The criminal justice system has an interdependent structure with critical functions performed by public agencies at all levels of government and private entities. The effectiveness of the criminal justice system is significantly improved when there is planning, analysis, and coordination among these stakeholders at the local, regional and state levels. Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils or similar organizations are appropriate entities to achieve this purpose. Recognizing the value of such an undertaking, governmental and nongovernmental justice system stakeholders should support and participate in the efforts of Criminal Justice Coordinating Councils.

• ADOPTED: April 25, 2012

Public safety is increased by reducing the accessibility to and the availability of illicit drugs.  Abuse of drugs and alcohol increase the community risk factors of anti-social and criminal behavior.  Crime control and the use of the criminal justice system to address the misuse and abuse of drugs should be the societal response of last resort.  Criminal justice policy makers and leaders from all levels and branches of government must collaborate with members of the health services community, both public and private, to address the consequences of drug and substance abuse.  Public and private health care systems should be adequately funded to prevent inappropriate criminal justice system responses; however, for those offenders who suffer from drug disorders, the criminal justice system must provide the best possible treatment in conjunction with criminal sanctions.

• ADOPTED April 26, 2007
• REVISED April 14, 2010

Public safety, the overarching goal of the criminal justice system, will be best served if planning, policy and funding are guided by empirical knowledge about the key elements of practices that are known to have positive impacts when implemented with fidelity for appropriate populations and issues.  When feasible, criminal justice system policy makers and practitioners should adopt and support evidence based and promising practices while maintaining flexibility with regard to innovative practices which have a sound basis in empirical research.  Support for research, including implementation, outcome and impact evaluations as well as cost benefit analysis studies is critical if the system is to make the best use of its limited resources and to advance the body of knowledge that leads to informed decisions.  Such knowledge is of limited use unless policy makers, practitioners, funders and the public at large are kept well-informed through outreach and through the creation of clearinghouses of information and linkages to technical assistance regarding best practices.

• ADOPTED April 6, 2011

Violence and the fear of violence have devastating effects on communities’ quality of life.  Criminal justice practitioners, health system representatives and the media must recognize the relationships between the response to violence and the treatment and prevention of future violence; and they must engage communities on how best to prevent violence, encouraging public and private collaboration at all levels.  Accurate reporting of crime and analysis of actual crime trends is critical in order to enable appropriate use of crime reduction strategies.  Trust and confidence in the criminal justice system is enhanced when the needs of victims of these crimes are immediately addressed with adequately funded responses and well-trained personnel.  In addition to ensuring their safety and to providing treatment when necessary, victims and witnesses should be consulted and informed concerning law enforcement and prosecution efforts.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992    
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994   
• AMENDED July 18, 1999
• REVISED July 28, 2002
• REVISED July 15, 2005
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REAFFIRMED April 24, 2008
• REVISED April 6, 2011

In the United States, the investigation and prosecution of crime is largely performed at the local level and is most often viewed as a local issue.  However, crime has significant national implications; therefore, crime patterns and trends generally are reflected across state lines and international borders.  Crime is a drain on the nation’s economy, well being and international competitiveness. For these reasons, crime should be viewed as a national issue and the availability of federal funds to combat it should be a national priority.  To the greatest extent possible, federal funds should be integrated and directed through statewide criminal justice planning agencies to help ensure coordination, transparency and complete accountability. By directing funds in that manner, the public is assured that the needs of the state are being addressed with an understanding of the overall status of justice issues within the state.

