The Standard: Highlighting the People and Practices that Define our Field

Advancing Evidence-Based Pretrial in Indiana: Judicial Spotlight: Judge Mark Spitzer, Grant County , IN

Thu, 23 Apr 2026 10:05:24 GMT

Indiana's Evidence-Based Pretrial Framework: Built Through Collaboration, Data and Judicial Leadership.

Indiana has become a leading example of how multidisciplinary collaboration and evidence-based decision-making can strengthen pretrial systems. In this Judicial Spotlight, Judge Mark Spitzer of Grant Circuit Court reflects on Indiana’s journey, the role of JRAC and EBDM, and the principles that continue to shape pretrial practice across the state.

Indiana’s Pretrial Story

Q: For those unfamiliar, can you briefly share “The Indiana Story” and how EBDM and JRAC have shaped pretrial practices in your state?

"Indiana’s pretrial transformation began with a broader concept: system alignment through collaboration. Drawing from a medical model—where outcomes improved through research, education, and coordinated implementation—criminal justice leaders explored how similar principles could be applied to justice systems.

Grant County became one of seven national pilot sites for the Evidence-Based Decision-Making (EBDM) Initiative, bringing together stakeholders across the system—judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation, community corrections, treatment providers, and local government. The goal was simple but powerful: better collaboration leads to better outcomes.

As the work progressed, Indiana expanded EBDM statewide. Through a multidisciplinary state-level committee, pretrial was identified as a key “change target.” This led to the development of Indiana’s evidence-based pretrial system—not as a top-down mandate, but as a collaborative effort across all justice system partners. Today, that work continues through the Justice Reinvestment Advisory Council (JRAC) and the Indiana Pretrial Release Committee—both grounded in the same collaborative, evidence-driven principles that started in Grant County.

“Indiana’s evidence-based pretrial system was built collaboratively, with stakeholders across the justice system asking: How can we do this the best way?”

Judicial Background and Leadership

Q: Please share a brief overview of your judicial background and your involvement with the Indiana Pretrial Initiative.

"I serve as a Circuit Court Judge with general jurisdiction, including criminal law and high-level felony cases, so pretrial decision-making is a regular part of my work. Over time, I became involved in Indiana’s statewide EBDM efforts, co-chaired pretrial initiatives, and was later appointed by the Chief Justice to chair the Indiana Pretrial Release Committee. I have also served as the Indiana Judges Association’s representative on the Indiana Bail Commission and have had the opportunity to teach judges and other stakeholders about pretrial practices. Those roles have allowed me to engage with pretrial from the bench, at the policy level, and through judicial education."

Why Pretrial Reform Matters

Q: What inspired your commitment to improving pretrial decision-making in Indiana?

Anyone who has worked within a traditional cash bail system has seen its limitations. For Judge Spitzer, evidence-based pretrial offered a better way. Rather than relying on assumptions, it gives judges better information to make more principled decisions about who can be safely released and under what conditions.

"If you’ve spent time on the bench under a traditional cash bail system, you quickly see its limitations. You set bail expecting someone will be released—and they aren’t. Or you set bail expecting detention—and they post it.

Historically, cash bail has not done a good job addressing public safety or ensuring appropriate release decisions. That realization led me to ask: is there a better way.

Evidence-based pretrial provides that better way. It gives judges more information to make informed decisions about who can be safely released and under what conditions. We know most individuals can be safely released pretrial, and most do not engage in misconduct. The key is having a principled, data-informed approach to decision-making."

Why It Matters: Evidence-based pretrial helps judges:

Make more informed release decisions
Better protect public safety
Respect due process and the presumption of innocence
Reduce unnecessary detention

Collaboration as Infrastructure

Q: Indiana has a strong JRAC infrastructure. How does your state’s approach compare to a Court Coordinating Council model?

Judge Spitzer describes them as essentially serving the same purpose: bringing multidisciplinary voices together to identify challenges, align strategy, and improve outcomes across the system. Indiana’s success has come in large part from maintaining that collaborative structure over time.

The Role of Data

Q: Data has been central to Indiana’s pretrial work. How is pretrial data being used to inform judicial decision-making and system improvement?

Data is a core component of evidence-based practice. Judge Spitzer emphasizes that systems should measure what they are doing, examine whether it is effective, and adjust accordingly. Indiana’s use of data has helped demonstrate that evidence-based release practices can improve outcomes without compromising public safety.

"Data is foundational to evidence-based pretrial. One of the core EBDM principles is to measure what you’re doing and respond accordingly. If something isn’t working, you change it. If it is working, you strengthen and expand it.

Data also plays a critical role in addressing misinformation. There are many misconceptions about pretrial release and public safety. By analyzing outcomes over time, we can demonstrate that evidence-based practices enhance—not diminish—public safety.

Equally important is ensuring that data reaches policymakers and decision-makers. That’s how systems evolve and improve."

