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

Addressing the Competency Crisis Through Local Innovation

Wed, 21 Oct 2026 13:43:03 GMT

Program Innovation Spotlight: Allegheny County Mobile Competency Restor ation and Support Team

Across the country, courts and pretrial systems are confronting a growing competency crisis. Individuals with serious mental illness who are found not competent to stand trial can spend weeks or months incarcerated while awaiting admission to a state hospital for competency restoration. The result can be prolonged incarceration, delayed case resolution, disruption of treatment, and significant costs to both local and state systems.

In Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, that challenge had become impossible to ignore.

In 2024 alone, individuals found not competent to stand trial spent more than 13,000 days—more than 35 years collectively—in the Allegheny County Jail while awaiting transfer to a state hospital for competency restoration. Between 2018 and 2024, the median wait for state hospital admission was 82 days. At the time, commitment to a state hospital was the county’s only option for competency restoration.

Rather than accept those delays as inevitable, Allegheny County asked a different question: Could competency restoration be delivered locally, in the least restrictive setting appropriate to each individual, while still meeting the needs of the courts and protecting public safety?

That question led to the creation of the Mobile Competency Restoration and Support Team (MCRST).

Building a Local Solution

MCRST was co-designed by the Allegheny County Department of Human Services and the Behavior Assessment Unit within Allegheny County Pretrial Services. The goal was straightforward but ambitious: provide local competency restoration services that could reduce state hospital wait times and decrease unnecessary incarceration for individuals with serious mental illness who had been found not competent to stand trial but were likely to be restored.

Before developing the model, Allegheny County examined its own data. The findings demonstrated both the scope of the problem and the opportunity for a different approach.

Nearly half—49%—of individuals committed to the state hospital for competency restoration had a misdemeanor as their highest charge. The county also found substantial cycling through the competency system: 30% of individuals committed to the state hospital had multiple commitments during the period reviewed, and 25% experienced multiple state hospital commitments within the same year.

County leaders reviewed research, studied competency restoration models operating elsewhere in the country, and consulted extensively with evaluators, courts, the jail, public defenders, the judiciary, community providers, data analysts, and other subject-matter experts.

Rather than simply replicate an existing program, Allegheny County used those lessons to develop a model specifically designed around its local needs.

Meeting People Where They Are

The resulting MCRST model is a multidisciplinary, mobile approach that combines mental health treatment, competency restoration, psychoeducation, case coordination, peer support, and persistent engagement.

The team includes a program manager, psychiatrist, behavioral health registered nurse, certified peer specialist, dual-diagnosis licensed therapist, competency support specialist, and Justice Related Services forensic support specialist.

Individuals are referred to MCRST by the Behavior Assessment Unit after being assessed as not competent to stand trial but likely to be restored and after the appropriate court order is entered.

One of the program’s defining features is its mobility. Services are not tied to a single facility.

MCRST can work with individuals in jail, treatment facilities, or the community, allowing the team to follow participants as their circumstances change. Treatment and case plans are individualized, and support continues through transitions until the court case is resolved and appropriate community services are established, when applicable.

The program also provides 24/7 on-call crisis support and uses a level-of-care structure to determine the frequency of contact based on an individual’s current mental health needs. Participants requiring the highest level of care may receive four to six contacts each week.

Even when someone is initially resistant to services, the team maintains consistent outreach. That assertive engagement philosophy is central to the model: MCRST meets people where they are rather than requiring people to fit into a predetermined service setting.

From Pilot to Practice

Allegheny County began a soft launch of MCRST in March 2025, initially limiting referrals to individuals in jail who had already been committed and were awaiting transfer to the state hospital, as well as individuals returning from the state hospital.

Twelve people were referred during this initial phase.

The program fully launched on June 1, 2025. Initially, every referred participant was incarcerated. As MCRST established credibility and trust with the courts and community partners, however, the program increasingly demonstrated that competency restoration services could be delivered safely outside of a jail or hospital.

By August 2026, 52% of MCRST’s active caseload was receiving services in the community.

The shift represents more than a change in location. It reflects a fundamentally different approach to competency restoration—one that separates access to treatment from unnecessary incarceration whenever the court determines that community placement is appropriate.

Promising Results in the First Year

The results from MCRST’s first year demonstrate the potential impact of locally designed competency restoration.

The median wait for state hospital admission fell from 82 days to 43 days, meaning individuals who still required hospitalization waited approximately five weeks less than in previous years.

More significantly, 55 individuals were diverted from state hospital admission because of their engagement with MCRST.

Twenty-three existing state hospital commitments were rescinded because individuals were restored through MCRST services, made significant progress toward restoration, or were diverted to appropriate community-based acute treatment. Another 32 individuals who were found not competent but likely to be restored were referred directly to MCRST without first receiving a state hospital commitment—an option that did not exist before the program.

For 29 individuals, the change was even more significant: they received competency restoration services entirely in the community and never had to be incarcerated to access those services.

MCRST also reported 61 successful discharges during its first year. A successful discharge means the participant’s court case was resolved, the individual was released from jail to the community, outpatient treatment was established, and the person successfully reintegrated into the community.

Early post-program outcomes are equally encouraging. Of 67 individuals discharged from MCRST during the first year, only four—6%—were subsequently incarcerated. Two were ordered to undergo another competency evaluation, and only one—1.5%—was again found not competent.

The program has also demonstrated substantial fiscal impact. Based on the median length and daily cost of Allegheny County state hospital admissions, the 55 state hospital diversions produced an estimated $6.8 million in avoided state hospital bed costs alone—an amount exceeding the program’s operating costs even after staffing was expanded.

That estimate does not include additional potential savings from reduced jail stays, transportation, sheriff staffing, and court processing delays.

Lessons for Other Jurisdictions

MCRST’s first year also produced lessons that may be valuable to jurisdictions considering similar approaches.

One of the most immediate was the importance of planning for demand. Referral volume during the first year was 37% higher than anticipated based on the previous year, requiring Allegheny County to adjust its staffing model as implementation progressed.

The experience also reinforced the value of phased implementation. Beginning with a smaller, targeted referral population gave partners an opportunity to identify problems, refine processes, and establish working relationships before expanding the program.

Judicial engagement proved equally important. Judges need opportunities before implementation to understand the program, ask questions, establish expectations, and develop confidence in community-based alternatives. Collaboration with jail leadership and treatment staff is similarly essential to clarify responsibilities and ensure effective communication when participants remain incarcerated.

Finally, Allegheny County emphasizes the importance of finding the right provider and staff. Building the appropriate team may require additional time and a broader recruitment strategy, but individuals who are genuinely invested in this work can make a significant difference in both implementation and outcomes.

Redesigning Systems Around People

For Allegheny County leaders, MCRST demonstrates what becomes possible when jurisdictions reconsider assumptions about where competency restoration must occur.

“In its first year, our Mobile Competency Restoration and Support Team has shown what is possible when we redesign systems around dignity, treatment needs, and evidence. Individuals served are spending less time in jail, receiving services in the community, and returning to the competency process at dramatically lower rates, all while producing local and state cost savings greater than the program’s operating costs. We’re proud to contribute an approach that can scale and help other jurisdictions solve one of the most pervasive challenges in pretrial justice.”

— Alex Jutca, Director, Allegheny County Department of Human Services

MCRST Program Director Renee Madden also credits the people delivering the services:

“Delivering this program has required significant effort and flexibility; I’m incredibly proud of how seamlessly the team has navigated this, with their consistent, assertive, and empathetic approach to support stability for some of the most complex patients in our county.”

A Model With Lessons Beyond Allegheny County

The competency crisis is not unique to Allegheny County. Jurisdictions across the country continue to struggle with increasing demand for competency services, limited forensic hospital capacity, lengthy waits, and the consequences of keeping people with serious mental illness incarcerated while they await treatment.

MCRST was designed for Allegheny County, but its underlying principles are adaptable.

A smaller jurisdiction might develop a smaller multidisciplinary team, combine staff responsibilities, or partner with a neighboring county. A larger jurisdiction might operate multiple teams serving different facilities or geographic areas. The precise structure can change while preserving the fundamental principle: competency restoration should occur in the least restrictive appropriate setting and should not require incarceration simply to access treatment.

Allegheny County’s first-year results offer an encouraging example of what can happen when pretrial agencies, behavioral health systems, courts, jails, and community providers work together to rethink longstanding practices.

For the broader pretrial field, the lesson may be larger than competency restoration itself. Meaningful system change often begins when jurisdictions examine their own data, question whether existing practices are producing the outcomes they want, bring the right partners to the table, and build alternatives around the needs of the people those systems serve.

MCRST did not simply create another program. It created another pathway—one that demonstrates that improving public systems, supporting court processes, using resources responsibly, and treating people with dignity do not have to be competing goals.

Meet the NAPSA Board: Janice Radovick Dean

Wed, 14 Oct 2026 13:04:38 GMT

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Janice Radovick Dean

Board Role/Title: Northeast Region Director

Location (City/State): Pittsburgh, PA

Professional Role/Organization: 5th Judicial District of Pennsylvania – Criminal Division

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

I have worked in the Allegheny County Criminal Division for 39 years, gaining extensive experience across multiple areas of the criminal justice system. I began my career in Adult Probation and went on to establish our Pretrial Program. I currently serve as the Administrator of the Criminal Division, where I oversee Adult Probation, Pretrial Services, and Criminal Court staff.

Throughout my career, I have had the opportunity to work directly with the courts, staff, and justice partners to develop and improve programs, policies, and practices that support the effective administration of justice.

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

In 2006, when we began researching pretrial services and exploring different programs, almost everyone I spoke with was a NAPSA member. They encouraged me to become involved with the organization and shared their knowledge and experiences so generously.

I was so impressed by everyone’s willingness to help us as we developed and established our pretrial program. Their support made a lasting impression on me. Once our program was up and running, I knew that I wanted to give back to the pretrial community and help others in the same way that NAPSA members had helped us.

What motivated you to serve on the NAPSA Board?

Once I became a NAPSA member, I knew I wanted to serve on the Board because I wanted to give back to an organization that had given me so much. I had seen firsthand the value of NAPSA’s support, resources, and willingness to share knowledge, and I wanted to be part of helping other pretrial professionals.

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

I’m very interested in training for staff, stakeholders and judicial officers.

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

There is a lot of misinformation out there about pretrial programs, risk assessments and data. Making sure that pretrial professionals are always taking these opportunities to educate their employees, system stakeholders and the public.

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

I have been on the board for 10 years and have institutional knowledge. I also have worked almost all the jobs in criminal division in my jurisdiction so have a perspective that is well rounded.

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

Work - I am really proud of the work that we have done in Allegheny County over the last 15 years in terms of revamping Pretrial, Probation and Criminal Court processing.

Personal – I am extremely proud of my twin daughters and what great humans they have grown into. They are successful and kind.

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

Make as many connections as you can at conferences, join NAPSA committees and use what you learn to take back to your jurisdiction. Don’t be afraid to ask questions and contact any NAPSA board member for advice, help or as a sounding board.

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

The board works hard all year long to make sure that we are advancing NAPSA’s mission. It is a lot of work but very rewarding.

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

I enjoy travelling, baking, volunteering and spending time with my family.

Culture is Still King

Thu, 08 Oct 2026 16:02:02 GMT

Reflections on Culture, Mindset, and the Future of Pretrial Systems

Written by Glenn Tapia, ACJI

Over the several months, the Alliance for Community and Justice Innovation (ACJI) had the opportunity to engage with the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) around a series of connected conversations about organizational culture. The series began with a national NAPSA webinar leading up to the Annual Conference and continued in Reno, Nevada, through three additional presentations focused on organizational well-being, appreciative mindset, and mindset as a lever for change.

Each presentation approached pretrial work from a different angle, but the conversations repeatedly returned to the same conclusion.

Culture is not separate from the technical work of pretrial services. It influences how that work is understood, implemented, sustained, and experienced by the people doing it.

That matters because pretrial work takes place in an unusually complex environment. Pretrial professionals operate at the intersection of public safety, individual liberty, courts, prosecution, defense, law enforcement, community resources, and human behavior. Decisions are often made quickly, with incomplete information, competing expectations, and significant consequences. Legislative change, reform pressures, workforce challenges, public scrutiny, and regular exposure to crisis add additional layers of stress.

In an environment like this, culture is not a secondary concern. It is part of the operating environment itself.

