Posted: August 7th, 2023

Directive on Enhancing Administrative Practices in Criminal Justice

Administrative Leadership Directive. Leaders in criminal justice must remain up to date on administrative practices at the local, state, and federal levels. Each level and branch of criminal justice involves different administrative processes and considerations depending on the issue and the needs of the agency and the public.

Imagine that you are a team leader at an agency and have been asked to address the administration of a particular issue in criminal justice. You will investigate the issue and the administrative practices being used. As the team’s leader, determine the agency’s administrative response to such cases going forward. For this assessment, you will prepare a directive to share with your team on best practices in administration for the chosen issue.

Select one of the following criminal justice specializations at the federal, state, or local level as your focus for this assessment:

Community policing and law enforcement practices
De-escalation and use of force
Detention conditions
Alternatives to incarceration
Parole and probation
Rehabilitation and reintegration
Cybercrime
Juvenile justice
Global or international issues (e.g., border patrols, customs, FDA checkpoints, immigration/ICE, trafficking, terrorism)
Crime trends and social issues related to justice for specific populations:
Poverty
Immigration
Mental health conditions, disabilities, and vulnerable adults
Public health (e.g., COVID-19, HIV)
Missing or exploited children
Age
Sex and gender
Race and ethnicity
Another topic approved by your faculty member
Search the University Library and other reputable resources for current trends and policy issues related to the selected specialization. Familiarize yourself with the administrative practices and leadership decisions involved with managing these kinds of situations.

Select at least 2 cases at any level that have informed policy for the criminal justice specialty you selected.

Assessment Deliverable
Write a 1,400- to 1,750-word directive in which you analyze criminal justice administrative practices for a specific issue and recommend strategies and policies that could be applied in a federal, state, or local criminal justice organization. Include the following in your directive:

Summarize lessons learned from the administrative practices used in each selected case. Analyze the administrative strategies, practices, and policies within the cases, as well as any issues you observe (e.g., gaps in information, procedural issues):
Describe any issues that the teams working these cases might have encountered and the impacts of those issues.
Describe similarities and differences between the cases and compare the lessons learned from each case about administrative practices and leadership decisions.
Explain why the outcome of each case is important for the organization to consider when developing action plans for handling this issue.
Determine a current trend in criminal justice administration related to the selected cases. Explain the extent to which the trend is influencing public policy. Predict potential issues related to the trend that might affect public policy, if any.
Explain the administrative procedures that are currently in place to address policy issues. Explain the role and duties of criminal justice leaders in establishing accountability and consistency in administrative practices.
Recommend administrative practices that would better serve the public at the selected level. Explain the potential benefit of making your recommended changes to these administrative practices. Decide how your agency should apply the recommended administrative practices and give directions to the task force on how to implement them in the future.
Cite at least 4 sources to support your assessment: at least 1 for each example case study and at least 2 peer-reviewed sources.

Format all citations and references according to APA guidelines.

Submit your assessment.

See the links below to support the assignment.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/president…

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120

Directive on Enhancing Administrative Practices in Criminal Justice: A Focus on Detention Conditions

The landscape of criminal justice administration is a complex tapestry, woven with distinct administrative processes at the local, state, and federal levels. Among the diverse realms within the criminal justice system, one critical facet is the management of detention conditions. Ensuring humane, just, and constitutional conditions for incarcerated individuals is an indispensable responsibility that demands rigorous administrative practices. In response to this imperative, this directive embarks on a comprehensive analysis of detention conditions administrative practices and outlines strategies for improvement.

Lessons Learned from Selected Cases

Two cases stand as paragons in shaping policy concerning detention conditions: the landmark case of Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009) and the highly impactful Brown v. Plata (2011). In Iqbal, the Supreme Court stressed the significance of individualized determinations in holding government officials accountable for alleged constitutional violations. This lesson underscores the imperative for meticulous documentation and accountability measures within detention facilities.

Similarly, the Brown v. Plata case exemplifies the broader impact of overcrowded and inhumane conditions on detainees. The court ruled that overcrowding within California’s prison system amounted to cruel and unusual punishment, necessitating substantial reforms. This case underscores the importance of addressing systemic issues that undermine detainees’ rights.

Encountered Issues and Impacts

Detention condition administrative teams often encounter challenges related to funding constraints, inadequate staff, and infrastructure deficiencies. These issues manifest as compromised safety, mental health deterioration, and heightened tensions among detainees. Such challenges not only compromise the welfare of incarcerated individuals but also jeopardize the overall integrity of the criminal justice system.

Comparative Analysis and Lessons

A comparative analysis of the two cases reveals both parallels and disparities in administrative practices. While Iqbal emphasizes the need for individualized accountability, Brown v. Plata underscores the systemic implications of detention conditions. The intersection of these cases underscores the holistic nature of detention conditions administration, encompassing both individual and systemic considerations.

Importance for Organizational Action Plans

The outcomes of these cases resonate profoundly within criminal justice organizations, necessitating the development of comprehensive action plans. Incorporating the lessons from Iqbal, agencies must implement stringent record-keeping mechanisms and establish clear lines of responsibility. Brown v. Plata underscores the significance of systemic reform, compelling organizations to address overcrowding, resource deficits, and humane treatment.

Current Trends and Influences on Public Policy

A prevailing trend in criminal justice administration is the growing emphasis on restorative justice and rehabilitation. This trend seeks to counteract the punitive nature of detention by focusing on rehabilitation and reintegration. While influencing public policy in positive ways, it raises concerns about potential compromises to public safety and the challenge of measuring rehabilitation outcomes accurately.

Role of Administrative Procedures and Leadership Accountability

Administrative procedures are the bedrock of effective detention conditions management. These procedures encompass regular facility assessments, transparent reporting, and collaboration with external oversight bodies. Criminal justice leaders bear the responsibility of instilling a culture of accountability and consistency, both within their own agencies and in partnership with external stakeholders.

Recommended Administrative Practices

To elevate detention conditions administration, the following practices are recommended:

Individualized Assessments: Establish a standardized process for individualized assessments, ensuring that each detainee’s needs and circumstances are considered.

Data-Driven Decisions: Utilize data analytics to identify trends and address potential issues promptly, thereby enhancing facility management.

Collaborative Oversight: Foster collaboration with independent oversight bodies, ensuring external accountability and transparency.

Rehabilitative Focus: Implement rehabilitative programs tailored to individual needs, promoting reintegration and minimizing recidivism.

Implementation and Benefit

The adoption of these recommended practices promises multifaceted benefits. Enhanced accountability and transparency will bolster public trust, while rehabilitative programs will contribute to safer communities and reduced rates of reoffending. Moreover, collaboration with external oversight bodies will augment oversight efficacy and reduce the potential for abuse.

Conclusion

The administration of detention conditions in criminal justice demands the highest standard of expertise and dedication. By learning from pivotal cases, acknowledging encountered challenges, and embracing prevailing trends, agencies can foster a transformative paradigm shift. This directive outlines a roadmap for elevating administrative practices and nurturing a criminal justice system that embodies justice, accountability, and compassion.

References

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009).
Brown v. Plata, 563 U.S. 493 (2011).
Bales, W. D., & Mann, K. (2016). Overcrowded: The Messy Politics of CA Corrections. University of California Press.
Saldaña, J. (2020). The Process of Punishment: Theorizing Restorative Justice. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(7), 777-800.

Order | Check Discount