“If what you’re doing is not effective, you should change it. If it is effective, you should keep doing it—and maybe even broaden it”

Data is not just for reporting. It is for:

Continuous quality improvement
Policy development
Transparency
Public education
Judicial decision support
Community trust

Certification and Professional Practice

Q: Indiana has implemented a pretrial certification framework. What led to that decision?

"Indiana’s certification model grew out of its earlier success with problem-solving courts, including drug courts and veterans treatment courts. In those settings, certification helped ensure that programs were using best practices and achieving stronger outcomes. That same framework translated well to pretrial. Programs receive education, are observed in practice, and are given feedback on how to align more closely with best practices."

For Judge Spitzer, certification has helped professionalize the field and build confidence in the consistency and quality of pretrial services. Review Indiana's Pretrial Services Certification Rules .

The Judicial Perspective

Q: What aspects of pretrial reform are you most passionate about from the judicial perspective?

Judge Spitzer returns often to one central tension: balancing the presumption of innocence and due process with public safety. That is where the judicial role becomes especially important. Evidence-based pretrial gives judges better tools and better information, helping them make decisions that are more principled, more consistent, and more just.

"It comes down to balance—presumption of innocence, due process, and public safety. There is inherent tension in that balance, and getting it right is critical.

The best way to navigate that is by equipping judges with reliable information and education. When judges understand the data, the research, and the available tools, they can make better, more principled decisions. That ultimately benefits both individuals in the system and the broader community."

“We are serving the public best when we make these decisions in the best way that we can.”

Challenges Ahead

Q: What do you see as the greatest opportunity—or challenge—currently facing pretrial systems?

One of Indiana’s biggest emerging questions is how to approach preventative detention if constitutional and statutory changes move forward. Judge Spitzer notes that any such implementation must remain faithful to best practices, due process, and the practical realities of jail overcrowding.

He also points to an ongoing communications challenge: correcting the misconception that public safety is best achieved by detaining everyone. That approach, he notes, carries enormous costs for individuals, families, communities, and local systems.

"In Indiana, a major challenge is the potential implementation of preventative detention through a constitutional amendment. The question becomes: how do we implement that in a way that maintains fidelity to evidence-based practices, protects due process, and avoids unnecessary jail overcrowding?

More broadly, there is an ongoing “information battle.” Misconceptions about pretrial can drive policies that favor unnecessary detention. In reality, overuse of detention has significant financial and human costs—and often isn’t needed to maintain public safety."

Current Challenges

Preventative detention policy changes
Protecting due process
Avoiding unnecessary jail overcrowding
Countering misinformation about pretrial release

Proud Accomplishment

Q: Looking back, what accomplishment related to pretrial improvement are you most proud of?

Judge Spitzer points to his role in helping build Indiana’s evidence-based pretrial system, but he is just as proud of the culture surrounding it. Indiana has not settled for maintaining the status quo. Instead, it has created a structure that continues to evaluate itself, learn from research, and improve over time.

“We’re not satisfied with the status quo—we’re continuing to move forward.”

"I’m proud of the role I’ve played—alongside many others—in developing Indiana’s evidence-based pretrial system.

What excites me most is not just what we’ve built, but how we’ve built it: a system committed to continuous improvement. We are not satisfied with the status quo. We evaluate, adapt, and evolve based on data and research. That mindset is what gives this work long-term promise."

Advice to Other Jurisdictions

Q: What guidance would you offer to jurisdictions beginning or advancing pretrial reform efforts?

His advice is straightforward: do not reinvent the wheel.

“There is already strong work happening across Indiana and around the country, and the pretrial field is notable for its willingness to share tools, lessons, and innovations.

Jurisdictions do not have to start from scratch. Many low-cost and no-cost resources already exist, and learning from others can accelerate progress.”

Priorities for the Future

What priorities should stakeholders focus on to continue strengthening pretrial practice?

Judge Spitzer emphasizes support for frontline practitioners. Indiana’s coordinators have had a meaningful voice in shaping the state’s work, and that feedback loop has been one of its greatest strengths.

By creating a safe and collaborative environment for coordinators to share concerns, ideas, and practical lessons, Indiana has reinforced the idea that systems are only as strong as the people doing the day-to-day work.

"Ultimately, systems are only as strong as the people implementing them. Empowering those individuals has been one of our most important decisions."

Final Reflection

Q: What should readers take away from this work?

For Judge Spitzer, the message is simple: this work matters.

Pretrial systems affect real lives—not only those charged with offenses, but also victims, families, and communities. Evidence-based approaches create a better opportunity to balance those interests fairly, thoughtfully, and effectively.

"This work is worth the effort.

In the criminal justice system, we’re talking about real lives—not just individuals charged with offenses, but also victims and entire communities. Evidence-based pretrial gives us the ability to better balance those competing interests than we have historically.