Culture Is Upstream from Strategy

Pretrial organizations understandably invest significant time and resources in laws, policies, assessment instruments, supervision models, evidence-based practices, strategic plans, and performance measures. These are all important. Yet none of them operate independently of the culture in which they reside. If these practices are plants, then the culture is like the soil around it; perhaps rich in nutrients or perhaps depleted of critical elements that keep vegetation growing.

Culture influences how people interpret a policy, how discretion is exercised, whether staff feel comfortable questioning a decision, how supervisors respond to mistakes, and whether a new practice becomes part of everyday work or remains something people technically comply with while continuing to operate as they always have.

A law can establish what an organization must do. A strategic plan can describe where an organization intends to go. A mission statement can articulate values and purpose. Those things matter, but they do not automatically determine how people behave when the work becomes difficult, ambiguous, stressful, or politically complicated.

Culture fills that space.

This is why we describe culture as upstream from strategy, implementation, and outcomes. A strong strategy placed into an unhealthy culture can stall quickly. A technically sound reform introduced into a fearful or cynical environment may produce compliance without genuine commitment. Conversely, a healthy culture can create the conditions for people to learn, adapt, solve problems, and improve implementation over time.

Culture does not replace good policy or sound practice. It determines how much of their potential is realized.

We Need to Work ON Culture, Not Only Inside It

Most professionals spend their careers working inside an organizational culture. We adapt to existing norms, routines, habits, expectations, and unwritten rules. We learn which conversations are welcomed, which behaviors are rewarded, how disagreement is handled, and what people have learned not to say.

The more important question is whether we are also willing to work ON that culture in an active leadership mode rather than passive bystander mode.

Working on culture means periodically examining the environment we are collectively creating. What behaviors have become normal? What are we reinforcing through our attention and reactions? Where has silence developed? What do staff believe happens when they bring forward a concern, challenge an assumption, or admit they need help?

This cannot be assigned exclusively to executives, human resources, or an organizational development project. Formal leaders have an especially important responsibility because their behavior carries organizational authority, but culture is also created through thousands of ordinary interactions among peers, supervisors, teams, and partners.

Every meeting contributes something to culture. So does every response to a mistake, every difficult conversation, every moment of recognition, and every decision about whether to speak up or remain silent.

The goal is not to make everyone responsible for everything. It is to recognize that everyone participates in the culture they experience.

The Risk of Becoming a Bystander

One of the more challenging ideas that emerged across these conversations is that people can become passive observers of culture.

It is understandable to describe organizational culture in terms of what other people are doing. Leadership does not listen. Communication is poor. People are negative. Nobody speaks up. That is simply how the organization works.

Sometimes those observations are accurate and important. Organizational power is not distributed equally, and formal leaders have greater responsibility for creating conditions that support trust, clarity, accountability, and psychological safety.

At the same time, culture requires some individual reflection. What am I reinforcing? What behavior am I tolerating? What assumptions am I carrying into conversations? What emotional energy am I adding to the room? Where might my own avoidance, cynicism, defensiveness, or silence be contributing to the very conditions I dislike?

When people become bystanders to culture, they give up some of their ability to influence it. Over time, they may also become increasingly affected by the conditions they have stopped trying to shape.

Working on culture therefore requires both organizational accountability and personal responsibility.

Mindset Is Part of the Culture Equation

Another theme across the NAPSA sessions was the relationship between individual mindset and collective culture. We often talk about culture as if it exists outside the individual, but culture and mindset constantly influence one another. Think about it? Do burned out people create a challenging culture? Or does a challenging culture create burned out people within it? The questions and answers are circular. Our mindsets are part of culture and vice versa. We cannot de-couple the two as independent elements.

People are shaped by the environments in which they work. At the same time, the way people think, react, communicate, and interpret events shapes those environments in return.

This is particularly important in stressful settings. Stress can spread socially. So can anxiety, cynicism, defensiveness, curiosity, optimism, and hope. Emotional contagion means that how we show up has consequences beyond our own internal experience.

Over time, individual patterns become collective patterns.

If enough people become risk-averse, the organization becomes more cautious. If enough people become cynical, cynicism begins to feel normal. If curiosity is consistently modeled and rewarded, people become more willing to ask questions. If leaders respond constructively to bad news, people become more willing to bring forward difficult information.

For that reason, culture change is partly an inside-out process.

If we want an adaptive organization, we have to examine our own capacity to adapt. If we want an appreciative culture, we have to notice whether our attention is dominated by deficits or whether we can also recognize strengths and possibility. If we want an outward culture, we have to consider whether we are genuinely trying to understand the needs, pressures, and perspectives of other people.

Organizational transformation cannot be reduced to individual mindset, but neither can individual mindset be removed from the equation.

Psychological Safety Makes Learning Possible

Psychological safety is another essential part of healthy organizational culture.

Pretrial organizations operate in environments where judgment, discretion, uncertainty, and rapid decision-making are common. In those conditions, organizations need people who are willing to ask questions, acknowledge uncertainty, share concerns, identify mistakes, request help, and challenge assumptions.

Those behaviors become less likely when people believe the interpersonal cost of speaking up is too high.

Psychological safety does not mean avoiding accountability or making work comfortable at all times. It means creating an environment where people can participate honestly in the learning process without unnecessary fear of humiliation, rejection, or retaliation. Research has consistently connected psychological safety with team learning behavior, including asking questions, discussing mistakes, and sharing information that may be difficult to hear (Edmondson, 1999).

This has direct implications for pretrial systems. Silence in an organization should never automatically be interpreted as agreement. Sometimes silence reflects uncertainty. Sometimes it reflects exhaustion. Sometimes it means people have learned that speaking up is unlikely to help.

A healthy culture pays attention to both what people are saying and what they may have stopped saying.

Resilience Means Doing Hard Things Better

The conversation about culture also has to acknowledge the reality of pretrial work. It is uniquely demanding work.

Pretrial professionals routinely navigate difficult decisions, competing stakeholder expectations, public scrutiny, high caseloads, changing laws, human crisis, and the moral weight of decisions affecting liberty and safety. These stressors are not simply individual inconveniences. Over time, they can become organizational conditions.

For that reason, resilience should not be defined as making difficult work easy. Nor should it become another way of asking individuals to tolerate unhealthy systems.

A more useful definition is that resilience helps people and organizations do hard things better.

That requires attention to both individual and collective capacity. Organizations need to consider workload, trust, relationships, recovery, psychological safety, communication, supervision, and leadership behavior. Individuals also benefit from developing ways of thinking that allow them to remain effective under changing and difficult conditions.

Four mindsets are especially relevant to this work.

An adaptive mindset helps people respond to complexity without assuming every challenge has a simple technical solution. An outward mindset helps people recognize the needs, objectives, and humanity of others. An appreciative mindset keeps problems from becoming the only thing people can see. An infinite mindset helps leaders think beyond immediate pressures and consider the kind of organization they are building over time.

None of these mindsets eliminates stress. They increase our ability to work through stress more thoughtfully and collectively.

From Fighting Against to Fighting For

The appreciative mindset session at the NAPSA conference centered on two questions: What are we fighting against, and what are we fighting for?

Pretrial systems have real problems that require attention. Risk, failure to appear, burnout, limited resources, stakeholder disagreement, public criticism, and organizational silos cannot simply be ignored.

The danger comes when an organization becomes so focused on what it is trying to stop that it loses clarity about what it is trying to create.

An appreciative mindset does not deny problems. It asks whether the problem should become the center of organizational attention.

Instead of focusing only on fighting against failure to appear, a system can also fight for reliable court connection. Instead of focusing only on noncompliance, it can ask what supports meaningful engagement. Instead of defining the challenge as eliminating silos, leaders can focus on creating coordinated decision-making and stronger shared purpose.

The distinction matters because the questions organizations ask influence where people place their attention. Research in positive psychology suggests that constructive emotional states can broaden attention and expand the range of ideas and actions people are able to consider (Fredrickson, 2001). Appreciative Inquiry similarly encourages organizations to identify strengths, relationships, and existing examples of success that can be expanded rather than relying exclusively on deficit analysis (Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005).

The point is not to ignore what is wrong. It is to ensure that what is wrong does not become the organization’s entire field of vision.

Pretrial Advancement Has to Begin From Within

The environment surrounding pretrial services will continue to change. Laws will evolve. Technology will advance. Workforce expectations will shift. Communities will change. Political and public expectations will continue to influence the criminal legal system.

Organizations cannot control all of those forces.

They can, however, develop their capacity to learn and adapt.

One useful way to think about organizational sustainability is to compare the rate of change outside the organization with the rate of learning and adaptation inside it. When the external environment changes faster than an organization can learn, the organization increasingly finds itself reacting to forces it does not control. Eventually, change is imposed from the outside, or the organization struggles to remain relevant to the environment around it.

The answer is not simply to move faster. It is to become more capable of learning.

That requires psychological safety, healthy disagreement, adaptive thinking, shared purpose, resilience, and a culture in which people believe they have both permission and responsibility to participate in improvement.

If the pretrial field wants to advance externally, some of that advancement has to begin internally, within organizations, teams, and individual professionals.

An Opportunity for NAPSA and the Pretrial Field

NAPSA is well positioned to help lead this conversation.

Pretrial occupies a distinctive place in the criminal legal system. Its work connects courts, public safety, individual liberty, human behavior, community resources, and multiple professional disciplines. That position gives pretrial professionals a perspective on system complexity that few other parts of the justice system experience in quite the same way.

The field has invested appropriately in evidence-based practice, professional standards, data, assessment, and operational improvement. The next level of advancement should also include greater culture-change acumen.

That means helping leaders understand psychological safety and organizational well-being. It means helping professionals recognize the relationship between mindset and culture. It means strengthening the capacity of organizations to learn, adapt, engage disagreement, and remain connected to shared purpose during periods of uncertainty.

NAPSA can help make these ideas part of the professional conversation across its membership and, potentially, across the broader criminal legal field.

The common lesson from these four conversations is not that culture solves every problem. It is that nearly every strategy, reform, practice, and improvement effort must eventually travel through culture.

If pretrial systems want their strategies to take hold, their people to remain resilient, and their organizations to adapt to what comes next, culture cannot remain in the background.

It has to become part of how the field thinks about advancement itself.

And that is why, after four NAPSA conversations from the webinar to Reno, the conclusion remains the same: Culture is King.

References

Cooperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. (2005). Appreciative inquiry: A positive revolution in change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

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.

Partnership in Practice: Honoring APPR as NAPSA’s 2026 Partner of the Year

Wed, 30 Sep 2026 11:50:28 GMT

Partnership is a word we use often in the pretrial field.

But meaningful partnership is more than working alongside one another. It means sharing knowledge. Asking difficult questions. Bringing research and practice together. Creating space for different perspectives. And, perhaps most importantly, standing alongside people as they work to turn good ideas into meaningful change.

A true partner does more than share your goals. A true partner helps carry the work, brings out the best in those around them, and remains beside you when the work becomes difficult. That spirit of partnership was echoed throughout the nominations submitted on behalf of this year’s recipient. NAPSA Nomination

That is why the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) is proud to recognize Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research (APPR) as the 2026 Partner of the Year.

Recognizing a Champion for the Pretrial Field

First awarded in 2010, NAPSA’s Partnership Award recognizes a stakeholder association or individual who is a true champion for the pretrial field. The Partner of the Year Award is presented by the NAPSA Board of Directors to an organization whose collaboration with practitioners and justice system stakeholders helps advance pretrial justice.

APPR exemplifies that spirit of partnership.

Managed by the Center for Effective Public Policy, APPR is a national initiative working to strengthen the capacity of communities to implement fair, just, and effective pretrial practices. Its work brings together practitioners, researchers, policymakers, system leaders, and community members around a shared goal: improving pretrial systems and the outcomes they produce for people and communities. But APPR’s impact is about more than the policies it promotes or the resources it develops.

It is about how the work gets done.

Bridging Research and Practice

One of the persistent challenges in our field is translating what we know into what we do.

Research can tell us a great deal about effective pretrial systems. Law establishes the principles that should guide our decisions. Data can help us understand what is happening within our own jurisdictions. But none of those things implement themselves. Real change happens in courtrooms, pretrial offices, county meetings, data workgroups, training rooms, and conversations among people willing to examine their systems and ask whether there might be a better way.

APPR helps create that bridge.

Through training, technical assistance, research, practical resources, the APPR Community, the Pretrial Professional Network, and direct work with jurisdictions, APPR gives practitioners more than information. It gives them tools to put that information into practice.

That distinction matters.

