Office of Justice Programs Annual Report to Congress Fiscal Year 2000 The Office of Justice Programs is pleased to present its Annual Report for the Fiscal Year 2000. During FY 2000, OJP continued its established programs, but also expanded into new areas relevant to criminal justice policy. OJP developed several new initiatives in FY 2000. The Department's National Institute of Justice, along with the Office of National Drug Control Policy, presented the Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force Final Report, whose findings will further enable local communities to curb methamphetamine use and its effects. Moreover, OJP improved its use of technology designed to assist local law enforcement and corrections personnel. FY 2000 was the first year the Department was able to implement the Crime Identification Technology Act, which funds information systems and identification technologies that enhance local authorities' ability to reduce and prevent crime. OJP also awarded grants to combat Internet crimes against children under its Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program. OJP continued to make more applications for its grant programs available on-line, including the Bulletproof Vest Program, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program, Executive Office of Weed and Seed grants, Drug Courts Implementation grants, equipment grants to support first responders in preparation of a domestic terrorism event, Residential Substance Abuse and Treatment Program, and violence against women grant programs, among others. This Annual Report provides an array of information about OJP's programs to the Congress and the public, however, additional resources are also available. Throughout this report, you will find lists of publications to refer to for further information on specific issues. Other resources also include OJP's Website (www.ojp.usdoj.gov) and the Department's clearinghouses and offices, whose contact information is provided at the end of this report. OJP looks forward to cooperating with the Congress, along with other federal agencies at all levels of government and within the community, in our ongoing effort to ensure that American communities remain safe. Table of Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1: THE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 2: Empowering Communities to Address Crime . . . . . . . . . . 11 3: Breaking the Cycle of Substance Abuse and Crime . . . . . . 23 4: Combating Family Violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5: Addressing Youth Crime. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 6: Managing Offenders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 7: Protecting and Supporting Victims of Crime. . . . . . . . . 68 8: Enhancing Technology's Use in Addressing Crime. . . . . . . 75 9: Enhancing Law Enforcement Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . 90 10: Countering Terrorism & Ensuring Domestic Preparedness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 For More Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107 1 The Office of Justice Programs OJP'S MISSION To provide federal leadership in developing the nation's capacity to prevent and control crime, administer justice, and assist crime victims. OJP GOALS  To identify, define, and promote the understanding of critical crime, delinquency, and justice issues.  To develop, support, and evaluate promising and innovative strategies for ensuring safe and just communities and assisting victims of crime.  To build partnerships that strengthen federal, state, and local government and community capacities.  To ensure a fair workplace that maximizes each employee's contribution to the overall mission and goals of OJP. Since 1984, the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) has provided federal leadership in developing the nation's capacity to prevent and control crime, improve the criminal and juvenile justice systems, increase knowledge about crime and related issues, aid crime victims, and assist state and local jurisdictions to better ensure public safety. OJP is led by an Assistant Attorney General (AAG), who is responsible for the overall management and oversight of OJP. The AAG sets policy and ensures that OJP policies and programs reflect the priorities of the President, the Attorney General, and the Congress. The AAG promotes coordination among the bureaus and offices within OJP. Five bureaus the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime administer federal grant, training and technical assistance, technology development and introduction, research, and statistics programs. OJP also includes a number of program offices. These offices include the Violence Against Women Office, the Executive Office for Weed and Seed, the Corrections Program Office, the Drug Courts Program Office, the Office for State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support, the Office of the Police Corps and Law Enforcement Education, and the American Indian and Alaska Native Affairs Desk. Many of these offices were first authorized under the 1994 Crime Act. THE OJP BUREAUS The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) provides funding, training, and technical assistance to state and local governments to combat violent and drug-related crime and to help improve the criminal justice system. It administers the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program, the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Program, the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, Public Safety Officers' Benefits, the Regional Information Sharing Systems Program, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program, community prosecution grants, and other grant programs and initiatives. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the principal criminal justice statistical agency in the nation. BJS collects and analyzes statistical data on crime, criminal offenders, crime victims, and the operations of justice systems at all levels of government. BJS provides financial and technical support to state governments in developing capabilities in criminal justice statistics, as well as improving the accuracy, utility, and interstate accessibility of criminal history records. BJS supports the enhancement of records of protective orders involving domestic violence and stalking, sex offender records, automated identification systems, and other state systems supporting national records systems and their use for background checks. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the principal research and evaluation agency in the Department of Justice. NIJ supports research and development programs, conducts demonstrations of innovative approaches to improve criminal justice, tests new criminal justice technologies, provides technology assistance, evaluates the effectiveness of justice, and disseminates research findings to practitioners and policymakers. NIJ also provides primary support for the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, a clearinghouse of criminal justice-related publications, articles, videotapes, and online information. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) provides federal leadership in preventing and controlling juvenile crime and improving the juvenile justice system at the state and local levels. OJJDP provides financial assistance to states, local communities, Indian tribes, and the juvenile justice community to help improve the nation's juvenile justice system and sponsors innovative research, demonstration, evaluation, statistics, and technical assistance and training programs to improve the nation's understanding of and response to juvenile violence and delinquency. OJJDP also administers the Missing and Exploited Children's program, funded under the Victims of Child Abuse Act, and the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) works to enhance the nation's capacity to assist crime victims and to provide leadership in changing attitudes, policies, and practices to promote justice and healing for all victims of crime. OVC provides federal funds to support victim assistance and compensation programs nationwide, and advocates for the fair treatment of crime victims and the recognition of the crime victim within the justice system. OVC administers grants for programs designed to benefit victims, provides training for diverse professionals who work with victims, develops projects to enhance victims' rights and services, and undertakes public education and awareness activities on behalf of crime victims. THE PROGRAM OFFICES OJP has three offices that administer major programs first authorized by the 1994 Crime Act:  The Corrections Program Office (CPO) administers two major formula grant programs and provides technical assistance to state and local governments to help them with the implementation of the Crime Act's corrections-related programs.  The Drug Courts Program Office (DCPO) administers the Crime Act's discretionary drug courts grant program. This program provides support for the development of drug courts through planning workshops, and implementation and improvement of drug courts through grants to local and state governments, courts, and tribal governments, and through technical assistance and training.  The Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) administers programs designed to help prevent and respond to violence against women, including domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. VAWO administers formula and discretionary grant programs authorized by the Violence Against Women Act and subsequent legislation. VAWO also coordinates other Justice Department initiatives relating to violence against women, responds to requests for information, and collaborates with other federal agencies. The following offices are also located within OJP:  The Office for State and Local Domestic Preparedness Support (OSLDPS) is responsible for enhancing the capability of state and local jurisdictions to prepare for and respond to incidents of domestic terrorism involving chemical and biological agents, radiological and explosive devices, and other weapons of mass destruction. It awards grants for equipment and provides training and technical assistance for state and emergency response agencies. OSLDPS operates the Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama, a facility to train emergency response personnel to respond to incidents involving chemical and other weapons. The National Domestic Preparedness Consortium (NDPC) is a partnership of several nationally recognized public universities and the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Energy. The NDPC supports the efforts of OSLDPS by providing expertise and training to the state and local emergency management response community.  The Office of the Police Corps and Law Enforcement Education (OPCLEE) provides college educational assistance to students who commit to public service in law enforcement, and scholarships to students with no service commitment, who are dependents of law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty.  The Executive Office for Weed and Seed (EOWS) coordinates the Weed and Seed strategy, a community-based, multi-disciplinary approach to combating crime. EOWS works closely with United States Attorneys to implement Operation Weed and Seed in communities throughout the country. Six offices within OJP provide agency-wide support. They are the Office of Congressional and Public Affairs (OCPA), the Office of General Counsel (OGC), the Office of Administration (OA), the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Office of Budget and Management Services (OBMS), and the Office of the Comptroller (OC). OJP also includes an American Indian and Alaskan Native Affairs Desk (AI/AN), which improves outreach to federally recognized Indian tribes. ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS OJP's Office for Civil Rights actively enforces civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination by agencies that receive federal funding. OCR has initiated a number of investigations into complaints against various police departments alleging discriminatory traffic stops and searches, or other forms of racial profiling. When complaints are sustained, OJP takes administrative action to remedy civil rights violations, from requiring changes in policy to suspending funding. Even when no violations are found, OJP often recommends changes in policies and practices to help law enforcement alleviate perceptions of bias and to build community trust. OJP also works with agencies to promote the full and equal participation of women and minority individuals in employment opportunities, and investigates complaints of employment discrimination. OJP'S FY 2000 BUDGET Since enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, OJP's annual budget, which includes funding for the Public Safety Officers' Death Benefits and the Crime Victims Fund (CVF), has grown from $1.1 billion in 1995 to $4.4 billion in 2000. The FY 2000 budget included $3.4 billion in direct appropriations and $985 million from the Crime Victims Fund, which is financed by collections of fines, penalty assessments, and bond forfeitures from defendants convicted of federal crimes. Congress placed a cap on this fund and limited the FY 2000 CVF obligations to $500 million. In addition, OJP administered $389 million in reimbursable agreements from DOJ and non- DOJ agencies. Overall, in FY 2000, OJP managed nearly $4.8 billion. The chart on page 8 provides details on OJP's FY 2000 appropriations. THE OJP REORGANIZATION In FY 1999, Congress directed OJP and the Justice Department to develop a plan for a new organizational structure for OJP that would explore the consolidation and streamlining of agency programs and activities. During FY 2000, much progress was made as OJP continued to refine the reorganization plan and begin preparing for its implementation. In November 1999, in the conference report accompanying the FY 2000 Justice Department appropriations bill, Congress directed OJP to prepare and submit to Congress a formal proposal for implementing selected components of the plan submitted to Congress in FY 1999. Specifically, these components included the creation of a "one- stop" OJP information center; the establishment of "state desks" for geographically-based grants administration; and the consolidation and streamlining of OJP program and policy functions by subject area. In January 2000, the Attorney General approved OJP's proposal for implementing the new structure and it was forwarded to Congress for review. In April 2000, with Congress' concurrence, OJP began work on tasks preparatory to implementation of the new OJP organizational structure. It is expected that the reorganization of OJP will be implemented in phases in FY 2001. FY 2000 Appropriations in millions of dollars OJP PROGRAMS Violence Against Women Law Enforcement and Prosecution Grants 206.8 Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies 34 Rural Domestic Violence Grants 25 Drug Courts 40 Prison Construction Grants 488.5 State Prison Drug Treatment 63 SCAAP (BJA) 1 585.0 Other Violent Crime Reduction Programs 28.6 BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE Local Law Enforcement Block Grants 497.9 Byrne Formula Grants 500 Byrne Discretionary Grants 52 Regional Information Sharing System 20 National White Collar Crime Center 9.3 EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR WEED AND SEED 33.5 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS 25.5 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE 43.4 COUNTER TERRORISM PROGRAMS 152.0 OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION Formula and Discretionary Grants 280.1 Missing Children's Program 20 Victims of Child Abuse Act 7 Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants 238 OJP MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 37.5 ___________ TOTAL 2000 OJP Appropriations 3,387.1 OFFICE FOR VICTIMS OF CRIME 2 500 PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS' DEATH BENEFITS 32.5 ___________ TOTAL 3,919.6 1/ Includes $165 million earmarked from the prison construction grant program. 