Criminal Justice Coordinating Council 
State of Georgia's 2004 Edward Byrne Memorial Drug Control and System Improvement Program Strategy 
L. Gale Buckner Executive Director 
 
 I. Executive Summary 
With the influx of drugs into the United States and the looming crack cocaine epidemic of the early 1980's, President Ronald Reagan initiated his famous "War on Drugs" (President Richard Nixon first coined the phrase in 1972). State and local governments were in need of additional resources, which were currently unavailable to them. Congress was faced with a daunting task. Our elected representatives set out to develop a new law, which would serve to assist states and local governments in their efforts to combat the trafficking, distribution, sale, and use of illegal drugs. Enter, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988. 
The State of Georgia continues to be faced with the ever-growing problem of trying to control drug and violent crime. From a law enforcement perspective, each agency's overall goal is to protect and serve its citizens. Drug and violent crime make achieving that goal extremely challenging. In FY 2003, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (Council), on behalf of the State of Georgia, received $13,458,353 in Byrne funding. Out of the 29 Byrne Purpose Areas to choose from, eleven areas were selected in which to allocate funding. Those eleven purpose areas focus on six components of the criminal justice system. They are as follows: 
 Law Enforcement  Corrections  Courts  Juvenile Justice  Prevention, Education, and Treatment  Criminal Justice Records Improvement 
The State's priorities were identified and their correlation to the to the National Drug Control Strategy has been noted. This strategy has been compiled by the Council to serve as a comprehensive blueprint of the efforts that have been undertaken in this state, as well as the projected new and continuation efforts to commence over the next four years. Interagency collaboration, community engagements, statewide and national ties allow Georgia to remain connected to the people it serves and allows the Council to continue developing promising strategies to address our states continuing battle against drug and violent crime. 
2 
 
 Introduction 
The 2004 Georgia Strategy for Drug Control and Violent Crime is submitted to the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) in conformance with provisions of federal law (42 U.S.C. 3753(a)(1) promulgated to implement the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program authorized by Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3711, et seq., as amended. 
Consistent with the State's goal of an increased public awareness of the criminal justice system, affected agencies and interested persons are encouraged to review this document to understand and appreciate the State's strategy for drug and violent crime control programs that improve the functioning of Georgia's criminal justice system. 
Description 
The State currently ranks tenth in population among the states. The total estimated population in 2003 was 8,684,715 a 34% increase over the 1990 population of 6,478,216. For a variety of reasons, Georgia continues to experience the highest population growth rate in the South, and one of the highest rates in the nation. 
From the 1970s through the 1990s, Georgia's cities, especially Atlanta, experienced significant growth. There are eight Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) within the state of Georgia. The most populated MSA is the metropolitan Atlanta area with over 4 million persons. Atlanta serves as a major economic center for the South and is the state capital. 
The interstate highway system in Georgia includes three major north-south arteries, I-75, I-85, and I-95 and an east-west route, I-20. Additionally, I-16 links Macon, in the center of the State with Savannah, a port city on the Atlantic Ocean. One of the busiest commercial airports in the nation is Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, which is located in south metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia. Other metropolitan areas are also serviced by commercial air carriers and the State is the site of many general aviation airports and private airstrips. 
3 
 
 Historically, the State has maintained a significant railway system, and two major north-south lines support considerable freight movement and passenger service. 
The Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council 
Declaring it to be "the public policy of Georgia to provide the necessary leadership to coordinate the major components of the criminal justice system by establishing a state-wide coordinating body which represents all components and all levels of the criminal justice system," in 1981 the General Assembly of Georgia created the Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (Ga. L. 1981, pp. 1306-1311). 
The Council has developed into an agency with collateral responsibility for the administration of both state and federal criminal justice grant programs. These include the Edward Byrne Memorial Formula Grant Program, the Victims of Crime Act Grant Program, Violence Against Women Act Grant Program, the State Crime Victims Compensation Program, the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program, the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant, the Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Program, the Paul Coverdell National Forensic Sciences Improvement Act Grant, the Project Safe Neighborhoods Program, the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Act Grant, the State Victims Assistance Academy, as well and the Serious and Violent Offender Re-entry Initiative. It also holds an annual Statewide Crime Victims Training Conference. 
Edward Byrne Memorial State And Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program 
The Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program ("Byrne Program"), established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690, Title VI, Subtitle C) and implemented by the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program authorized by Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3711, et seq., as amended, is administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). 
This federal grant program places emphasis on violent and drug-related crime and serious offenders and on fostering multijurisdictional and multi-State efforts to support national drugcontrol priorities, and assists the states and units of local government in carrying out specific programs that offer a high probability of improving the functioning of the criminal justice system. 
4 
 
 Both discretionary and formula grant funds are used to implement programs that carry out 29 legislatively authorized purposes, including multijurisdictional task force programs. FY2004 marks the 16th year of federal funding through the Byrne program. The Bureau of Justice Assistance, which manages a discretionary grant program that awards funds directly to public and private agencies and private nonprofit organizations and a formula grant program, designed as a working partnership among federal, state, and local governments, that awards funds to the States, which in turn make "sub-awards" (or sub-grants) to State and local units of government for the purposes of enforcing state and local laws that establish offenses similar to crimes enumerated in the Federal Controlled Substances Act; improving the functioning of the criminal justice system; and, emphasizing violent crime and serious offenders. During FY 2003, $631 million was disbursed to the states, $481 million of which was for formula grants and $149 million for discretionary grants. 
Byrne Program Administrating Agency 
In Georgia, the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council has been designated by the Governor to be the State Administrative Agency (SAA) for purposes of the Byrne Program. SAA operations in Georgia are supported, in part, by administrative funds that originate from the federal grant. 
The Council operates as a medium for the development and execution of Statewide approaches to the prevention of violence and drug abuse. In this capacity, it identifies the nature and scope of crime, recommends policies intended to marshal the State's resources in response to crime, and coordinates Statewide and community strategies that are implemented to address crime problems. 
Conscious of the importance of public safety, the Council promotes safe and healthy Georgia communities by convening diverse groups of affected persons, facilitating the productive exchanges of ideas on crime control, and providing the funds necessary to implement successful projects and promising prototype programs. 
5 
 
 II. Data and Analysis 
Strategy Requirements under Federal Legislation The Multi-year Strategy 
BJA has determined that requiring a comprehensive Statewide Strategy once every four years appropriately accommodates the overall goals of the Byrne Formula Grant Program. This schedule provides the State with more flexibility, while redirecting resources toward making the overall process more accountable. 
Drugs, crime, and weaknesses in the justice system infrastructure are long-term problems; to address them effectively, the States need a planning process that is continuous and comprehensive in order to achieve expected results over a number of years. Such planning would establish and periodically review priorities addressed to long-term goals and ensure stable program funding for some period. The move to a 4-year cycle, promotes the concept of ongoing strategic planning, review, and modification. 
At the core of this comprehensive strategy is a direct linkage between priorities and programs funded. Priorities are identified and established by the SAA and its advisors based on the analysis of the problems and resource needs of the State. These priorities establish the framework of the implementation plan, which includes the identification of specific continued and new programs that will be funded to address these priorities. 
Georgia Statewide Strategy 2004 
The new strategy presented in this report is reflective of Georgia's efforts to remain responsive to the changing environment in which the State's criminal justice system operates. Planning and change management are important parts of leadership; as conditions change, organizations that coordinate multi-agency initiatives must keep pace with changes in their environment. Striving for continuous improvement, the Council undertook to develop a strategy to battle drugs and violent crime that builds and improves on the work the State has done over the last four years. 
A key element of the strategy is a partnership of key agencies and persons. Demonstrating a commitment to such a partnership, the Council engaged affected stakeholders in 
6 
 
 a meaningful way, gathering their input on important issues, thus increasing their ownership of the 
strategy. In 2003, the Council held a series of public forums across the state to solicit information 
about pressing issues facing Georgia's criminal and juvenile justice systems. In these meetings, 
stakeholders raised a number of important policy issues deserving emphasis in the 2004 Strategy. 
These include, for example, alternatives to incarceration (prison and jail), domestic violence 
programs, continued funding of drug task forces, and additional drug and alcohol treatment 
programs. 
In addition to focus groups with stakeholders, the Council also collected and analyzed criminal 
justice indicators available from various sources. These sources include the following: 
 Georgia Uniform Crime Report (incident and arrest data, 1980-2002)  Georgia Department of Corrections  U.S. Bureau of Census  Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles  Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice  Department of Community Affairs (County Jail Reports)  Georgia Office of Planning and Budget 
Building on the strategic priorities identified by the 2000 Strategy, the Council solicited the 
identification of, and solutions to, drug and violent crime as well as substance abuse and 
community safety issues throughout the State. The new strategy will be inclusive of a four year 
period covering years 2004-2007, and will be monitored and updated annually to ensure that 
targets are met and new problems adequately addressed. Another comprehensive Statewide 
Strategy is planned for 2008. 
System Overview 
In order to fully appreciate Georgia's methods for addressing its multi-year strategy and the 
problems it confronts, it is necessary to understand that Georgia's criminal justice system is large 
and diverse. 
 In each of Georgia's 159 counties, the Sheriff serves as the chief law enforcement officer, although primary law enforcement responsibilities have been assumed by county police departments in many counties. Hundreds of municipal, county, university, transit, and special purpose police departments in the State are responsible for the protection of the public, investigation of crimes, and apprehension of criminals. 
 The elected District Attorney is the chief prosecuting officer for the State of Georgia within each of the State's 49 judicial circuits. The District Attorney represents the State of Georgia in the trial and appeal of criminal cases in the Superior Court for the judicial circuit and delinquency cases in the juvenile courts. The District Attorney is also the legal advisor to the grand jury. In 63 of the 159 counties in Georgia, misdemeanor cases are 
7 
 