It is one thing to tell a jurisdiction what research says.

It is another to sit beside the people doing the work and help them determine what that research means for their policies, their data, their staff, their courts, and the people moving through their system.

That is partnership in practice.

Partnership That Produces Results

APPR’s contribution to the pretrial field can perhaps best be understood through the experiences of the jurisdictions and practitioners who have worked alongside its team.

For years, APPR has helped communities move from conversations about pretrial improvement to the difficult work of implementation. Its partnerships have included intensive technical assistance, implementation of the Public Safety Assessment, policy development, training, leadership development, research translation, and support for jurisdictions examining their own systems and practices.

The results of those partnerships can be seen across the country.

In 2020, Criminal Justice Alternatives in Wake County, North Carolina, became one of APPR’s inaugural Learning Sites. Over the next two years, APPR provided technical assistance for the county’s Pretrial Reform Project. According to Executive Director Jennifer Gibbs, that collaboration ultimately resulted in a new bond policy and six distinct areas of system-wide reform, supported by the guidance of Alison Shames and the expertise and resources of the broader APPR team.

In Nebraska, APPR worked alongside pretrial leaders in both Douglas and Lancaster Counties in implementing the Public Safety Assessment. Jeff Kilpatrick and Tyrone Harper highlighted not only APPR’s assistance with implementation, but the team’s broader commitment to helping jurisdictions implement fair, effective, and data-driven pretrial practices.

And in Oakland County, Michigan, APPR’s impact extended beyond a particular policy or tool. Public Services Director Barbara Hankey described technical assistance provided by Alison Shames and Kelvin Banks as instrumental in helping the county reignite a shared vision for pretrial improvement, providing guidance that was practical, thoughtful, and grounded in experience.

These examples illustrate something important about APPR’s approach:

The work is not done to jurisdictions; it is done with them.

That philosophy is reflected in the people APPR has assembled to provide technical assistance. Its team includes professionals with years of direct experience in pretrial services who understand both the challenges and realities faced by local jurisdictions. As one nomination emphasized, that practitioner experience has allowed APPR to provide assistance that is not only informed by research, but practical, credible, and relevant to the people responsible for implementation

That experience has helped APPR earn something that cannot be created through research or policy expertise alone:

Trust.

And trust makes difficult conversations possible.

It allows jurisdictions to examine longstanding practices honestly. It creates room to acknowledge when something is not producing the intended result. And it gives local leaders a knowledgeable partner who can help them determine not only what should change, but how to make that change achievable and sustainable.

Creating a Community of Pretrial Professionals

Perhaps one of APPR’s most important contributions has been its investment in the people doing this work. Pretrial professionals work in systems that can look remarkably different from one jurisdiction to another. Some programs have large teams and sophisticated data systems. Others may have only a handful of staff members—or even one person—trying to build effective practices with limited resources.

Yet many of the questions we face are remarkably similar.

How do we support court appearance?

How do we use supervision appropriately?

How do we measure whether what we are doing is working?

How do we implement assessment tools with fidelity?

How do we communicate effectively about pretrial justice?

How do we change practices that have existed for years when research, data, or law tells us we should do something differently?

APPR has helped create spaces where practitioners do not have to answer those questions alone.

Through technical assistance, training opportunities, online communities, and professional networks, APPR has fostered collaboration and created opportunities for practitioners to reach beyond the boundaries of their own jurisdictions when they need ideas, guidance, or simply the perspective of someone who understands the work. As nominators from Nebraska noted, APPR’s online forum gives practitioners a place to connect with others in the field when facing challenges or seeking guidance. Those connections allow people to share resources, troubleshoot challenges, learn from one another, and recognize that innovation does not always have to begin from scratch. Sometimes the most valuable technical assistance starts with someone saying, “We struggled with that too. Here is what we learned.” That kind of connection strengthens not just individual programs, but the entire field.

Giving Practitioners Tools to Lead Change

APPR’s extensive collection of resources and training reflects another important principle: sustainable system change requires capacity. Jurisdictions need more than recommendations. They need practical ways to examine their current practices, understand their data, engage stakeholders, implement improvements, measure outcomes, and continuously evaluate whether those improvements are working as intended.

APPR’s contributions have taken many forms. Its work has included targeted technical assistance for jurisdictions implementing the Public Safety Assessment, resources such as the Gender-Based Toolkit, mentoring opportunities for the next generation of pretrial leaders, and ongoing webinars covering issues relevant to pretrial practitioners and system decision-makers. Many of these opportunities are offered at no cost to participants, expanding access to professional development and expertise across the country. APPR has also developed resources addressing issues across the pretrial continuum—from legal principles and first appearance to pretrial services, supervision, data and performance measurement, system collaboration, community engagement, and implementation of the Public Safety Assessment.

Its work encourages jurisdictions not simply to adopt a practice because it is considered a best practice, but to understand why they are doing it, implement it intentionally, and examine whether it is producing the outcomes they intended.

That is how improvement becomes sustainable.

The Courage to Ask Better Questions

Some of the most meaningful progress in pretrial justice begins with a deceptively simple question:

Why do we do it this way?

Across the country, APPR has worked with jurisdictions willing to ask that question.

Sometimes the answer confirms that a practice is working. Sometimes the data tells a different story. And sometimes we discover that a practice exists primarily because it has existed for a very long time. Improvement requires the willingness to look honestly at all three possibilities.

APPR creates opportunities for practitioners and system leaders to examine long-standing assumptions through the lens of law, research, data, equity, and real-world experience. Just as importantly, it helps jurisdictions move from asking questions to identifying practical next steps.

Because asking better questions matters. But what we do with the answers matters even more.

A Steady Partner in a Changing Field

The pretrial field does not operate in a vacuum.

The public conversation surrounding bail, pretrial release, public safety, and justice reform has changed considerably over time. Those conversations can be complicated, and the work can become more difficult when evidence-based practices become caught in broader debates.

One of APPR’s nominators specifically recognized the organization for remaining a steady, thoughtful, and trusted partner during a time when pretrial and bail reform have become increasingly challenging topics. Rather than becoming distracted by the surrounding debate, APPR has continued supporting practitioners and jurisdictions through practical, nonpartisan, and evidence-informed work.

That consistency matters.

Partnership is easiest when everyone agrees and progress comes quickly.

The measure of a partner is often what happens when the work becomes difficult.

APPR has continued to show up.

Why This Partnership Matters to NAPSA

NAPSA and APPR share something fundamental: a belief in the people who make up the pretrial field.

Our organizations understand that advancing pretrial justice requires strong policy and sound research, but it also requires practitioners who have the knowledge, resources, professional networks, and support necessary to turn those principles into daily practice.

That shared commitment has created countless opportunities for collaboration, including conference education, professional development, resource sharing, and connections among practitioners and experts across the country.

APPR’s partnership with NAPSA is also reflected in the service of its people. Tara Boh Blair serves on the NAPSA Board of Directors, while Tanya Anderson serves on the NAPSA Education Committee and contributed to the development of the judicial track at this year’s conference. APPR has consistently supported NAPSA conferences through workshops, presentations, educational opportunities, and participation while also extending learning beyond the annual conference through virtual training, webinars, research summaries, and other resources.

But the partnership between NAPSA and APPR extends far beyond a conference.

It exists whenever research reaches a practitioner who can use it.

Whenever a jurisdiction finds a resource that helps solve a problem.

Whenever one pretrial professional connects with another.

Whenever data causes a team to reconsider an assumption.

Whenever someone leaves a training with not only a new idea, but a practical way to put that idea into action.

Those moments may happen quietly, one jurisdiction or one practitioner at a time.

Collectively, they move a field forward.

Partnership Is How Progress Happens

No single organization can advance pretrial justice alone. Not NAPSA. Not APPR. Not any court, pretrial agency, researcher, policymaker, or practitioner. The work requires all of us.

It requires people willing to share what they know and equally willing to acknowledge what they still need to learn. It requires researchers who listen to practitioners and practitioners who engage with research. It requires national organizations willing to support local innovation and local leaders willing to share what they learn with the broader field.

Most importantly, it requires relationships built around a common purpose.

That is what APPR has helped cultivate.

The nomination letters submitted for this award came from practitioners in different jurisdictions with different systems and experiences. Yet their messages were remarkably consistent: APPR has provided expertise, resources, technical assistance, professional development, connection, and—perhaps most importantly—people willing to stand beside practitioners while they do the difficult work of improving their systems.

There will always be more work to do. More questions to ask. More data to examine. More practices to improve. More people to bring into the conversation. But we are better equipped to do that work because we do not have to do it alone.

That is the value of partnership.

And that is why NAPSA is proud to recognize Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research as the 2026 Partner of the Year.

To the entire APPR team: thank you for the research you translate, the resources you create, the questions you encourage us to ask, the practitioners you connect, and the jurisdictions you walk alongside.

Thank you for showing up when the work is exciting and when it is difficult.

Most of all, thank you for being a partner to NAPSA and to the pretrial field.

Congratulations, APPR. This recognition is well deserved.

Beyond the Credential: Why NAPSA Certification Matters to the Future of Pretrial Services

Wed, 23 Sep 2026 14:27:49 GMT

Beyond the Credential: Why NAPSA Certification Matters to the Future of Pretrial Services

Pretrial services has evolved significantly over the past several decades.

What was once often treated as an informal function of the court has developed into a specialized profession grounded in constitutional law, national standards, research, evidence-based practices, and an increasingly sophisticated understanding of how pretrial decisions affect individuals, courts, and communities.

As the profession has evolved, so has the need for a common standard of knowledge and competency for the professionals doing this work.

That is where NAPSA certification comes in.

The Certified Pretrial Services Professional (CPSP) credential is more than a designation following someone's name. It represents a practitioner's commitment to understanding the legal, historical, ethical, and evidence-based foundations that should guide pretrial practice—and to continually developing as a professional.

Creating a Common Foundation for a Growing Profession

Pretrial practice looks different across the country.

State laws vary. Court structures vary. Agencies are organized differently. The responsibilities assigned to pretrial professionals can differ significantly from one jurisdiction to another.

But some foundations of effective pretrial practice transcend geography.

Constitutional rights. National standards. Ethical practice. Evidence-based decision-making. Objective assessment. Individualized decision-making. The use of the least restrictive conditions necessary to reasonably assure court appearance and public safety.

NAPSA developed its national certification program to establish a benchmark of professional knowledge around those foundations.

Certification helps create a common professional language among practitioners who may work in very different systems while reinforcing the principles that should remain at the center of pretrial practice.

Two Paths to Professional Certification

NAPSA currently offers certification in two areas: Pretrial Release and Pretrial Diversion.

The Pretrial Release Certification is designed for professionals involved in screening, assessing, supervising, and managing individuals awaiting trial. Its areas of focus include bail law and constitutional history, risk assessment, least-restrictive release conditions, national standards, and strategies supporting successful court appearance.

The Pretrial Diversion Certification is designed for professionals working with deferred prosecution, intervention, and diversion programs. Its focus includes prosecutorial discretion, voluntary participation, individualized planning, criminogenic needs, and processes associated with successful program completion and charge dismissal.

Both provide professionals an opportunity to demonstrate knowledge extending beyond the policies and procedures of their individual jurisdictions.

And that distinction matters.

Understanding the “Why” Behind the Work

One of the greatest benefits of certification may actually occur before someone ever takes the examination.

Preparing for certification asks practitioners to step outside the routines of their own agencies and examine their work through a broader lens.

Why do we assess risk?

Why does the law favor release?

Why should conditions be individualized?

Why can unnecessarily intensive supervision be counterproductive?

Why do simple interventions such as court reminders matter?

What constitutional principles are behind the decisions our systems make every day?

When practitioners understand the why behind a practice, their work becomes more intentional.

Tasks that may once have felt procedural become connected to something larger: constitutional protections, empirical research, professional ethics, and the fundamental purposes of the pretrial system.

That is the difference between simply knowing what your agency does and understanding why sound pretrial practice requires it.

Certification Is More Than Letters After Your Name

Professional credentials certainly provide individual benefits.

Certification can distinguish practitioners within a growing field, demonstrate verified expertise, strengthen confidence when navigating difficult legal and ethical questions, and support opportunities for advancement, leadership, and specialized assignments.

But its value extends beyond the individual practitioner.

When an agency invests in certification, it is also investing in organizational capacity.

Certified professionals bring nationally informed knowledge back to their agencies. They can help colleagues examine policies and practices, support implementation of evidence-based approaches, mentor newer professionals, and strengthen the quality and consistency of information provided to the court.