2/ Program funds are not appropriated. OVC is funded by collections of fines, penalty assessments, and bond forfeitures from defendants convicted of federal crimes. SHARING INFORMATION WITH THE FIELD The resources and national perspective of the federal government give it a unique role in sharing knowledge about crime, justice, public safety issues, and victims. An important part of OJP's mission is providing state and local justice officials, practitioners, researchers, and the public with information. To make its resources more understandable and accessible to the public, OJP revamped its previously bureau/office-organized Website. In FY 2000, OJP launched a new Website that was redesigned so that important information could be found by topics and issues relating to all public safety fields. As a result of the new design, inquiries to OJP's public e-mail address increased significantly. On the average, the e-mail box receives over 700 inquiries per month. In 2000 alone, OJP received a total of 7,645 inquiries from law enforcement officials, federal, state and local officials, researchers, non- profit and for-profit organizations, universities, congressional staff members, the media, and the public. In FY 2000, OJP continued to support the operation of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), which supports the information dissemination efforts of all OJP bureaus and offices, as well as the Office of National Drug Control Policy. NCJRS maintains a library of more than 145,000 documents, available in print and through the Web at www.ncjrs.org. The NCJRS toll-free number at 1-800/688-4252 provides access to reference specialists who conduct individualized research and provide copies of publications. For criminal justice technology development and standards publications, NIJ manages "JUSTNET" on the Web at www.nlectc.org. Criminal justice practitioners and other interested persons can also request these publications by calling 1- 800/248-2742. JUSTNET serves as a gateway to the products and services of NIJ's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system, as well as other technology information and services of interest to the law enforcement and corrections communities. OJP also continued to support the Department of Justice Response Center in FY 2000. The Response Center is staffed by specialists who answer questions and provide information about Justice Department funding programs, including all OJP and Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office funding programs. Center staff also can provide copies of program solicitations, guidelines, and other documents. OJP's Office of the Comptroller (OC) answers over 33,000 calls a year at its Customer Service Center. Staff provide prompt answers to funding recipients' financial questions via toll-free telephone (1-800/458-0786) and e-mail (askoc@ojp.usdoj.gov). Ninety-seven percent of questions are answered immediately or within 24 hours. In addition to the $4.4 billion in payments made to OJP and COPS grantees during FY 2000, OC provides formal financial technical assistance to recipients through its nationwide Regional Financial Management Training Seminars. These two-day training seminars are conducted throughout the year, both in Washington, DC and at various locations across the country, at no cost to recipients. OC trained over 3,000 recipient and program staff during FY 2000. To ensure that OJP's recipients understand and carry out the financial requirements attendant to their awards, OC implemented a risk-based financial monitoring program that examined 1,800 grants in FY 2000, representing over $1.2 billion awarded by OJP. Recipients are either visited or called by OC staff, who provide financial technical assistance, advice, and guidance in support of OJP's programs. REACHING OUT TO A LOCAL DISTRICT SCHOOL OJP employees "practice what they preach" and take pride in working with the Washington, DC community. In 2000, OJP marked the 10th anniversary of its partnership with the Benjamin Orr Elementary School. On June 12, 2000, OJJDP and OJP volunteers joined fourth-grade students and teachers from the Orr School for lunch at the District ChopHouse & Brewery. The lunch culminated the 3-week Manners and Dining Out Program, through which students learned some key elements of fine dining. The students each ordered for themselves and calculated the total cost, including tax and tip, for the meal. The students were each given $20 in "Orr School Money," which they used to "pay" their bill. The District ChopHouse & Brewery covered the cost of the meals. A local anchorman interviewed participants for a segment that aired on the 6:00 p.m. news. Over the course of the year, OJP volunteers participated in Orr School reading programs, accompanied Orr students on field trips, and provided holiday gifts for students and their families. Orr students also participated in DOJ events, such as holiday programs. 2 Empowering Communities To Address Crime Federal and state agencies, along with urban, rural, and tribal communities, have learned that no one program or organization alone can effectively promote safer neighborhoods. Improving the quality of housing, education, employment, economic opportunities, environment, and health care resources available to all families and communities especially in neighborhoods where high rates of crime and poverty co-exist is difficult. Research and experience have demonstrated that the principle behind building safe and healthy communities is in the shared understanding of local needs and issues and the flexibility to address these local needs and issues. This approach involves a number of building blocks leading to positive change in our communities, which include: applying comprehensive approaches; building communities and justice system institutions; working with community leadership; strengthening local organizational capacity; promoting multi-disciplinary partnerships; applying technology and the strategic planning process; and giving residents a real opportunity to solve problems with justice system institutions. OJP has worked to build on community partnerships and expand them throughout the justice system as a whole. During FY 2000, OJP continued to encourage the development of systemwide strategies such as the Weed and Seed program, in which federal and local prosecutors and law enforcement work together to "weed" violence and drug dealing from a specific geographic area, and work with government and private housing, employment, and social service agencies to "seed" an area with jobs, livable housing, and opportunities for youth. BUILDING KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CRIMINAL JUSTICE In FY 2000, statistical data provided OJP insight into how these systemwide strategies have affected our nation's communities. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report, Criminal Victimization 1999-Changes 1998-99 with Trends 1993-99, released in August 2000, the nation's violent crime rate fell by more than 10 percent during 1999, reaching the lowest level since BJS started measuring it in 1973. There were an estimated 28.8 million violent and property crimes during 1999, compared to 44 million such incidents counted in the first year of BJS' National Crime Victimization Survey. The report stated that every major type of personal and property crime measured decreased between 1993 and 1999. The 1999 data indicated:  54 percent of all violent crime victims in 1999 knew their attackers;  almost 70 percent of the rape and sexual assault victims knew the offender as an acquaintance, friend, relative or intimate, compared to just under 50 percent of the aggravated assault victims;  44 percent of violent victimizations in 1999 were reported to police, compared to 34 percent of property crime victimizations;  the most frequently reported crime was motor vehicle theft, while the least frequently reported was personal theft;  little more than 28 percent of the rape and sexual assault victimizations were reported to the police;  persons 16-19 and 35-49 years old experienced violent crimes at rates lower than they did in 1998; and  last year's violent crime rates fell for a third of the demographic categories examined, including males, whites, urbanites, and those earning $75,000 or more annually. According to preliminary Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) data, homicides declined about 8 percent last year. Historically, males accounted for about three-quarters of the murder victims, and about one in eight of the murder victims was less than 18 years old. Property crime rates continued a 25-year downward trend, dropping 9 percent from 1998 to 1999 from 217 per 1,000 U.S. households to 198 per 1,000 households. In October 2000, BJS released the report, Firearm Injury and Death from Crime, 1993- 97. The number of gunshot wounds from any type of crime fell nearly 40 percent during the 5 year period from 1993 through 1997, according to the comprehensive report. BJS cites data from multiple sources, including its National Criminal Victimization Survey (NCVS), as well as hospital emergency department intake information and death certificates from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and law enforcement homicide reports from the FBI. Twenty-eight percent of the serious, non-fatal violent victimizations that occurred from 1993 through 1997 were committed with a firearm. According to BJS' household survey of crime victims, 4 percent of the serious victimizations were committed with a firearm and resulted in injuries, and less than 1 percent resulted in gunshot wounds. About 80 percent of gunshot wound victims sought medical treatment in a hospital. The CDC data showed that gunshot wounds from any type of crime fell 39 percent from 64,100 to 39,400 during the 5 year period. Firearm-related homicides fell 27 percent from 18,300 to 13,300 during the same period. The BJS report said the CDC's Firearm Injury Surveillance Study showed that 62 percent of non-fatal firearm injuries treated in U.S. hospital emergency rooms were assaults, 17 percent were accidents, 6 percent were suicide attempts, 1 percent were from law enforcement activity, and 13 percent were from unknown causes. The CDC's Vital Statistics data indicated that 44 percent of firearm deaths were homicides. CDC's data further showed that, during the 5 year period from 1993 through 1997, there were an estimated 3.3 non-fatal gunshot injuries from assaults treated in emergency rooms for every single firearm-related homicide. According to CDC and FBI data, four out of five victims of both fatal and non-fatal gunshot injuries from assaults were male and nearly half of all victims were black males. Black males ages 15-24 made up 26 percent of all the non-fatal gunshot victims and 22 percent of all homicides, according to data from the FBI. The BJS report also indicates that 38 percent of the gunshot assault victims and 31 percent of the homicide victims were ages 18 to 24, while juveniles under 18 years old accounted for 16 percent of non-fatal firearm assault victims and 10 percent of firearm homicides. FBI statistics indicated that from 1993 to 1997, 60 percent of offenders who used a firearm to commit murder were younger than 25: 17 percent were juveniles (younger than 18 years old) and 24 percent were between 18 and 20 years old. The FBI's Uniform Crime Reports indicated that 1 percent of serious violent crimes reported to police from 1993 to 1997 were homicides, 69 percent of which were committed with firearms. For 56 percent of the non-fatal firearm assault victims the relationship to the offenders was unknown. Approximately 11 percent were injured by someone known to them. According to firearm homicide data in the FBI's Supplemental Homicide Reports, the victim's relationship to the offender was unknown in 41 percent of cases, while in 44 percent of the cases, the killer was someone the victim knew and in 15 percent the killer was a stranger. Among gunshot assault cases where the firearm type was provided, 82 percent of non-fatal victims were shot with a handgun. In firearm homicide cases, 81 percent of victims were killed with a handgun, 6 percent with shotguns, 5 percent with rifles, and 7 percent with unspecified firearms. Data reported to the FBI indicated that in 1998 more than 400 police officers were injured in firearm assaults, and 58 police officers were killed by a firearm while responding to a crime. The firearm injury rate for police officers declined in the early 1980s and began climbing again after 1987. In the late 1990s, however, firearm injury rates fell to their lowest level in the 1978-1998 period. Additional reports released by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) regarding community-based programs also provided valuable information. In April 2000, BJA issued Keeping Illegal Activity Out of Rental Property: A Police Guide for Establishing Landlord Training Programs. This report focused on a Landlord Training Program in Portland, Oregon, and described how property owners, tenants, and law enforcement agencies cooperated to combat drug-related crime, particularly through effective property management and techniques that discouraged drug activity on rental property. The report also served as a training manual for communities that wished to start a Landlord Training Program. Such programs exist in 22 states. Kids' Korner Program: City of Reno, Nevada Police Department, a BJA publication issued in June 2000, described an initiative that teams law enforcement, public health, social service agencies, and public and private