NCJ Number
79040
Date Published
1981
Length
371 pages
Annotation
This study examined 12 agencies in the executive branch of Minnesota's State government that had criminal justice responsibilities to identify problem areas within their administrative and support services and recommend improvements to create a more integrated criminal justice system.
Abstract
Following a brief review of government reorganizations in Minnesota, this report traces the history of the Justice System Improvement Study (JSIS) which received its funding from the State legislature and the LEAA in late 1979. The JSIS examined the following agencies: Attorney General's Office, Board of Pardons, Department of Corrections, Corrections Board, County Attorneys Council, Crime Victims Reparations Board, Sentencing Guidelines Commission, Ombudsman for Corrections, Peace Officer Standards and Training Board, the Department of Public Safety, and the State Public Defender. Managers in each agency were interviewed using a structured questionnaire relating to their support and administrative functions. Agency literature, legislation, and budget documents were also examined. The explanation of the project's research design focuses on dimensional activity analysis, the method developed for analyzing complex public organizations. Key elements considered in this approach include an activity's impact, control over decisionmaking, control over resources, priority given to an activity, and authority for an activity. Also assessed are an activity's compliance with agency objectives and the appropriateness of the activity's place in the organization. Separate sections then describe the 12 agencies studied with respect to powers, duties, responsibilities, expenditures, organizational structure, problem areas, and corrective recommendations. A proposal for an integrated criminal justice training bureau is outlined, and executive branch criminal justice expenditures are analyzed. Recommendations are presented which emphasize the need for systemwide long-range planning under the leadership of the Criminal Justice Council and for enhanced coordination in the areas of data processing and training. Organizational changes are also suggested. Charts, a glossary, and approximately 90 references are included.