Certification can also strengthen an agency's credibility with judges, prosecutors, defense counsel, policymakers, and other justice-system partners by demonstrating a commitment to recognized professional standards.

Perhaps most importantly, certification helps establish pretrial services as more than a job.

It helps establish it as a profession.

From a Job to a Career

Professional fields need professional pathways. For newer practitioners, certification provides an opportunity to build knowledge and demonstrate a commitment to professional development. For agencies, supporting certification can help create a culture in which learning, professional growth, and continuous improvement are expected and valued.

And certification is not only for people beginning their careers.

Experienced pretrial professionals bring years—sometimes decades—of practical knowledge that cannot be replicated through an examination or study guide. Certification does not replace that experience.

It provides an opportunity to connect that experience to current national standards, research, and legal principles.For seasoned practitioners, earning the CPSP can validate what they have learned through years of practice while reinforcing their roles as leaders, mentors, and subject-matter experts within their organizations.

What Should Candidates Expect?

The certification process is designed around structured self-study in three primary areas:

Historical and legal underpinnings
National standards
Legal, evidence-based, and promising practices

NAPSA provides study materials for both the Pretrial Release and Pretrial Diversion certification tracks. These resources address key legal cases, national standards, research findings, terminology, and foundational concepts practitioners need to understand.

For professionals who have not taken an examination in some time, the idea of certification can understandably feel intimidating. But the purpose is not simply to test someone's ability to memorize information. It is an opportunity to study the foundations of the profession, connect them to daily practice, and demonstrate an understanding of the principles that should guide the work.

Building a Shared Professional Identity

Perhaps the larger significance of certification becomes clearer when we consider where pretrial services is headed.

Across jurisdictions, practitioners are increasingly being asked to understand complex legal principles, interpret risk information, communicate effectively with judicial officers, implement evidence-based interventions, work collaboratively across systems, and balance individual liberty with court appearance and public safety.

Doing that work well requires specialized knowledge.

A nationally recognized professional credential provides practitioners working in vastly different jurisdictions with a shared foundation from which to approach those responsibilities.

Local laws will continue to differ.

Agency structures will continue to differ.

Communities will continue to have different resources and challenges.

But professionals can still share an understanding of the constitutional, ethical, and evidence-based principles upon which effective pretrial practice should be built.

The Bigger Picture

When a judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, policymaker, or community partner sees CPSP following a professional's name, those letters should communicate something.

They should communicate that the practitioner has invested time in understanding the profession beyond the boundaries of their own agency. That they have studied the law and history underlying pretrial justice. That they understand national standards and evidence-based principles. That they recognize the ethical responsibility inherent in work involving individual liberty, public safety, and the administration of justice. And that they have chosen to invest in becoming better at the work.

Ultimately, that may be the strongest argument for certification.

Becoming a Certified Pretrial Services Professional demonstrates that you view pretrial services not simply as a job, but as a profession—one requiring knowledge, integrity, continued learning, and a commitment to fairness, justice, and community safety.

As pretrial services continues to evolve, developing knowledgeable professionals will be essential to sustaining that progress.

The strength of the pretrial field ultimately depends on the strength of the professionals entrusted to carry its principles into practice every day.

Ready to Take the Next Step?

Whether you are new to pretrial services, an experienced practitioner looking to validate years of knowledge and experience, or an agency leader interested in investing in the professional development of your team, NAPSA certification provides an opportunity to strengthen both individual practice and the profession as a whole.

NAPSA offers two Certified Pretrial Services Professional (CPSP) certification pathways:

Pretrial Release — for professionals working in pretrial assessment, release, supervision, administration, and related functions.
Pretrial Diversion — for professionals working in diversion, deferred prosecution, intervention, and related programs.

Visit the NAPSA Certification page to learn more about the certification process, review eligibility and requirements, access study guides, and apply for the Pretrial Release or Diversion certification exam.

Aaron Johnson is the Director of Personal Bond, Magistrate Court, and Collections for Galveston County, Texas, bringing more than 30 years of experience in public safety and criminal justice. His career has focused extensively on developing, strengthening, and modernizing pretrial justice systems.

Prior to joining Galveston County in 2019, Aaron served as Director of Pretrial Services for Santa Clara County, California, and helped establish the first Pretrial Services Agency in Johnson County, Kansas. His work has included pretrial risk assessment, release and detention guidelines, diversion initiatives, and evidence-based system development.

Aaron serves on the Board of Directors of the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) as Southern Region Director and has chaired NAPSA’s Education Committee since 2019. He also serves as President of the Texas Association of Pretrial Services (TAPS) and is a frequent presenter on leadership, pretrial practices, and system development.

In 2024, Aaron founded AЖA Your Vision Coaching, LLC (AKAYVC), providing executive coaching, leadership development, organizational training, and professional education.

Aaron holds a Bachelor of Science in Sociology from the University of Kansas and an MBA from MidAmerica Nazarene University. He served in the U.S. Army Reserve as a combat field medic and is a graduate of the National Institute of Corrections’ Pretrial Executive Training Program. His honors include the 2019 NAPSA Member of the Year Award and the 2026 TAPS Pretrial Pioneer Awar

Upstream: The Intersection of Behavioral Health, Public Health, and Pretrial Services

Wed, 16 Sep 2026 17:07:59 GMT

I’d like to talk with you about the intersection of public health and the criminal legal system—specifically, behavioral health and pretrial services.

People detained pretrial make up a significant portion of the population in our nation’s local jails. We also know that behavioral health needs are highly prevalent among people who come into contact with the criminal legal system, including substance use disorders and mental health conditions. Often, these needs occur together. For purposes of this discussion, I will refer to them as co-occurring disorders .

Those statistics matter, but the people behind them matter even more.

Looking Beyond the Charge

Many people entering the pretrial system face charges that do not necessarily indicate a high likelihood of new criminal activity or failure to appear. When validated pretrial assessment tools are appropriately used, they can help practitioners and courts identify individuals who have a high likelihood of remaining arrest-free and returning to court while their cases are pending.

Put positively—as we are increasingly learning to do—many of the people we encounter have a high likelihood of succeeding in the community while awaiting trial.

Yet many people remain detained.

Courts may believe that setting what appears to be a relatively low monetary bond—$100, $250, or $500—provides a reasonable path to release. Those of us working directly with pretrial populations know that even a seemingly small amount can represent an insurmountable barrier for someone experiencing poverty.

For a person choosing between rent, food, transportation, medication, or other basic necessities, there may simply be no money available for bond.

Poverty does not exist independently from health.

When people experience poverty, they are more likely to face unmet social determinants of health—the conditions in which people are born, live, learn, work, and age that influence their health and well-being.

Those needs may include:

Access to safe and stable housing
Reliable access to food and clean water
Transportation
Employment and economic stability
Access to physical and behavioral healthcare
Personal and community safety
Social connection and support

Now picture yourself on one of the hardest days you have ever experienced.

Maybe it was a final exam in college. Maybe it was going through a divorce. Maybe it was moving your family from one home to another or losing someone you loved.

Now imagine navigating that same experience without stable housing, reliable transportation, employment, education, financial resources, or a strong support system.

Then imagine doing it while also experiencing a serious mental health condition, substance use disorder, or both.

How much harder would that hardest day become?

A Public Health Issue Within the Criminal Legal System

I believe it is incumbent upon us as a field to look closely at the prevalence of behavioral health needs among people entering our jails and pretrial systems.

When we see the same challenges repeatedly—untreated mental health conditions, substance use disorders, housing instability, poverty, food insecurity, and limited access to healthcare—we should ask whether we are responding to an individual criminal legal problem or seeing the consequences of much larger public health and community challenges.

That distinction matters.

If we understand these challenges partly through a public health lens, our response begins to change.

Instead of asking only, “What condition should we impose?” we can also ask:

“What does this person need to succeed?”

And then:

“Does that need require a court condition, or is it something we can offer voluntarily through supportive services?”

Those are very different questions.

Treatment Should Not Require Incarceration

For far too long in the United States, jails and other parts of the carceral system have become de facto points of access to behavioral healthcare for people who were unable to obtain adequate services in their communities.

We have all heard some version of the same statement:

“What is the largest provider of mental health services in our community?”

Too often, the answer is the local jail.

In Maine, where I work, that conversation frequently points to facilities such as the Cumberland County Jail.

But consider what that really means.

Think about the people in your own life who have never been involved in the criminal legal system.

How many take medication for depression or anxiety? How many receive counseling? How many need medication or other support to focus, function, sleep, work, or manage daily life?

Probably more than we realize.

Now think about people you know who live with serious and persistent mental health conditions and have never been arrested.

We understand that they need healthcare.

Why should our understanding of behavioral health fundamentally change when the person needing care has also come into contact with the criminal legal system?

Jail should not have to become the gateway to treatment.

Support Without Turning Support Into a Condition

Our country is moving—far too slowly, in my estimation—toward a model that better recognizes the value of supportive services for people involved in the pretrial system.

The idea is relatively simple: we can help people access what they need without automatically turning every service into a condition of release.

I strongly support that approach.

At Maine Pretrial Services, we have been doing versions of this work for 40 years. We may not always have had a particular name for it.

If pushed to describe it, I might simply call it humanity .

If you met someone who had very little and you had access to resources that could help, what would you do?

You would ask:

“What do you need?”

You might follow that with:

“What can you do, and what can I do to help?”

Sometimes people need treatment. Sometimes they need housing. Sometimes they need transportation, identification, food, medication, or help understanding where they are supposed to be next.

Sometimes they simply need someone who knows the system to point them in the right direction.

That is support.

It does not always have to become supervision.

Navigators—and a Larger Purpose

That brings us to the growing role of navigators .

Navigators can be tremendously valuable, particularly when systems are complicated and resources are fragmented. But I believe we should challenge ourselves to think beyond helping one person navigate a broken or disconnected system.

What if navigation also helped us identify where the system itself needs to change?

If we repeatedly encounter people who cannot find behavioral healthcare, that tells us something.

If we repeatedly encounter people without stable housing, that tells us something.

If transportation consistently prevents people from reaching treatment, employment, or court, that tells us something.

If people routinely enter jail because community services were unavailable long before their arrest, that tells us something too.

Instead of addressing each issue only after an individual has been arrested and detained, we should also be asking:

What does this community need to better support the people who live here?

That is the larger purpose.

If communities are supported, funded, connected, and trained to respond effectively to behavioral health and social needs, they can become the center of service rather than relying on the criminal legal system to fill gaps it was never designed to fill.

Moving Upstream

I believe we need to move upstream.

We should not wait until someone's needs have gone unmet for so long that crisis becomes the point of intervention.

We should not wait until housing instability becomes homelessness.

We should not wait until an untreated behavioral health condition becomes an emergency.

And we should not wait until someone enters the criminal legal system before they can finally access help.

The consequences of unmet needs do not necessarily stop with one person. Persistent poverty, instability, trauma, and lack of access to care can affect families and communities across generations.

I was fortunate.

My parents grew up during the Depression, but they had enough. And because they had enough, we could keep our eyes open and our bodies moving forward. We could go to school. We could work. We could contribute.

When you do not have enough—enough food, enough safety, enough stability, enough healthcare, enough opportunity—it becomes extraordinarily difficult to do those things.

We can change that.

The Role of Pretrial Services

None of this means pretrial services should become the behavioral health system, housing system, public health department, or social services agency.

It should not be up to pretrial services to fix every unmet community need.

But pretrial professionals occupy a unique position.

Every day, we see where systems connect—and where they do not.

We see the person who could succeed in the community if transportation were available.

We see the individual whose behavioral health needs existed long before an arrest.

We see the person whose housing instability makes nearly every other part of life more difficult.

We see what happens when community resources are available.

And we see what happens when they are not.

That perspective gives our field both an opportunity and a responsibility to contribute to the conversation.

We can build partnerships with public health agencies, behavioral health providers, housing organizations, peers, community-based organizations, and other local resources.

We can offer voluntary connections to services without unnecessarily transforming every need into a court mandate.

We can collect and share data about the barriers we repeatedly see.

We can ask whether our practices support successful pretrial outcomes while preserving the presumption of innocence and using the least restrictive interventions necessary.

Most importantly, we can use our proximity to the issue to advocate within our own systems for a different way of thinking.

Start upstream.

Build communities in which people can access help before crisis becomes criminal legal system involvement.

Make treatment available because someone needs treatment—not because someone has been arrested.