organizations in assisting low-income families who live in local motels due to high housing costs. Under Kids' Korner, which began in 1996, police officers routinely visit motels to check on the status of children and refer families to appropriate community resources. On May 23, 2000, Kids' Korner received the National Council on Crime and Delinquency's New American Community Award. In July 2000, BJA released Memphis, Tennessee Police Department's Crisis Intervention Team, a bulletin focusing on the efforts of specially trained law enforcement and medical personnel who respond to 911 emergency calls involving the mentally ill. Originally conceived as a response to the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill in the 1960s, the Memphis Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) is now a success, with over 200 of the 900 patrol officers as members. The Memphis CIT works in conjunction with the University of Tennessee Medical Center, families of the mentally ill, and emergency medical and psychiatric services. It has inspired other cities around the country, including Albuquerque, New Mexico and San Jose, California to implement similar programs. PROBLEM-SOLVING APPROACHES TO COMMUNITY SAFETY The Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative (SACSI), which began in five cities nationwide in 1998, takes a problem-solving approach to a specific, local crime problem and increases the capacity of U.S. Attorneys to work in collaboration with federal, state and local law enforcement and community partners in reducing local crime. SACSI tests the assumption that crime is most effectively reduced by: bringing together the various perspectives and capacities of community groups and agencies to address a major crime problem; gleaning knowledge from street-level practitioners and working hand-in-hand with researchers to determine the exact nature and scope of a targeted crime problem; and designing interventions based on the opportunities the analysis reveals. SACSI is operating in Indianapolis, Indiana; Memphis, Tennessee; New Haven, Connecticut; Portland, Oregon; and Winston-Salem, North Carolina, with each city focusing on a crime problem of significance within its community. The initiative has five distinct steps, or stages: 1. Form an interagency partnership 2. Gather information and data about a targeted crime problem 3. Design a strategic intervention to tackle the problem 4. Implement the intervention 5. Assess and modify the strategy as ongoing analysis reveals effects Though direct federal funding for the first five sites has ended, all are continuing their efforts, some in significant new ways. In Winston-Salem, widespread community support for this work has resulted in nearly $2 million in foundation funding to establish the Center for Community Safety at Winston-Salem State University. The Center will expand the strategic approaches work in Winston-Salem and also serve as a training center for other communities in the problem-solving approach. The University of Memphis is developing a Center for Community Criminology and Research to help prepare researchers to work directly with communities. Portland, Indianapolis, and New Haven are beginning to apply this approach to problems such as offender reentry and domestic violence. In FY 2000, five new sites were designated as strategic approaches sites to reduce violent firearms-related crime. They are St. Louis, Missouri; Detroit, Michigan; Atlanta, Georgia; Rochester, New York; and Albuquerque, New Mexico. A training curriculum has been developed by the Justice Department to transfer lessons learned to these new sites and to others interested in adopting the SACSI approach. Key players from the first five sites will administer the training in the new sites, and to other interested districts. This curriculum will also soon be offered at the National Advocacy Center, as part of core training for incoming U.S. Attorneys and Assistant U.S. Attorneys. ADDRESSING HATE CRIME In 2000, the Department of Justice supported police and prosecutorial agencies in responding to hate crimes. The Office of Justice Programs' (OJP) Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) convened a policy briefing on hate crimes in January 2000. In conjunction with the two- day policy meeting, where federal, state, and local officials shared information about effective strategies employed across the nation to respond to hate crimes, BJA presented a 15-minute video and accompanying brochure to assist law enforcement officers in preventing and investigating hate crimes. The video, "Responding to Hate Crimes," was a collaborative effort between BJA and the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). The materials were the result of the 1997 White House Conference on Hate Crimes and the later IACP Summit on Hate Crimes in America. The video was sent to approximately 16,000 police and sheriffs' departments across the country. These materials were also presented at BJA's policy briefing for State Administrative Agency Directors, who collectively administer over $600 million annually in BJA funding through the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program and the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants (LLEBG) Program, as well as other federal and state funds. In March 2000, OJP's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) released the first two reports in a series of hate crime bulletins, Addressing Hate Crimes; Six Initiatives That Are Enhancing the Efforts of Criminal Justice, and Promising Practices Against Hate Crimes: Five State and Local Demonstration Projects. The first bulletin focused on the following innovative efforts by police and prosecutors to improve systems for responding to hate crimes. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Summit: Hate Crime in America. Convened in collaboration with OJP and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), law enforcement, civil rights, and other leaders developed a broad range of recommendations for addressing hate crimes in communities across the country; DOJ's National Hate Crimes Training Initiative. This initiative involved the development of multi-level hate crime training curricula and the creation of a nationwide training program for local law enforcement agencies to implement the curricula; BJA's Roll Call Video: Responding to Hate Crimes. BJA produced a 20- minute video covering the initial response to and investigation of possible hate crimes; IACP's Responding to Hate Crimes: A Police Officer's Guide to Investigation and Prevention. This compact guide was published as a quick reference to address hate incidents, hate crimes, and how best to assist victims; The American Prosecutors Research Institute's (APRI) Resource Guide, Prosecutors Respond to Hate Crimes Project. APRI released this resource guide on hate crimes for local prosecutors; and The Maine Department of the Attorney General's Designated Civil Rights Officers Project. This project called for the development of a coordinated statewide system for hate crime investigation and prosecution. Promising Practices Against Hate Crimes: Five State and Local Demonstration Projects discusses five BJA-funded demonstration programs located in Los Angeles, California, San Diego, California, Maine, and Massachusetts that are among the nation's most promising models for confronting and reducing bias-motivated acts. These programs demonstrate that the most effective approaches include coordination among all components of the criminal justice system, focused efforts to address the needs of the victims of hate crimes, diversion programs for youth, and activities encouraging tolerance in our schools. In addition, BJA funded Combating Prejudice and Hate on Campus, the first national student symposium on preventing and reducing hate crime and bias incidents on American college campuses. More than 300 students, faculty, and administrators from 70 educational institutions attended the event, held March 23-24, 2000 in Boston, Massachusetts. ADDRESSING CRIME IN NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITIES A critical DOJ priority is to help tribal governments build comprehensive and effective law enforcement and public safety systems that will provide a foundation for safe communities. As part of this important initiative, several OJP bureaus and offices provide funding and support to tribal communities. The goal of the Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement (CIRCLE) Project is to enhance tribal governments' response to public safety and to improve the quality of life in tribal communities. The CIRCLE Project promotes the intertribal exchange of ideas and experiences. It also fosters coordination within the three participating Indian tribes the Northern Cheyenne, the Oglala Sioux, and the Pueblo of Zuni for more efficient and effective use of resources. It combines comprehensive problem-solving planning, implementation, and evaluation with traditional tribal justice practices and support from a broad range of federal partners. On December 5, 2000, OJP participated in the second cluster meeting of the CIRCLE Project held in Zuni, New Mexico. Other participants included representatives from DOJ agencies such as the Office Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), U.S. Attorneys, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Office of Tribal Justice, as well as other federal agencies such as the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services. These federal agencies and tribes are working together to channel technical assistance and resources to the CIRCLE sites. Major FY 2000 BJA-funded initiatives for American Indian and Alaska Native communities included the Tribal Court Assistance Program, Crime Analysis and Planning Strategies for American Indian and Alaska Native Communities, and the Alaska Native Technical Assistance and Resource Center. As part of the Department of Justice's FY 2000 Indian Country Law Enforcement Initiative, BJA helped American Indian and Alaska Native communities to develop, enhance, and operate tribal courts. This funding, administered under the Tribal Court Assistance Program, recognizes that tribal courts are the most important vehicle for maintaining security and restoring the community in Indian Country. They give Native American communities a forum to address specific issues such as substance abuse and domestic violence, and promote tribal sovereignty and self-government. Awards under the first component of this initiative funded either new tribal courts or improvements to existing courts in areas such as case management, court personnel training, equipment acquisition, indigent defense services, and diversion programs. The second component of the initiative provided training and technical assistance for tribal court grant recipients and created a National Tribal Court Resource Center. The Center's initial goals are to create a clearinghouse of existing tribal judicial resources, establish a toll-free help line for tribal justice systems, develop a free searchable database of tribal justice system opinions, provide online reference and research assistance services through the Center's Website (www.tribalresourcecenter.org), and establish a mentor system for tribal justice systems. In 1998, BJA began regional Community Analysis and Regional Planning Strategies training for tribal leadership and communities with large portions of diverse Native American populations. Managed by Fox Valley Technical College in Appleton, Wisconsin, these 4-day executive-level training sessions assist tribal jurisdictions as they develop a comprehensive model for identifying crime risk and assessing its impact. THWARTING ECONOMIC CRIME On May 8, 2000, OJP's Bureau of Justice Assistance and Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) co-sponsored a week-long economic crime summit in Austin, Texas. More than 1,000 public and private sector economic crime security professionals from around the world attended the conference to learn about the latest crime trends and strategies to thwart economic crime. Plenary sessions and workshops focused on e-commerce crime, health care fraud, identity fraud prevention, telemarketing offenders and victims, fraud prevention for the elderly, and national programs and federal offices that offer support to fraud victims. SUPPORTING COMMUNITY JUSTICE PROGRAMS Weed and Seed The Weed and Seed approach is a coordinated strategy that works to make a wide range of public and private sector resources more accessible to communities. Under the leadership of U.S. Attorneys, the strategy brings together federal, state, and local crime-fighting agencies, social service providers, representatives of public and private sectors, business owners, and neighborhood residents and links them in a shared goal of weeding out violent crime and gang activity while seeding the community with social services and economic revitalization. The Weed and Seed approach emphasizes four principles aggressive law enforcement strategies, community policing, the provision of crime prevention, intervention, and treatment services, and neighborhood restoration and revitalization activities. Initiated in 1991 in three pilot sites, the Weed and Seed approach is currently operational in over 250 sites around the nation. During FY 2000, over 250 communities used funding from Executive Office for Weed and Seed (EOWS). Since Weed and Seed is primarily a strategy, all Weed and Seed sites must show their capacity to obtain financial and in-kind resources from a variety of public and private sources. Many Weed and Seed sites receive support from federal, state, and local agencies, and the private sector (non-profit and for-profit). Technical assistance plays an integral role in the success of the Weed and Seed strategy and is available to all Officially Recognized Weed and Seed sites. Therefore, the Executive Office for Weed and Seed encourages Officially Recognized sites to develop written technical assistance (TA) work plans, which are based on ongoing local needs assessments. To facilitate technical assistance for sites, EOWS works with over 100 TA providers or consultants who carry out TA and have years of advanced, professional experience in areas including: strategic planning, evaluations, grants and funding review, team building, computer systems, funding and marketing, job training, asset mapping, and community policing. Technical assistance usually involves an EOWS consultant traveling to a specific Weed and Seed site. There are many other forms of TA that EOWS can provide, including: electronic (e-mail broadcasts and EOWS Web page), multi- site technical assistance, and telephone consultation. EOWS also sponsors several training workshops and conferences, as well as live, interactive satellite broadcast series that cover Weed and Seed topic areas. In February 2000, EOWS held