NM Data In Integration Grant Program: Webinar 2 Zach Grant New - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

NM Data In Integration Grant Program: Webinar 2

Zach Grant New Mexico Sentencing Commission 505 595 6468 | zwg2@unm.edu JULY 8, 2019

BACKGROUND

HB 267 (and related junior budget bills)

• Pretrial Bucket: contact AOC’s Kelly Bradford - aockkb@nmcourts.org
• Data Integration Bucket: ~900k
• Overseen by New Mexico Sentencing Commission (NMSC)
• ~450k for statewide, will first target the SID (state identifier number)
• ~375k for Data Integration Grant Program
• Mandates creation of CJCCs, requires grant applications be endorsed

by those CJCCs

WHY DATA INTEGRATION?

WHY DATA INTEGRATION?

• For system as a whole: streamlined business processes

WHY DATA INTEGRATION?

• For system as a whole: streamlined business processes
• For policy makers: easier, more informed policy and resource

allocation decisions

WHY DATA INTEGRATION?

• For system as a whole: streamlined business processes
• For policy makers: easier, more informed policy and resource

allocation decisions

• For program managers: Effective, efficient, timely program evaluation

and performance management

WHY DATA INTEGRATION?

• For system as a whole: streamlined business processes
• For policy makers: easier, more informed policy and resource

allocation decisions

• For program managers: Effective, efficient, timely program evaluation

and performance management

• For the public: better “service” AND therefore safety

LONG TERM VISION

LONG TERM VISION

• CURRENT:
• Siloed information due to the fragmented structure of the criminal justice

system

LONG TERM VISION

• CURRENT:
• Siloed information due to the fragmented structure of the criminal justice

system

• STRUCTURE:
• CJCC – type bodies provide a vehicle for using technology more

collaboratively to break down OR connect those siloes systematically, including (eventually) governance of sharing agreements and data usage.

LONG TERM VISION

• CURRENT:
• Siloed information due to the fragmented structure of the criminal justice

system

• STRUCTURE:
• CJCC – type bodies provide a vehicle for using technology more

collaboratively to break down OR connect those siloes systematically, including (eventually) governance of sharing agreements and data usage.

• EXPECTATIONS: 20 year project
• Coloring in the wall metaphor
• Supermarket metaphor

WHY LOCAL DATA INTEGRATION GRANTS?

• Open ended, ground up approach. We want to identify:
• local priorities based on local variables
• priorities that are common to multiple districts
• as many collective needs as possible to include in report back to State

Legislature

• Design Thinking - Vase Example
• Coopetition more than competition

You tell us problem and the proposed solution! We pay!

(If we can!)

WHY CJCC APPROVAL?

• To ensure key stakeholder decision makers are informed about any

applications submitted and have had an opportunity for input

• To ensure collaboration has occurred in the application drafting

process among 2+ CJCC stakeholders

• Exact process will depend on your local CJCC.

APPLICATION PROCESS

TIMELINE:

• JULY 15: application packet released
• JULY 15- AUGUST 15: additional webinars planned, including potential
• vendor demos
• brainstorming assistance
• AUGUST 15: applications due by 5pm
• SEPTEMBER 1: grants awarded, contract and vendor selection process begins
• HIGH REACHING GOAL - OCTOBER 1: work begins

APPLICATION PACKET

• Still in development but…
• …will aim to be fairly open ended
• As light as possible: ID the problem, PROPOSE a solution, PROVIDE

some background information.

• Will ask for as many applications as your district can generate
• Will ask for broad stroke budget numbers. More important will be the

level of collaboration and vision behind the idea.

THE MOST COMPETITIVE IDEAS WILL:

❑ Have BREADTH: i.e. benefit at least 3 criminal justice stakeholders (more = better) ❑ Have DEPTH: i.e. solves consensus priority needs. ❑ Aim to take a small bite out of a BIG apple:

• Can provide tangible benefit in 1 year
• Will enable additional future development to solve additional needs
• Take an iterative, modular, micro-services approach to technology development

❑ Allow for, immediately or in the future:

• Easier access to data from external users (APIs etc)
• Cleaner processes that lead to cleaner data entry / maintenance

❑ AND/OR: Lead to cost savings and efficiencies in logistics or other system processes

WHAT NOW?

WHO TO INVITE TO PARTICIPATE:

• Anyone with insight and breadth of knowledge about:

❑ Sending or receiving information to and from their entity to external partners (includes IPRA) ❑ Records management ❑ IT / Networking ❑ Data management ❑ Business processes and flows with external partners

STEPS:

1. Assemble group of representatives from relevant CJCC partners 2. Inform them of process and program 3. Gather ideas from the group, brainstorm 4. Compile into a wish list 5. As a group, evaluate wish list and prioritize by vote 6. Identify which top ideas match application criteria the best 7. Identify:

• sponsor entity for that idea / application
• partner entities to assist the sponsor
• Individual(s) to draft the application

8. Gain CJCC approval 9. Submit to NMSC on August 15

WISHLIST SPREADSHEET TOOL

• GOAL: identify consensus priorities.
• USES: Google Sheets – allows for collaboration from multiple stakeholders remotely
• If you’re a stakeholder with an idea: find your own section of empty space on Tab 1,

enter background info on the idea(s) for others to review.

• If you’re the group coordinator:
• Encourage all representatives to vote before you meet on Tabs 2 (BREADTH) and 3 (DEPTH)
• Before the meeting, prep Tab 6 by sorting ideas to show highest votes
• As a group:
• Optional: discuss which ideas are similar (Tab 4) and what broad stroke start-up costs might be (Tab

5)

• Required: Using scores on Tab 6, discuss which ideas meet group’s goals the most

SAMPLE IDEAS

• Court Processes:
• Access to real time court disposition information
• Automate calendaring information
• Automate notice of hearings
• Custody Related:
• Where is an individual being held?
• Are they under supervision?
• Are they in the infirmary?
• Do they need to be on or taken off the transport list?
• Warrant Related:
• Enable law enforcement and jails to get most updated warrant information possible.
• Is the person alive? (DOH Death certificates)
• Was the warrant quashed or cancelled?
• Is there an outstanding warrant in another county before a jail release?
• High frequency utilizers / familiar faces –
• pull data from multiple sources to gather real-time information about the most frequent utilizers across the system. ER

visits, multiple arrests, treatment needs or costs in jail, flag for diversion, etc.

STILL TO COME AS TIME ALLOWS:

• Demos from prospective vendors with examples of projects from
• ther states and local jurisdictions
• Data integration research and background information (not just a NM

effort)