Create systems where support is truly support.

It should not have to be the responsibility of pretrial services to solve these problems.

But, as always, pretrial services aims to assist.

And because we have such a close perspective on these issues, I call upon us to be among those who help change them.

About the Author:

Elizabeth Simoni is the Executive Director of Maine Pretrial Services, Inc., a private non-profit dedicated to assisting primarily indigent individuals in Maine’s civil and criminal court systems. Ms. Simoni is active in Maine and nationally. In 2024, she received the National Association of Pretrial Services (NAPSA) Lifetime Achievement Award for assistance with national pretrial publications, national standards board service, and three decades of pretrial service development in Maine. She is an active member of the National Institute of Corrections’ (NIC) Pretrial Executive Network and is the criminal justice representative on the Co-Occurring Collaborative Serving Maine’s board of directors. Her agency portfolio includes pretrial and reentry services, treatment court case management, behavioral health contracting for specialty courts, and holistic defense case management. She graduated from the University of Maine School of Law (1992), and Michigan State University (1989).

Honoring Tim Schnacke: 2026 Ennis J. Olgiati Award Recipient

Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:47:40 GMT

An association says a lot about itself through the people it chooses to honor.

The Ennis J. Olgiati Award, established in memory of Ennis J. Olgiati and first presented in 1983, is the highest honor bestowed by the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA). It recognizes individuals and organizations whose lifetime achievements have made a lasting impact on the field of pretrial services.

This year, NAPSA had the privilege of adding Tim Schnacke to that remarkable group.

For those of us who know Tim, have learned from him, called him with a question, sat through one of his trainings, read his work—or received one of his famously detailed emails—it is hard to imagine someone more deserving.

It is also hard to figure out where to begin when describing his impact.

Tim has spent decades helping our field understand not only what we should be doing, but why. He has pushed us to understand the history behind our practices, the law beneath them, and the principles they are supposed to protect.

And he has never been afraid to tell us when he thinks we need to look again.

As Kennedy Spurgeon said in honoring Tim: “An Association says a lot about itself in the people it chooses to honor.” Kennedy went on to describe what selecting Tim says about NAPSA: that we respect our history, that we want to understand the legal and practical underpinnings of our work, and that we value those willing to carry the message of pretrial justice into places practitioners cannot always reach.

And perhaps most fittingly for Tim, it says we don't mind “having our assumptions challenged if it shows a better path forward.”

Anyone who has spent much time with Tim is probably smiling at that last part.

Tim the Professional

Mike Jones describes Tim as “easily the foremost pretrial legal scholar of our generation.” That is a big statement. But look at what Tim has done.

His scholarship has influenced some of the most prominent university law professors writing about pretrial law. His work has helped shape legal thinking in bail litigation across the country, including cases before state and federal courts. His scholarship has influenced portions of the NAPSA Standards.

For more than 15 years, Tim's work has also helped guide publications, trainings, and technical assistance provided through the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).

And at the state and local level, Tim became the person people called.

Line staff. Executives. Attorneys. Judges. Policymakers. Practitioners.

When someone needed to understand pretrial law—or, as Tim often reminds us, “Bail and No Bail” —Tim was there.

As Mike put it: “There might not be another attorney, or any professional, who has done even one of these things. Tim has done them all.” But Tim's contribution has never been just about knowing the law. It is about the way he thinks. Tim sees things other people don't always see. He can take history, law, policy, research, and practice, find connections between them, and turn those connections into ideas that practitioners can actually use.

Mike describes Tim as one of those rare people whose mind truly lives “ on the balcony”— someone able to see both what is happening right in front of us and the much larger picture.

And Tim has used that perspective to ask our field some difficult—and necessary—questions.

He has never been particularly impressed by the explanation, “Well, that's the way we've always done it.”

Instead, Tim asks us to go back to the law. Go back to the evidence. Go back to history. Go back to the principles we say we believe in.

Sometimes, after pages of research and discussion, Tim can bring all of that complexity back to one remarkably simple idea:

“Bail means release. No bail means no release.”

That ability to strip away years of assumptions and return a complicated issue to its fundamental legal principle is quintessentially Tim.

And it has changed the way many of us understand our own systems.

From Scholarship to System Change

Tim's ideas have never stayed confined to journal articles, conference sessions, or training rooms. They have changed systems. New Mexico provides one powerful example. When New Mexico became one of the first states in the country to move toward an in/out model of pretrial release, the state was entering new territory. There wasn't a roadmap. Tim worked alongside the late Justice Charles Daniels and the New Mexico judiciary as they figured out what that new system should look like.

And in typical Tim fashion, he didn't help once and disappear.

He kept coming back.

He trained. He answered questions. He worked through constitutional issues. He helped with legislative questions. He helped people understand the history behind policies and the legal principles underneath them. Kelly Bradford remembers calling Tim during legislative sessions with questions about proposed legislation, constitutional issues, or the history behind a policy. No matter how busy he was, Tim made time. And he didn't just give her an answer.

He gave her the answer that helped her understand.

That difference tells you a lot about Tim. He wasn't interested only in helping someone solve the problem in front of them. He wanted them to understand enough to be better prepared for the next one. That is the difference between simply being an expert and being a teacher. Tim has always been both.

And Then There Is Tim the Person

The professional accomplishments alone would make Tim worthy of the Olgiati Award. But they aren't the whole reason so many people in this field care about him. Because then there is Tim the person. Yes, Tim is incredibly smart. His ability to research, investigate, connect ideas, and imagine possibilities is extraordinary.

But there is no ivory tower here.

A remarkable amount of the work that has influenced courts, national organizations, scholars, policymakers, and pretrial systems across the country has come from Tim's one-person nonprofit, working out of his basement. There is something wonderfully Tim about that. And while doing all of that, he has remained one of the most generous people you could hope to have as a colleague. Need something? Call Tim. He will stop what he is doing. He will listen. He will give you his full attention. It doesn't particularly matter whether the problem is professional or personal.

And Tim doesn't just answer the question and move on. He follows up. He stays with you until the issue is resolved. That kind of generosity is harder to put on a résumé, but it may explain Tim's impact better than almost anything else. Tara Blair, who has known Tim for more than 20 years, put it beautifully: “So much of what we now teach, discuss, and take for granted in this field has Tim's fingerprints on it.” She's right.

Tim's Fingerprints Are Everywhere

They are in the scholarship of people he has influenced and mentored.

They are in the NAPSA Standards.

They are in national training and technical assistance.

They are in courtrooms and legal arguments.

They are in New Mexico and in jurisdictions across the country.

They are in conference sessions and weeklong trainings.

They are in the practitioners who sat through one of Tim's trainings and went home thinking differently about their own systems. And they are in the countless phone calls, conversations, emails, and brainstorming sessions where Tim helped someone understand something they didn't understand before. His influence has reached jurisdictions he may never visit and rooms he may never know his work entered. That is an extraordinary legacy. Over the years, Tim has been a lot of things to NAPSA and to the larger pretrial field. Historian. Educator. Legal scholar. Advocate. Advisor. Mentor. Colleague. Friend. And, as Kennedy Spurgeon affectionately described him, an occasional “agent provocateur.” We wouldn't have it any other way.

A Tribute From the People Who Know Him

Unfortunately, Tim wasn't able to be with us in person at the 2026 NAPSA Conference to receive the Olgiati Award. And if there is one challenge in trying to explain Tim's impact in a blog post, it is that there are simply too many people with a Tim story. So we asked some of them to help us tell his.

NAPSA's special video tribute brought together colleagues and friends from across the pretrial field, including Spike Bradford; Alison Shames, Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research (APPR); Mike Jones; Holly Busby, National Institute of Corrections (NIC); Virginia Bersch, APPR; and Matthew Alsdorf, APPR.

They come from different organizations, different roles, and different parts of Tim's career. But listen to their stories and a remarkably consistent picture emerges.

They talk about the scholar whose work helped shape a field.

The teacher who could make enormously complicated ideas understandable.

The person willing to challenge assumptions when the law, history, or evidence told us we needed to think differently.

And they talk about Tim the person .

The mentor.

The colleague.

The friend.

The person who made time, shared what he knew, answered the question—and then followed up to make sure you were okay. Together, their stories demonstrate something that a list of professional accomplishments never could. They show the reach of one person's willingness to teach, challenge, mentor, and give. Tim's influence isn't contained in one organization, one jurisdiction, one publication, or even one generation of pretrial professionals. It lives in the people he has taught, challenged, advised, mentored, and befriended over decades.

Tara's words come back to us: “So much of what we now teach, discuss, and take for granted in this field has Tim's fingerprints on it.” The people in this video are some of those fingerprints. And they are only a few of them.

Watch NAPSA's tribute to Tim Schnacke, presented at the 2026 NAPSA Conference, and hear—in their own words—what Tim has meant to the people and the field he has spent his career serving.

A Lifetime of Advancing Pretrial Justice

The Olgiati Award is a lifetime achievement award, but in Tim's case, “lifetime achievement” shouldn't make his contribution sound finished. It isn't. Tim's work continues every time someone he taught teaches someone else. It continues every time a practitioner asks why instead of accepting “that's how we've always done it.” It continues every time a jurisdiction goes back to the law and examines whether its practices actually reflect the principles it is trying to uphold. It continues through the standards, scholarship, training, litigation, and reforms he helped shape. And it continues in all of us who are better at this work because Tim took the time to teach us, challenge us, or answer the phone.

The people Tim taught are teaching others.

The people he challenged are asking better questions.

The people he mentored are leading systems.

And the people he helped are helping someone else.

That is a legacy worthy of NAPSA's highest honor.

Tara said it simply: “Nobody deserves this recognition more.” We couldn't agree more. In recognizing Tim Schnacke as the 2026 recipient of the Ennis J. Olgiati Award, NAPSA honors one of the foremost pretrial legal minds of our generation.

But we also honor the person behind that scholarship—the teacher, mentor, colleague, and friend who has spent decades studying deeply, questioning thoughtfully, teaching generously, and challenging all of us to get the work right.

Tim, thank you for the scholarship.

Thank you for the questions.

Thank you for challenging us.

Thank you for answering the phone—even apparently at 6 a.m.

And most of all, thank you for spending so much of your career making the rest of us better at ours.

Congratulations, Tim. This one is very well deserved.

Michael R. Jones, Ph.D. is a senior criminal justice consultant with over 20 years of experience helping county and state justice systems improve performance through data-guided strategy and cross-agency coordination. As founder and President of Pinnacle Justice Consulting, he advises elected officials and justice partners nationwide on jail population management, pretrial policy, and system governance. His work has helped jurisdictions reduce jail populations, improve court appearance rates, and make defensible, cost-effective decisions, often without expanding facilities, programs, or staffing. Dr. Jones is widely respected for his independent, neutral perspective and his ability to translate data and research into practical options for decision-makers. His Ph.D. is in clinical psychology from the University of Missouri-Columbia.

Hillary Hartoin is the Court and Pretrial Services Director for Cass County, Indiana, with more than a decade of leadership experience in court administration, pretrial and probation supervision, community corrections, and grant management. She is committed to strengthening communities through people-centered supervision that balances accountability with opportunity while prioritizing public safety. In her role, Hillary leads data-driven, evidence-based initiatives to improve outcomes in community supervision and serves as Chair of the Local Justice Reinvestment Advisory Council (JRAC), advancing continuous quality improvement and system-level innovation.

Hillary holds degrees in Business Administration and Computer Information Systems and is a certified probation officer and NAPSA Certified Pretrial Services Professional. She is nationally recognized for her leadership, including being named the 2025 NAPSA Member of the Year and Behavioral Health Champion of the Year. She serves on the NAPSA Board of Directors and contributes nationally through the National Institute of Corrections Pretrial Executive Network, and the Indiana Judicial Conference Pretrial Release Committee.

The Team Behind NAPSA’s Growing Digital Presence

Wed, 19 Aug 2026 20:57:47 GMT

Why Communication Matters in Pretrial Justice

NAPSA’s growing communications efforts bring together Wendy Venvertloh, Executive Director, Nichole Richardson, Dykema Association Management Services; Corina N. Castillo, Pretrial Program Manager for the 6th Judicial District of New Mexico; and Hillary Hartoin, NAPSA Board Member and At-Large Director, who helps lead the development and writing of content for The Standard , NAPSA’s blog.

Together, the team supports a communications strategy designed not simply to tell members what NAPSA is doing, but to create meaningful opportunities for professionals across the country to connect, learn, contribute, and be recognized.

