Committee narrows success measures for justice projects; plan to disaggregate outcomes by behavioral‑health status and race

Julia (Village Reach), the consultant leading the performance measurement work for the justice project, told the Justice Project Oversight and Planning Committee on April 7 that she had revised outcome measures and would produce a draft evaluation plan for committee review in April and a data‑source work phase in May.

Julia said the committee had previously discussed four key outcome measures focused on people with serious mental illness; she reported that feedback from JPOP and the Index committee suggested the measures be broadened to encompass behavioral health more generally — including substance use and co‑occurring disorders — and to plan to disaggregate metrics by race and ethnicity to surface inequities.

She framed the measurement effort within a results‑based accountability approach: for each project Julia is asking (1) who is the client, (2) what are the activities and (3) what does success look like. Those project‑level questions inform performance metrics for “how much did we do” and “how well did we do it,” while the pre‑specified outcome measures address “is anyone better off.”

Julia presented a theory‑of‑change slide that ties five strategies, the 15 implementation projects, definitions of success and four outcome measures to intended community‑level impacts: increased health and increased safety. She said the JPOP‑focused strategy differs from other strategies because JPOP’s role is oversight, transparency and accountability rather than direct service delivery.

Committee members emphasized accountability to the community and the importance of diverse stakeholder participation in oversight, noting that success includes not only completed milestones but that the group creates shared understanding, surfaces constraints, aligns actors and produces annual and progress reports that reflect voter expectations. Members suggested including measures such as reduction in recidivism, timely reporting and evidence that funds are being used consistent with the implementation plan.

Julia said next steps are to refine project‑level measures based on stakeholder interviews, produce a draft evaluation/performance measurement plan (targeted for April), and then dig into data sources and feasibility in May to identify which metrics can be measured now and which will require new data collection. She said the draft plan will be open for feedback and that Village Reach will work to reconcile goals with available data.

Ending: Julia said the draft evaluation plan will be circulated for feedback in April, and that May work will focus on available data versus measurement goals so the committee can understand what can be reported and what will need new data collection or systems changes.