its annual application kit workshop for Officially Recognized sites. In 2000, EOWS sponsored several conferences, including one held in New Orleans, Louisiana in May on law enforcement and community and one held in Miami, Florida in September on creating healthy communities. In January 2000, EOWS published a report, Weed and Seed Best Practices, which focused on four cities Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Salt Lake City, Utah; San Jose, California; and Syracuse, New York that implemented successful crime reduction activities, community policing, crime prevention initiatives, and neighborhood restoration. The initiatives being undertaken in these cities represent approaches that communities across the country may wish to consider when crafting a comprehensive, community-based response to crime and community well-being. Specifically, the publication highlighted community activity in the following areas:  Pittsburgh's efforts to promote neighborhood revitalization through techniques such as developing community technology centers and building the capacity of community-based organizations;  Salt Lake City's undercover law enforcement initiative to disrupt illegal drug and gang activities in targeted areas;  San Jose's community policing approach, which dedicates local-level community coordinators to assist in fostering community involvement and improving community safety and well-being; and  Syracuse's collaborative prevention program which emphasizes involvement with the arts as a vehicle to counteract youth crime, truancy, ethnic intolerance, and substance abuse. Community Oriented Policing EOWS hosted a teleconference, along with the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), to spotlight best practices in community policing in April 2000. The teleconference brought together police chiefs and criminal justice researchers from around the country to present model community policing approaches. The discussion also encompassed the community's perspective on community policing. This teleconference followed a Community Oriented Policing Summit live satellite broadcast, also hosted by EOWS, at which these officials discussed promising approaches to and key components of successful community policing programs. The live satellite broadcast was the fourth in the EOWS Community Training Broadcast Series, a series of five one-hour satellite broadcasts on topics of interest to Weed and Seed sites and communities across the country. To assess COPS effectiveness in promoting community policing in communities, OJP's independent research and evaluation arm, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), supported an independent, national evaluation of the COPS program. Findings released in September 2000, showed that COPS has increased the number of officers deployed in America's communities, advanced the utilization of problem-solving policing, helped police departments provide their officers with new technology, and made it easier and quicker for police departments to apply for and receive COPS grants. The evaluation was conducted by the Urban Institute with NIJ funding. The study reported that:  By May 1999, 100,500 officers and equivalents had been funded. Preliminary estimates indicate that between 84,700 and 89,400 officers will have been deployed by 2003.  Because some officers will have departed before others begin service, the Urban Institute estimated that the federally funded increase (based on awards through May 1999) in policing levels will peak in 2001 between 69,000 and 84,600 before falling to between 62,700 and 83,900 in 2003.  The COPS program accelerated the transition to of community policing in those agencies that were already advancing their own local programs, rather than causing the acceleration.  Building partnerships with communities was commonplace for COPS grantees; however, in a number of instances these partnerships were short-term working arrangements.  Many police departments and communities engaged in local problem solving, though the form and visibility of problem solving varied widely throughout communities. The evaluation covered the first four years of the COPS program, with specific focus on how COPS grants enabled law enforcement agencies to put more officers on the street to engage in community policing and redeploy existing officers to community policing by increasing officer productivity through the use of technology or by hiring civilians. FOR MORE INFORMATION Visit the OJP Website at www.ojp.usdoj.gov, which includes general information about OJP and its bureaus and program offices, e-mail addresses, downloadable versions of application kits, and links to selected criminal justice Websites. The National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Website at www.ncjrs.org offers online versions of most OJP publications. OJP publications can also be ordered by calling the NCJRS toll-free number at 1-800/851-3420. The following publications are available from NCJRS: Criminal Victimization 1999-Changes with Trends 1993-99 (BJS) NCJ 182734 Firearm Injury and Death from Crime (BJS) NCJ 182993 Homicide Trends in the United States (BJS) www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/homtrnd.htm Keeping Illegal Activity Out of Rental Property: A Police Guide for Establishing Landlord Training Programs (BJA) NCJ 148656 Kid's Korner Program: City of Reno, Nevada, Police Department (BJA) NCJ 181718 Memphis, Tennessee Police Department's Crisis Intervention Team (BJA) NCJ 182501 Addressing Hate Crimes: Six Initiatives That Are Enhancing the Efforts of Criminal Justice Practitioners (BJA) NCJ 179559 Weed and Seed Best Practices (EOWS) NCJ 181507 The COPS Program After 4 Years: National Evaluation (NIJ) NCJ 183644 Promising Practices Against Hate Crimes: Five State and Local Demonstration Projects (BJA) NCJ 181425 3 Breaking the Cycle of Substance Abuse and Crime There is a close relationship between substance abuse and crime. The majority of persons who come into contact with the criminal justice system, regardless of the offense, are substance abusers. Approximately 73 percent of the 106,139 federal arrests made during fiscal year 1998 were made by Department of Justice law enforcement agencies the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Marshals Service according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics' (BJS) report, 1998 Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, released in May 2000. Almost half of these arrests made during 1998 were for drug or immigration offenses. Treasury Department agencies made 11 percent of the arrests, while other federal agencies, such as the Postal Service and the Defense, Interior, and Agriculture Departments, accounted for the remainder. Highlights from the 1998 Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics include:  The number of defendants prosecuted in federal courts rose 12.7 percent from 69,351 in 1997 to 78,172 in 1998, principally because of increases in drug law prosecutions (38 percent of the increase) and immigration law violations (29 percent of the increase). Most (83 percent) were charged with felony offenses.  Eighty-seven percent of those charged were convicted. Of those convicted, 94 percent plead guilty.  Seventy-one percent of those convicted were sentenced to prison, up from 60 percent of those convicted in 1990.  The average prison sentence imposed on the 43,041 persons sentenced to prison during 1998 was 58.8 months, down from the high of 62.6 months in 1992. However, the length of time likely to be served in prison is increasing. Since 1990 the time actually served rose from 65 percent to 87 percent of the sentence imposed.  Forty-three percent of those charged with federal offenses were freed while awaiting trial, down from 62 percent during 1990. Violent, drug, weapons, and immigration offenders were among those least likely to be released. About 43 percent of weapons, 35 percent of drug, 32 percent of violent, and 8 percent of immigration offenders were released while awaiting trial in 1998.  About 84 percent of those released while awaiting trial completed their release without incident, while most (14.5 percent) of those who violated the conditions of their release committed only technical violations of their release, such as a failure to participate in a substance abuse treatment program or any other court-imposed condition. Three percent committed new crimes and 2 percent failed to make scheduled court appearances. (Offenders may have had more than one type of violation, so percentages add to more than 100 percent.) According to another BJS publication, Drug Use, Testing, and Treatment in Jails, released in May 2000, an estimated 10 percent of the inmates tested for drugs in local jails during June 1998 tested positive for one or more illegal drugs. More than two-thirds of the 712 jails that tested inmates had at least one inmate who tested positive. The findings in this report are based on data collected in June 1996 from a representative sample of the nation's jail inmates. About 54 percent of all inmates were held in jails that tested for illegal drug use. It was found that different jails tested inmates at various times during their incarceration, and they used a variety of criteria to select inmates for testing. Among those facilities that tested, fewer than 5 percent tested all inmates upon admission to jail. About 49 percent of those jails that tested, selected inmates at random, and 69 percent selected inmates for testing upon an indication of drug use. Some jurisdictions also tested all inmates upon entry into a facility after an absence for activities such as work release, furlough, or court visit. The report also found that among the sanctions that jails impose on inmates who tested positive, 70 percent usually took away inmate privileges, such as visitation rights, recreational activities, and freedom to move about the facility, and about half took away good time or reclassified the offender to a higher security level. Other findings in the report include:  Drug testing policies to detect and control drug use in jails often also included jail employees.  49 percent of the jails reported testing staff members, compared to 47 percent of the jurisdictions that test inmates.  Of the 1,418 jail jurisdictions that tested employees, 70 percent said all staff members were subject to testing, including supervisors, administrative staff, and corrections officers, as well as programs and treatment personnel.  One-fifth of these jurisdictions tested only prospective employees, and one percent tested only corrections officers. Dismissal was the usual sanction against staff members.  Almost 73 percent of jail authorities provided substance abuse treatment or programs for jail inmates.  Self-help programs, such as Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous, were common, with about 68 percent of jurisdictions having such groups or providing peer group counseling or education and awareness programs.  About 43 percent provided detoxification, sent inmates to a special residential treatment facility, or provided professional counseling. Among those inmates surveyed who had pled guilty or had been convicted of an offense, 36 percent were under the influence of drugs at the time of the offense. In 1998 almost 72,000 were under the influence of marijuana or hashish and 59,000 were under the influence of powder or crack cocaine. BJS reported that, in interviews with convicted jail inmates, 16 percent said they committed their offenses to get money for drugs. Two-thirds of all convicted jail inmates were actively involved with drugs prior to their admission to jail. Among convicted jail inmates who were actively involved with drugs prior to their going to jail, 20 percent said they had received treatment or participated in a substance abuse program since their admission. COMBATING THE METHAMPHETAMINE PROBLEM Collaboration among agencies responsible for education, public health, law enforcement, and public safety is critical to implementing effective responses to the growing meth-amphetamine problem, according to the findings of the final report of the Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), along with the Office of National Drug Control Policy, released the report, Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force Final Report, in Washington, DC at the 68th Winter Meeting of the U. S. Conference of Mayors. The report describes the methamphetamine problem; needs and recommendations in the areas of law enforcement, prevention and education, and treatment; and research priorities to advance the understanding of the nature and effects of the methamphetamine problem and to measure the effectiveness of prevention, enforcement, and treatment interventions. A final section discusses promising strategies and recommendations for the federal government to assist communities in combating methamphetamine. In FY 2000, Congress appropriated $35,675,000 to the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) to help state and local law enforcement in combating meth- amphetamine production, distribution, and use. These funds can also be used to reimburse the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for properly removing and disposing of hazardous materials found at clandestine methamphetamine laboratories. BJA, in cooperation with the COPS Office and the DEA, administered $16,275,000 for the FY 2000 Methamphetamine/Drug Hot Spots Program. Between August 2000 and February 2001, BJA awarded 18 grants totaling $12,214,837. Awards were delayed because of the grantees' need to address environmental considerations and assurances of their ability to comply with the laws and regulations. BJA also provided $150,000 in funding to support nationwide training in multi-agency responses to methamphetamine laboratories. Additionally BJA funded Circle Solutions to update training on clandestine lab enforcement and cleanup issues, with special emphasis on the needs of agencies in high intensity drug trafficking areas. The COPS Office retained two earmarks, $18.2 million for the California Department of Justice and $1.2 million for a Tri-State Methamphetamine Training Program, based in Iowa, which addresses a broad array of law enforcement initiatives pertaining to the investigation of methamphetamine trafficking in many heavily impacted areas of the country. To ensure that the investigation and cleanup of methamphetamine labs does not violate federal environmental and occupational safety laws, BJA, in cooperation with DEA and the COPS Office, devoted substantial effort in explaining to law enforcement agencies the requirements for compliance and providing guidance for programmatic remedies. On April 26, 2000, BJA sponsored such a conference for the Methamphetamine/Drug Hot Spots Program grantees. Further, BJA, in consultation with DEA, developed and published in the Federal