SAA Taskforce Performance Measures: A Look At Metrics Used to Evaluate MJTFs

(Click here to download a PDF version of this report)

In response to member requests, the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA) compiled performance metrics used by State Administrating Agencies (SAAs) to monitor the activities of state- and grant-funded multi-jurisdictional taskforces (MJTF). These performance measures were gathered in an effort to collect and disseminate common, promising and innovative measures being used by SAAs. As part of this work, NCJA conducted a content analysis of the performance measures found in MJTF state and grant reporting forms. This analysis is presented to help the field understand the current state of MJTF performance measurement and to provide SAAs with a peer comparison and the opportunity to learn from others in the field.

States spend an average of $7.1 million a day keeping youth in residential facilities, according to estimates from a 2009 Justice Policy Institute study. These facilities are often expensive and vary greatly in quality, rehabilitative methodology and service provision. In many states, reliance on residential treatment facilities and other out of home placements have impacted juvenile justice agencies ability to support or enhance other community based alternatives.

Click here to view or print this report in PDF format.

Assessment Scope

Since 2009, the National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA), with support from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), has provided training and technical assistance (TTA) in strategic planning to State Criminal Justice Administering Agencies (SAAs) in 20 states, 2 territories, and the District of Columbia. TTA services have been tailored to the needs, planning scopes, and timelines established by SAAs.

As state administrating agencies work to determine which elements of their criminal justice system are most in need of limited Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne JAG) dollars, they often rely on their state and local partners for data and information. In states with highly centralized criminal justice systems, the process of strategic planning and resource allocation can often be done with representation from fewer agencies. Conversely, in states where the locality is responsible for the majority of criminal justice administration, strategic planning requires input and work from many local planning entities. Whether called criminal justice coordinating councils, boards, or committees these entities are important partners and can provide valuable insight on local level needs or trends.