 prosecuted by the Solicitor-General, who is a county officer who represents the State of Georgia in the trial and appeal of misdemeanor criminal cases in the State Courts. Indigent defense is provided by local bars and State and county-funded offices. 
 The State's court system is comprised of a Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals of Georgia, and 49 judicial circuits, each with a court of general jurisdiction (Superior Court). Courts of limited jurisdiction in the State include state courts, probate courts, juvenile courts, magistrate courts, and municipal courts. 
 The State Board of Pardons and Paroles is the State's discretionary parole release and clemency agency that is responsible for the supervision of more than 23,000 parolees. 
 The Department of Juvenile Justice provides supervision, detention and a wide range of treatment and educational services for youths referred by juvenile courts. 
 The Department of Corrections is responsible for the State's population of 48,000-plus inmates, and the supervision of 136,000-plus probationers. 
 The Georgia State Patrol (GSP) enforces traffic laws on the State's highways, and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) provides assistance to the state's criminal justice system in the areas of criminal investigations, forensic laboratory services and computerized criminal justice information. 
 The State Attorney General criminally prosecutes any State officer or person, firm, or corporation for violating any criminal statute while employed by or in having business dealings with or for the State. 
According to the latest crime statistics, Georgia's violent crime rate measuring the number of 
murders, rapes, robberies, burglaries, larcenies, and auto-thefts per 100,000 residents is widely 
regarded as the "bell weather" for national and state trends (see Figure 1). 
Figure 1 
 
Violent Crime Rates For The U.S. & Georgia 1998-2002 (per 100,000 population) 
 
600 500 400 300 200 100 
0 1998 
 
1999 
 
U.S. Georgia 
 
2000 
 
2001 
 
2002 
 
8 
 
 As shown in Figure 1, Georgia and the U.S are both showing marked decreases in violent crime. In the State, the decrease in crime has been, at least partially, attributed to several developments: 
 Continued efforts to expand Georgia's prison system and increase overall time served.  Restorative justice that focuses on the harms of crime, empowering and responding to 
victims, and involving offenders in repairing the victim and the community.  Community policing which incorporates a proactive stance and higher level of involvement 
with neighborhoods and businesses.  Community courts with their innovative approaches to sanctioning and treating "quality-of- 
life" offenders (low-level offenders).  Drug courts that closely supervise pre-trial defendants through stabilization and recovery.  Community-based corrections that focuses on diversions, alternatives to incarceration, 
and reintegration of offenders. 
The decline is certainly welcomed, but Georgia and U.S. crime rates have exhibited similar swings over the past 20 years and crime over the past 50 years is still high. For example, in 1972, Georgia's murder rate dropped from 19 to 11 homicides per 100,000 residents in just five years, only to climb again to 17 homicides per 100,000 in 1982. Fulton County, the most populated county in the state and home to the City of Atlanta, handles 40% of Georgia's criminal prosecutions. The City of Atlanta has seen a 1st quarter overall decrease in Index crimes which show a 10% decline during the first three months of 2004 as compared to the same period in 2003. However, crimes such as Aggravated Assault are on the way up, equaling a 6% increase over this same time period in 2003. 
Current Sentencing Practices 
One reason for the decline in crime is the tougher sentencing and time served policies. Georgia inmates stay in prison longer than in most states, even though the percentage of time served falls below 85% for many crimes. This stems from the historical practice among Georgia judges of meting out severe sentences compared to the rest of the nation. Serving over 60% of a sentence in Georgia for non-violent and drug crimes still exceeds the prison time in other states that may require 85% or more time served. However, among violent and sex crimes, Georgia offenders already serve 85% of the sentence and can expect to serve longer as a result of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles 1998 90% Time Served policy for all violent and sex offenders (See Figure 2). Offenders convicted of murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, aggravated 
9 
 
 child molestation, aggravated sodomy, aggravated sexual battery, and rape are already required to serve a 100% of a 10 year minimum prison term (ranges from 10 years to life). 
 
Figure 2 
Percent of Sentence Served by Crime Type 
FY 1993- FY 2003 Release Cohorts 
 
100 
 
Sentence 4.8 yrs 
 
Serve 3.8 yrs 
 
90 
 
Sex 
 
85.9% 
 
Sentence 6.3 yrs Serve 4.4 yrs 
 
80 
 
Sentence 3.6 yrs 
 
Serve 1.9 yrs 
 
70 
 
Violent 
 
69.5% 
 
Sentence 3.6 yrs 
 
Serve 1.4 yrs 
 
60 
 
Sentence 6.4 yrs 
 
53.2% 
 
Serve 2.2 yrs 
 
50 
 
Property 
 
40 
 
Drug Possess 
 
39.1% 
 
34.7% 
 
30 
 
Drug Sales 
 
20 
 
10 
 
0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 
 
Georgia's Expanding Prison Population 
Georgia's prison population has grown by approximately 93% over the last ten years (See Figure 3), making Georgia one of the top ten states in the use of prisons. Currently, Georgia has a prison population of just over 48,000 inmates, and a 2002 incarceration rate of 552 inmates per 100,000 residents. The State has expanded prison bed space by an unprecedented 150% between 1990 and 2002, from 18,800 prison beds to 47,939 beds. 
 
10 
 
 Figure 3 
 
Actual Prison Populations by Year End 
60000 
 
50000 40000 
 
32,587 
 
34,206 
 
35,342 
 
36,612 
 
39,326 
 
41,949 
 
44,022 
 
47,120 
 
48,830 
 
30000 
 
27,984 
 
25,191 
 
20000 
 
10000 
 
0 FY1993 FY1994 FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 
 
Prison Population and Budget Forecasts 
Figure 4 shows the projected prison population as well as the projected county jail backlog of state prison inmates through October 2007. Assuming an unchanged planning environment, this projection assumes that current sentencing practices and the State Board of Pardons and Paroles 90% Time Served policy for violent offenders will remain in effect. Based on the current trend of sentences being handed down by the courts in Georgia, this number is projected to exceed 10,000 inmates by October 2007. 
11 
 
 Figure 4 
 
Georgia Prison Population Projection (Estimate) 
 
5 9 ,0 0 0 5 7 ,0 0 0 
 
P o p ulatio n (inm ates) 
 
Oct 2007 5 8 ,6 7 7 
 
5 5 ,0 0 0 5 3 ,0 0 0 
 
Oct 2007 B acklog 1 0 ,7 3 8 
 
5 1 ,0 0 0 
 
Nov 2002 4 8 ,8 9 7 
 
4 9 ,0 0 0 
 
B a ck lo g pa sse s 4,00 0 in June, 2004 
 
4 7 ,0 0 0 
 
4 6 ,6 9 1 
 
4 7 ,9 3 9 
 
C ap acity (b eds) 
 
4 5 ,0 0 0 N o v-0 2 M a r-0 3 Ju l-0 3 N o v-0 3 M a r-0 4 Ju l-0 4 N o v-0 4 M a r-0 5 Ju l-0 5 N o v-0 5 M a r-0 6 Ju l-0 6 N o v-0 6 M a r-0 7 Ju l-0 7 
 
County Jail Populations 
Georgia county jails are also experiencing an unprecedented growth in the number of inmates awaiting trial, currently numbering more than 19,700 detainees. These trends have led many counties to consider and implement many innovative projects to reduce jail populations and the influx of new offenders, such as drug courts and residential substance abuse treatment (RSAT) programs. In addition, Figure 5 makes note of the current and previous county jail backlog as it has surpassed 4,000 state prison inmates currently being held in local county jails. 
 
12 
 
 Figure 5 
 
INMATES SENTENCED TO STATE INSTITUTIONS 
January 1987 - April 2004 
5500 
 
5000 
 
4,325 
 
4500 
 
4000 
 
3500 
 
3000 
 
2500 
 
2000 1500 
 
*See note below. 
 