If you haven’t started this work, I encourage you to. It matters—and it makes a difference."

“This work is worth the effort.”

Indiana’s progress in pretrial reform reflects years of intentional collaboration, thoughtful leadership, and a willingness to evolve. Judge Mark Spitzer has helped shape that work from the bench, through statewide committees, and in the education of judges and practitioners across the state. His perspective is a reminder that strong pretrial systems are built not only on policy, but on principle, partnership, and persistence.

Meet the NAPSA Board: President Eric Schmidt

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 17:06:34 GMT

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Eric Schmidt

Board Role/Title: President

Term of Service: 2017 - Present

Location (City/State): Detroit Michigan

Professional Role/Organization: Manager / Oakland County Pretrial & Justice Services

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

I began my career in 1995 as a Pretrial Services Investigator for Oakland County, Michigan. Over the next 31 years, I would remain with the same organization holding many positions throughout the organization. The one I enjoyed the most was spending 16 years as the Supervisor for Oakland County Pretrial Services. In 2020, I completed my master’s degree in public administration, and shortly after was promoted Manager overseeing both pretrial and post-conviction programming.

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

After attending many NAPSA conferences, I started to understand the needs of practitioners nationally. I too had a desire to learn, to professionally grow, and push myself to continue bringing best practices to my organization. It was then that I joined the NAPSA Education Committee. My involvement in that committee motivated me to look for more ways to help the field, so I ran for the Midwest Regional Director.

What motivated you to serve on the NAPSA Board?

During my time on the NAPSA Education Committee, the people I met inspired me to keep learning, contributing, and gave me the inspiration to run for a board position. I am hopeful that I can contribute transparent leadership, fairness, and inspire others on the board to be creative, innovative, and together we will continue moving NAPSA forward.

What area of NAPSA’s work are you most passionate about?

The areas of NAPSA’s work that I am most passionate about are really the overarching goal to educate the field on best practices in pretrial. It’s been exciting two years with innovation, webinars, a new leadership session, and hosting a conference that educates not just pretrial professionals, but judicial officers and prosecutors / defense attorney’s alike.

What do you see as the biggest opportunity—or challenge—facing pretrial services today?

One of the biggest opportunities for pretrial services today is to continue building supportive services into supervision strategies and thinking critically about managing court ordered compliance in a way that supports people, provides recommendations for alternatives to revocation for technical violations, but when necessary, assists the court in determining who pose an articulable risk to public safety. These opportunities need to involve all system stakeholders.

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

During my 31 year career in the pretrial services field, I have a good understanding of the needs of both practitioners and stakeholders. I have a collaborative approach, believe in transparency, and have a leadership style that welcomes the voices of not just the executive board, but all board members. I believe that this combination of leadership style, experience, and direct communication will help strengthen the board.

What accomplishment—professionally or personally—are you most proud of?

I’m very proud to have maintained such a long career within one organization. The field, system culture, and most recent system collaboration with all stakeholders in my home jurisdiction is something I’m professionally proud to have been a participant in. Personally, I am most proud of being a dad to my 12-year-old daughter.

What advice would you give to someone new to pretrial services or NAPSA?

My first suggestion to someone new to pretrial services would reflect the need to fully understand the court rules and / or bail statutes of the jurisdiction they work in. Second, I would recommend the review of the NAPSA Standards, and that they work within their agency to implement as many as possible. As the field continues changing, everyone needs to keep evolving themselves, their organizations, and their systems.

What do you hope NAPSA members know about the Board’s work?

I hope that NAPSA members know that the board continues to work for them, the field we all love, and that we are working tirelessly to bring education, training, and standards of excellence for pretrial justice.

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

Outside of work, I enjoy spending time with my family, our Australian Sheppard (Wynter), playing golf, traveling, and the sport of fowling.

Closing

I’ve enjoyed my time on the NAPSA board and it’s been my pleasure to have served as the Midwest Regional Director, the President-Elect, and now continue serving the members as the President.

Texas Association of Pretrial Services (TAPS) Honors Aaron Johnson

Tue, 07 Apr 2026 02:08:15 GMT

Aaron Johnson:

A Career Defined by Pretrial Leadership, Reform, and Service

Written by April Craig, TAPS Vice President

In pretrial services, lasting change rarely comes from one policy or one moment. It comes from leaders who spend years building better systems, challenging outdated practices, and keeping fairness at the center of public safety. Aaron Johnson, Director of Personal Bond, Magistrate Court and Collections for Galveston County, is one of those leaders.

Mr. Johnson currently serves as President of the Texas Association of Pretrial Services and has led Galveston County’s Personal Bond and Collections operations since 2019. Before coming to Texas, he built a career across multiple jurisdictions and has worked in state and county public safety agencies since 1995. His professional background also includes service in the U.S. Army Reserve as a combat field medic, along with academic training in sociology and business administration.

