & WALES (2)
Latest publication covers:
 Extent of and trends in crime
 Violent and sexual crimes
 Acquisitive and other property crime
 Publications perceptions
 Detection of crime
 Geographic patterns of crime
Most chapters draw on police figures and British Crime Survey
Discontinuance in police figures
 Major changes in offence coverage in 1998
 e.g., minor assaults
 Also changes in police recording practices
 e.g., counting by victims
NEW ZEALAND
GOOD POINTS
•
Straightforward
•
Show detection (resolution) figures
•
Monthly online figures
BAD POINTS
•
Both fiscal and calendar year
publications – too much
•
Little commentary (need to read Police
Annual Report as well)
•
Nothing about victims
•
Nothing about offenders
NEW ZEALAND (2)
•
Review of statistics in 2009 (last review in 1982)
–
•
e.g. recommendation to record victim-offender relationship
Another discontinuance in the figures
 Major change in computer systems
 New system meant fewer offences were ‘lost’
 New police recording rules
 Bought some area more into line with the areas with the
most ‘generous’ recording
OFFENCES FOR THE REGIONAL INDICATORS
See Handout # 2
The following offence types are considered core crimes to be covered in 12th UN
Survey by the end of 2010:
Intentional Homicide
Violent Crime
Assault
Sexual Violence
Rape
Robbery
Property Crime
Not all these
offences are being
covered in the Pilot
Data Collection
Exercise
Theft
Motor Vehicle Theft
Burglary
Domestic Burglary/Housebreaking
Drug Possession/Use
Drug Trafficking
Kidnapping for Ransom
SUGGESTED REGIONAL INDICATORS (1)
See Handout # 2
No. of crimes recorded by the
police, by offence type
No. of persons recorded by the
police as suspects, by offence type
No. of persons (suspects), by age
No. of persons (suspects), by sex
No. of persons (suspects), by
citizenship
No. of persons (suspects), by
ethnicity
No. of persons (suspects), by
whether recidivist or not
Recorded by the police (some
crimes are not reported by victims)
First stage of ‘attrition’ calculation.
In the current system = ‘suspects’.
Feasible?
SUGGESTED REGIONAL INDICATORS (2)
See Handout # 2
No. of victims recorded, by offence
type
No. of victims, by age
Issue of counting number of
victims
No. of victims, by sex
No. of victims, by citizenship
No. of victims, by ethnicity
Offender-victim relationship, by
offence type
Problematic for some crimes?
Not currently collected?
Victimisation (prevalence) rates by
crime type according to victim surveys
Share of crimes reported an unreported according to victim surveys
Crimes included in scope of the
survey
Crimes which ‘the police came
to know about’?
PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE
•
See Handout # 3 – to be discussed in Sessions 4 & 5
SESSION 3: WRITTEN RULES FOR RECORDING AND
COUNTING CRIMES AND SUSPECTS
• What is the present consistency in recording (without written
rules)?
• What are the main rules?
 The principal offence rule
 Multiple offences
 Multiple offenders and suspects
• Resource and training implications
PRESENT CONSISTENCY
DISCUSSION
COUNTING RULES IN POLICE STATISTICS
“…. the rules applied in each country to count offences included in crime
statistics. Such rules vary … hence introducing differences in recorded
crime rates that do not reflect actual differences in the levels of crime”.
Aebi 2003, p. 1.
What we know is that there are NO CONSISTENT counting rules across the
Western Balkans, or across other countries
See Handout # 4
However, there is some ‘best practice’ guidance
THE PRINCIPLE OFFENCE RULE (POR)
International guidelines suggest it may be appropriate to apply a POR
when counting and reporting offences.
Written counting rules should say whether a POR rule is applied or not
• In the Western Balkand, only Albania applies a POR
• In other Western countries, about half apply a POR, and half do not
• The main thing is to know (if there is no POR, the crime count is higher)
Ideally,the POR should be consistent across agencies – police, prosecutors,
courts
• BUT changing to a POR will reduce the crime count, and cause a ‘break’
in the crime statistics series
THE PRINCIPLE OFFENCE RULE - EXAMPLE
Assault
Criminal damage
Offences
Suspects
Offences
POR
No POR




1
2
MULTIPLE OFFENDERS / SUSPECTS
If there is more than one offender involved in an offence, six of the
Western Balkans countries count one offence (including Kosovo)
In one country, the number of offences = the number of offenders
In terms of suspects, it is reasonable to count two
Assault
Criminal damage
Offenders (suspects)
No POR
One
Two




Offences
2
2?