1000 
 
Jan-87 Jul-87 Jan-88 Jul-88 Jan-89 Jul-89 Jan-90 Jul-90 Jan-91 Jul-91 Jan-92 Jul-92 Jan-93 Jul-93 Jan-94 Jul-94 Jan-95 Jul-95 Jan-96 Jul-96 Jan-97 Jul-97 Jan-98 Jul-98 Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Jan-01 Jul-01 Jan-02 Jul-02 Jan-03 Jul-03 Jan-04 Jul-04 
 
*NOTE: Only 101 counties reported data for January 1987 while 80 counties reported data for March 1996; therefore, data is not shown for these two months. 
III. Resource Needs 
Program Resource Requirements 
The major resource needs for the state of Georgia: 1. Additional personnel and related resources to assist in the overall reduction of trafficking of illegal drugs and narcotics in and through the state; 2. Replacement of overused and outdated equipment for law enforcement use and deployment in the field; 3. Enhancement of cooperation, collaboration, and coordination between and among those agencies vested with the responsibility to address serious crime in Georgia through the continued use and formation of Multijurisdictional Task Forces; 
13 
 
 4. The major objectives, which individually and collectively support each of the major goals established for this strategy, are anticipated to: 
A. Reduce the demand for, as well as the availability of, drugs, narcotics and illegal substances, through drug abuse resistance education for youth, and vigorous enforcement of drug laws, including drug related traffic offenses; 
B. Improve the operational effectiveness of law enforcement agencies and personnel by enhancing training, providing canine support, intelligence exchange, and other initiatives supportive of multijurisdictional enforcement efforts; 
C. Improve records keeping, data-gathering, and processing of forensic evidence concerning crime so that appropriate resources may be targeted at and to appropriate audiences; and, 
D. Support and assist efforts by various agencies to combine talent and resources in order to broadly affect the crime and drug problems in multiple jurisdictions. 
These goals and objectives are necessarily broad because the problems that contribute to violent crime and drug abuse are diffuse. It is the role of the Council to facilitate cooperation and collaboration in Georgia's criminal justice community, so that resources are best utilized to address crime-related problems within the State. 
IV. Priorities and the National Drug Control Strategy 
Coordination with the National Drug Control Policy 
The latest National Drug Control Strategy includes three major National Priorities: National Priority I Stopping Use Before It Starts: Education and Community Action National Priority II Healing America's Drug Users: Getting Treatment Resources Where They Are They Are Needed National Priority III Disrupting the Market: Attacking the Economic Basis of the Drug Trade 
State Strategy Reflects National Priorities 
Historically, strategy submissions from Georgia have uniformly aligned with the evolving goals of the National Drug Control Policy. The above National Priorities, which were most recently 
14 
 
 publicized in the 2004 National Drug Control Strategy, are integrated into Georgia's new multi-year plan. National Priority I Objectives Objective 1: Educate parents and other caregivers, teachers, coaches, clergy, health professionals, and business and community leaders to help youth reject illegal drugs and underage alcohol and tobacco use. Objective 2: Pursue a vigorous advertising and public communications program dealing with the dangers of illegal drug, alcohol, and tobacco use by youth. Objective 3: Promote zero tolerance policies for youth regarding the use of illegal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco within the family, school, workplace, and community. Objective 4: Provide students in grades K - 12 with alcohol, tobacco, and drug prevention programs and policies that are research based. Objective 5: Support parents and adult mentors in encouraging youth to engage in positive, healthy life-styles and modeling behavior to be emulated by young people. Objective 6: Encourage and assist the development of community coalitions and programs in preventing drug abuse and underage alcohol and tobacco use. Objective 7: Create partnerships with the media, entertainment industry, and professional sports organizations to avoid the glamorization, condoning, or normalization of illegal drugs and the use of alcohol and tobacco by youth. Objective 8: Develop and implement a set of research-based principles upon which prevention programming can be based. Objective 9: Support and highlight research, including the development of scientific information, to inform drug, alcohol, and tobacco prevention programs targeting young Americans. National Priority II Objectives Objective 1: Support and promote effective, efficient, and accessible drug treatment, ensuring the development of a system that is responsive to emerging trends in drug abuse. Objective 2: Reduce drug-related health problems, with an emphasis on infectious diseases. Objective 3: Promote national adoption of drug-free workplace programs that emphasize a comprehensive program that includes: drug testing, education, prevention, and intervention. 
15 
 
 Objective 4: Support and promote the education, training, and credentialing of professionals who work with substance abusers. Objective 5: Support research into the development of medications and related protocols to prevent or reduce drug dependence and abuse. Objective 6: Support and highlight research and technology, including the acquisition and analysis of scientific data, to reduce the health and social costs of illegal drug use. 
The specific objectives stated in National Priority II are related to efforts of the Health and Human Services agencies. Georgia's planning efforts include coordination with those agencies. Drug treatment and substance abuse programs that provide counseling, rehabilitation, and reintegration of juvenile offenders are coordinated by the Children and Youth Coordinating Council (CYCC) with Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant funding (JAIBG). Adult offenders undergo an offender management program for substance abuse rehabilitation based on a project administered through the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles. Based on past performance, 33,500 inmates will receive mandatory drug tests, 2,204 will develop individual aftercare plans, and 475 will enter residential treatment, as conditions of their release from prison. 
A drug database developed through the Administrative Office of the Courts provides a statewide resource for drug and other trial courts to utilize to locate treatment resources permitting an offender to obtain treatment, including the crucial aftercare component, as part of the court imposed sanctions holding them accountable for their conduct, but assisting them to overcome the substance abuse problem. This resource will serve 224 trial courts and 247 judges statewide among Georgia's 49 Judicial Circuits. National Priority III Objectives Objective 1: Strengthen law enforcement -- including Federal, state, and local drug task forces -- to combat drug-related violence, disrupt criminal organizations, and arrest and prosecute the leaders of illegal drug syndicates. Objective 2: Improve the ability of High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) to counter drug trafficking. Objective 3: Help law enforcement to disrupt money laundering, seize, and forfeit criminal assets. 
16 
 
 Objective 4: Support and highlight research and technology -- including the development of scientific information and data -- to detect, disrupt, deter, and seize illegal drugs in transit to the United States and at U.S. borders. Objective 5: Support and highlight research, including the development of scientific information and data, to inform law enforcement, prosecution, incarceration, and treatment of offenders involved with illegal drugs. Objective 6: Disrupt and dismantle major international drug trafficking organizations operating within the state and arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate their leaders. Objective 7: Support and complement source country drug control efforts and strengthen drug control capabilities. Objective 8: Develop and support bilateral, regional, and multilateral initiatives and mobilize statewide organizational efforts against all aspects of illegal drug production, trafficking, and abuse. 
The State's primary weapon in the war on drugs and violent crime will continue to be multijurisdictional task forces (MJTF). State and local governments provide substantial resources to these task forces in conjunction with Byrne Program funding to combat drugs and violence. The combined efforts of 33 local and statewide task forces will result in an anticipated 9,000+ drug arrests, including street, middle, and upper level distributors and traffickers. 
All Georgia MJTF's are required to participate, cooperate, and share intelligence with any federal law enforcement agencies working in their geographical areas of responsibility. Federal agencies working in conjunction with Georgia MJTFS have included the DEA, FBI, BATF, U.S. Customs, U. S. Marshals Service, U. S. Treasury, INS, and the U.S. Park Service. 
To further support national objectives, Georgia will continue funding regional K-9 programs to provide canine assistance to drug task forces that cannot afford the cost of a drug dog and handler, or lack sufficient work to justify the expense of the canine team. These teams also provide assistance to other law enforcement agencies at Georgia's seaports in conducting searches of shipping containers. 
17 
 
 The School Resource Officer (SRO) program provides an armed, uniform officer to serve in a proactive role in partnership with the local school officials providing a role model for students and enhancing safety in the school environment. Currently, several thousand students attend schools with School Resource Officer programs in Georgia utilizing Byrne funding. 
The Gang Related Education and Training Program (GREAT) is included in the multi-year strategy to encourage local jurisdictions to initiate these programs to counter gang activity together with its accompanying violence and drug abuse. 
In conjunction with the Domestic Cannabis Eradication and Suppression Program (DCE/SP), which is administered by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Governor's Task Force on Drug Suppression (GTF) combats the growth of domestic marijuana on a Statewide basis. In addition to the GBI, this task force is comprised of the Georgia State Patrol, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Georgia Department of Transportation, and Georgia National Guard. Marijuana eradication is a year round effort by GTF, which focuses on outdoor plots from April through October and indoor marijuana operations year round. 
All projects in Georgia's Statewide Strategy 2004 priority one are supportive of National Priority III. The MJTF's are the primary means for initiating the arrest of distributors at street and mid-level, using that arrest as an investigative and intelligence tool permitting them to trace the drugs back up the chain of supply, until upper level and major offenders can be identified, their distribution points and methods determined, and their operations eventually disrupted through arrest and seizure of offenders and assets. 
In coordination with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation's Regional Drug Enforcement Offices, or with the DEA, or from their own intelligence sources, Georgia MJTF's may interdict drugs imported and transshipped via state or interstate highways from the import point to destination markets. 
18 
 