One of the clearest themes in Mr. Johnson’s career is that he has not simply managed pretrial systems. He has helped create and modernize them. Mr. Johnson helped develop and implement the first Pretrial Services Agency for Mr. Johnson County, Kansas, in 2010. Working with the University of Missouri–Kansas City and the Pretrial Justice Institute, he contributed to the development and validation of Mr. Johnson County’s risk assessment tool and helped shape that county’s pretrial release and detention guidelines. Those efforts reflected an early commitment to evidence-based decision-making in a part of the justice system that too often relied on habit instead of data.

Mr. Johnson later brought that same reform-minded approach to Santa Clara County, California, where he served as Director of Pretrial Services from 2016 to 2019. In that role, he helped implement 16 recommendations from the county’s Bail and Release Work Group. Those changes included the use of the Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment tool in intimate partner violence cases and multiple diversion efforts through the department. His work there showed an ability to connect policy, operations, and public safety in practical ways.

Since taking over in Galveston County in 2019, Mr. Johnson has led within a jurisdiction that has been central to some of Texas’ most important pretrial debates. Public reporting and court records show that Galveston County’s bail system became the subject of federal litigation over wealth-based detention and the lack of counsel at initial felony bail hearings. In 2018, a federal court ordered the county to provide counsel at those hearings, a ruling described by the ACLU as the first federal decision to hold that the Sixth Amendment requires counsel at initial felony bail hearings. More recent Texas Indigent Defense Commission monitoring materials show that Galveston County’s Personal Bond Office screens defendants for indigence after arrest as part of that process. While those reforms grew out of litigation and broader county action, they also form the environment in which Mr. Johnson’s leadership in Galveston has taken shape.

Mr. Johnson’s influence extends well beyond one county. TAPS elected him as its current President, and he also serves as the Chair of the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies’ (NAPSA) Education Committee and has been a regular speaker at national conferences on pretrial risk assessment and leadership. Mr. Johnson received NAPSA’s 2019 Member of the Year award. His statewide policy engagement is also public: Texas House materials show him submitting comments on pretrial legislation as a TAPS representative.

That broader leadership helps explain why his colleagues see him as a pioneer. Reform in pretrial services is difficult work. It requires balancing constitutional protections, public safety, court operations, victim concerns, and the realities counties face every day. Mr. Johnson’s career reflects repeated involvement in that kind of work: creating agencies, implementing validated tools, expanding diversion options, engaging in statewide advocacy, and helping shape conversations about how Texas handles pretrial release.

On March 25, 2026, Mr. Johnson was recognized at the Texas Association of Pretrial Services conference with the TAPS Pioneer Award. Based on the record of his career, that recognition fits. The award honors leadership that moves the field forward, and Mr. Johnson’s work has done exactly that across counties, across states, and across the broader movement for fairer pretrial justice.

At a time when jurisdictions across the country continue to examine the role of bail, detention, and equity in the justice system, Aaron Johnson’s career stands out as a reminder that meaningful reform is built by people willing to do the long, detailed, collaborative work. His contributions have not only shaped local practice; they have helped push the field of pretrial services toward a more thoughtful and more just future.

About the Author:

April Craig serves as Vice President of the Texas Association of Pretrial Services and as Programs Manager for Dallas County Pretrial Services. After graduating from Texas State University, she began her career in criminal justice as a felony legal assistant and probation officer before transitioning into pretrial services, where she developed a strong passion for bail reform and professional education. She later earned a master’s degree in criminal justice leadership and management from Lamar University and was first elected to the TAPS Board as Treasurer in 2015. Through her work at both the county and statewide levels, Ms. Craig has remained committed to advancing effective pretrial practices, supporting professional development, and strengthening the field across Texas.

Celebrating the Retirement and Enduring Legacy of Timothy R. Schnacke

Mon, 06 Apr 2026 16:07:34 GMT

A tribute to a scholar and leader whose work reshaped the national conversation on bail and due process.

On behalf of the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) and its Board of Directors, we are proud to recognize and celebrate the retirement of Timothy R. Schnacke—a transformative leader whose scholarship, integrity, and vision have helped shape the modern pretrial justice landscape.

Throughout his distinguished career, Tim has guided the field to better understand not only what pretrial justice should be, but how to build it. His work has supported practitioners, courts, policymakers, and researchers nationwide, consistently grounding reform in constitutional principles, the history of bail, and evidence-based legal practice.

Tim’s unique ability to clarify complex legal issues—and to challenge long-standing misconceptions about bail, risk, and detention—has strengthened the foundation of pretrial reform efforts across jurisdictions. His scholarship has helped elevate the national conversation from one centered on money and tradition to one focused on due process, fairness, and intentional decision-making.