Register a program-level environmental assessment with mitigation measures that can be used by any agency undertaking similar investigative programs to ensure compliance with current environmental laws. In addition, the use of multi-jurisdictional task forces has produced a variety of benefits for law enforcement and adjudication committees, including unprecedented interagency coordination and pooling of resources, the establishment of new systems to facilitate information sharing and intelligence gathering, and improved access to specialized resources. States spent $186 million in FY 2000 on 829 multi-jurisdictional task forces. One of the nation's most effective users of such task forces is the State of Wyoming. The State's Regional Enforcement Teams (RETs) have made investigating and prosecuting the trafficking of methamphetamine a priority. As a result, the number of cases involving methamphetamine has increased 350 percent since 1990. In one case, two RETs worked with the Internal Revenue Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to shut down a cartel distributing methamphetamine in several counties. This complex investigation, which involved gathering information on a kidnaping, an attempted murder, and multiple co-conspiracies, produced numerous convictions and sentences in federal and state courts. FIGHTING SUBSTANCE ABUSE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL Over half of adult male arrestees in 34 reporting American cities tested positive for drug use according to data released by NIJ. The report, Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program: 1999 Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and Juvenile Arrestees, found significant differences in the patterns of arrestee drug use by city. For example, the percentage of male arrestees who tested positive for any drug ranged from 50 percent in San Antonio to 77 percent in Atlanta. The range among female arrestees was even more pronounced, from a low of 22 percent in Laredo, Texas, to 81 percent in New York City. These findings emphasize the need for local, comprehensive approaches to address drug use among at-risk individuals. ADAM assists both law enforcement officials and drug treatment providers as they work together to break the cycle of drug use and crime. The ADAM study found:  cocaine remains the drug of choice among many arrestees: more than one-third of adult male arrestees in a majority of sites tested positive for cocaine;  the proportion of male adult arrestees testing positive for marijuana was greater than the rate of female adult arrestees in all sites;  among juvenile detainees, marijuana was the most commonly used drug more than six times higher than cocaine use for both juvenile males and females;  opiate use, such as heroin and opium, remained relatively low in 1999 compared to the prevalence of cocaine and marijuana among adult arrestees; and  the proportion of female adult arrestees testing positive for opiates was greater than that for male adult arrestees in many sites. Consistently high percentages of overall use among arrestees, however, mask differences in trends for specific drugs and in specific segments of the arrestee population. For example, methamphetamine use among ADAM arrestees is a phenomenon that appears to be concentrated mainly in the Western part of the United States, particularly in Portland, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Diego, San Jose, and Spokane, where more than 20 percent of both the male and female arrestee populations tested positive for the drug. Methamphetamine use among juvenile arrestees followed a pattern similar to that of adult arrestees: methamphetamine was more commonly used by females and was most often detected at sites in the West/Southwest. Data collected under the ADAM program highlight the complex nature of the drug abuse problem and the need for communities to tailor law enforcement, prevention, and treatment efforts to meet local drug problems. Local efforts to prevent substance abuse by young people were enhanced through nearly $9 million in federal grants awarded to 94 sites, including Boston, Chicago, Detroit and Washington, DC, through the Drug-Free Communities Support Program in September 2000. The Drug-Free Communities Support Program was created under the Drug-Free Communities Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-20) to strengthen local antidrug coalitions, which include businesses; youth service organizations; health care professionals; and state, local, or tribal government agencies. Each of the coalitions receiving grants has worked together for a minimum of six months on substance abuse reduction initiatives before applying for the grants. The program, now in its third year of funding, is overseen by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) in partnership with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), the Justice Department agency that administers the grant. ONDCP and OJJDP selected the new sites through a competitive review process from more than 200 applications. In Fiscal Year 1998, ONDCP and OJJDP awarded grants to 93 sites. An additional 124 sites received grants in Fiscal Year 1999. Awards range up to $100,000 for use over a one-year period. The coalitions, which have developed a long-range plan to reduce substance abuse, are required to match grant awards with funding from non-federal sources. The new program sites represent a cross-section of projects from every region in the nation. Fifty-four are predominantly rural, 24 are predominantly urban, and 13 are predominantly suburban. Further, 10 of these sites include tribal communities. OJJDP is conducting a national evaluation of the Drug-Free Communities Support Program. One of the Centers for the Application of Prevention Technologies, through funding from OJJDP and the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP), will also provide the grantees technical assistance to help implement effective community prevention programs. In addition, the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA) provides support to these grassroots organizations. With the addition of the sites, the grants are funding more than 300 community coalitions of youth, parents, media, law enforcement, school officials, religious organizations, and other community representatives in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The program, which will allow the coalitions to strengthen their coordination efforts to prevent and reduce young people's illegal use of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, also encourages citizen participation in substance abuse reduction efforts and disseminates information about effective programs. The Enforcing the Underage Drinking Laws (EUDL) Program is helping all 50 states and the District of Columbia develop comprehensive and coordinated initiatives to enforce state laws that prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages to minors and prevent the purchase or consumption of alcoholic beverages by minors. OJJDP awarded FY 2000 block grants of $360,000 each to all states and the District of Columbia. Recipients use these funds to support activities in one or more of three areas: enforcement, public education activities, and innovative programs. OJJDP selected 11 states and 1 territory to receive FY 2000 discretionary grants: Connecticut, Hawaii, Kansas, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, and Wisconsin. OJJDP also funds an extensive training and technical assistance program through the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE) of Calverton, Maryland and its partners, including Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) of Dallas, Texas; American Indian Development Associates of Albuquerque, New Mexico; the National Crime Prevention Council of Washington, DC; the Police Executive Research Forum of Washington, DC; and the National Liquor Law Enforcement Association of Raleigh, North Carolina. During FY 2000, PIRE provided training and technical assistance to more than 4,000 individuals through a variety of activities. PIRE also continued to operate the Underage Drinking Enforcement Training Center which helps states receiving EUDL funds to focus their efforts on prevention, intervention, and enforcement issues. In addition, OJJDP continues to support a national evaluation of the EUDL program by Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. OJJDP also supports the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (CSPV) at the University of Colorado, Boulder in helping communities replicate the Life Skills Training (LST) and Technical Assistance Program, a school-based drug prevention initiative to reduce the risks associated with substance abuse. The program motivates youth to make healthy lifestyle decisions by training them to resist peer and media pressures, develop a positive self-image, manage anxiety, communicate effectively, build healthy relationships, and handle social situations with confidence. CPSV works in conjunction with LST and the National Health Promotion Associates, which provides three years of training workshops for all LST instructors (a 2-day, initial training in the first year, and 1 day workshops in the second and third years to train teachers in the booster sessions) and curriculum materials for all LST instructors and students. In FY 2000, OJJDP awarded $4,964,110 to CSPV to expand its efforts. With this funding, CSPV provided training and technical assistance to an additional 35 sites, bringing the total to 70. The program now serves approximately 280 schools and more than 110,000 students. ADDRESSING SUBSTANCE ABUSE IN INDIAN COUNTRY In September 2000, the Attorney General addressed the "Indian Self-Determination: Summit on Tribal Strategies to Reduce Alcohol, Substance Abuse and Violence." The summit provided tribal leaders with an opportunity to develop a national agenda on alcohol, substance abuse, and violence for Indian Country. The summit also highlighted promising practices developed by tribal governments and programs. OJP released the report, Promising Practices and Strategies to Reduce Alcohol and Substance Abuse Among American Indians and Alaska Natives, at the summit, which highlights promising programs and initiatives that have proven effective for addressing substance and alcohol abuse problems among American Indians and Alaska Natives. The report is part of an overall effort to develop a comprehensive approach to reduce substance abuse and violence in Indian country. The programs highlighted represent three types of policy initiatives designed to reduce substance abuse: efforts that control the availability of drugs and alcohol within a tribal jurisdiction; educational and treatment efforts; and efforts that reduce the social and environmental factors that increase the risk of harm to the individual and the community. Programs described in the report include, the Poarch Creek Indian Nation Drug Court Program, the Pueblo of Zuni Recovery Center, and the Southern Ute Peaceful Spirit Youth Services Program. In addition to program descriptions, the report also contains a literature review, a selected bibliography, and a listing of resources for further information. DRUG COURTS OJP's Drug Courts Program Office (DCPO) awarded more than $25 million to 102 communities to plan, implement, or enhance drug courts in June 2000. Drug courts integrate substance abuse treatment, drug testing, sanctions, and incentives with case processing to place nonviolent drug-involved defendants in judicially supervised rehabilitation programs. Thirty-eight of the grants totaling more than $5 million were made to Native American tribal governments to plan or implement drug courts. These grants help respond to the higher alcohol dependency rates and need for treatment among Native Americans, which was reported in a 1997 study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Since the drug court grant program was authorized in the 1994 Crime Act, OJP has made approximately 650 grants totaling over $125 million to plan, implement, or enhance drug courts throughout the country. More than 650 drug courts are operating in the United States and more than 425 are being planned. All 50 states have drug courts in operation or in the planning stages. Once limited only to adult offenders, specialized drug courts have been developed for juveniles, families, and persons charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) or Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), as well as for tribal court operations. In addition to the drug courts supported through Drug Court Grant Program funding, all states and communities use their own funds or a combination of state and local, private, and federal funding to support drug court programs. Some localities use funding from OJP's Byrne Formula Grant Program, the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants, or the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants Program, all of which include drug court funding as an allowable purpose area. All drug courts use multiple funding sources, even those that have received Drug Court Grant Program funding. The Drug Courts Program Office greatly expanded its training efforts in FY 2000 in response to the needs expressed by drug court practitioners. Under the Drug Court Planning Initiative (DCPI), a series of three workshops on planning a drug court is now available directly to interested communities, which no longer need to submit a funding application or provide a 25 percent local match. Communities must assemble a complete drug court team of up to 10 individuals for adult, juvenile, or family drug courts, and team members must attend all training sessions in order to qualify for payment of workshop and travel expenses by DCPO. As a result of this improved access, DCPO was able to train more than 200 communities in planning a drug court in FY 2000 nearly a 300 percent increase from its previous training capacity. DCPO expects to train an additional 200 communities in FY 2001. During the past two years alone, DCPO has funded and directed more than 50 training workshops and provided more than 3,500 incidences of technical support and assistance to practitioners in the field. In addition to the drug court planning workshops, training is being developed to serve operational drug courts through a series of single-subject training programs on topics such as team building, management, cultural competency, and technology. Also, the Mentor Drug Court Network is a cadre of 25 experienced drug courts providing referrals that link interested communities with operational drug courts that have agreed to serve as mentors. Over 2,500 persons visited a mentor drug court in the past year; 1,900 of those visits were in conjunction with DCPO training programs. The Drug Court Clearinghouse, funded by DCPO and operated by American University, supports training and technical assistance efforts, and serves as a repository of statistics and research findings on drug courts. A sampling of the statistics and research findings released by the Clearinghouse in June 2000 indicate continued positive outcomes for drug court graduates and participants: Over 57,000 individuals have graduated from a drug court. More than 1,000 drug-free babies have been reported born to drug court participants. Over 90 percent of graduates retained or obtained employment. Over 4,500 parents with previous child support orders were reported to be current in their child support, and 3,500 parents were reported to have regained custody of their children, as a result of drug court participation. Determining the effectiveness of drug court programs is an integral part of DCPO's efforts. With DCPO funding, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is overseeing a national evaluation program examining the impact of 25 drug courts. The first phase of a retrospective evaluation of the Pensacola, Florida and Kansas City, Missouri drug courts was released in March 2000 and a similar evaluation of the Las Vegas, Nevada and Portland, Oregon drug courts was released the following month. Findings from these studies include: Participation in the Pensacola Drug Court reduced recidivism for new felonies from roughly 40 percent to nearly 12 percent within a 2-year follow-up period. Participation in the Kansas City Drug Court reduced recidivism for new felonies from approximately 50 percent to 35 percent within a 2-year follow-up period. 