 V. Selected Programs 
I. Multi-Jurisdictional Task Forces Program II. Approved by BJA: June 27, 2003 III. Connects with National Priority #3 IV. Byrne Purpose Area #2 V. Description of the Selected Program: -Consists of locally implemented multi-jurisdictional drug task forces; the State Drug Task Force; Multi-jurisdictional Drug Fugitive Squads; Drug enforcement training; and, K-9 Resource teams VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: 
Number of arrests made Number of undercover buys made Amount and types of illegal drugs seized Amount of currency confiscated Number and types of training provided Number of law enforcement officers trained Number of searches conducted (K-9) VII. July 30 I. Drug Abuse Resistance Education & School Resource Officers (SRO) Program II. Approved by BJA: September 15, 1995 III. Connects with National Priority #1 IV. Byrne Purpose Area #1 V. Description of Selected Program: -Drug resistance educational program; taught in public school systems; and taught by law enforcement officers VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Number of classes held; Number of student participants; Number of students successfully completing the course Number of SRO's 
19 
 
 Number of SRO arrests Number of SRO citations and warnings given Number of students counseled or intervened with by SRO's VII. July 30 I. Tag and Title Fraud Program II. Approved by BJA: 2002 III. Connects with National Priority  N/A IV. Byrne Purpose Area #5 V. Description of Selected Program: -Investigations into illegal chop shop operations and other tag/title fraud operations. Many of which have illegal drug sales connected with them. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Number of investigations conducted Number of vehicles recovered Amount of currency recovered Amount and types of drugs seized VII. July 30 I. Electronic Warrant Interchange Program II. Approved by BJA: October 27, 2000 III. Connects with National Priority  N/A IV. Byrne Purpose Area #10 V. Description of Selected Program: -Involves modification in the current Warrant Attainment Process and the implementation of an Electronic Warrant Interchange (EWI) System VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Number of warrants tracked and managed by the EWI system Amount of time reduction involved in officer involvement in procuring an initial warrant Increase/Reduction of jail population through timely first appearances and/or probable cause hearings 
20 
 
 VII. July 30 I. Impact Program II. Approved by BJA: June 21, 2001 III. Connects with National Priority #1 & #2 IV. Byrne Purpose Area #11 V. Description of Selected Program: -Substance Abuse Counseling; Job referral services; Moral Reconation Therapy; Reasoning and Reconation classes; and Intensive Supervision VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: 
Number of adults & juveniles who's probation or parole has been revoked Number of adults & juveniles who are gainfully employed Number of drug screens administered Percentage of total drug screens which yield positive test results Number of adults and juveniles actively supervised by the program VII. July 30 I. Day Reporting Center II. Approved by BJA: October 27, 2000 III. Connects with National Priority #1 & #2 IV. Byrne Purpose Area # 13 V. Description of Selected Program: -A joint partnership between the State Board of Pardons and Paroles and the Department of Corrections to serve as a last step for probationers and parolees who would be revoked and returned to prison if they do not complete the drug counseling programs. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Number of probationers/parolees accepted into the program Number of graduates from the program Number of drug screens administered Number of positive drug screens Number of participants removed from the program 
21 
 
 Amount of prison costs avoidance Amount of hours of community service performed VII. July 30 I. Death Investigations II. Approved by BJA: 2000 III. Connects with National Priority  N/A IV. Byrne Purpose Area # 15 A V. Description of Selected Program: -Project provided Medical Examiner Investigators to assist in death investigations. Thereby allowing the state crime lab to have investigators on duty 24/7. VI. Performance measure to be collected include: Number of deaths cases worked Number of post-mortem latent prints obtained VII. July 30 I. Live Scan Project II. Approved by BJA: September 20, 1995 III. Connects with National Priority  N/A IV. Byrne Purpose Area #15 B V. Description of Selected Program: -This project allows local law enforcement agency's to have direct access the AFIS system to quickly input arrestee fingerprint information into a centralized database. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Accuracy rate of arrestee information entered into and returned through AFIS Reduced transmitting time into both state and national fingerprint repositories Time and money savings in preparing traditional fingerprint cards for mailing to the state and national repositories Reduction in fingerprint card rejection rate Reduced turn-around time in accurately identifying arrestees VII. July 30 
22 
 
 I. Drug Court Program II. Approved by BJA: September 13, 1995 III. Connects with National Priority # 2 IV. Byrne Purpose Area # 20 V. Description of Selected Program: -Drug court programs which operate as an alternative to detention, jail, and prison for non-violent offenders who have a substance abuse history. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: 
Number of participants accepted into program Number of participants sanctioned by the program Number of participants to be removed from the program Number of participants to graduate from program VI. July 30 I. S.T.A.R. (Student Transition And Recovery) Program II. Approved by BJA: December 9, 1999 III. Connects with National Priority # 1 IV. Byrne Purpose Area # 20 V. Description of Selected Program: -Decreasing juvenile delinquency through an integrated approach with parental, courts, and school officials. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Average recidivism Rate Absenteeism rate Number of court ordered referrals Number of parental or school referrals Number of students removed from the program Number of students completing the program Amount of community service hours performed by the students Average G.P.A. before S.T.A.R. 
23 
 
 Average G.P.A. after S.T.A.R. Number of home visits performed Number of school days saved VII. July 30 I. Anti-Terrorism Training Programs II. Approved by BJA: June 21, 2001 III. Connects With National Priority # 3 IV. Byrne Purpose Area # 26 V. Description of Selected Program: -Program created to develop a state level information sharing and analysis center (GISAC) to coordinate all law enforcement in the event of a terrorist attack as well as an international training component where Georgia law enforcement officials can see first hand how other countries address terrorism. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Number of infrastructure inquires made by GISAC Number of Intelligence inquiries made by GISAC Number of participants attending the international terrorism training VII. July 30 I. Crimes Against Children Unit II. Approved by BJA: October 27, 2000 III. Connects with National Priority  N/A IV. Byrne Purpose Area # 28 V. Description of the Program: -Forensic medical services component to assist child victims of sexual abuse. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: Number of child forensic medical examinations conducted VII. July 30 I. Child Abuse Investigative Support Center II. Approved by BJA: June 21, 2001 
24 
 
 III. Connects with National Priority  N/A IV. Byrne Purpose Area #28 V. Description of Selected Program: -State investigations center which specializes in child abuse and/or death cases. VI. Performance Measures to be collected include: 
Number of cases investigated Number of trainings provided Number of trainings attended Number of cases prosecuted VII. July 30 
VI. Coordination Efforts 
Development Process and Coordination Issues 
The Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Statewide Drug Control and Violent Crime Strategy development and planning process is a responsibility assumed by staff of the Council. The Council is committed to ensuring that the Statewide Strategy reflects the interests and concerns of criminal justice officials at all levels of government, as well as public officials who represent the State and its cities and counties. 
The primary goals of the Council regarding the new strategy were to create a Statewide Strategy in 2004 that would encourage cooperation and coordination among agencies involved in drug and violent crime control efforts, and to establish a comprehensive approach to the problems being confronted by the State's criminal justice system. 
So that potential areas of overlap might be explored and to determine how similar goals and objectives can be met, Council staff coordinated with many local, state and federal agencies by commencing periodic statewide public hearings and Council meetings, attending other related agency meetings and workshops, conducting telephone and mail surveys of criminal justice agencies on Byrne related topics, and by analyzing the National Drug Control Policy. The Council 
25 
 
 is pleased to report that great progress continues to be made in developing constructive and collaborative relationships in relation to combating violent crime. 
Coordination Among Criminal Justice System Entities in Georgia Diverse Council Membership 
The proposed 2004 Strategy plan stems, in large part, from the diversity of the Council's membership. The Council includes private citizens, representatives of State and local criminal justice agencies, and other affected groups. As noted earlier, the composition of the Council includes police chiefs, sheriffs, prosecutors, judges, court personnel, and representatives from the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, Georgia Bureau of Investigation, and the Georgia Departments of Corrections, Education, and Juvenile Justice. The corrections and juvenile justice representatives have a role in coordinating substance abuse treatment initiatives as well as other corrections issues. 
Coordination With Special Criminal Justice Entities 
The Council also provides and receives strategic planning input through membership on many other relevant committees and task forces. As previously mentioned, the Executive Director of the Council serves as a member on numerous criminal justice bodies that provide a convenient forum for meaningful exchanges of information pertinent to the State's strategy. Additionally, Council staff and members meet on a regular basis with members of the Georgia Sheriffs' Association and the Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police to share information and coordinate planning efforts. 
Coordination efforts are further facilitated through the Council's Crime Control and System Improvement (CCSI) Advisory Committee that is comprised of representation from various levels of government, and also includes private citizens. The CCSI Committee provides input during the planning process, and it makes recommendations to the Council, which makes the final recommendations to the Governor regarding funding priorities and sub-grant awards. 
Coordination with Law Enforcement Agencies 
Historically, coordination among federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in Georgia has been highly participative and structured toward the most effective uses of federal funding for drug control and violent crime reduction. The multi-year strategy enhances the day-to- 
26 
 
