Steering committee proposes Justice Project Data Coordination Work Group to centralize fragmented data

At a steering committee meeting of the Justice Implementation Project task force, members proposed creating a short-term Justice Project Data Coordination Work Group to pull together the county's fragmented data efforts and prepare a coordinated package for the county council within roughly three months.

Peter, a steering member who led the item, said the current situation is "fragmented" and proposed "bringing all of our data efforts within the IPRTF into one work group" to inventory existing projects, standardize definitions and involve data owners so the work can be presented to county council. He framed the proposal as a focused, time-limited effort with an explicit end goal: a council presentation supported by a coalesced data strategy.

Supporters said the work is urgent because several new initiatives are being built now. Bertie pointed to recent meetings where new diversion case management systems and a jail medical-records contract were being negotiated and said early coordination would allow the task force to define required fields up front. She also cited a juvenile recidivism figure discussed in a child advisory group: "70 percent of juveniles detained in juvenile detention went on to be involved as adults in the criminal justice system," and argued that prevention planning should include youth perspectives.

Several members flagged practical constraints. Satpal urged that departmental willingness to share data (public defender, prosecutor, sheriff, corrections, health) must be established before taking a package to council and asked for clarity on benefits and funding. Dean said the "real limiting factor is staff support to do the work," recommending short-term consulting or staffing arrangements—such as using previous consultants who helped develop an interim dashboard—to provide scheduling, research and dashboard support at the pace the group is proposing.

Members debated whether the index committee should perform the work. Barry noted the index committee was created for coordination, but several participants said the index committee's existing cadence (meeting every other month) is too slow for the reported three-month goal and that a narrowly chartered, short-term work group would allow a faster, outcome-oriented effort while drawing volunteers from existing bodies.

Next steps recorded in the meeting: Peter said he had drafted a memo based on focused questions and planned to share it with Satpal and other volunteers as a starting document; members agreed the proposal should be circulated and discussed at the next IPRTF meeting and that the interim data dashboard discussion at the upcoming JPOP meeting would supply helpful information on staff time and what the dashboard can yield. No formal motion or vote occurred during the steering meeting.

The steering committee encouraged short, public summaries of any rapid job-group meetings so the full task force can stay informed; members also asked staff to add a discussion of the proposed work group to the February steering and IPRTF agendas. The meeting adjourned without a formal vote.