• ADOPTED April 26, 2007
• REVISED April 14, 2010

The preservation of our constitutional protections is paramount and is critical to providing both public safety and justice.  This is our fundamental guiding principle.  Because the highest duty of government is to provide for the safety and security of the public, justice policy makers from all branches and levels of government must constantly collaborate with each other, the private sector and communities, to assure that public safety and security exists and that victims of crimes are protected.  System-wide planning and information sharing, as well as constant assessments and evaluation are necessary for the effective operation of the criminal justice system.  Moreover, adequate financial resources, effectively used, are essential for the attainment of true homeland security, public safety and justice.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994
• AMENDED July 18, 1999
• REVISED July 28, 2002
• REVISED July 15, 2005
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REAFFIRMED April 25, 2012

On a daily basis, there is a critical need for justice agencies at all levels of government to gather, share and analyze information and communicate with each other seamlessly.  However, often   these agencies operate independently of one another, resulting in incomplete information, redundancies, errors and other inefficiencies, which hamper government’s ability to manage justice resources prudently, make good policy decisions and protect the public effectively.  Therefore, agencies should adopt procedures and funding priorities that ensure a coordinated approach that includes stakeholders from all related communities of interest, including juvenile justice, social services, and emergency management partners.  Investments in technology should be strategic and well considered, based on enterprise-wide needs and open standards, and adhere to federal and state data and architectural  standards, including those from the Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative (GLOBAL) and the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM).   Information sharing policies, procedures, and systems must ensure that privacy rights of individuals are protected and confidentiality of records collected and shared is maintained.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994
• REVISED Nov. 9, 2001
• REVISED Aug. 10, 2004
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REVISED April 24, 2008
• REVISED April 25, 2012

Developmental differences between children and adults must be taken into account by the justice system, to minimize the prosecution of juveniles in the criminal justice system and the incarceration of juveniles in adult prisons. We re-affirm and support the principles of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended, which address and protect the needs and rights of juveniles.  Juvenile crime prevention and control strategies must be based on a comprehensive and strategic approach emphasizing the application of research, science, and public education about reducing risk factors and enhancing protective factors to prevent delinquency and establish a system of graduated sanctions and effective treatment to control delinquency and reduce recidivism.  When properly implemented in communities, this approach will result in a continuum of services designed to strengthen both juvenile offenders and their families, support core social institutions, and make strategic long-term investments in evidence-based prevention, intervention, and treatment services.  Adequate resources must be made available for such programs and services in order to succeed in reducing both juvenile crime and the development of adult criminal careers.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994
• REVISED Nov. 8, 2001
• REVISED Aug. 10, 2004
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REVISED August 9, 2009
• REVISED April 25, 2012

The lack of appropriate and necessary treatment for those who suffer from mental illness represents a serious public health and public safety issue.  Some individuals with mental illness and co-occurring disorders become a part of the criminal justice system, either as victims or as offenders.  The system must address the challenges presented by these individuals, even though it is often ill equipped to provide adequate treatment because of lack of resources, lack of staff, legal constraints and infrastructure limitations.  Identified advances include early identification and treatment, law enforcement and correctional officer training, provision of housing, adequate discharge medication amounts, and standardized assessment and diagnostic tools.  The criminal justice and mental health systems must become partners in addressing the needs of the mentally ill in the criminal justice system.  Criminal justice professionals must continue to work with policymakers, law enforcement, mental health providers, community groups, and both public and private sector professionals to educate and to develop solutions to this important health and public safety issue.

• ADOPTED  July 22, 2003
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REAFFIRMED April 24, 2008
• REVISED April 6, 2011

Prisons and jails are a necessary part of our criminal justice system however overcrowded correctional facilities create significant safety issues within these institutions and limit the effectiveness of rehabilitation programming.  State and local governments should seek to identify and implement ways to alleviate prison overcrowding with full knowledge of the costs of incarceration and its impact on public safety.  The federal government should avoid policies which exacerbate the overcrowding in state and local facilities.  Creative evidence-based options to incarceration, particularly for non-violent offenders, can play a significant role in relieving prison overcrowding while at the same time reducing costs.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994
• REVISED April 27, 2000
• REVISED July 22, 2003
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REAFFIRMED April 24, 2008
• REVISED April 6, 2011
• REVISED April 25, 2012