 day operational relationships among these agencies, and provides opportunities for policy makers to better plan resource allocations to support their activities. 
The Council is responsible for facilitating the coordination among state, local and federal agencies, and in fulfillment of this responsibility, it requires each Byrne funded multijurisdictional task force to include state and local law enforcement and federal agents, whenever possible. Absent such inclusion, the task forces are required to coordinate their activities and operational planning with the nearest federal agencies, including, but not limited to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the U.S. Customs Service (USCS), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Attorneys, and the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS). For example, the fugitive task forces in the State maintain very close contact with the local FBI and USMS offices that are involved in local task force strategic planning. Routinely, the DEA works closely and coordinates with local drug task forces. 
Coordination is further enhanced by ongoing relations between the Council and the federal Law Enforcement Community Coordinators (LECC) in each of the U.S. Judicial Districts. Council staff maintains contact with LECCs in the Northern, Middle, and the Southern Districts, all of whom participate in Council meetings. Representatives from the U.S. Attorney's Office in these three districts have participated in training conferences and workshops conducted by the Council, and reciprocally, Council staff has attended workshops sponsored by federal prosecutors. 
Coordination with other U.S. Department of Justice Funded Programs 
Coordination with other federally funded programs is comprehensive due, substantially, to the Council fulfilling its role as the state administrating agency for many such grant programs. The Council also administers the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program, the STOP Violence Against Women Grant Program, the Victims of Crime Act Grant Program, the Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing Grant Program, the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative, the Project Safe Neighborhoods Program, and the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program. 
Juvenile Justice Coordination 
Annual State and local expenditures for juvenile justice in Georgia are close to $280 million. Coordination with juvenile justice related grants is accomplished by Council interaction 
27 
 
 with the Governor's Children and Youth Coordinating Council (CYCC), that has been designated by the Governor as the Statewide Administrative Agency (SAA) for the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG) Program in Georgia. Staff members from the CJCC and the CYCC consult periodically to coordinate relevant funding decisions. 
Fiscal Year 1998 marked the inaugural funding by Congress for the JABG Program as a means of providing significant fiscal support to the states to promote increased accountability and improved services within the juvenile justice system. Similar to the Byrne Program, projects that are proposed by local governments must meet the terms of one of 12 designated program areas. Approved projects are funded, coordinated, and audited by the SAA. 
In response to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) executed by the State and the U.S. Justice Department regarding problems in the juvenile justice system, the CYCC earmarked a large portion of the first year of JABG funding to the State Department of Juvenile Justice. This allocation was made to expedite system improvements to avert future legal action by the federal government. Funding for FY 2003 of JABG was $3,945,300 and decreased to $1,489,591 for FY 2004. The CJCC anticipates that it will maintain appreciable contact with the CYCC and DJJ concerning the coordination of projects within respective program areas. 
Coordination With Affected Organizations, the Public, and State Legislature Coordination with Affected Organizations 
In mid-September 2003, the Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council announced that it intended to solicit input from policy makers and community stakeholders in Georgia to assist the Council in the development of its new four-year Statewide Strategy for criminal initiatives in the State. 
In advance of scheduled open meetings, a direct mailing was made to over 2,200 law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, correctional and parole officials, victims services providers and other parties including academic professionals, mental health and substance abuse professionals and interested citizens. 
Local, state, and county government along with members of the general public and victim services agency officials reiterated the challenges facing Georgia's 159 counties as they contend with the local impacts of State legislation intended to address the continuing problems associated 
28 
 
 with crime. They urged a comprehensive approach to criminal justice planning, and voiced concerns about the housing of State inmates and probation violators in county jails and correctional institutions, state funding for public safety officers, the preservation of inmate labor, the regulation of private prisons, local funding of indigent defense, and increased funding for the State's crime laboratory and drug enforcement. 
Coordination with the Public 
Coordination and planning for the 2004 multi-year statewide strategy has included efforts to solicit input from the State's criminal justice system and the public at large. These efforts included advertised public hearings which were held to help establish a dialogue between various levels of government and community organizations to determine which Byrne projects are most desired and effective. These public hearings, which are held throughout the year in conjunction with other Council functions including Committee meetings and Council meetings, were announced in local newspapers to adequately notify the public. 
At venues throughout the State, government officials as well as members of the public were provided the opportunity to personally communicate with Council staff on a variety of issues pertinent to Byrne Program funding and program activities: 
Public Hearing Date and Location: 
October 8, 2003 Armstrong Atlantic State University October 22, 2003 Georgia Public Safety Training Center October 29, 2003 Dougherty County Judicial Building/Office of the District Attorney November 6, 2003 Athens-Clarke County Courthouse/Athens-Clarke County Police Department November 7, 2003 Rome Police Department 
Many individuals furnished pertinent information at the public hearings, the format of which was designed to encourage a focus on new approaches to address the State's drug and violent 
29 
 
 crime problem. A variety of issues were raised, most of which pertained to the expansion of special purpose programs, such as School Resource Officers (SRO), Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT) for inmates, Student Transition and Recovery project (STAR), special probation options, juvenile interventions, and adult sex offender management. A number of topics were related to alternatives to incarceration, drug courts, and rural law enforcement. Domestic violence was identified as a significant problem across the State, and especially noteworthy were the discussions of offender tracking, sheltering of abused women, coordination among agencies, and conditions of pre-trial release of alleged offenders. 
Responding to the Legislature 
The General Assembly of Georgia convenes in January each year, and during the 40-day session the Executive Director of the Council attends numerous legislative oversight committee hearings to respond to legislators about the status of grant programs administered by the Council. Additionally, the Director consults with these legislators on matters relating to other State criminal justice programs and the anticipated effects of proposed legislation. Members of the Council staff also respond to legislative inquiries, and occasionally address committees to offer opinions on legislative initiatives. Members of the Council who are chairs of pertinent criminal justice committees are also invited to review the comprehensive strategy and provide comments. Additionally, legislative initiatives are routinely discussed at Council meetings and by Council staff participating in other criminal justice related meetings. 
Advisory Board as Coordination Vehicle Council Advisory Board 
The Council is made up of six main committees:  Executive Committee  Crime Victims Assistance Advisory Committee  Administrative Rules Committee  Crime Control and System Improvement Advisory Committee  Crime Victims Compensation Board  Statistical Analysis Center Committee 
30 
 
 Coordination With Agencies Administering Federal Formula Funds for Drug Prevention and Control 
The Council recognizes that the drug problem in Georgia cannot be addressed or solved through the efforts of the criminal justice system alone. To be effective in the State's drug control plan, the Council must develop a comprehensive, coordinated approach that includes the active involvement of educators, treatment providers, and the local communities. Various state agencies and other organizations receive federal funding to support ongoing delinquency prevention, drug treatment, and educational programs, and the Council remains involved with the multifaceted drug prevention and education efforts in the State. 
To determine appropriate priorities, it is necessary to gather information from many different agencies because of multiple funding sources. These sources include the Byrne Grant, as well as the Drug Free Schools Act, the execution of which involves two different grant programs in Georgia. One part is administered by the Department of Human Resources and one part is administered by the Department of Education. The Drug Free Schools Act provides funds to 19 regional mental health regions through the Department of Human Resources. It also provides funding for all School Districts for drug and violence prevention programs. Others include federal and state recognized programs as well as locally developed drug prevention programs including the DREAM curriculum, Boys Town National Training Center materials, Second Step curriculum, Anger Management curriculum, and Project Alert. 
The Council collaborates with the Department of Education in assessing the impact of Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) projects throughout the State. As mentioned above, the Director of the Council also is a member of and attends DARE Board meetings that are held quarterly. The Board consists of members of the Peace Officer Standards and Training Council, the Chiefs of Police Association of Georgia, the Georgia DARE Officers Association, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Education, the Public Safety Training Center and other related agencies. Topics at the meetings include requests for DARE Officer Training, Middle/Junior High Training, DARE Parent Program Training, and de-certification of DARE officers. The Board also reviews and approves DARE Instructor Candidates before they can be certified, however, it is the responsibility of each agency to maintain National Accreditation. 
31 
 