Suspects
1
2
MULTIPLE OFFENCES
What happens when a victim reports more than one offence at the
same time? For example, different incidents of domestic violence...
• In all the Western Balkans, the rules are that all offences are
counted, with the exception of Albania
The important thing is for the rules to be understood and
consistently applied
OTHER COUNTING RULES ISSUES
DOC. N. 8: HOME OFFICE COUNTING RULES IS USEFUL
Some issues are:
 Whether to record a crime, misdemeanour, or incident at all?
 ‘No crime-ing’ after recording
 ‘Evidenced-based’ recording or ‘prima facie’ recording (i.e.
taking the victim’s word)
 Crimes per victim or per episode?– e.g. shoplifting in several
shops
 Classification and re-classification
WHAT IS CURRENTLY MOST OFTEN DONE MAY BE THE BEST
STARTING POINT FOR FORMALISING WRITTEN RULES
RESOURCE AND TRAINING IMPLICATIONS
 Who would take the lead in formulating written rules?
 How would prosecutors be involved?
 What learning opportunities would personnel be given?
 What testing mechanisms would be put in place?
 How would the written rules be revised?
DISCUSSION
SESSION 4: PARTICULAR ISSUES FROM THE
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Victim-offender relationships
 Relevant to Recommendations # 2 & 8
 Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise
• Ethnicity and citizenship
 Recommendation # 8
 Also relevant to Pilot Data Collection Exercise
• Recidivism of offenders
 Recommendation # 2
• Organised crime ‘marker’
 Recommendation # 3
VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS
The primary interest is in:
• People known to each other >>> not known to each other
 Important for ‘stranger violence’
• People who are (or were) partners (‘partner violence’)
 Violence by ex-partners seen as important as violence by current
partners
• People who are in a domestic relationship ranging wider than partners
(‘domestic violence’)
There are several possible classifications
VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS
See Handout # 5
INTERNATIONAL CRIME VICTIMISATION SURVEY
1
Spouse, partner (at the time)
2
Ex-spouse, ex-partner (at the time)
3
Boyfriend (at the time)
4
Ex-boyfriend (at the time)
5
Relative
6
Close friend
7
Someone he/she works/worked with
8
None of these
9
Refuses to say
VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS
See Handout # 5
UN MANUAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM OF CRRIMINAL JUSTICE
STATISTICS (pp. 55 AND 60)
Spouse
Ex-spouse
Parent
Child
Other family
Friend
Business relation
Acquaintance
Stranger
Other
Issue of ‘partners’
Issue of step-parents
What is a ‘child’
How extended is the ‘family’
Boy-friend / girl-friend?
Seen before but don’t know?
The issue is whether known or not
VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS – OTHER ISSUES
• Relationship can only be recorded if there is a relationship offences
• Relationships when there is more than one victim?
• Relationships when there is more than one offender?
• Whose account of the relationship does one take – the offender or
the victim’s?
DISCUSSION
ETHNICITY AND CITIZENSHIP
See Handout # 6
• Recommendation 8 wants ethnicity & citizenship collected for
suspects and offenders
• Also in Pilot Data Collection Exercise
• Ethnicity & citizenship are both data fields in the police recoding form
 but not clear how they are completed
• Judicial statistics recorded nationality: Albanian, Serb, Montenegro,
Muslim, Turk, RAE, Foreigner, Other
DISCUSSION
RECIDIVISM OF OFFENDERS (1)
See Handout # 3
• It is unusual to report on offender recidivism in publications on ‘crime
statistics’
 More often reported in relation to prosecution or courts statistics
• There are some problems
 What is a recidivist? What counts?
• Anyone previously arrested?
• Only those previously sanctioned? But what about police
warnings and cautions?
RECIDIVISM OF OFFENDERS (2)
See Handout # 3
• The Pilot Data Collection Exercise seems problematic
 Asks for “recidivists of the same offence”. What is the same
offence?
 What if the suspect is recidivist of the same offence AND another
offence? The totals won’t add up.
DISCUSSION
ORGANISED CRIME ‘MARKER’
See Handout # 7
Recommendation 3: Should KPIS include a specific field for indentifying
organised crime cases?