27 percent of Portland drug court clients were arrested for a new offense as compared to 46 percent for the comparison group. 39 percent of Las Vegas drug court clients were arrested for a new offense as compared to 66 percent for the comparison group. DCPO is also committed to helping state and local drug courts obtain outcome information such as recidivism, retention, and relapse, and to evaluate their drug court systems. Through state evaluation and management information systems grant awards, DCPO is currently funding 14 statewide evaluations totaling $3.5 million. DCPO will review and disseminate evaluation findings to the drug court field when the evaluations are completed. In addition, FY 2001 implementation grantees will be required to conduct an outcome evaluation, as well as process evaluation, of their drug court operations. The combination of funding, training, technical assistance, and evaluation now being implemented by the DCPO will help to maintain strong, effective drug courts throughout the country. Those drug courts can become major assets to public safety, improved operation of the nation's justice systems, and to achieving the goal of breaking the cycle of substance abuse and crime. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT FOR OFFENDERS OJP awarded grants totaling more than $57 million to all 50 states and eligible territories to continue providing substance abuse treatment for offenders at state and local correctional facilities. The grants were made under the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for State Prisoners program, which was originally authorized in he Crime Act of 1994, and has allowed OJP to provide more than $230 million to the states and territories since 1996. FOR MORE INFORMATION Visit the OJP Website at www.ojp.usdoj.gov, which includes general information about OJP and its bureaus and program offices, e-mail addresses, downloadable versions of application kits, and links to selected criminal justice Websites. The National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Website at www.ncjrs.org offers online versions of most OJP publications. OJP publications can also be ordered by calling the NCJRS toll-free number at 1-800/851-3420. The following publications are available from NCJRS: Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, 1998 (BJS) NCJ 180258 Drug Use, Testing, and Treatment in Jails (BJS) NCJ 179999 Methamphetamine Interagency Task Force Final Report (NIJ) NCJ 180155 Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) Program: 1999 Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and Juvenile Arrestees (NIJ) NCJ 181426 Promising Practices and Strategies to Reduce Alcohol and Substance Abuse Among American Indians and Alaska Natives (OJP) NCJ 183930 The Interrelationship Between the Use of Alcohol and Other Drugs (DCPO) NCJ 178940 Drug Testing in a Drug Court Environment: Common Issues to Address (DCPO) NCJ 181103 4 Combating Family Violence The nature and extent of violence within the family is tragic and alarming. Family violence intimate partner violence, child maltreatment, and elder abuse is still a significant problem that often results in an increase in the use of criminal and civil justice processes. However, progress is being made in addressing this problem. BUILDING KNOWLEDGE ABOUT VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN Violence against women by intimate partners fell by 21 percent from 1993 through 1998, according to the Intimate Partner Violence report released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) in May 2000. The data are from BJS's National Crime Victimization Survey, in which a nationally representative sample of men and women age 12 years old and older are interviewed twice a year. The report provides information on violence by intimates (current or former spouses, girlfriends, or boyfriends) and covers trends in intimate violence, characteristics of victims (race, sex, age, income, ethnicity, and whether the victims live in urban, suburban, or rural areas), type of crime (physical assault, verbal threats), and trends for reporting to police. Intimate victimizations measured include rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. Data on murder by intimates are also given. According to the report, an estimated 876,340 violent victimizations against women by intimate partners occurred during 1998 down from 1.1 million in 1993. In both 1993 and 1998 men were the victims of about 160,000 violent crimes by an intimate partner. On average each year from 1993-1998, 22 percent of all female victims of violence in the United States were attacked by an intimate partner, compared to 3 percent of all male violence victims. Other highlights from the Intimate Partner Violence report include:  Intimate partners committed fewer murders in 1996, 1997, or 1998 than in any other year since 1976;  Between 1976 and 1998 the number of male victims of intimate partner murder fell an average 4 percent per year, and the number of female victims fell an average 1 percent;  During 1998 women were the victims of intimate partner violence about five times more often than males, and;  There were 767 female victims of intimate partner violence per 100,000 women in 1998, compared to 146 male victims. According to data contained in the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Supplementary Homicide Reports:  about 11 percent of all murders in 1998 (1,830 homicides) were the result of intimate partner violence, compared to about 3,000 such homicides in 1976;  in 72 percent of the intimate partner homicides, the victim was female (1,320 incidents) compared to 50 percent in 1976;  the number of white female intimate partner homicide victims rose 3 percent between 1976 and 1998;  the number of black females killed by intimates fell 45 percent, black males fell 74 percent, and white males fell 44 percent;  between 1997 and 1998, the number of white females murdered by an intimate partner increased 15 percent;  between 1993 and 1998, women from 16 to 24 years old experienced the highest per capita rates of intimate victimization 19.6 per 1,000 women;  about half of the intimate partner violence against women was reported to police during the 6-year period; black women were more likely than other women to report such violence;  among victims of violence by a domestic partner, the percentage of women who reported the violence to police was higher in 1998 (59 percent) than in 1993 (48 percent);  half of the female intimate violence victims told the survey they were physically injured, and 37 percent of these victims sought professional medical treatment;  about 45 percent of the female intimate violence victims lived in households with children younger than 12 years old; and  among all U.S. households, 27 percent were homes of children younger than 12 years. However, it is not known to what extent young children in households with intimate violence witnessed that violence. Although the incidence of family violence has shown a decline, family violence continues to occur across the country. In July 2000, OJP's National Institute of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Service's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) released the report, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS). This study, which followed the release of the BJS Intimate Partner Violence report containing NCVS data, used a different method to collect the data. The NCVS asked respondents specifically about their experiences with crime, whereas the NVAWS was administered in the context of a personal safety survey. As a result, the surveys showed both similarities and differences in their findings. For example, both surveys indicate that women are much more likely to be victimized than men and are more likely to suffer injuries as a result of victimization. However, the surveys differ in the number of victimizations reported by survey respondents and the proportions of those reporting their victimization to the police. Both surveys are part of the Justice Department's efforts to develop multiple measures to improve understanding of violence between intimates and formulate more effective policy, including prevention and intervention tools. According to the NVAWS report, nearly 25 percent of surveyed women and about 7 percent of surveyed men said they have been raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse or partner at some time in their lives. The NVAWS compared victimization rates among women and men, specific racial and ethnic groups, and same-sex and opposite-sex couples. The NVAWS found the following:  violence perpetrated against women by intimates is often accompanied by emotionally abusive and controlling behavior;  women whose partners were jealous, controlling, or verbally abusive were significantly more likely to report being victimized;  verbal abuse was found to be the behavior most likely to predict intimate partner victimization;  rates of reported intimate partner violence varied significantly among women of different racial backgrounds;  African-American and American Indian/Alaska Native women and men tended to report higher rates of intimate partner violence than women and men from other backgrounds;  Asian/Pacific Islander women and men tended to report lower rates;  women experience more chronic and injurious physical assaults in intimate partner relationships than do men;  women who were physically assaulted by an intimate partner averaged 6.9 physical assaults by the same partner and men averaged 4.4 assaults; and  more than 40 percent of women who were assaulted experienced an injury during their most recent assault, compared to 20 percent of the men. ADDRESSING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN In October 2000, OJP's Violence Against Women Office (VAWO) awarded $131.6 million under the STOP (Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) Violence Against Women Formula Grant program to improve law enforcement, prosecution, and victim services responses to domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and five territories. Since the first grants were awarded in 1995, VAWO has awarded over $681 million in STOP funds and over $1.6 billion in overall VAWA grant programs since its legislative enactment in 1994. STOP funds are used for the training of law enforcement officers and prosecutors to more effectively identify and respond to domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking; to develop domestic violence units in police departments and prosecutors' offices; to enhance victim services; and to improve court responses to these crimes. Ninety-four jurisdictions across the country received a total of $28.9 million to continue their efforts in implementing policies that encourage or mandate the arrest of batterers and enforce protection orders. The VAWO Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program fosters collaboration among law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, and victim advocates to treat domestic violence as a serious crime. With the help of the Arrest Program, communities are sending a strong message to batterers that domestic violence will not be tolerated. In FY 2000, this program was reauthorized by the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act of 2000, further improving the enforcement of protection orders. VAWO awarded funds to 94 communities in 41 states and the District of Columbia to continue Arrest Program projects that began with FY 1998 and FY 1999 funds. In FY 2000, there were 176 jurisdictions participating in the Arrest Program, with at least one jurisdiction in almost every state receiving funding. In order to receive this funding, states, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribal governments have to certify that their laws or official policies encourage or mandate the arrest of domestic violence offenders when there is probable cause or when a protection order has been violated. Applicants also have to demonstrate that their laws and policies discourage the arrests of both offender and victim. Police officers, prosecutors, and victim advocates have been using Arrest Program funds to build on their efforts to hold offenders accountable and to improve victims' safety. While there is not yet an official evaluation of the program, communities have reported that the Arrest Program has made a real difference in their fight to eliminate violence against women. FY 2000 Arrest Program funds are being used to:  establish specialized units in police departments or prosecutors' offices that focus solely on domestic violence;  centralize responsibility for domestic violence cases in groups or units of probation and parole officers or judges;  educate criminal justice personnel about domestic violence and how to improve the handling of domestic violence cases;  develop, improve, and coordinate domestic violence computer tracking systems to ensure communication among police, prosecutors, and criminal and family courts; and  strengthen services for victims. FIGHTING FAMILY VIOLENCE IN TRIBAL AND RURAL COMMUNITIES Delivery of domestic violence services in rural areas can be difficult. Rural battered women and children face challenges, such as geographic isolation, not encountered by victims living in urban areas. The unique circumstances of rural