 Substance Abuse Treatment 
Substance Abuse Treatment coordination efforts require communication with State agencies that administer the major correctional treatment programs. As the administrating agency for the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Grant Program (RSAT) and the Serious and Violent Offender Re-entry Initiative (SVORI), the Council has responsibility for coordinating correctional treatment programs under RSAT and the Byrne Program. The Department of Human Resources (DHR), Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse (MHMRSA), administers the federal Substance Abuse Block Grant Program, the funds from which are distributed to the 7 Regional Mental Health and Substance Abuse Offices throughout the State. The Regional Boards then prioritize and allocate these funds to a variety of substance abuse programs. The Department of Human Resources coordinates substance abuse treatment activities with the Georgia Department of Corrections and the Council coordinates its substance abuse treatment activities with both agencies. 
Nature and Extent of Drug Crime in Georgia 
The problem and effects of crime have significantly impacted Georgia's criminal justice agencies during the past decade. Rural and urban law enforcement agencies in Georgia have extended their staffing and operational budgets, local court dockets have expanded beyond manageable portions, and the State's correctional system has expanded to an unprecedented capacity. 
In order for Georgia to develop and implement an effective Statewide Strategy for drug control, violence prevention, and criminal justice system improvement, the State must first characterize the nature, extent, and trends of the problems to be addressed. 
Developments in the State continue to shape the challenges facing the criminal justice system, and policy makers throughout Georgia need to be continually apprised of those developments, especially as they relate to the capacity of the Georgia criminal justice system's achievement of attainable goals, most importantly the effective and efficient utilization of State resources to ensure the protection of Georgia citizens, businesses, and visitors. 
32 
 
 Data Sources for Problem Statement Research 
The Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council analyzed a variety of current, valid, and pertinent data in support of the development of the multi-year strategy, and pursued an aggressive agenda of research specific to crime trends and projections. The Council exploited various knowledge sources and involved multi-disciplinary experts in the study of the State's crime problems, and the outcome of the initiative is the establishment of a baseline level of information that will be needed in the State for a comprehensive, long-term strategy of innovative, yet pragmatic, solutions to identified problems. 
Analysis of Drug and Crime Problems and Trends 
When reviewing crime statistics, criminal justice agencies can make informed decisions concerning the most efficient and effective manner in which to dedicate limited resources toward the reduction of drugs and violent crime in local communities. One emerging trend is the arrest rate for drug violations. Areas of Greatest Need In considering all information, the Council identified the following as the greatest areas of need for the next four years: 
 Rural crime is a problem in Georgia. Rural areas are used to produce drugs, such as marijuana and methamphetamines, and they are used as transshipment points for drugs and cash from drug sales. Also, urban street gangs are setting up operations in rural areas. Drug trafficking is seen as the main reason for the expansion of these gangs to rural areas. 
 The many and continuous successes of the Multijurisdictional drug task forces in Georgia demonstrate that local authorities can work effectively to combat illegal drugs in Georgia's rural areas, where there is a need for the continued augmentation of law enforcement resources in order to adequately address violent and drug-related crime. 
 SRO programs are needed in Georgia school districts where local law enforcement agencies need assistance in initiating school safety projects. 
 Expansion of K-9 teams, so that more areas of the State can benefit from bomb threat responses, drug and safety searches in public schools, canine tracking of suspects. 
33 
 
  Diversion programs for drug addicted adult offenders (e.g, drug courts, RSAT, etc.).  Improved coordination of law enforcement intelligence among federal, State, and local 
agencies.  Regional intelligence coordination  resolve conflict and facilitate exchanges.  The accuracy and completeness of criminal justice records, in particular criminal history 
records indexed to single- and multi-state offenders, enhances the capacity of the State to prevent the sale of firearms to prohibited persons, properly register and publicly list violent sexual offenders, and protect Georgia's children from child abusers. Federal legislation requires that each state receiving Byrne program formula funding set-aside at least 5% of the annual total award for the improvement of its criminal justice records. The State of Georgia is proposing the allocation of that 5% for Fiscal Year 2004 for the implementation of its Criminal Justice Records Improvement (CJRI) plan.  While currently over 80% of the fingerprint workload of the Georgia Crime Information Center (GCIC) is received electronically, many jurisdictions in the State lack "live scan" devices that permit the electronic transfer of fingerprint images and related data to the State agency responsible for the maintenance of Georgia's computerized criminal history data base which includes the fingerprint and criminal history records of more than 2.4 million persons (Georgia ranks fourth in the nation in the number of criminal fingerprint records processed each year; only California, New York, and Florida process more postarrest criminal fingerprints than Georgia.) "Live scan" technology enables states to update criminal history record information in a matter of hours, rather than weeks, as is the case of the mailing of fingerprint cards to the GCIC.  The automation of prosecution and judicial disposition reporting is a priority in Georgia. Paper disposition reporting methods do not allow for the identification of significant shortfalls in reporting, such as delinquent dispositions, and preclude expedited updates of important criminal history record information. Previous allocations have funded pilot tests of interfaces among law enforcement, prosecution, and courts; the development of record and interface standards; and, competitive awards to local court clerks. Full statewide automation of court dispositions remains a critical need. 
34 
 
  Develop and implement effective day treatment centers for probationers and parolees with a history of substance abuse - alcohol and illegal drugs. 
Facilitating Objective SAC Collaboration 
In an effort to facilitate improved, and more appropriate use of limited resources, the Council will continue to utilize the data gathering and analysis capabilities of the Statistical Analysis Center (SAC), which is organized under the Council. 
Stated concisely, the objective of the SAC is to provide policy-makers and decisionmakers in Georgia with the best, most reliable and valid information on the nature, extent and location of crime and crime victims so that programs, initiatives and resources may be better focused to meet the needs of the State and its citizens. 
As a "facilitating objective," the Council will assist the SAC in accomplishing agency and citizen surveys in the future that will then be incorporated into crime control strategies, goals and objectives for subsequent years. Future research activities are anticipated to include assessments of Byrne-funded programs to enhance the Council's evaluation and planning initiatives. It also should provide pertinent information about existing and new program and project types to determine their effectiveness. 
Strategy Priority #1 Drug Enforcement 
Statement of the Priority Issue: The reduction in the flow of illegal drugs into and through the State by improving the operational effectiveness of law enforcement agencies and personnel, by enhancing training, canine support, and other initiatives supportive of multijurisdictional enforcement efforts. 
Multijurisdictional Task Force Initiatives (Byrne Purpose Area 2) 
The multijurisdictional task force initiative is the most familiar of the Byrne Programs in Georgia, and is considered by many to be the most productive. According to law enforcement executives, the program accomplishments are directly attributable to the diligence and dedication of the officers from numerous jurisdictions throughout Georgia who serve on these task forces. 
In Fiscal Year 2003, 33 task forces received $7,838,700 in Byrne Program funds. Typically, the Council allocates 60% of each year's Byrne funding to this program. Within that 
35 
 
 allocation, approximately 90% is specifically dedicated to drug enforcement, 3% to task forces specifically assigned to locate and arrest violent and drug crime fugitives from justice, 2% to Statewide drug training, and 5% for canine support. 
Originally, the drug task forces (MJTFs) were primarily located in rural counties and small to medium sized cities. While many of the presently funded units are located within one of the eight "Metropolitan Statistical Areas" in Georgia, the participants are still relatively smaller local agencies. Historically, these agencies have generally lacked the opportunity to partner extensively with Federal agencies in a continued drug control effort. This impediment resulted primarily because of geographical location and the different sectors of the drug market which the respective agencies target as their primary mission(s). These multi-jurisdiction task forces target three levels of drug distribution that vary in volume among the jurisdictions, including major, mid-level, and street-level distributors. The efforts of the MJTF's amounted to 6,316 drug arrests which total 16% of the (40,504 drug arrests) in the 2002-2003 reporting period statewide. The drugs of choice vary in the different jurisdictions of the State, so accordingly enforcement tactics and results differ among the funded task forces. 
State Drug Task Force (Byrne Program Purpose Area 2) 
The Council recognizes that it is not fiscally possible to fund a MJTF, nor to provide the specialized equipment needed for covert drug investigations, in every jurisdiction in Georgia. The Council acknowledges that local resources do not permit many smaller agencies to dedicate personnel to necessary advanced training, nor to redirect from patrol activities resources that are required to successfully pursue drug related criminal activities. 
In recognition of this, the State Drug Task Force (SDTF) was organized to provide assistance to jurisdictions in the State that lacked sufficient resources to conduct covert drug investigations in response to identified drug crimes, including violent crimes associated with drug trafficking. It provides special covert investigations to those jurisdictions not able to participate in a MJTF, or to those in a MJTF but requiring covert investigative assistance due to an unusual drug problem. Local requests for special drug enforcement assistance are channeled through one of the 15 Regional Investigative Offices operated by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI), that directs this project. In the event that a regional office can respond to the request for assistance, 
36 
 