• Some consensus about what organised crime is:
 Structured groups of three or more people, not randomly
formed, but not ‘static’ relationships
 Committing serious crime
 Over a period of time
 For financial or other material benefit
 Using intimidation, and / or threat, and / or violence
• BUT ….. obvious problems in ‘ordinary’ police officers knowing
• A ‘marker’ might be viable, but further checks would be needed by
the Organised Crime Section
DISCUSSION
SESSION 5: CURRENT REPORTS, REGIONAL INDICATORS
AND PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE
1. Overview of the current reports
 What they are – but also discussed in Session 6
2. Current reports in terms of the
• Regional Indicators
• Pilot Data Collection Exercise
CURRENT REPORTS
• What are they?
• My understanding
Published In English
Annual Police Report
Yes
No
Monthly report to Interior Affairs
No
?
Annual report to Interior Affairs
No
Yes
?
Yes
Annual Report of Kosovo Anti-Corruption Unit
DISCUSSION
OFFENCES FOR THE PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE
Which of these is going to cause problems? How far are the definitions
in footnotes in Handout # 3 the same?
Data Collection Exercise
All offences
Completed Intentional Homicide
Violent crime
Assault
Sexual violence
Rape
Robbery
Drug Trafficking
Yearly case statistics
Murder
Aggravated/grievous assault /assault
Sexual assault
Rape
Robbery
Drug use /possession
Migrants smuggling
Drug dealing / possession
Trafficking in persons
Total corruption offences
Passive bribery
Trafficking in persons
INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED IN THE PILOT DATA
COLLECTION EXERCISE
1. Number of offences recorded by the police, by offence type
2. Number of persons recorded by the police as suspects, by offence type
3. Profile of persons recorded by the police as suspects, by offence type and
Sex
Which of these is going to cause
Age
Citizenship
problems? Some issues have
Ethnicity
been discussed in Session 4
Recidivism
4. Victim-offender relationship, by offence type
5. Profile of victims recorded by the police, by offence type and
Sex
Age
Citizenship
Ethnicity
SESSION 6: PUBLICATION OF RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION
1. How are the current ‘publications’ received?
 What tables are most needed, used and liked?
 What are the main problems in compiling them?
 How could these problems be resolved?
DISCUSSION
2. How feasible is internet publication?
3. How feasible in publication in English?
4. Do current publications matching different user requirements?
DISCUSSION
5. Ways forward with analysis and interpretation
THE CURRENT PUBLICATIONS: GOOD AND BAD
How are the current ‘publications’ received?
 What tables are most needed, used and liked?
 What are the main problems in compiling them?
 How could these problems be resolved?
DISCUSSION
INTERNET PUBLICATION? ENGLISH PUBLICATION?
USER REQUIREMENTS?
How feasible is internet publication?
How feasible in publication in English?
Do current publications matching different user requirements?
DISCUSSION
ANALYSIS
Doc N. 9: UN Manual – Chapter VI, Annex B & F – some guidelines
Analysis: some principles
• People like some degree of consistency
• Longer-term figures are useful (not just this year / last year)
• Per capita rates are useful for:
 different areas (crimes / population)
 different population groups (offenders x ethnicity /
population x ethnicity)
• Graphical material is good, but keep it simple
DISCUSSION
INTERPRETATION
Analysis should normally be limited to presentation and technical interpretation of
the data. While users often want interpretive analysis of .. policy implications …a
bureau of criminal justice statistics may jeopardize its credibility and perceived
objectivity by performing this type of analysis. …. Policy analysis and data
interpretation may be more appropriately performed by subject-matter specialists
under the guidance of statistical experts.
UN Manual, page 33
• Most official reports just present the facts
 Avoiding – e.g. – “large increase” / “small increase”
• But ‘odd’ results may need explaining
 they are often due to technical factors
• Important to explain discontinuances in the data
 It may be an analysis task to ‘splice’ the data, or rework it
ANALYSIS
Doc N. 9: UN Manual – Chapter VI, Annex B & F –s some guidelines
Analysis: some principles
• People like some degree of consistency
• Longer-term figures are useful (not just this year / last year)
• Per capita rates are useful for:
 different areas (crimes / population)
 different population groups (offenders x ethnicity /
population x ethnicity)
• Graphical material is good, but keep it simple
• How feasible in publication in English?
Do current publications matching different user requirements?
DISCUSSION
SESSION 7: VICTIMISATION SURVEYS
• The purposes of victimisation surveys
• Strengths and weaknesses
• Three international comparative exercises
 International Crime Victimisation Survey (ICVS)
 ICVS-11
 Eurostat survey in 2013
 Western Balkans Corruption Survey
VICTIMISATION SURVEYS (1)
• Developed since 1970s (USA, Netherlands, Scandinavia)
• Many countries now have their own ‘bespoke’ surveys
 which have run for many years
 providing an independent measure of trends in crime
• These bespoke surveys are not very comparable
e.g., Differences in offence coverage
Counting rules!