Most incarcerated offenders eventually return to local communities, where their risk of re-offending is high unless effective re-entry programs are in place.  The twin goals of re-entry programs are to reduce recidivism in order to improve public safety and to help states reduce growing prison populations.   Re-entry planning should begin while offenders are still incarcerated, and should incorporate a validated risk assessment tool to guide placement into evidence-based programs to reduce recidivism.  Community supervision if appropriate should entail a continuum of services that are identified as needs while the offender is incarcerated and should focus on the supervision of higher-risk offenders to reinforce accountability and to ensure recidivism reduction.   When appropriate, upon release offenders should enter community-based programs created through partnerships with government, community agencies, and faith-based organizations to provide access to housing, jobs, family counseling and treatment in the communities where offenders live.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994
• REVISED Nov. 8, 2001
• ADOPTED April 26, 2007
• REVISED August 9, 2009
• REVISED April 25, 2011

The American principles of equal protection and equal justice demand recognition that racial disparities exist throughout the criminal justice system.  Minorities are overrepresented among victim and offender populations. Criminal justice professionals should support research and funding to address the root causes of these disparities and develop effective policies and best practices to counter these problems. Criminal justice professionals at all levels should strive to have the persons administering the system reflect the populations that they serve. Lawmakers should support these efforts through effective funding and legislation that seeks to correct such disparities.

• ADOPTED  July 29, 2007
• REVISED April 14, 2010

The State Administering Agency (SAA) is the executive branch agency designated by the Governor to accept federal criminal justice funds.  As a result of this responsibility, these agencies serve as the primary coordinating body for state and local criminal justice issue identification, collaboration, planning, and policy development and implementation.  Ideally the SAA should also assume strategic planning, training and information sharing responsibilities to assure that the agency functions as a single source for best practices and promising approaches.  Leveraging public funds to meet state and community needs and starting new initiatives in response to the economic and social climate is a primary function of the SAA.  As the main clearinghouse of criminal justice information, the State Administering Agency should be the communicator of these issues to the state’s legislators and policy makers and to members of Congress and must serve as a leader in the development of effective criminal justice policy and responsible stewards of public funds.

• ADOPTED April 26, 2007
• REVISED April 14, 2010

Recognized tribal nations are sovereign entities that predate the United States Constitution and have the inherent authority of self governance.  It is essential to maintain strong tribal justice systems and ensure effective working relationships between tribal and non-tribal justice agencies.  Each tribal nation is a unique and separate government and caution should be exercised in generalizing tribal justice issues.  The status of tribal justice systems varies and is constantly evolving.  There is a strong common interest in building and maintaining effective tribal justice systems, so federal funding should be provided directly to tribal justice systems and directly to states that further or enhance tribal justice through cooperative agreements or that directly administer justice systems on Indian reservations.   Finally, direct federal funding should be available to augment the efforts of tribes and states as they address the disproportionate number of Indian people present in the non-Indian justice systems.

• ADOPTED July 29, 2007
• REVISED April 14, 2010

Government and non-governmental organizations should coordinate with each other and within communities to assure that comprehensive services are available to respond to the needs of crime victims, and to ensure that crime victims are treated with fairness, respect and dignity – free from intimidation and further harm throughout the justice process.  States, tribes and the federal government should guarantee victims’ rights, including the right to privacy, to protection from intimidation, to case status information, to recovery of reasonable reparation, and to due process within justice proceedings.  Justice practitioners must be prepared to address the needs of all victims, including those with special needs, victims with disabilities, underserved populations, non-English speaking victims and seniors.  Justice professionals must be sensitive to the needs of victims and witnesses and must remain vigilant in enforcing victims’ rights to the fullest extent permitted by the law.  Resources must be assured to establish and maintain services and compensation, and to assist all crime victims in overcoming the economic, physical and emotional consequences of crime.

• ADOPTED May 28, 1992  
• REAFFIRMED June 2, 1994   
• AMENDED July 18, 1999
• REVISED July 28, 2002
• REVISED July 15, 2005
• REVISED April 26, 2007
• REAFFIRMED April 24, 2008
• REVISED April 4, 2011