A Culminating Contribution: Bipartisan Bail Reform: Three Pillars of Pretrial Justice

In December 2025, Tim published what he described as his final paper, “ Bipartisan Bail Reform: Three Pillars of Pretrial Justice .” The paper serves as a thoughtful culmination of decades of work and reflects his commitment to principled, practical reform.

In it, Tim outlines three essential pillars that jurisdictions must embrace to move from arbitrary, money-based systems toward intentional, constitutionally grounded pretrial frameworks:

1. Collaboration

Expanding and clarifying the roles of the broad range of stakeholders required to achieve meaningful pretrial justice—including courts, pretrial services professionals, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, policymakers, and community partners.

2. Education

Addressing persistent misunderstandings about bail and “no bail,” distinguishing historic reform from modern improvements, and examining the complexities surrounding risk assessment and prediction. Tim consistently emphasized that sustainable reform begins with shared understanding.

3. Intentional Release and Detention

Replacing random, money-based outcomes with systems defined by purposeful release and narrowly tailored detention decisions grounded in law, due process, and individualized consideration. Together, these pillars reflect Tim’s lifelong message:

"Pretrial systems must be principled, evidence-based, and constitutionally sound."

A Lasting Impact on the Field

Tim’s extensive body of work—including seminal writings on risk, due process, and the history of bail—remains available through the Center for Legal and Evidence-Based Practices . His publications continue to inform policy development, training, and implementation efforts nationwide.

His voice has shaped national dialogue. His scholarship has guided reform. His leadership has strengthened practice.

While Tim may be retiring from active work, his influence will continue to guide the field for years to come. The principles he championed—collaboration, education, and intentionality—remain central to NAPSA’s mission and to the continued advancement of fair and effective pretrial justice systems.

On behalf of NAPSA and the broader pretrial community, we extend our deepest gratitude for his extraordinary contributions and wish him the very best in his well-earned retirement.

Wendy Venvertloh

Executive Director

National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA)

Culture Is King in Pretrial Systems

Thu, 26 Mar 2026 17:36:28 GMT

Why Culture Work Is Essential in a Complex and Changing Environment

Written by Glenn Tapia, ACJI

Pretrial systems are under constant pressure. New legislation, evolving court expectations, public scrutiny, staffing challenges, and rapid reform efforts all converge at the front end of the justice system. In this environment, leaders often focus on policies, tools, and evidence-based practices to drive improvement.

Yet time and again, reforms stall, fade, or fail to deliver their promise. The reason is rarely the tool itself. More often, it is culture.

This article explores why culture work is not optional in pretrial systems, why these environments are uniquely complex and change-heavy, and how leaders can intentionally shape cultures that support effectiveness, humanity, and sustainability rather than resistance and burnout.

Why Pretrial Is Inherently Complex

Pretrial work sits at the crossroads of public safety, legal decision-making, human behavior, and community trust. Decisions are fast, high-stakes, and highly visible. Staff navigate uncertainty daily, often with incomplete information and competing demands.

This complexity creates pressure. When systems are under pressure, culture shows up fast.

Culture influences how decisions are made, how discretion is exercised, how staff interact with one another, and how individuals are treated at their first point of system contact. In complex systems, culture becomes the operating system that guides behavior when rules alone are not enough.

Culture Is Upstream From Policy and Practice

At ACJI, culture is understood as upstream from strategy, practice, and outcomes. Policies and tools may define what should happen, but culture determines what actually happens and what becomes habit.

When culture is misaligned, even well-designed reforms struggle to take root. Control-heavy norms, deficit-focused problem solving, and unspoken expectations quietly undermine change. Staff may comply outwardly while disengaging inwardly. Innovation slows. Decision quality erodes.

When culture is healthy, adaptive, and people-centered, the opposite occurs. Staff engagement improves. Collaboration increases. Equity and consistency strengthen. Systems gain the capacity to adapt rather than react.

Common Cultural Traps in Pretrial Environments

Pretrial systems often inherit cultural patterns shaped by risk, liability, and urgency. These patterns can include:

A strong emphasis on control rather than learning
Problem fixation instead of strengths-based improvement
Pseudo-silence, where people stop speaking up because it feels unsafe

Over time, these dynamics contribute to occupational stress, disengagement, and organizational fatigue. Leaders may sense something is wrong but struggle to name it because culture operates quietly in the background.

Culture Work Is Leadership Work

Culture does not change through memos or new checklists. It changes through daily leadership behavior, mindset, and interaction.

Leaders at all levels shape culture through how they respond to tension, invite dialogue, handle mistakes, and model curiosity. Psychological safety becomes a critical condition for change, especially in environments marked by stress and organizational trauma.

A foundational principle of culture work is simple but demanding: as a leader, I am culture. Every interaction either reinforces the current culture or nudges it toward something healthier.

Culture as the Anchor in a Changing Pretrial Environment

Pretrial systems operate amid constant change. Legislative reforms, political shifts, and differing stakeholder perspectives place ongoing pressure on agencies at the front end of the justice system. In these conditions, culture becomes the anchor.

