U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Recovery Act: Department of Justice Could Better Assess Justice Assistance Grant Program Impact

NCJ Number
232684
Date Published
October 2010
Length
82 pages
Annotation
This report presents the methodology and findings of an assessment of management and performance under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), under which the U.S. Justice Department's (DOJ's) Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) awarded nearly $2 billion in 4-year Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) funds to State and local governments for criminal justice activities.
Abstract
The 14 recipient States reviewed for this assessment received approximately $1 billion. Overall, approximately $270 million (26 percent of Recovery Act JAG funds) had been reported expended as of June 30, 2010, but the expenditure rates of funds awarded through State administering agencies (SAAs) showed considerable variation, ranging from 5 to 41 percent of SAA's total awards. The funds were spent mostly for law enforcement and corrections, including equipment purchases and the hiring or retaining of personnel. Officials in all 14 States and 19 percent of localities in the assessment sample (12 of 62) reported that without Recovery Act JAG funding, support for certain ongoing local law enforcement programs or activities would have been eliminated or cut. State officials cited challenges in meeting required quarterly Recovery Act reporting time frames, due to work demands and personnel shortages. States reported sharing information and promising practices related to JAG activities in a variety of ways; DOJ encouraged such sharing through a number of programs. DOJ established new performance measures for assessing the Recovery Act JAG program and is working to refine them; however, these measures lack key attributes of successful performance assessment systems the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has previously identified, such as clarity, reliability, a linkage to strategic or programmatic goals, and objectivity and measurability of targets. Revisions are recommended. 10 tables, 6 figures, and 8 appendixes with supplementary information