communities also complicate the ability of the criminal justice system to investigate and prosecute domestic violence and child victimization cases, and they present barriers for victim service providers in identifying and assisting abused women and children. In FY 2000, VAWO awarded $23.9 million in funding under the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program to continue projects begun with FY 1998 grant funds. As a result, victims of domestic violence and their children living in 63 rural areas in 41 states will receive improved services. These grants will help improve the investigation and prosecution of domestic violence and child abuse cases and increase victims' access to advocacy and counseling in rural areas. This program assists criminal justice and social service staff to find creative solutions to some of the problems they face in rural communities. The Rural Program provides a unique opportunity for rural jurisdictions to address the needs of law enforcement, prosecution agencies, the courts, and nonprofit nongovernmental victim services agencies responding to domestic violence and child abuse cases. Rural jurisdictions are encouraged to create or enhance partnerships among criminal justice agencies, community organizations, health and social service providers, and child welfare agencies to implement prevention and education programs, as well as to develop innovative strategies to address the unique challenges of preventing and responding to domestic violence and child victimization in rural areas. States, Indian tribal governments, local governments in rural states, and other public and private entities in rural areas are eligible to apply. According to the VAWA statute. There are 19 states classified as rural. In non-rural states, the state may apply on behalf of one or more of its rural jurisdictions. The STOP Violence Against Women Program, authorized under VAWA, has allowed OJP to assist tribal justice agencies to partner with service providers that assist Indian victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. This collaboration promotes the safety and sovereignty of Native American women and also emphasizes holding offenders accountable. At a December 1999 domestic violence conference convened in Flagstaff, Arizona, over 100 tribal governments and Native American organizations from 25 states met to learn about the promising practices and programs addressing violence against Native American women. Two nonprofit Native American organizations, Mending the Sacred Hoop and Sacred Circle National Resource Center to End Violence Against Native Women, spearheaded the program as part of a VAWO technical assistance grant. Conference attendees, which included tribal grantees from VAWO's STOP Violence Against Indian Women program, discussed promising efforts within the areas of law enforcement, prosecution, tribal courts, tribal leadership, victim's advocacy, and coordination with county, state, and federal agencies, including United States Attorney's Offices. Tribal grantees also had the opportunity to visit the Hopi Tribe to see its community response to domestic violence. Assistant United States Attorneys from various districts, along with the Northwest Tribal Court Judges Association and the American Indian Law Center, assisted with training and presentations. Since the inception of the STOP Violence Against Indian Women Discretionary Grant program in 1995, VAWO has awarded over $36 million to tribal governments to strengthen the tribal justice system's response to violent crimes against Indian women. In FY 2000, VAWO awarded 82 Indian tribal governments $6.35 million in 23 states to continue projects begun in previous fiscal years that help Indian women who are victims of domestic and sexual abuse. These funds also assist law enforcement officers and prosecutors who investigate and prosecute cases involving violence against Indian women. In FY 2000, total funding for the STOP Violence Against Indian Women Discretionary Grant Program was $8.27 million. COMBATING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES Sexual assault and other violent crimes against women often go unreported on college campuses because appropriate services are not available to victims or there is a lack of coordination with the local criminal justice system. For the second year, VAWO awarded $6.8 million to higher education institutions under its FY 2000 Grants to Combat Violent Crimes Against Women on Campuses program. In order to receive funding, colleges and universities must:  develop partnerships with nonprofit victim advocacy organizations and local criminal justice or civil legal agencies;  train campus police to respond to sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking; and  establish a mandatory prevention and education program on violence against women for incoming students. Congress appropriated $10 million for the FY 2000 Grants to Combat Violent Crimes Against Women on Campuses program, which is authorized by the Higher Education Amendments of 1998. VAWA received 120 applications requesting $40.1 million and awarded 20 grants. The remaining funds were used for a national evaluation of the program and technical assistance. The Grants to Combat Violent Crimes Against Women on Campuses program was reauthorized as part of VAWA 2000. HELPING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS Many domestic violence victims do not have access to civil legal services, which can provide important avenues for victims to escape from circumstances that lead to domestic violence . Under the Legal Assistance to Victims Grant Program, in FY 2000 VAWO awarded 30 new grants totaling $7.7 million to law school legal clinics, victims and legal services organizations, domestic violence programs, and bar associations so that victims of domestic violence in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and three territories can receive legal assistance with matters related to the abuse. These funds provide legal assistance to victims of domestic violence to address their immediate concerns about physical safety and financial security, and enable them to escape the violence. Grantees are using the civil legal assistance funds to:  establish legal advocacy programs to represent victims in protection order, divorce or separation, spousal and child support, and custody matters;  help victims access benefits, health care, and housing; and  recruit and train attorneys who provide pro bono civil legal assistance to domestic violence victims. VAWO also awarded 56 grants totaling $15.9 million to continue projects begun with FY 1998 Legal Assistance grant funds. EFFORTS TO HELP CHILDREN EXPOSED TO VIOLENCE OJP also is working to assist children exposed to violence. Nine sites are sharing more than $6 million in grants during the first year of a five and a half year Safe Start Initiative to develop comprehensive efforts to help children exposed to violence. The sites are San Francisco, California; Bridgeport, Connecticut; Pinellas County, Florida; Chicago, Illinois; Washington County, Maine; Baltimore, Maryland; Rochester, New York; Chatham County, North Carolina; and Spokane, Washington. Each grantee receives approximately $670,000 per year from OJP's Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention. The Safe Start Initiative is part of the Children Exposed to Violence Initiative (CEVI), which was launched in December 1998. CEVI is a nationwide effort to seek new and effective means to prevent children's exposure to violence, to adopt innovative intervention efforts, and to find better ways to hold perpetrators accountable. The Safe Start Initiative is based in part on the Child Development Community Policing (CD-CP) pilot program developed by Yale University and the New Haven (Connecticut) Police Department with OJJDP support. The CD-CP program brings police officers and mental health professionals together through training, consultation, and support to provide constructive intervention for children who are victims and witnesses of violent crime. OJJDP, which administers the Safe Start Initiative, selected the 9 grantees after a review of the 208 applications. First-year funding is dedicated to a thorough review of existing community services and gaps that need to be filled. Based on this review, the grantees will plan a 5-year comprehensive response. The sites' plans will be based on coordination among law enforcement, mental health and medical professionals, and child protective service providers. The plans will include efforts such as child advocacy centers, home visitation programs, and domestic violence services for battered mothers whose children are at a high risk of exposure to violence. In addition to the nine Safe Start sites, OJJDP also awarded $670,000 to each of three sites Miami, Florida; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Newark, New Jersey for a 2-year period. These sites are focusing on specific improvements to services for children exposed to violence. The National Center for Children Exposed to Violence in New Haven is working with OJJDP to provide training and technical support to the Safe Start sites. As part of CEVI, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) released a video series and companion resource guide, Responding to Child Victims and Witnesses: Innovative Practices that Work. The Responding to Child Victims series includes three individualized videos, which highlight innovative practices for specific groups that work with child victims and witnesses law enforcement, prosecution, and the courts. A fourth video stresses the importance of partnerships among these groups, mental health providers, and community organizations to effectively respond to children who are exposed to violence. The companion resource guide offers discussion questions on how to address child victims. OVC also produced a video, Through My Eyes, which features the voices and artwork of children who have experienced or witnessed violence and comments from mental health and treatment providers on the effects of violence on children. BJA-funded Closed-Circuit Televising of Child Victims of Abuse (CCTV) grants were instrumental in securing portable videotape and closed-circuit television equipment that allowed the testimony of child victims at Children's Advocacy Centers to be televised and linked to courtrooms. CCTV grants purchased document cameras and electronic whiteboards that clarify the testimony of child victims through physical evidence such as drawings. The grants also funded the creation of forensic interview rooms in Children's Advocacy Centers and training for criminal justice professionals in interviewing child victims that examined legal requirements, minimizing trauma, and a range of issues related to children's memory. FOR MORE INFORMATION Visit the OJP Website at www.ojp.usdoj.gov, which includes general information about OJP and its bureaus and program offices, e-mail addresses, downloadable versions of application kits, and links to selected criminal justice Websites. The National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Website at www.ncjrs.org offers online versions of most OJP publications. OJP publications can also be ordered by calling the NCJRS toll-free number at 1-800/851-3420. The following publications are available from NCJRS: Intimate Partner Violence (BJS) NCJ 178247 Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NIJ/CDC) NCJ 181867 Child-Development Community Policing: Partnership in a Climate of Violence (OJJDP) NCJ 164380 Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants to Combat Violence Against Women - The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (NIJ/Urban Institute) Responding to Child Victims and Witnesses Series (Videotapes and Resource Guide) (OVC) NCJ 181501, 181504, 181505, 181500, 181506 Through My Eyes (Videotape) (OVC) NCJ 178229 5 Addressing Youth Crime Through comprehensive and coordinated efforts at the federal, state, and local levels, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) contributes to the reduction of youth violence. OJJDP continues to strengthen the nation's juvenile justice system and supports prevention and early intervention programs that are making a difference for young people and their communities. Juvenile violent crime is at its lowest level since 1987 and fell 30 percent from 1994 to 1998, according to the OJJDP bulletin, Juvenile Arrests 1998, which reports significant decreases for every violent crime, including a nearly 50 percent drop in the juvenile murder arrest rate from 1993 to 1998. The bulletin presents an analysis of the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports data, including arrest rates, which are the numbers of arrests for a specific crime per 100,000 youth ages 10 to 17. In addition to the sharp declines in violent crime committed by juveniles, there was also a 33 percent drop in the arrest rate for weapons law violations by youth between 1993 and 1998. Juvenile Arrests 1998 also showed drops in other juvenile arrest rates: Forcible rape down 25 percent from 1991 to 1998. Aggravated assault down 20 percent from 1994 to 1998. Robbery down 45 percent from 1995 to 1998 and now at its lowest level since 1980. Burglary down 22 percent from 1989 to 1998 and 50 percent from 1980 to 1998. Larceny-theft down 4 percent from 1989 to 1998. Motor vehicle theft down 39 percent from 1989 to 1998. Arson down 23 percent from 1994 to 1998 and now at its lowest level since 1990. In addition to the juvenile arrest data, the bulletin also presents an analysis of a new FBI study of 1998 data on family violence and the relationship between offenders and victims. Young people were victims in 58 percent of forcible rapes, with 15 percent of the victims under age 12. When rapes occurred between family members, juveniles were victims 73 percent of the time and 39 percent of the victims were under age 12. ENSURING SCHOOL SAFETY The majority of schools are very safe, and even those with higher levels of crime than the typical school may be safer generally than the communities in which they are located. However, no level of school violence is acceptable and reducing violence in schools and assuring that students can learn in a safe and nonthreatening environment is a national priority. Many programs have been implemented in the nation's schools in recent years to promote safe and healthy learning environments. While many schools also have incorporated school safety technologies within their overall school safety plans, little focused national attention has been given to the possible role of technology as an effective aid in creating safer and more secure schools. The NIJ-coordinated Safe Schools Technology Initiative encourages technology developers to work with schools, school administrators, and law enforcement agencies that serve schools to propose new or improved safety technologies that