Culture shapes how staff interpret new laws, respond to external pressure, and engage disagreement. When culture is clear and values-driven, agencies adapt without losing purpose. Shared norms provide stability when policies shift and leadership changes. Culture does not stop change, but it prevents drift. For pretrial systems navigating evolving legal and justice landscapes, culture is essential infrastructure, not a soft initiative. It keeps the system steady while allowing forward movement (Alliance for Community and Justice Innovation).

Moving From Survival to Advancement

Pretrial systems cannot afford to treat culture as an afterthought. In environments defined by complexity and constant change, culture is the strategy that allows reforms to take hold and people to thrive.

Intentional culture work creates the conditions for learning, adaptation, and resilience. It helps systems move beyond survival mode toward sustainable advancement.

Culture is not soft work. It is essential infrastructure for pretrial systems that seek to be effective, humane, and ready for the future.

Where Can I Learn More?

NAPSA is partnering with the Alliance for Community and Justice Innovation (ACJI) to deliver a webinar on Culture and Pretrial System Advancement. Join our webinar on Monday March 30 ^th at 2:00 p.m. EST for 90 minutes to learn what this culture talk is all about. Guest presenters Glenn A Tapia (ACJI) and Hillary Hartoin (Cass County Court Services and NAPSA) will discuss how Culture is King in our profession.

About the Author

Glenn A. Tapia is the Director of Leadership and Organizational Intelligence with the Alliance for Community and Justice Innovation (ACJI). He brings 37 years of public sector criminal justice experience, including 25 consecutive years with the State of Colorado and 13 years in senior executive leadership across both the executive and judicial branches. Glenn previously served as Director of Colorado Probation Services and Director of Colorado Community Corrections, providing statewide oversight of large-scale community supervision systems, policy development, and budget administration.

Glenn’s work is grounded in applied implementation science, evidence-based decision-making, and adaptive leadership. His expertise spans organizational culture, leadership development, neuro leadership, and system reform. He has taught criminal justice at the university level and consults nationally with local, state, and federal agencies. Glenn is deeply committed to advancing public safety policy and practice through the disciplined application of science, collaboration, and organizational intelligence.

Diversion Committee Relaunched - First Step, Revise Diversion Standards

Fri, 13 Mar 2026 13:30:22 GMT

NAPSA’s Diversion Committee

Begins Standards Revisions by Defining Diversion

The National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) has played a seminal role in shaping the field of Diversion for nearly five decades. NAPSA first articulated a definition of Diversion in its 1978 Black Letter Standards for Pretrial Release , thereby laying the foundation for a national dialogue on alternatives to traditional criminal case processing. Building upon that framework, NAPSA issued the inaugural Pretrial Diversion Standards in 1995, emphasizing the importance of non-punitive pathways to case resolution—approaches designed not only to improve immediate community outcomes but also to mitigate long-term recidivism risk.

Recognizing the rapid evolution of Diversion practices, NAPSA published the second edition of the Performance Standards and Goals for Pretrial Diversion/Interventions in 2008. This work was prompted by profound system-level developments, including the advent of electronic criminal record systems and the proliferation of treatment courts. NAPSA further contributed to the field through the release of key publications such as Promising Practices in Pretrial Diversion (2009), Pretrial Diversion in the 21st Century (2009), and Outcome and Performance Measures for the Pretrial Diversion Field (2011). In collaboration with the National Institute of Corrections, NAPSA also convened a national symposium that culminated in the 2017 report, Using Front-End Interventions to Achieve Public Safety and Healthy Communities .

Over the past several years, organizations such as the American Bar Association, the Center for Effective Public Policy, the National Institute of Corrections, and All Rise have produced exemplary resources, trainings, and scholarship in this area. NAPSA commends these contributions and now seeks to once again assume a leadership role by reestablishing the NAPSA Diversion Committee . The charge to this committee is multifaceted: to develop a comprehensive definition of Diversion; to delineate NAPSA’s role in advancing the field; to design practical tools for practitioners; and to update the Diversion Standards, which have not been revised since 2008.

The committee is composed of an accomplished and diverse group of practitioners from approximately a dozen states, representing rural, suburban, and urban jurisdictions. Members bring expertise across multiple disciplines, including direct service delivery, program management, and prosecution. This breadth of experience provides the foundation for producing resources that are both theoretically rigorous and operationally pragmatic. Over the coming years, the committee will release a series of documents and tools, culminating in the development of robust, research-informed Diversion Standards that reflect the needs and realities of contemporary practice.

As an initial step, the committee has adopted the following working definition:

Diversion refers to any program or strategy that directs individuals away from traditional criminal justice processes.