 the request is forwarded to the SDTF for action. The SDTF has continuously provided support and covert operations assistance to 35 counties across the state since its inception in 1996. 
Regional K-9 Multijurisdictional Resource Team (Byrne Program Purpose Area 2) 
The K-9 unit is an invaluable resource to the State's MJTFs and local law enforcement agencies in the war against drugs and violent crime. Unfortunately, the expense of acquiring and maintaining this resource for each MJTF or agency is cost-prohibitive. An important consideration for case prosecution was that smaller agencies and many MJTFs do not have a sufficient workload for K-9s to maintain a needed level of proficiency. The Council also discovered that locally sponsored MJTFs often lacked uniform standards for training and certification of their K-9 teams. 
With considerable input from potential users of the resource, and from operational K-9 units, the Council developed the concept of Statewide Regional K-9 Resource Teams. The project requires a suitable site for a statewide training center, a statewide training coordinator qualified to train other K-9 handlers, appropriate courses of instruction, and an agency willing to undertake the project. 
In Fiscal Year 2003, three teams shared $667,000 in federal funding. Subsequent years of activity also yielded significant accomplishments. The efforts for FY 2003 led to 10,832 searches, 195 demonstrations, 346 misdemeanor arrests, 454 felony arrests, as well as thousands of local, state, and federal requests for assistance. 
Drug Enforcement Training (Byrne Program Purpose Area 2) 
The Georgia Public Safety Training Center (GPSTC) is located on 620 acres in Monroe County, approximately 50 miles south of Atlanta, the capitol of the State. The Center is a comprehensive training complex designed to address the needs of state and local public safety and judicial personnel. Secondary objectives of the Center are to promote cooperation and crosstraining among the various disciplines utilizing the facility, to attract the best qualified candidates to a career in public safety, and to attract out-of-state trainers to the Center in order to enrich Georgia's training program. 
Nine resident agencies have responsibility for training the various disciplines of public safety at the Center. Programs for law enforcement, firefighting, corrections, and emergency 
37 
 
 medical services are routinely provided, and the Center provides basic, specialized, and advanced training relevant to drug enforcement including training on related areas such as community policing techniques, basic Spanish, and managing confidential informants. 
In Fiscal Year 2003, the Center received $400,000 and provided 121 on-site and twentynine courses off-site to 3,385 students. Of the 3,385 officers attending, 3,198 successfully completed the training regimen, representing a 94% graduation level. The Council is very pleased with the level of successful course completion, considering the nature of the specialized courses, the wide range of skill and educational levels of the officers attending from all regions of the state, and the extremely large number of officers trained. 
Strategy Priority #2 Drug Prevention and Education 
Statement of the Priority Issue: The reduction of the demand for, as well as the availability of drugs, narcotics, and illegal substances, through drug abuse resistance education for youth. 
School Resource Officer/DARE (Byrne Program Purpose Area 1) 
The School Resource Officer (SRO) program, which the Council considers to be community policing practiced in the school environment, serves as a proactive deterrent to drug and violent crime, while providing a positive role model to students and encouraging cooperation between law enforcement, educators, youth, and parents. The SRO can be a useful project for jurisdictions that cannot fund a Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program, or as a complement to the DARE program. The SRO program is particularly reassuring to students and educators, especially where there is violence, or the strong perception of violence, in the schools, or in the immediate vicinity of the campus. 
The DARE program is based on the premise that prevention can be a powerful solution to the nation's drug problem. Three DARE programs were funded in FY 2003 for $40,146. The program is structured to provide school children with information concerning drug abuse, the negative consequences of abuse, and life skills for combating peer pressure. The most unique feature of this type of project is the utilization of DARE certified uniformed law enforcement officers as instructors. Funding is allocated to support an instructional curriculum at both the elementary and middle school levels (fifth and seventh grades). 
38 
 
 In Fiscal Year 2003, $95,139 in Byrne funding was allocated for SROs in Georgia. Those uniformed officers responded to 235 complaints, effected 122 arrests (including 19 felonies), issued 11 traffic warnings or citations, and recovered 50% of the property reported to them as stolen or lost. In addition, 26 instances of assistance to other local law enforcement were documented, and 352 conferences with students were conducted by the SRO's. 
Strategy Priority #3 Criminal Justice Records Improvement 
Statement of the Priority Issue: The priority issue is Criminal Justice Records Improvement (CJRI) in the State of Georgia. 
The primary response for CJRI improvement has included the collection of delinquent dispositions, compliance audits, assistance with standardized reporting software, and supporting technology to provide automated records and dispositions. 
Cognizant of the importance of this vital resource to the justice system, in the 2003 Byrne Program year, the Council approved $1,527,000 for CJRI. 
GCIC Local Audit Team (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15B) 
Part of the 5% set-aside mandated under the Byrne Program supports the Local Audit Team. The Team was allocated $325,000 in 2003 to expand the scope of the audits to expedite the collection of delinquent dispositions. Among other noteworthy accomplishments, the team audited 272 local agencies for compliance with records submission while collecting and processing 11,620 delinquent dispositions in the 2002 grant period. 
Local Live Scan (Byrne Program Purpose Area 15B) 
Live scan systems convert fingerprint records to digital images, which can then be transmitted and stored electronically in computer databases. This conversion greatly expedites record searches and identification of newly arrested offenders, and eliminates the majority of manual processing and manual record searches. Live scan prints of arrested persons are quickly transmitted to the State and national repositories for matching with existing fingerprint records. This provides a positive identification of the offender, and alerts the arresting agency to any outstanding charges. 
Continued automation of this system is a prerequisite to eliminating the current backlog in criminal fingerprint cards that await processing at the national repository. Live scan technology 
39 
 
 also reduces the time required for law enforcement agencies to be notified by the FBI or the State repository that an arrestee is wanted in other jurisdictions, or to receive an expedited response to an inquiry regarding possible matches of crime scene latent prints. The difference in response time on persons newly arrested and booked can be accurately stated: live scan reporting to a state with an Automated Fingerprint Identification System takes approximately two hours, compared to a 4-8 week response from non-automated systems. 
Strategy Priority #4 Offender Drug Treatment 
Statement of the Priority Issue: Providing programs to address the treatment needs of adult and juvenile drug and alcohol dependent offenders. 
Parolee Drug Testing, Treatment & Rational Thinking Skills (Byrne Program Purpose Area 13) 
Over 60% of all inmates annually admitted to Georgia prisons report some form of substance abuse problem, over 50% of the standing inmate population is diagnosed with a drug abuse problem, and over 30% have a diagnosed alcohol problem. Approximately 20 percent of the inmates were committed for a drug crime or an alcohol-related crime. 
The Georgia Department of Corrections mandates a drug education course for all inmates, a 35- day program for those with more severe substance abuse diagnoses, and the department recently added a federally funded six-nine month Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program (RSAT) for hard core, chronic drug abusers. Research has demonstrated that prison based treatment is far more effective in reducing recidivism when follow-up (aftercare) is required after the offender's release from treatment in prison. 
In 2001, the Georgia Department of Corrections partnered with the State Board of Pardons and Paroles to form the Atlanta Day Reporting Center (Center). The Center offers more stringent supervision of probationers and parolees who would otherwise have their sentences revoked and would have been returned to the confines of a state correctional facility. Mandatory drug testing participation in Cognitive skills building classes allow for more frequent monitoring of probationer/parolee behavior allows for the supervising officer to recommend and to implement appropriate programs for the offenders' participation. 
40 
 
 In the 2002-2003 Byrne Program year, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles and Georgia Department of Corrections staff accomplished the following: 
Graduation results from the ADRC program during the Byrne reporting period are represented below (Graduates will be required to complete six-months of aftercare consisting of weekly group counseling sessions and random drug screening at the ADRC): 
 Nine offenders graduated in February 2003 (67% [6] probation and 33% [3] parole) and eight graduated in April 2003 (100% [8] probation). A total of 107 offenders have graduated from the Atlanta Day Reporting center representing $1,926,000 in prison cost avoidance. 
 Of the total number of graduates, 82% (88) were probationers and 18% (19) were parolees. Those offenders have performed a total of 9,416 hours of community service valued at $48,492. 
In addition to drug testing, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles is moving forward with programs to implement pilot reparative boards as part of a larger restorative justice movement in a community corrections setting primarily for state offenders in both urban and rural areas of the state as a mechanism for reducing crime by enhancing citizen involvement in the entire process. 
Strategy Priority #5 Improving the Criminal Justice System 
Statement of the Priority Issue: Improvement of the system by conducting initiatives to enhance prosecutorial, defender, and judicial resources, including information systems, court delay reduction programs and alternatives to traditional adjudication and incarceration; and, upgrading correctional resources in prisons and jails. 
Alternatives to Incarceration (Byrne Program Purpose Area 20) 
Alternatives to incarceration typically serve collateral purpose areas, often including elements of court delay reduction, offender treatment, and drug training and education. The Council has included some innovative efforts in this direction in this strategy. 
Student Transition and Recovery (STAR) Program 
First funded in 1998, this innovative project, which received $112,983 in FY 2003, will continue in the 2004 strategy. A collaborative effort among the court system, school system, and the Georgia DJJ, the STAR program diverts youth from the juvenile justice system. Participants 
41 
 