While each member brings a different role and perspective, their work connects NAPSA’s organizational priorities, social media presence, professional resources, and storytelling into a more cohesive digital communications strategy.

Building NAPSA’s Social Media Community

At the center of NAPSA’s social media presence is Corina N. Castillo , Pretrial Program Manager for the 6th Judicial District of New Mexico and a member of NAPSA’s Communications Committee.

Corina helps lead the planning, coordination, and day-to-day engagement behind NAPSA’s presence across LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram. Working from an organized social media calendar, she helps ensure that NAPSA maintains a consistent presence while balancing organizational news, educational resources, conference and training opportunities, member recognition, committee activities, professional observances, and stories from across the pretrial field.

But Corina’s role goes beyond scheduling posts.

As a practicing pretrial professional herself, she understands the audience behind the platforms. NAPSA’s followers include officers, supervisors, program managers, directors, judges, researchers, treatment and justice partners, and professionals working in jurisdictions of every size across the country.

That practitioner perspective helps turn NAPSA’s social media from a place where information is simply posted into a place where the pretrial community can see, recognize, and learn from one another.

Helping Tell the Stories Behind the Field

Working alongside the social media efforts is Hillary Hartoin, NAPSA Board Member and At-Large Director, who also serves on NAPSA’s Communications Committee and helps develop, write, and manage content for The Standard .

Hillary’s role with the blog focuses on helping NAPSA tell the stories behind the organization and the broader pretrial profession. That includes identifying topics and individuals to feature, developing articles, interviewing NAPSA leaders and practitioners, highlighting committee initiatives and promising practices, and helping translate the work occurring throughout the association into content that is accessible and meaningful to members.

Since the launch of The Standard , Hillary has contributed articles highlighting many different dimensions of the profession—from the people leading NAPSA to the committees shaping its work and the innovations occurring in jurisdictions across the country.

Her Meet the NAPSA Board series has introduced readers to leaders including President Eric Schmidt, Vice President Domingo Corona, Past President Kelly Bradford, and Treasurer Tara Boh Blair, giving members an opportunity to learn more about the professional experiences and people behind NAPSA’s leadership.

Other pieces have moved beyond individual profiles to explore the infrastructure that supports the profession, including “Setting the Standard: How the NAPSA Standards Committee Shapes Pretrial Justice,” “Building Knowledge, Advancing Practice: The NAPSA Education Committee,” and “Telling the Story of Pretrial Justice: The Role of the NAPSA Communications Committee.”

The blog has also created opportunities to showcase innovation and leadership outside the organization itself. Articles such as “Advancing Evidence-Based Pretrial in Indiana: Judicial Spotlight: Judge Mark Spitzer” and “New Mexico Pretrial Executive Network Summit Strengthens Leadership, Innovation, and Community” allow practitioners to learn from work happening in jurisdictions across the country.

More recently, “Building the Next Generation of Pretrial Leaders: How NAPSA's Leadership Workgroup Is Shaping the Future of Pretrial Leadership” explored the importance of intentionally developing the next generation of professionals who will guide the field.

Through this work, Hillary helps connect her role as a NAPSA Board Member with a broader goal: making the work of NAPSA, its members, and the pretrial profession more visible.

Where the Blog and Social Media Come Together

Corina and Hillary’s roles also demonstrate how NAPSA’s expanding communications platforms complement one another.

The Standard provides the space to tell a deeper story.

Social media provides the opportunity to bring that story to the community.

A long-form article highlighting a practitioner, committee, emerging practice, or innovative jurisdiction can become multiple opportunities for engagement across LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram. Social media then directs members back to NAPSA’s website, where they can explore the full story, discover additional resources, and learn more about the association.

At the same time, the relationship works in the opposite direction. Conversations, accomplishments, photographs, programs, and ideas shared by members through NAPSA’s professional network can identify new stories worth exploring through The Standard.

Together, Corina’s leadership of NAPSA’s social media presence and Hillary’s work with The Standard help create a continuous communications cycle:

Find the stories. Tell the stories. Share the stories. Start conversations. Connect the field.

That collaboration supports a larger goal than simply increasing the number of posts NAPSA publishes.

It helps create a national professional community in which practitioners can see the work happening beyond their own jurisdictions, recognize colleagues, discover new ideas, and understand how their individual work contributes to the larger pretrial profession.

One Communications Strategy, Many Voices

NAPSA’s growing digital presence demonstrates what can happen when organizational leadership, professional storytelling, and practitioner voices come together.

Wendy Venvertloh provides executive leadership and helps connect communications with NAPSA’s broader organizational mission and strategic direction. Nichole Richardson provides association management and communications support that helps turn those priorities into consistent outreach.

Corina Castillo helps lead NAPSA’s social media presence, coordinating and engaging with the professional community across LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram. And Hillary Hartoin, as a NAPSA Board Member and Communications Committee member, helps develop and write The Standard, creating a platform where NAPSA can go beyond announcements and tell the deeper stories of the people, practices, leadership, and innovation shaping pretrial services.

Each role is different, but the purpose is shared:

To connect the field, elevate its professionals, share its knowledge, and ensure the important work happening in pretrial services has a platform and a voice.

Want to Get Involved? Add Your Voice to NAPSA’s Communications

NAPSA’s communications efforts are strongest when they reflect the experiences, ideas, accomplishments, and perspectives of professionals from across the pretrial field—and the Communications Committee provides an opportunity for members to be part of that work.

Whether you enjoy writing, storytelling, social media, identifying emerging practices, recognizing the accomplishments of colleagues, sharing resources, or simply helping generate ideas for future content, there are opportunities to contribute. You do not have to be a communications professional to bring something valuable to the committee. Practitioner experience and a willingness to share what is happening in your jurisdiction or across the profession are exactly what help make NAPSA’s communications meaningful.

Getting involved is also an opportunity to connect with colleagues from across the country while helping NAPSA identify and elevate the people, programs, innovations, and ideas that deserve a broader audience.

The Communications Committee is always looking for new voices, new perspectives, and new stories to tell. If you would like to become more involved with NAPSA and help strengthen how we connect and communicate with the pretrial community, consider joining the Communications Committee or contributing an idea for The Standard.

Because NAPSA’s story is not the story of any one committee, leader, or organization.

It is the collective story of the professionals and communities that make up the pretrial field—and we want to help you tell it.

To contribute ideas or learn more, contact NAPSA at info@ napsa .org .

Meet the NAPSA Board: President Elect Brian Brittain

Wed, 12 Aug 2026 13:01:53 GMT

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Brian Brittain

Board Role/Title: President Elect

Term of Service: 2026- Present

Location (City/State): Deland, Florida

Professional Role/Organization: Court Services Manager, Volusia County 7th Judicial Circuit

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

Since 2001, I’ve been involved in the criminal justice realm, working with problem-solving courts, pretrial services, and various roles in court administration. Prior to my career in criminal justice, I served in the United States Army with the 101st Airborne Division. I’ve had the privilege of serving on NAPSA’s Board of Directors for years, starting as the Southern Regional Director and then as chair of the Education Committee, where I took part in revamping and updating the Certified Pretrial Services Professional (CPSP) certification exam and software. Additionally, I served two terms as Treasurer and a few years as Vice President. I had the pleasure of serving many years as president of the Association of Pretrial Professionals of Florida (APPF) and spent six years as the pretrial commissioner for the Florida Corrections and Accreditation Commission, helping ensure that pretrial agencies upheld the highest standards of professionalism and pretrial practices.

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

I attended my first NAPSA conference in Washington DC in 2012. I remember meeting various board members and thought what an amazing group of people they were. It was them who inspired me. At that conference, NAPSA was looking to elect a new Southern Regional Director and all I could think of was that this was my shot at getting involved. I gave an off the cuff speech about why I would make a good director, entered a contested election I was certain that I would lose, did not inform my boss of my intentions (an incredibly poor decision in hindsight, zero stars, do not recommend), and the rest is history.

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

For years I was almost completely invested in the science and education of pretrial risk assessment. While that is still a professional and scholarly passion, my focus has shifted more towards the promotion and creation of pretrial and professional standards

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

I think the biggest challenge currently is maintaining NAPSA’s neutrality in a fluctuating political climate. Pretrial services has an important place in our communities and there are often competing viewpoints on how those resources are best utilized.

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

I believe my experience in criminal justice, particularly front-end justice, combined with my educational background, positions me as a scholar-practitioner. This unique blend allows me to bring both practical, real-world insights and evidence-based perspectives to discussions. Additionally, my many years of prior board service give me valuable organizational context, enabling me to help the board learn from past decisions while moving forward thoughtfully.

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

It is hard to highlight just one moment as I have been extremely fortunate in both a professional and personal capacity. However, watching four of my children graduate from basic training (three in the Navy, one in the Army) resulted in many proud tears.

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

Probably the same advice I would give any professional, take advantage of the cards you are dealt. Opportunities exist to get involved; opportunities exist for professional development. At the end of the road, I believe that if we can look back and say that we took advantage of the opportunities laid before us, then we have done well.

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

Well, the board’s work is… work. I think that is probably what most people don’t see. It is traveling on weekends for meetings, being away from family, conference calls, Zoom meetings, and all this adding to an already busy schedule. But there is a knowing that you have the unique opportunity to make a difference. Sometimes those differences are small, sometimes they are big, but the joy in making a difference, no matter how big or small, is what keeps me going.

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

I just love to have fun and can usually make that happen wherever I am. I enjoy traveling and I have an eclectic mix of favorite destinations. From the overwhelming sensation of people filled theme parks to climbing mountains in quiet solitude. I have crossed many things off my bucket list, but traveling to space is still there… one day, one day.

Leading from the Bench: How NAPSA's Judicial Education Workgroup is Shaping the Future of Pretrial Justice

Wed, 05 Aug 2026 15:25:57 GMT

The decisions judges make during the pretrial phase are among the most significant in the criminal justice system. Every release or detention decision requires balancing constitutional rights, public safety, court appearance, victim considerations, and the unique circumstances of each individual before the court. As pretrial practices continue to evolve through research, legislation, and emerging technologies, judicial education has never been more important.

Recognizing this need, the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) established the Judicial Education Workgroup to ensure judges have access to high-quality, evidence-based education developed specifically for the unique challenges of pretrial decision-making. Through collaboration with judicial leaders from across the country, the workgroup is helping strengthen courts by providing practical, relevant, and peer-driven educational opportunities.

Why Judicial Education Matters

Judges today face increasingly complex pretrial decisions in an environment of changing laws, evolving case law, heightened public attention, behavioral health challenges, and expanding pretrial services. While every jurisdiction is different, judges across the nation share many of the same questions:

How can courts balance public safety with the presumption of innocence?
What role should validated pretrial assessments play in judicial decision-making?
How should courts respond to individuals experiencing behavioral health or substance use disorders?
How can judges navigate public scrutiny while remaining impartial and grounded in evidence-based practices?

These challenges require education that goes beyond statutes and case law. Judges benefit from opportunities to learn from one another, discuss emerging issues, and explore practical strategies that improve courtroom decision-making while maintaining judicial independence.

A Workgroup Built by Judges, for Judges

NAPSA's Judicial Education Workgroup was created to provide exactly that.

Comprised of experienced judges and pretrial professionals from diverse jurisdictions, the workgroup brings together a wide range of perspectives to identify educational needs, develop relevant programming, and ensure judicial education reflects both current research and the realities of today's courtrooms.

The group's mission is simple but significant: support judges with education that strengthens informed, fair, and evidence-based pretrial decision-making.

As Judge Mark Spitzer of the Grant County Circuit Court in Indiana notes:

"Despite being a critical stage of criminal procedure, our judicial education programs often neglect the pretrial phase. Pretrial impacts jail populations, recidivism, and criminal justice outcomes. Judges who have a criminal docket, and their communities, can greatly benefit from robust education on the evolving law and evidence-based practices that inform modern pretrial practice."

By combining legal expertise with operational knowledge of pretrial systems, the workgroup helps bridge the gap between policy, research, and courtroom practice.

Building the Judicial Track

One of the Judicial Education Workgroup's most visible accomplishments has been the development of NAPSA's Judicial Track at the Annual Conference.

Rather than adapting general conference sessions for judges, the workgroup designed an educational experience specifically for judicial officers. Every session is carefully developed to address issues judges encounter daily while providing practical tools that can be applied immediately upon returning to their courts.