This intentionally broad conceptualization affirms the diversity of approaches currently in practice while leaving space for future innovation. It explicitly encompasses treatment courts, while recognizing that specialized organizations such as All Rise are best positioned to lead the field on that specific model. More broadly, the definition reflects NAPSA’s conviction that Diversion can—and should—be available at every stage of the criminal justice continuum. Whether implemented through law enforcement-led deflection, pre-charge prosecutorial initiatives, or post-charge options, Diversion must consistently be grounded in three essential pillars: ethics, empirical research, and the rule of law.

Through this relaunch, NAPSA reiterates its dedication to promoting Diversion as both a core principle and an applied practice. We invite members and colleagues to participate in this endeavor. Those interested in contributing to the NAPSA Diversion Committee may contact NAPSA Executive Director Wendy Venvertloh at execdirector@napsa.org.

Wendy Venvertloh

Executive Director

National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA)

Setting the Standard in Pretrial Justice

Wed, 11 Mar 2026 18:26:40 GMT

Introducing NAPSA’s Refreshed Strategic Vision:
Setting the Standard in Pretrial Justice

The National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) has long served as the national voice for safe, fair, and evidence‑based pretrial justice. At our recent Board of Directors strategic planning meeting, leadership undertook an in‑depth review of the organization’s vision, mission, guiding values, and strategic approach. Today, we are excited to share the refreshed framework that will guide NAPSA’s future and continue to elevate the standard for pretrial practice nationwide.

Reaffirming Our Mission

At the center of this strategic refresh is a mission that remains deeply aligned with NAPSA’s purpose:

NAPSA’s mission is to promote pretrial justice and public safety through rational pretrial decision making and practices informed by evidence.

This unwavering focus ensures that every program, publication, partnership, and educational offering continues to support fairness, community well‑being, and data‑driven pretrial outcomes.

Our Updated Values

The Board reaffirmed and refined NAPSA’s core values, which now highlight the essential traits that define the organization’s leadership in the field:

Accountability
Collaboration
Equity
Integrity
Non‑partisan
Transparency

These values reflect our belief that the pretrial system must operate with fairness, openness, and a commitment to evidence‑based justice - principles that guide NAPSA’s programs and the broader field.

Our Core Strategic Approach

NAPSA continues to anchor its strategy in what it does best:

Providing evidence‑based standards and education to individuals and agencies.

This core approach will remain the foundation of NAPSA’s impact—ensuring that practitioners, jurisdictions, and policymakers have access to the most current research, proven practices, and high‑quality professional development opportunities.

Supporting Strategies for the Future

To carry out this strengthened strategic agenda, the Board reaffirmed a suite of supporting strategies that reflect NAPSA’s long‑standing leadership in setting and advancing professional standards:

Professional Standards
Annual Conference & Training Institute
Individual Practitioner Certification
Agency Accreditation
Diverse Educational Opportunities
Publications
Professional Development
Technical Assistance

These strategies ensure that NAPSA remains the premier resource for practitioners and agencies committed to equitable and effective pretrial practices.

Why This Matters for the Pretrial Field

NAPSA’s refreshed mission and strategy reaffirm our commitment to the principles that have defined the organization since its founding. The updated framework positions NAPSA to:

Lead national dialogue on evidence‑based pretrial practices
Elevate practitioner professionalism and agency excellence
Strengthen partnerships across jurisdictions
Expand access to high‑quality training and resources
Support innovation and continual standards improvement

NAPSA’s standards, collaborations, and educational initiatives have long helped jurisdictions adopt safe and fair pretrial practices—and this updated strategic agenda ensures we continue to lead the field into the future.

What’s Next

In the coming months, NAPSA will be rolling out enhanced resources and communications aligned with this strategic refresh, including:

Amplified messaging, including this blog and social media - be sure to visit our new Instagram account at napsa_pretrial .
Updated standards and standards-related materials
Expanded educational offerings, including a focused judicial education curriculum at our 2026 conference
Leadership development
Modernized governance documents
Enhanced practitioner and agency support tools
Increased technical assistance capacity
New opportunities to engage with NAPSA committees, initiatives, and membership

We invite all members, partners, and practitioners to join us in advancing this renewed vision for pretrial justice.

Closing Thoughts

NAPSA’s Board of Directors has charted a bold and thoughtful path forward—one that honors our history while preparing us for the evolving challenges and opportunities within pretrial justice. With this updated vision, reaffirmed mission, clarified values, and strengthened strategies, NAPSA remains firmly committed to setting the standard for safe, fair, and evidence‑based pretrial practices nationwide.

Stay tuned for more updates here on The Standard , where we will continue to share insights, resources, and stories that move our field forward.

Wendy Venvertloh

Executive Director

National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA)

The Standard

Fri, 06 Mar 2026 16:51:28 GMT

Welcome to The Standard

Welcome to the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) Blog - The Standard - where we highlight the people and practices that define our field.