• Some international surveys (later)
VICTIMISATION SURVEYS (2)
• Focus on individuals and their direct experience of crime
 Whether or nor reported to the police
 Thus providing an independent measure of crime
• Good for describing the nature of everyday experience of victimisation
• Can show which types of people are most at risk (by collecting sociodemographic information
• Use sample survey methodology – mainly to get representative samples
• Household surveys most common, but there are also
 Surveys of businesses
• Generally take up other crime-related topics – e.g., fear of crime,
security precautions, attitudes to the police
VICTIMISATION SURVEYS (3)
• Sometimes focus on particular groups
e.g., women, ethnic minorities
• Sometimes focus on particular types of crime
e.g., domestic violence, sexual victimisation
• Usually measure victimisation over the last year (but sometimes
longer)
• Many countries have their own ‘bespoke’ surveys
 Which have run for many years – providing independent
measure of trends in crime
• These bespoke surveys are not very comparable
e.g., Differences in offence coverage
Counting rules!
VICTIMISATION SURVEYS (LIMITATIONS)
• Can’t cover all crimes
 murder (obviously)
 Fraud
 victimisation of children difficult
• Non-response can be high
 Are non-responders different?
• Do respondents remember everything? Minor offences likely to be
forgotten
• Do respondents tell interviewers everything? (Domestic violence)
• Sampling error
 Problematic for more uncommon crimes (e.g., robbery)
VICTIMISATION SURVEYS (METHODS)
• Face-to-face interviews were ‘gold standard’ – but expensive
• Computer technology - made a big difference
 CAPI – Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing
 CATI – Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing
 Cheap, but limits interview length
 Increasing mobile phone ownership posing a problem
 CASI – Computer Assisted Self Interviewing
 Good for sensitive subjects
• Postal questionnaires uncommon
 Cheap but poor response
• Internet surveys in development – Computer Assister Web Interviewing
(CAWI)
 But will need lots of testing
INTERNATIONAL VICTIMISATION SURVEYS
• Set up because independent surveys not comparable
 Meant to use identical questionnaires
 And same analysis methods
• A few international business surveys
• Some international surveys on violence against women
 but some lack of comparability – e.g. WHO
THE MAIN ONES
International Crime Victimisation Survey (ICVS)
Five sweeps - 1989, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004/5
Tirana (Albania) ‘96; Zagreb (Croatia) ‘96, 2000; Skopje ’86 Belgrade (Yugosl.) ‘96
2004/5 ICVS – two different threads
EU-ICVS
15 member states
ICVS outside EU
15 countries
All told, 30 countries + 33 city surveys
None of the Western Balkan countries
ICVS-II – 2 rounds
Mainly testing (including CAWI)
2008
4 countries
2010
6 countries
SURVEYS TO BE COMPLETED
Eurostat 2013
All member states
Questionnaire piloted tested in 17 countries
Questionnaire now revised (see handout) but not agreed
UNODC CORRUPTION SURVEYS IN WESTERN BALKANS
Has short victimisation survey module (see handout)
Mainly National Statistical Offices
Fieldwork completed in Macedonia; contracting with private
company ongoing in Kosovo
THE QUESTIONNAIRES & METHODOLOGY
• Some similarities in the questionnaires, but even small changes
make a difference
• Small changes in methodology can also upset comparability.
• Western Balkans victimisation results (in corruption survey)
may not be comparable with other surveys
 Because of smaller number of prompts
 Violent victimisation especially problematic
• Eurostat 2013 survey will have different prompts for violence
Handout # 8 = 2013 Eurostat questionnaire
Handout # 9 = ICVS-II questionnaire
Handout # 10 = W. Balkans Corruption Survey – victimisation questions
SESSION 8
ROUND–UP AND FUTURE PLANS
Summary of previous sessions – completed during training
Future plans
WHAT NEEDS MORE ATTENTION
[Points from previous sessions]
DISCUSSION
SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM GOALS
What are the goals
Which are longer-term?
Which are shorter-term?
SHORT-TERM GOALS – STEPS AND DEADLINES
DISCUSSION AND DECISIONS
LONGER-TERM GOALS – STEPS AND DEADLINES
DISCUSSION AND DECISIONS