Topics are selected based on current legal developments, emerging research, judicial feedback, and real-world challenges facing courts across the country. Sessions are designed to encourage thoughtful discussion while respecting the unique role and responsibilities of the judiciary.

This "judges teaching judges" model creates an environment where participants can openly discuss complex issues, exchange ideas, and learn from colleagues who understand the realities of presiding over pretrial proceedings.

Addressing the Issues That Matter Most

The Judicial Track explores many of today's most pressing issues in pretrial justice, including:

Judicial leadership in pretrial release and detention decisions
The appropriate use of validated pretrial assessments
Behavioral health and substance use considerations
Evidence-based pretrial supervision practices
Balancing public safety, court appearance, and individual rights

Each session emphasizes practical application while remaining grounded in constitutional principles and current research.

Learning Through Judicial Collaboration

One of the greatest strengths of the Judicial Education Workgroup is its emphasis on peer-to-peer learning.

Judges often work independently within their jurisdictions, yet many confront remarkably similar challenges. The Judicial Track creates opportunities for meaningful conversations among judicial officers from across the country, allowing participants to share experiences, discuss successful approaches, and consider new perspectives.

These conversations often continue long after conference sessions conclude, building professional relationships that strengthen courts well beyond the annual meeting.

Judge Bo Zeerip of the Delta County Court in Colorado captures the importance of this shared commitment:

"Judges are unique in the criminal justice system because we have the authority and duty to decide whether to release or detain presumptively innocent accused persons who come before us daily. It is an awesome power to be in a position to take away a person’s liberty prior to a guilty plea or verdict."

He adds that judges are "duty bound to honor and protect the constitutional rights of both accused persons and victims, while also promoting community safety and efficient court procedures," emphasizing that continued education helps courts maximize safe pretrial release, court appearance, and public safety.

Strengthening Courts and Communities

Judicial education extends far beyond professional development.

When judges understand evidence-based pretrial practices, local resources, behavioral health considerations, and effective supervision strategies, courts are better positioned to make informed decisions that promote fairness, enhance public safety, and improve court appearance rates.

Strong judicial leadership also fosters collaboration among courts, pretrial agencies, prosecutors, defense counsel, behavioral health providers, and community partners. These relationships help create more effective and responsive local justice systems while maintaining public confidence in the courts.

Advancing NAPSA's Mission

The work of the Judicial Education Workgroup directly supports NAPSA's mission to advance fair, effective, and evidence-based pretrial justice.

By developing specialized education for judicial officers, the workgroup strengthens collaboration between courts and pretrial professionals while encouraging consistent application of research-informed practices. The result is a stronger national network of judicial leaders committed to improving pretrial systems and serving their communities.

Looking Ahead

As pretrial justice continues to evolve, so too will judicial education.

Emerging technologies, advances in artificial intelligence, changing legislation, behavioral health initiatives, and increasing public expectations will continue shaping the future of court operations. The Judicial Education Workgroup remains committed to preparing judges to navigate these developments with confidence while preserving the integrity and independence of judicial decision-making.

Future educational opportunities will continue to expand as NAPSA explores additional ways to support judges throughout the year.

Join the Conversation

Whether you are new to the bench or have decades of judicial experience, the NAPSA Judicial Track offers an opportunity to learn from respected judicial colleagues, engage in meaningful discussions, and return home with practical strategies that can strengthen your court.

The challenges facing pretrial justice are complex, but they are not faced alone. Through collaboration, education, and shared experience, judges across the country are helping shape the future of pretrial practice—one informed decision at a time.

The response to NAPSA's Judicial Track has been tremendous. Due to strong interest from judges across the country, this year's Judicial Track has reached capacity.

If you are interested in participating, we encourage you to reach out to the NAPSA team. While attendance for this year's program is currently full, we would be happy to discuss opportunities, answer questions, and add interested judges to our contact list should additional space become available or as we plan future educational offerings.

The continued enthusiasm for the Judicial Track reflects the growing recognition that specialized judicial education plays a critical role in strengthening pretrial decision-making and supporting courts nationwide.

Although the Judicial Track is currently at capacity for this year's conference, we encourage interested judges to reach out to the NAPSA team. We'd love to connect with you, discuss future opportunities, and keep you informed as the Judicial Education Workgroup continues to expand educational programming throughout the year.

We invite you to join us at future NAPSA educational events and experience the Judicial Track firsthand. Together, we can continue building stronger courts, advancing evidence-based practices, and supporting judicial leadership in pretrial justice.

What's Love Got to Do with Pretrial? Everything — and Not the Way You Think

Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:42:11 GMT

Tina Turner and the Courage to Say Yes to Love

I gave a keynote at NAPSA last year — Leading from the Emerging Future of Pretrial — so I felt both honored and challenged when the program committee asked me to build on it with another plenary this year.

My new title — Leadership, Love, and Implementation Science in Pretrial — picks up where we left off, but it adds two notions that seem, on their face, paradoxical, unrelated, or even contradictory: Love and Implementation Science .

When I think about a life of courage, love, and getting things done, Tina Turner comes to mind. Her gutsy comeback at the age of 44, after surviving abuse, arrived with her hit What’s Love Got to Do with It.

Her voice resonates within us, ‘isn’t love just a secondhand emotion, and who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?’ Yet in the song she lets herself be drawn into the scary undertow of life, the tug of love she experiences that is pulling her forward. Loving and living fully are fearful, yet she says yes to life anyway.

What Does Love Have to Do with Pretrial?

You may be asking what love has to do with leadership and maximizing pretrial release, court appearance, and public safety.

It’s a fair question. Some skepticism is well earned in a field that deals directly with the horrible consequences of crime, seeks justice, and runs on law, evidence, risk, and data. We work hard to be rigorous, fair, and effective.

In contrast, love can sound soft, sentimental, and out of place — a nice feeling but secondary to the real work, precisely the kind of thing you keep out of serious professional decisions.

But what is love?

Perhaps it’s best to start with our own concrete experience — recall and allow yourself to re-experience when you ‘fell in love’ for the first time, the birth of your child, or the love you have for a parent, a friend, nature, or a country.

These are not fleeting feelings, they are enduring states of being and indicators of value that create a context, and give us the motivation and strength to face life’s challenges.

We Are Loved Into Being

When our daughter was born, it was love at first sight. Then came the fears, the tensions, the hard work, and the need for help from others.

Leaving the hospital carrying her in the baby carrier was joyful — and terrifying.

Can we do this? How can we do this? Who can help us?

Twenty-five years later, new challenges keep emerging, but these only strengthen and deepen our love.

As best they can, parents create a context in which their children can grow and flourish. As newborns we have no language or understanding of what the world is, and no ability to function in it. What babies and young children can do, with incredible capacity, is receive and instantly respond to the love of their parents and wider family. We are, quite literally, loved into being.

Love Creates the Conditions for Flourishing

A loving context creates a sense of safety which unleashes our inner unrestricted and infinite desire to question, understand, know, value, choose, act, love in return, and flourish.

Love is not self-protective. It is self-giving, risky, tremendously difficult to achieve and even harder to sustain.

Of course, none of us are loved perfectly and we live in a deeply imperfect world.

The absence of love is always wounding — it introduces elements of illegitimate coercion and leaves us anxious, constricted, fearful, self-protective, and insecure.

The mixture of loving and the non-loving is real; it gives rise to our potential for good but also to many of the problems which pretrial justice agencies seek to address.

Love as Leadership, Creating a Context Where Everyone Can Flourish

To be present to love we must transcend ourselves in response to that terrifying tug in our lives.

It is not about us; it is about responding to something of value and importance greater than us.

To the extent that we intentionally act in this way, we constitute ourselves and reality, making a unique contribution to the flow of history and the arc of justice.

Leaders, both formal and informal, have an important role. Their job is to create a context in which their agency and fellow staff — and the systems and institutions of justice — can flourish and meet their true ends.

A loving context preserves, carries forward, and goes beyond what is fair or required, allowing this fully human flourishing to take place.

The discipline of doing all the hard work to remain loving while building that context, despite the fears, challenges, and forces that constantly threaten to take us off course into what is non-loving, is what it means to be in love with our work.

The Leaders Who Love and Inspire Us

To me, the luminaries in our field have fallen and stayed in love with pretrial, grounding their extraordinarily intelligent, diligent, painstaking, and value driven work.

I think of Chief Justice Rehnquist who asserted,

“In our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception,” ( U.S. v. Salerno ),

and so many colleagues like Lori Eville, Spurgeon Kennedy, Tim Schnacke, Barb Hankey ...

So, What's Science Got to Do with It?

Everything — and, again, not in the way you think.

Our field has done a remarkable job of naming what legal and evidence-based pretrial practices should look like. The National Institute of Corrections (NIC), the American Bar Association, and NAPSA have painstakingly traced the history of pretrial jurisprudence and practice, to discern and hand us the essential elements, the outcomes, and the shared standards of excellence we hold ourselves to. We know, in broad strokes, what to do.

What most jurisdictions have not yet solved is how to get all the way there, and how to stay there when the training grant ends, the champion retires, or the first hard case hits the news.

Implementation science gives us a reliable, repeatable method for exactly that.

Its six active implementation frameworks help us foster the competency, organization, and leadership drivers that make change stick and evolve.

This includes installing usable practices through defined stages and ongoing coaching rather than one-time trainings as well as running short improvement cycles to self-correct and keep on course.

The scientific method is demanding — it must be applied rigorously and systematically, and it requires new learning — but if leaders establish a loving context within an organization, it becomes possible to collectively implement and sustain these implementation frameworks.

Context conditions our consciousness and the actions we take. It turns out that love and science walk hand in hand.

An Invitation to Reno to Put Love and Science into Practice

I’ve spent more than a decade helping agencies use both love and science, as part of the NIC pretrial faculty and, most recently, as an implementation coach to New Mexico’s remarkable Administrative Office of the Court’s statewide pretrial team that has helped all thirteen judicial districts and thirty-three counties of the state to successfully implement legal and evidence-based pretrial justice programs and outcomes.

As you prepare for Reno, ask yourself: What’s love — and implementation science — got to do with it, with you and your work in pretrial?

Come to the keynote for the fuller story, followed by a two-hour workshop where we will apply these ideas directly to your team, your jurisdiction, and the place you’re most stuck or challenged right now.

Bring your hardest case, the place of discord you would rather not face — that is the point. It is the place where you will meet the tension and the scary tug that is calling you to transcend where you are now and get to where you want to be.

About the Author:

Dr. Tom O’Connor is internationally recognized for his communication, facilitation, and cultural-change skills in the specialty area of criminal justice. He helps people to have better conversations, better collaboration, and better results.

A native of Ireland who now holds dual citizenship in the U.S., Tom has earned degrees in law, philosophy, theology and counseling. His PhD thesis focused on Religion and Culture in the U.S. Penal System. He spent nine years living as a friar (a wandering monk) with the Carmelite religious order. Tom currently assists the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) with the implementation of pretrial reform across the US as a member of its Pretrial faculty. On behalf of NIC Tom and his colleague, Samantha Collins, spent four years coaching the Statewide Pretrial Team to use Implementation Science to guide its successful implementation of legal and evidence-based pretrial service programs in all 33 counties and 13 judicial districts of New Mexico.

In his role as the Administrator of Religious Services for the Oregon Department of Corrections, Tom led a team of 24 full-time state chaplains and over 2,000 volunteers to develop the Oregon model of humanist, spiritual, and religious prison services. He conducted and published research to show that 71% of the men in prison and 95% of the women voluntarily participated in the program and it reduced recidivism. The model was featured on National Public Radio and in an award-winning film by Martin Doblmeier called Chaplains.

Tom is co-author with Brad Bogue of a new Practice Model for coaching that combines five evidence-based practices. Tom’s cutting-edge work on facilitating whole system change has taken him to many states in the U.S. and to countries including New Zealand, Canada, Australia, England, Ireland, and France. His company, Transforming Communication, supports and challenges criminal justice agencies to be more compassionate, collaborative, and achieve better outcomes.

Honoring Pretrial Professionals: A Thank You from NAPSA During Pretrial, Probation, and Parole Supervision Week

Mon, 20 Jul 2026 12:38:41 GMT

During Pretrial, Probation, and Parole Supervision Week

Each July, Pretrial, Probation, and Parole Supervision Week provides an opportunity to recognize the professionals who work every day to strengthen communities, support individuals, and uphold the principles of justice. The National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) would like to honor all community supervision professionals and specifically recognize and thank the dedicated pretrial professionals who serve at the front end of the justice system.