 report to a host campus prior to school for exercise and military drill, after which they report to their regular school. After school, they return to the host campus to receive assistance with homework and to study or work on projects until their parents pick them up at 6:30 p.m. In order for the child to participate, the parent(s) must agree to attend parenting and related classes. The youth are also required to perform community service projects on weekends. Mentoring is provided by program supervisors. 
Correctional Resource Upgrade (Byrne Program Purpose Area 11) 
As the State's inmate population continues to increase (projected to surpass 48,000 in 2004), the capacity and proper functioning of Georgia's prison system is vital to the criminal justice system. In recognition of the importance of this system, priority is given to projects of statewide impact or model local projects with a potential for replication, in preference to projects which focus only upon local issues or objectives which may not benefit other jurisdictions. 
The Georgia Prison System Expansion and Upgrades 
Continued expansion and upgrades of this system remain imperative if the State is to avoid adversely impacting the local jails during those periods when prison population increases above the state system's capacity, as occurred with substantial adverse impact to local jails in 1988 and 1989. 
Despite a reduction in both the rate and the number of violent crimes in Georgia, there has been a significant increase in the number of violent and sexual offenders who are serving an increasing percentage of their sentences in prison. Severe criminal penalties enacted by the General Assembly of Georgia, combined with stringent parole release policies adopted by the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, are contributing to a dramatic increase in the number of violent offenders incarcerated in Georgia prisons. 
The Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-In-Sentencing (VOITIS) funds are used to assist in major prison construction projects in Georgia. 
Drug-testing initiatives in Georgia support the goals expressed in the VOITIS program, in the national and state drug control strategies. Programs which assure or assist in random and forcause drug testing of appropriate categories of inmates, coupled with progressive sanctions, including meaningful and effective substance abuse treatment to assist non-violent alcohol and 
42 
 
 drug abusing offenders to recover from their disease and to avoid relapse into substance abuse and criminal behavior, are necessary to effectively manage inmate populations. These programs can decrease the number of non-violent offenders cluttering up the prison system who are incarcerated because of their substance abuse addiction, or criminal acts committed to support their addiction. 
Projects fostering drug testing, treatment and other interventions are important in managing the prison population because such programs help prevent substance abusing offenders from adding to the prison growth which will inevitably occur as lawmaker's reaction to public outrage regarding violent crime, as expressed in the various Truth In Sentencing initiatives, inevitably leads to longer imprisonment of violent offenders and more crowded jails and prisons. 
The state will continue to fund programs for expansion and upgrades of the prison system to maintain the anticipated growth in the violent inmate population. Byrne program funding will be used in coordination with State appropriations and other grant resources to fund programs that contribute to the overall enhancement of the correctional resource, including those which assist with drug testing, effective sanctions, and treatment of appropriate categories of substance abusing offenders. The Council will consider collaborative efforts to develop and implement day treatment centers. 
Model Jail Programs 
The Council has funded local jail projects that had potential for replication in other jurisdictions. To lower instances of violent conflict between inmates and staff, training in conflict resolution was provided to both groups at a major county jail that was experiencing a serious overcrowding problem. 
Because of their potential for replication and reasonable success in achieving stated project goals and objectives, reapplying local projects that have not reached their four-year eligibility limit for funding will be continued using the reduced funding scale now applicable to Byrne projects in Georgia. 
Evaluation of Funded Programs 
An evaluation is a systematic assessment of the results or outcomes of program efforts to measure actual outcomes against the intended outcomes of the program; to discover achievement 
43 
 
 and results; to discover deviations from planned achievements; to judge the meaning that agencies must draw resources from their general appropriations for that specific worth of the program; to identify unintended consequences; and to recommend expansion, contraction, elimination, or modification of the program. Assessing the Effectiveness of Criminal Justice Programs, Assessment and Evaluation Handbook Series No. 1, Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), 1994. 
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 established requirements that each program funded by Byrne Program formula grants must contain an evaluation component developed pursuant to federal guidelines. 
BJA states that the "purpose of evaluating each program is to assess how well it has been implemented and to assess the extent to which the activities funded have achieved the program's goals. Such assessments should be designed to provide administrators and policy makers with an improved understanding of whether specific activities accomplish their desired results of furthering the state strategy" (Program Guidance, BJA, 1988). 
Although federal law mandates the evaluation of Byrne-funded programs in order to ensure their accountability, evaluation activities undertaken by the states provide other important benefits as well. State administrators need periodic feedback to ascertain how effectively their multi-year strategies are achieving the articulated drug control and system improvement goals. Implementation and outcomes information can be used by criminal justice planners to revise, whenever necessary, state strategies to strengthen their chances of overall success. This information is also useful for determining whether (and when) to expand a particular project, to undertake similar projects in other jurisdictions, or to reallocate resources to other purposes. 
Through the evaluation mandate, states develop the capability to independently perform process and impact evaluations. Sub-grantees and other agencies are then guided by the State Administering Agency, in developing their own evaluation capabilities. 
While the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 provides no funding to NIJ and BJA for Byrne evaluations, both the NIJ and the BJA have actively promoted the idea of increasing the States' 
44 
 
 involvement in project evaluation as a way to compensate for the limited number of evaluations that the Federal agencies can sponsor. 
Evaluation Capabilities of the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council 
Traditionally, the Georgia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council has conducted intricate and professional process evaluations of funded programs and initiatives, and has consistently solicited relevant information from State agencies and programs concerning the impact of those programs and initiatives. 
Currently, the Council is further developing its capability to evaluate initiatives and assist agencies in their own impact evaluation of funded programs. It is anticipated, however, that this leadership and example will translate to better planning and evaluation capabilities of all criminal justice agencies in Georgia. It is imperative that the model developed be comprehensive and well organized. 
With the collaboration of the Statistical Analysis Center (SAC), the Council has implemented the following evaluation plan for the FY 2004 Byrne Memorial funding initiatives: 
Each applicant for funding will be required to establish quantifiable outcome or impact objectives of the planned imitative. While this has been expected in the past, subsequent steps by the Council will reinforce the objectives. 
Reaffirm Program Objectives 
Once the grant is awarded to an agency, they will be required to reaffirm the program objectives, with the expectation that the imitative will be evaluated based on their accomplishment. 
Separate Program Objectives 
The Council will consider the program objectives developed by the agency or organization, separate them as to process or impact objectives and communicate those impressions to the agency or organization. Through this exercise, the agency and its officials will better understand the differences as well as the need to evaluate the impact of an initiative. 
Evaluation Activities 
In an effort to gather as much data as feasible to determine whether projects are effectively utilizing federal funds, the Council monitors sub-grantees quantitatively through financial evaluation and qualitatively through programmatic and performance evaluation. This process 
45 
 
 enables the Council to better assess future funding needs and requests while at the same time holding sub-grant recipients accountable for their use of public funds. 
The Council's evaluation plan consists primarily of financial and on-site monitoring by staff members who also review quarterly report data submitted by each project. Staff members monitor each project by requiring extensive documentation of services provided as well as conducting random site visits. In addition, individual projects are visited upon request for technical assistance. 
Multijurisdictional Drug Task Forces 
Staff members have visited all of the 31 task forces and performed both financial and programmatic evaluations. In certain situations, the Council conducts week-long visits to task forces. The purposes of these trips are to develop a comprehensive evaluation plan for task forces, ascertain equipment needs (task forces are required to utilize the excess property program administered through the Georgia Emergency Management Agency), and meet with various representatives of local agencies on current and upcoming activities related to the Byrne Grant Program. 
Evaluations of multijurisdictional drug task forces are comprehensive in nature. The level of the evaluations were consistent across the board, primarily consisting of financial monitoring and programmatic compliance. If problems are uncovered during the course of an evaluation, a more detailed review of that particular task force is conducted. Activities included touring facilities and viewing demonstrations of vehicles and equipment. Staff members also timed their visits to enable them to attend and answer questions at the Task Force Control Board meetings. 
Additionally, quarterly reports were submitted by all task forces and are reviewed by staff members upon receipt, and then summary data from all the quarterly reports is then created by Council staff. 
Twelve of the twenty-eight local multijurisdictional drug task forces have a GBI Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge (ASAC) as a commander. These task forces receive additional evaluation and oversight from GBI Regional Drug Enforcement Offices (RDEO), that routinely conduct evaluations to assure conformance with GBI rules and regulations in their operational activities. 
46 
 
 This oversight provides added assurance that these task forces are run efficiently and effectively. As a result of these evaluations, the Council began a process to develop standard operating procedures manuals for the task forces. 
State Projects 
These projects are continually evaluated by Council staff. Many of the State agency subgrantees have a representative on the Council and attend periodic Council meetings. Also, many of the State agency project staff are members of other criminal justice related task forces and committees that Council representatives attend. This interaction allows for a less formal way of evaluating the projects by sharing information. They too are required to submit quarterly reports that are reviewed to determine the progress of the project. 
An annual review of each project is conducted by (Council) staff. In addition, under the current evaluation and monitoring plans in effect at the Council, each monthly or quarterly progress report and reimbursement request received from each project is reviewed by an experienced auditor and planner. Any deficiencies detected by Council staff are thoroughly explored and a remedy or action plan is developed to help the project reach its goals and objectives. 
47