have promise for wide implementation. Under this initiative, NIJ sponsors technology research and development in the following areas: concealed weapons/ contraband detection, information technology, less-than-lethal, surveillance, training, and simulation. Technology assistance is the final piece of the Safe Schools Technology Initiative. NIJ invites practitioner participation in policy and liability assessment forums that bring together law enforcement and school safety officials wherever appropriate. NIJ also utilizes the resources of its National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center system to provide technology information, assistance, demonstrations, and other support to community law enforcement agencies and school security personnel. Research validates that a comprehensive community-wide and school-wide approach works best to promote healthy child development and to reduce school violence and drug use. The safety and well-being of our nation's children can be enhanced through the work of partnerships that bring together schools, families, and community organizations and offer a broad-based preventive approach to violence and drug use. The Safe Schools/Healthy Students Initiative (SSHS) supports urban, rural, suburban, and tribal school district efforts to link prevention activities and community-based services and to provide community-wide approaches to violence prevention and healthy child development. This collaboration among the U.S. Departments of Education, Justice, and Health and Human Services helps communities design and put into place comprehensive educational, mental health, social service, law enforcement, and juvenile justice services for youth. In April 2000, more than $41 million in SSHS grants were awarded to 23 communities to make schools safer, to foster children's healthy development, and to prevent aggressive and violent behavior and drug and alcohol use among the nation's youth. These grants funded 23 new 3-year projects, adding to the 54 SSHS projects funded last year. Research shows that preventing violence by building on children's strengths and promoting healthy development produces more positive results and is more cost-effective than strictly punitive measures. Grantees were urged to intervene with children early and to use programs that have been proven effective, such as life skills development, mentoring, conflict resolution, support for families, professional development for staff, truancy prevention, after-school activities, teen courts, and alternative education. Continuation grants for the initial 54 three-year projects funded in FY 1999 were awarded in summer 2000 with nearly $100 million from the three federal agencies. Projects had to demonstrate substantial progress to receive continued funding. REDUCING YOUTH VIOLENCE Most OJJDP funding is awarded directly to state governments to support local juvenile justice and delinquency prevention projects. In FY 2000, OJJDP awarded more than $70 million to all 50 states, territories, and the District of Columbia under the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Program formula grant program to support a variety of juvenile justice activities, from prevention to incarceration. Two states are not participating in the Formula Grants Program (Wyoming and South Dakota) due to non-compliance with the core protections of the OJJDP Act. In these states, funds were awarded to non-profit agencies working to help the state attain compliance and regain eligibility. OJJDP also awarded more than $38 million under the Title V program, which provides funds to states to implement comprehensive plans for delinquency prevention, and more than $8 million under the State Challenge Grants program, which provides funds to improve juvenile justice systems, including juvenile courts, juvenile corrections, and juvenile probation and aftercare programs. The Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants (JAIBG) program is helping to strengthen the juvenile justice system by encouraging states and local jurisdictions to implement accountability-based reforms. Under the program, OJJDP awards block grants to states, which in turn are passed through to local jurisdictions. JAIBG also supports program-related research, demonstration, evaluation, training, and technical assistance activities. During FY 2000, 56 eligible jurisdictions, which includes the 50 states, territories, and the District of Columbia, received JAIBG awards totaling $224 million. The awards can be used to fund programs in 12 purpose areas, including construction of juvenile detention and corrections facilities; development of accountability-based sanctions programs for juvenile offenders; hiring of prosecutors, public defenders, and judges to address drug, gang, and youth violence more effectively; and the establishment and maintenance of interagency information-sharing programs to promote more informed decision-making in the control, supervision, and treatment of juvenile offenders. To help states and local jurisdictions implement JAIBG programs, OJJDP provides training and technical assistance through Development Services Group, Inc. (DSG), of Bethesda, Maryland and 16 other training and technical assistance providers. During FY 2000, the training program featured six regional training sessions for state and local JAIBG grantees and included a 3-day program of 20 workshops and presentations customized to the needs of each region. OJJDP and BJS also established the JAIBG Technical Support Center to help states calculate the amount of JAIBG funds to be allocated to local jurisdictions. ABT Associates Inc., of Cambridge, Massachusetts, is conducting a 48-month national evaluation of the JAIBG program. In addition, OJJDP continued to publish a series of JAIBG Bulletins, which present up-to-date information about each of the JAIBG program purpose areas. DSG coordinates a JAIBG Training and Technical Assistance Alliance that is composed of 19 providers (members include the American Correctional Association, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, American Probation and Parole Association, and the National Institute of Corrections) that give various types of services to states and localities implementing JAIBG programs. Since its inception in 1998, the Alliance has provided technical assistance (TA) in response to more than 2,510 requests. The TA has focused primarily on operating juvenile detention facilities, developing accountability-based programs, providing training for prosecutors, improving juvenile courts and probation, and implementing drug testing programs. In support of the JAIBG program, the Alliance has conducted 365 training events, workshops, presentations, and videoconferences reaching more than 16,000 practitioners, including juvenile justice specialists, judges, probation officers, law enforcement officers, court and school personnel, prosecutors, and detention staff. Local needs assessments have led to effective training approaches, which are crucial to increasing accountability in juvenile justice systems nationwide. By directly training state and local practitioners on best practices in juvenile accountability and graduated sanctions, OJJDP is supporting state and local governments in increasing their juvenile justice systems' capacity to address accountability. While juvenile crime rates have dropped throughout the nation, they continue to rise in Indian country. In December 1999, 34 American Indian and Alaska Native tribal communities were awarded nearly $8 million in Tribal Youth Program grants to prevent and control juvenile delinquency and substance abuse. The Tribal Youth Program, new in FY 1999, is administered by OJJDP. Funds are being used to support accountability-based sanctions, training for juvenile court judges, strengthening family bonds, substance abuse counseling, and other programs. The Tribal Youth Program was created through the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for 1999 (P.L. 105-277) and is part of a joint Justice Department and Interior Department Indian Country Law Enforcement Improvement Initiative to address the need for improved law enforcement and administration of criminal and juvenile justice in Indian country. PREVENTING YOUTH CRIME As part of another federal interagency collaboration to prevent youth crime, the Attorney General led a discussion on preventing and controlling juvenile crime by girls as part of the quarterly meeting of the Federal Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The Federal Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is chaired by the Attorney General and includes the Secretaries of Education, Health and Human Services, and Housing and Urban Development and juvenile justice practitioners appointed by Congress and the President. Its primary function is to coordinate all federal juvenile delinquency prevention programs, all federal programs and activities that detain or care for unaccompanied juveniles, and all federal programs related to missing and exploited children. It also examines how programs can be better coordinated at different levels of government to serve at-risk youth, makes recommendations to Congress, and reviews the programs and practices of federal agencies to assess their compliance with the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. The focus of the quarterly meeting on March 29, 2001 centered around the latest research on gender trends in juvenile crime, effective prevention programs for troubled girls, and promising intervention programs for girls in the juvenile justice system. In July 2000, the Deputy Attorney General met with youth from across the country to hear their ideas about the causes of juvenile violence and promising solutions. The youth were part of the National Campaign to Stop Violence "Do the Write Thing Program," through which seventh/eighth grade students and National Guard Unit high school students write essays and poems about delinquency, crime, and victimization. OJJDP has supported this program since 1997. For millions of children, Boys & Girls Clubs are a safe haven from drugs and violence. Established in 1906, the Boys & Girls Clubs of America has grown from 53 clubs to a national network of more than 2,800 clubs, many in public housing, schools, churches, shopping malls, homeless shelters, orphanages, Native American reservations, and U.S. military bases around the world. Today, Boys & Girls Clubs serve more than 3.3 million youth, employ more that 10,000 full-time and 40,000 part-time youth professionals, and organize the efforts of more than 200,000 volunteers. Over the 8-year history of its partnership with Boys and Girls Clubs of America, BJA funds have directly assisted over 600,000 youth and helped to start at least 850 new clubs. BJA has also funded nearly 2,200 special awards to help local clubs enhance their curricula and provide outreach in their communities. In 2000, BJA funds helped to establish new clubs and expand the outreach of existing clubs in severely distressed communities, in Indian country, and in small, rural communities. BJA funds also supported a pilot initiative to help bridge the technology divide between affluent and disadvantaged youth through youth technology centers. Under another long-standing program, the award-winning public service ads of the BJA- funded National Citizen's Crime Prevention Campaign challenged Americans to invest in youth and do something about violence, crime, and illegal drug use. Campaign advertising appears on television, radio, billboards, and posters; in newspapers and magazines; and now through Website banners. In 1998, the Campaign reached more than 155 million households and raised an unprecedented $128 million in donated broadcast and print media support. These media campaigns generate approximately 25,000 calls per year to the Campaign's toll-free number and 22,000 per year to a toll-free number for teens. The Campaign is a cooperative effort of the National Crime Prevention Council, BJA, the Crime Prevention Coalition of America, and the Ad Council, Inc. RESPONDING TO YOUTH CRIME America is demanding solutions to increases in violent crime committed by its youth. The emerging consensus is that communities need to adopt comprehensive approaches to combat juvenile crime. In response, OJJDP developed the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders to provide a framework of strategic responses at the community, city, state, and national levels. OJJDP's Guide for Implementing the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders provides the necessary tools and program information to systematically and comprehensively address rising violent juvenile crime. Implementing the Comprehensive Strategy, however, requires a commitment to improving the juvenile justice system; providing appropriate prevention methods to children, families, and communities; and intervening in the lives of first-time offenders with structured programs and services. The Comprehensive Strategy and the Guide are important resources for communities interested in identifying and implementing solutions to growing juvenile violence through a more effective juvenile justice system. States using the Comprehensive Strategy include: Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Texas. The Children's Initiative in San Diego, California, is also participating as a pilot site. Another OJJDP bulletin, The Comprehensive Strategy: Lessons Learned From the Pilot Sites, released in March 2000, found that leadership, engaging the media, and training a broad range of community participants are critical elements in establishing comprehensive, community- wide efforts to combat juvenile violence. Community support and the ability to maximize existing resources are other critical factors to ensure a successful youth crime-fighting strategy. The bulletin describes the efforts of three sites Lee County, Florida; Duval County, Florida; and San Diego, California that applied the principles of OJJDP's Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. The strategy, which OJJDP initially published in 1993, is based on six key principles: Strengthening families. Supporting core social institutions such as schools, churches, and other youth- serving organizations. Providing prevention programs that offer positive opportunities for troubled youth. Intervening early at the first signs of trouble to keep youth from moving toward more serious and violent crimes. Establishing accountability-based sanctions that provide for public safety while also providing treatment for young people in the juvenile justice system. Identifying and controlling the small group of serious, violent, and chronic offenders who account for most violent juvenile crime. OJJDP selected the three strategy pilot sites in 1993 and provided training and technical assistance to help them develop strategic plans to meet their needs.