20250121-113748-03

Ripening States and Projects
Monthly Updates:
September, the CSG Justice Center remained focused on general ripening activities related to planning for follow-up engagements that will build on connections made at the National Summit to Advance States' Criminal Justice Priorities in December 2023. In August, the CSG Justice Center of the mailed hard copies of data snapshots that were originally created and distributed at the National Summit to a comprehensive contact list of legislative and gubernatorial leaders in all 50 states. To date, we have held conversations with 120 recipients.
West Virginia
CSG Justice Center staff continued to follow-up with key stakeholders in West Virginia, including the speaker of the house and senate president to discuss the executive order to form the working group. Right on Crime, an organization that continues to support stakeholder engagement and guidance, particularly around obtaining an Executive Order to create the working group., met with legislative leadership staff to discuss the status of the executive order and provided an update that the senate resident and speaker are apologetic about the delay and intend to move the executive order forward.
CSG Justice Center staff met with the chief of staff for the WV attorney general (AG), who is projected to be the next governor in West Virginia, shared that the AG will not be responding to requests until after the election in November.
CSG Justice Center staff reached out to leadership at the County Commissioners' Association of West Virginia (CCAWV) to coordinate a meeting and are waiting for a response. Staff also met with key behavioral health stakeholders, including the West Virginia Office of Drug Control Policy and PSIMed, to learn more about the behavioral health landscape and opportunities in the state.
CSG Justice Center staff coordinated a signed data use agreement with the West Virginia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (WVDCR) and continued the process of cleaning data including identifying missing data and determining follow up questions for the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). CSG Justice Center Staff also met with the West Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute (WVCTSI) to discuss their resource mapping and data dashboards. WVCSTI agreed to provide the CSG Justice Center with the aggregate data used for the resource map and data dashboard. When we follow up every month, are we doing the same thing? Like are we sending them emails every month until we get a response?
Yes, the follow-up is to engage and keep a warm relationship in case we can offer any services that lead to a long-term ripening project.

JAC States and Projects
Monthly Updates:
North Carolina
In September, the CSG Justice Center began drafting and refining the preliminary findings presentation for North Carolina legislators, incorporating insights from the focus groups and analysis of 120 Department of Adult Corrections (DAC) data sets to assess prison trends and practice changes. CSG Justice Center staff also continued revising several documents, including a focus group summary, a one-pager, and a work plan. Additionally, CSG Justice Center staff collaborated with North Carolina's DAC to engage legislators and gauge interest in future JRI initiatives during an onsite visit. On September 9 -12, the CSG Justice Center staff traveled to North Carolina to meet with DAC staff and with House Justice Public Safety members to discuss current project goals and gauge interest in future JRI work.
Nebraska
CSG Justice Center staff from the CSG Justice Center conducted an in-person site visit with the Nebraska Board of Parole (NBOP) and the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services (NDCS) in Lincoln and Omaha. The visit, which took place from September 16-20, included observing NBOP hearings, attending parole school sessions, engaging in meetings with NBOP personnel, reviewing NDCS institutional programming, and discussing matters with NDCS institutional staff. This visit built on insights from a previous project with Nebraska's stakeholders and was part of the collaboration on the JRI JAC project, allowing CSG Justice Center staff to gather valuable information on revocation processes, condition setting, and the use of electronic monitoring (EM) and transitional housing.
The team observed how NBOP allocates significant resources to these areas in parole supervision. Key takeaways highlighted the need for a more structured approach to parole and violation hearings, focusing on risk factors and timely re-release options. Additionally, the visit underscored the importance of improving communication between the Board and NDCS, providing more training for the Board on NDCS programs, and developing joint policies for special conditions like economic mobility and transitional housing. Clearer guidelines for parole plan recommendations were also recommended.
Hawaii
CSG Justice Center staff virtually attended the final HCR 23 Task Force meeting on September 12 and partnered partnered with the CJRI Director in the State of Hawaii Judiciary to present findings from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR) and Hawaii Parole Authority (HPA) data collection. Throughout the month, the team worked closely with key state leaders to refine the data findings presentation and discuss potential recommendations for the task force.
The presentation to the HCR 23 Task Force covered the final data analysis findings from DCR and HPA data collection, and summarized key discussions from previous meetings on sentencing systems and stakeholder roles, while highlighting data trends from FY 2006 to FY 2024, which showed an increase in Level III minimum terms, particularly for Felony A and B offenses. Additionally, the presentation explored opportunities to enhance public safety and support reintegration through CSG Justice Center initiatives such as JRI and Reentry 2030.
Furthermore, the CSG Justice Center staff maintained ongoing communication with all relevant stakeholders in Colorado, Hawaii, Nebraska, and North Carolina to ensure transparency, collaboration, and successful implementation of the ongoing JAC project engagement.
The team continued to call and email legislators and stakeholders to drive conversations around the JAC, including looking to understand the criminal justice system dynamics, the government/political dynamics, the landscape of advocates, and the interplay of the unique relationships of the stakeholders.