For more than 50 years, NAPSA has served as the nation’s leading membership organization supporting legal and evidence-based pretrial practices. Our mission - to promote pretrial justice and public safety through rational pretrial decision making and practices informed by evidence - relies on continuous learning, open dialogue, and the exchange of ideas across jurisdictions and disciplines. This blog is designed to advance that mission.

The title The Standard reflects NAPSA’s role as the nation’s leader in developing, maintaining, and promoting the pretrial standards that guide our field. It underscores our commitment to elevating the practices and professionals who embody excellence and set the benchmark for high‑quality, evidence‑based pretrial services

What You Can Expect

Each month, we’ll highlight the topics that matter most to professionals, policymakers, researchers, and partners across the pretrial field, including:

News from NAPSA

Updates on training opportunities, the Annual Conference, committee work, partnerships, and organizational initiatives.

Innovations & Field Highlights

Profiles of programs, tools, and strategies that represent promising advancements in pretrial practice.

Policy & Practice Updates

Insights into legislative developments, case law, and best practices shaping pretrial systems nationwide.

Research & Emerging Evidence

Summaries of new studies, data trends, and evidence-based approaches that advance our understanding of pretrial justice.

Member Spotlights

Stories from practitioners and leaders across the country whose work strengthens communities and improves outcomes.

Why a Blog—and Why Now?

The pretrial field is evolving rapidly. With new research, shifting policies, ongoing public conversations about justice, and a growing need for reliable, practical information, NAPSA is committed to being a trusted source for insight and leadership. This blog provides a hub where members and the broader field can stay informed, stay connected, and stay inspired.

Join the Conversation

We encourage you to engage with the content, share articles with colleagues, and reach out if you have ideas or stories to contribute. Whether you’re a long-time NAPSA member or new to the organization, we’re glad you're here and we look forward to exploring the future of pretrial justice together.

Thank you for your commitment to advancing fair, evidence-based, and effective pretrial systems.

Welcome to The Standard !

Wendy Venvertloh

Executive Director

National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA)

The Standard: Highlighting the People and Practices that Define our Field

Advancing Evidence-Based Pretrial in Indiana: Judicial Spotlight: Judge Mark Spitzer, Grant County , IN

Indiana's Evidence-Based Pretrial Framework: Built Through Collaboration, Data and Judicial Leadership.

Indiana’s Pretrial Story

Judicial Background and Leadership

Why Pretrial Reform Matters

Why It Matters: Evidence-based pretrial helps judges:

Collaboration as Infrastructure

The Role of Data

Data is not just for reporting. It is for:

Certification and Professional Practice

The Judicial Perspective

Challenges Ahead

Current Challenges

Proud Accomplishment

Advice to Other Jurisdictions

Priorities for the Future

Final Reflection

Meet the NAPSA Board: President Eric Schmidt

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Eric Schmidt

Board Role/Title: President

Term of Service: 2017 - Present

Location (City/State): Detroit Michigan

Professional Role/Organization: Manager / Oakland County Pretrial & Justice Services

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

What motivated you to serve on the NAPSA Board?

What area of NAPSA’s work are you most passionate about?

What do you see as the biggest opportunity—or challenge—facing pretrial services today?

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

What accomplishment—professionally or personally—are you most proud of?

What advice would you give to someone new to pretrial services or NAPSA?

What do you hope NAPSA members know about the Board’s work?

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

Closing

Texas Association of Pretrial Services (TAPS) Honors Aaron Johnson

Aaron Johnson:

A Career Defined by Pretrial Leadership, Reform, and Service

About the Author: ﻿

Celebrating the Retirement and Enduring Legacy of Timothy R. Schnacke

A tribute to a scholar and leader whose work reshaped the national conversation on bail and due process.

A Culminating Contribution: Bipartisan Bail Reform: Three Pillars of Pretrial Justice

1. Collaboration

2. Education

3. Intentional Release and Detention

"Pretrial systems must be principled, evidence-based, and constitutionally sound."

A Lasting Impact on the Field

Culture Is King in Pretrial Systems

Why Culture Work Is Essential in a Complex and Changing Environment

Why Pretrial Is Inherently Complex

Culture Is Upstream From Policy and Practice

Common Cultural Traps in Pretrial Environments

Culture Work Is Leadership Work

Culture as the Anchor in a Changing Pretrial Environment

Moving From Survival to Advancement

Where Can I Learn More?

About the Author

Diversion Committee Relaunched - First Step, Revise Diversion Standards

NAPSA’s Diversion Committee

﻿ Begins Standards Revisions by Defining Diversion

Setting the Standard in Pretrial Justice

Introducing NAPSA’s Refreshed Strategic Vision: Setting the Standard in Pretrial Justice

The Standard

Welcome to The Standard

About the Author:

Begins Standards Revisions by Defining Diversion

Introducing NAPSA’s Refreshed Strategic Vision:
Setting the Standard in Pretrial Justice