Pretrial services is often viewed through the lens of two important responsibilities: helping ensure court appearance and promoting public safety during the pretrial period. These responsibilities remain at the heart of the profession and are essential to maintaining confidence in our justice system.

But pretrial services is more than ensuring people make their court appearances and remain arrest-free. While those responsibilities are critically important, the work of pretrial professionals goes much deeper.

At its core, pretrial services is rooted in a simple but powerful belief: people are more than the worst moment of their lives.

Every day, pretrial professionals work to advance effective, evidence-based pretrial systems that balance public safety, individual liberty, and the presumption of innocence.

Every day, pretrial professionals make decisions and provide support that can have a profound impact on the trajectory of an individual's future.

They provide courts with objective information to support judicial decision-making, conduct outcome assessments, monitor compliance with court-ordered conditions, and connect individuals to services that can help them successfully navigate the pretrial process. This work is not easy. It requires balancing public safety, accountability, constitutional rights, and compassion. It requires difficult conversations, thoughtful decision-making, professionalism, and a commitment to treating every individual with dignity and respect.

Pretrial professionals understand that successful outcomes are often shaped by factors that extend beyond the courtroom. A missed court date may not be driven by unwillingness to comply, but by transportation barriers, housing instability, mental health needs, substance use disorders, childcare challenges, or other obstacles that many people face every day. By identifying and addressing these barriers whenever possible, pretrial professionals help create pathways for success while maintaining accountability to the court.

This work sends a powerful message: You matter. Your future matters.

Across the country, pretrial officers and agency leaders witness extraordinary examples of resilience. They see individuals facing addiction, mental health challenges, poverty, trauma, housing instability, and other significant obstacles. Yet they also see people work toward recovery, maintain employment, reconnect with family, engage in treatment, and not only successfully meet their court obligations, but also successfully move forward with their lives.

These successes belong first and foremost to the individuals who do the hard work of change. But they are often supported by professionals who understand that public safety, court appearance, procedural fairness, and person-centered support are not competing goals—they are complementary ones that can coexist.

Pretrial executives and agency leaders play a vital role in advancing this mission. Through leadership, dedication, innovation, research, and collaboration, they help build systems that are fair, effective, and grounded in evidence and research. They champion best practices, strengthen community partnerships, support staff wellness, and promote policies that improve outcomes for courts, communities, the individuals they serve and the justice system as a whole.

As we celebrate Pretrial, Probation, and Parole Supervision Week, NAPSA extends its deepest gratitude to the thousands of pretrial professionals serving in courts, agencies, and communities across the nation.

Thank you for the countless hours you dedicate to public service.

Thank you for your commitment to public safety and court appearance.

Thank you for advancing evidence-based practices and supporting informed judicial decision-making.

Thank you for your professionalism, integrity, and compassion.

Thank you for believing in the possibility of change.

Thank you for recognizing the humanity in every person who enters the justice system.

And thank you for your unwavering dedication to a pretrial process that promotes fairness, accountability, and dignity for all.

The future of pretrial services will continue to be shaped by innovation, resilience, and a steadfast commitment to justice. NAPSA is proud to stand alongside the professionals who make that future possible every day.

From all of us at NAPSA: Thank you for your service, your leadership, and your belief that justice can be both effective and humane.

Wendy Venvertloh

Executive Director

National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA)

Meet the NAPSA Board: Treasurer Tara Boh Blair

Thu, 16 Jul 2026 17:23:57 GMT

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Tara Boh Blair

Board Role/Title: Treasurer

Term of Service: Midwest Director, January 2024-January 2026, Treasurer, January 2026 to present

Location (City/State): Mt. Sterling, KY

Professional Role/Organization: Senior Manager, Center for Effective Public Policy

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

I began my career in pretrial services in 1995 as a Pretrial Officer working the night shift in Fayette County, Kentucky. Those early years gave me a firsthand understanding of the challenges individuals face when entering the justice system and the important role pretrial professionals play in balancing public safety, court appearance, and fairness. Over the years, I worked my way through the ranks and became Director of Kentucky’s statewide pretrial services program in 2008.

In addition to my state leadership role, I began providing national and international training and technical assistance in 2009, helping jurisdictions improve pretrial practices, implement evidence-based reforms, and strengthen justice system collaboration. After retiring from Kentucky in 2021, I continued my work in the field as a Senior Manager at the Center for Effective Public Policy, where I support jurisdictions across the country with pretrial and justice-system initiatives. I feel incredibly fortunate to have spent my career doing work that I truly believe improves lives and communities.

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

I attended my first NAPSA conference in 1995, very early in my career, and immediately felt connected to the mission and the people. NAPSA provided a professional home where I could learn from experienced leaders, exchange ideas, and better understand the national importance of pretrial justice. What inspired me most was seeing how passionate members were about fairness, dignity, and improving outcomes for people involved in the justice system. Throughout my career, NAPSA has been a constant source of mentorship, innovation, and support. Many of the people I met through NAPSA became lifelong colleagues and friends who helped shape both my career and my perspective on leadership.

What motivated you to serve on the NAPSA Board?

After benefiting from NAPSA membership for so many years, I reached a point in my career where I wanted to give back to the organization that had given so much to me professionally and personally. Serving on the Board allows me to support the next generation of pretrial professionals while helping strengthen the organization for the future.

I also believe strongly in the importance of practitioner voices and field experience in leadership. Having worked at both the local and statewide levels, and now nationally, I wanted to bring those perspectives to the Board and help ensure NAPSA continues evolving to meet the changing needs of the field.

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

It is difficult to choose just one area because I care deeply about all aspects of pretrial justice and NAPSA’s mission. If I had to narrow it down, I would say I am most passionate about NAPSA’s commitment to supporting its members through high-quality training, education, mentorship, and networking opportunities.

Pretrial professionals often work in challenging environments and make difficult decisions every day. Having access to national standards, peer support, and continuing education is critical. NAPSA creates a space where professionals can learn from one another, share successes and challenges, and stay connected to the larger mission of advancing fair and effective pretrial practices.

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

One of the biggest opportunities is the continued momentum to expand and improve pretrial services programs nationwide. More jurisdictions are recognizing the importance of evidence-based practices, reducing unnecessary detention, and creating systems that are both fair and effective.

At the same time, one of the biggest challenges is ensuring that reform efforts are implemented thoughtfully and sustainably. Many jurisdictions face resource limitations, staffing challenges, political pressures, and misconceptions about the role of pretrial services. There is also a continued need for education about what pretrial services do and how they contribute to public safety, court appearance, and better system outcomes. I believe the field has made tremendous progress, but there is still important work ahead.

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

I bring over three decades of experience in pretrial services at the local, state, national, and international levels. Having worked in many different jurisdictions and systems, I understand that there is rarely a one-size-fits-all approach to reform. I value innovation, collaboration, and being willing to challenge traditional thinking when necessary.

I also believe it is important to bring honest dialogue and diverse perspectives to Board discussions. I do not always follow the status quo, and I think that willingness to think differently can help strengthen decision-making and strategic planning. My goal is always to help move the field forward while staying grounded in the realities practitioners face every day.

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

Professionally, receiving the NAPSA Olgiati Award in 2021 was an incredible honor. Being recognized by peers and colleagues with such a prestigious award meant a great deal to me because NAPSA has been such an important part of my professional journey.

Personally, I am most proud of my son, Dane. Watching him grow into a kind, hardworking, and thoughtful young man has been my greatest joy and accomplishment outside of my career.

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

Get involved early and take advantage of every opportunity to learn. Attend conferences, join committees, ask questions, and network with people in the field. One of the greatest strengths of NAPSA is the willingness of members to share knowledge, experiences, and support with one another.

I would also encourage new professionals to remember that pretrial work truly matters. The decisions made during the pretrial phase can significantly impact individuals, families, and communities. It is challenging work, but it is also incredibly meaningful and rewarding.

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

I want members to know that the Board truly works on behalf of the membership and is deeply committed to strengthening the organization and supporting the field. Board members dedicate significant time and energy to ensuring NAPSA continues to provide value through training, standards, conferences, and professional development opportunities.

We care deeply about listening to members, understanding the challenges they face, and helping position NAPSA to continue leading the field into the future.

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

Outside of work, I love traveling and exploring new places and cultures around the world. Travel has given me a broader perspective both personally and professionally, and I enjoy experiencing different communities, food, and traditions.

I also enjoy spending time with my family, gardening during the warmer months, and working on puzzles during the winter. Those activities help me recharge and create balance outside of a busy professional life.

Closing

I am grateful for the opportunities NAPSA has provided throughout my career and honored to serve on the Board. Pretrial services is more than a profession to me; it is a lifelong passion. I look forward to continuing to support NAPSA’s mission and working alongside dedicated professionals across the country who are committed to advancing fair, effective, and evidence-based pretrial justice practices

Building the Next Generation of Pretrial Leaders: How NAPSA's Leadership Workgroup Is Shaping the Future of Pretrial Leadership

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 14:55:29 GMT

Why Leadership Matters

Leadership has never been more important in the pretrial profession. In today's increasingly polarized environment, staff look to their leaders for guidance, stability, and direction. We do not always have all the answers, but by remaining in a constant state of learning, leaders develop the ability to navigate crucial conversations with care, diplomacy, and integrity. Pretrial leaders also work alongside judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, behavioral health providers, and community partners—stakeholders who often have different missions and perspectives. Building those relationships requires tact, humility, and the ability to find common ground so that the voice of pretrial services is heard. Above all, our staff look to us to be their advocates.

Leadership also shapes the future of our profession. As many justice-related professions continue to face recruitment and retention challenges, developing healthy workplace cultures has never been more important. Future leaders who understand their values, lead with purpose, and create environments where employees feel supported will help ensure that talented professionals choose to build careers in pretrial services. Our profession cannot afford leaders who are simply collecting a paycheck. Exceptional leadership is essential to advancing justice, serving our communities, and supporting the professionals who carry out this vital work every day.

"Leadership is the ability to be influenced and to be influential. Our words and actions as leaders are heard, valued, and judged by those in our charge. We are responsible for continuing to grow ourselves for the sake of those we lead and as role models to those who are watching."

The Leadership Workgroup

Recognizing the importance of leadership development, the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) established the Leadership Workgroup to invest in the next generation of pretrial leaders.

The workgroup's mission is:

"To develop emerging pretrial leaders who embody strong leadership, advance the essential mission of pretrial services, and create lasting local and national change in the communities we serve."

The workgroup brings together experienced pretrial professionals from across the country whose diverse leadership experiences have shaped every aspect of this initiative. Through meaningful conversations, members reflected on lessons learned throughout their careers, discussed the realities of leadership today, and identified the knowledge and skills they wished they had when first stepping into executive roles. Those discussions continue to guide the development of the Academy and its curriculum.

Building the Leadership Academy

One of the Leadership Workgroup's primary initiatives is the development of NAPSA's inaugural Leadership Academy. While the Academy is still under development, the committee is actively building a comprehensive 12-month leadership program designed specifically for emerging pretrial executives.

The Academy has been intentionally shaped through collaboration and shared experience. Rather than beginning with curriculum, the workgroup first focused on its collective "why." Members spent time discussing the purpose of the Academy, who it should serve, and the impact they hope it will have on both participants and the profession.

The committee carefully considered whether the Academy should focus on mid-level managers or executive leaders before reaching a consensus that the program should be designed specifically for pretrial professionals entering executive leadership. The workgroup reviewed several vision and purpose statements before selecting the final statement through an almost unanimous vote, reflecting the collaborative nature of the project and the shared commitment to creating a meaningful leadership experience for the profession. Every decision has been guided by thoughtful discussion, shared expertise, and a common vision for strengthening pretrial leadership nationwide.

Preparing the Next Generation of Leaders

Although the curriculum continues to evolve, the committee's vision is clear. The Leadership Academy is intended to build confidence in new pretrial executives and prepare them for success from the very beginning of their leadership journey.

Participants will develop effective communication strategies, strengthen evidence-informed decision-making, establish organizational priorities, and create healthy workplace cultures. The program will also help leaders develop a clear roadmap built around vision, strategic planning, and long-term organizational success.

The Academy is expected to provide participants with opportunities to strengthen their technical, legal, and analytical expertise while also developing the interpersonal leadership skills necessary to navigate conflict, inspire teams, and lead organizational change. A structured mentorship component, peer learning, and a capstone project will provide practical opportunities to apply lessons learned within participants' own agencies. As development continues, the committee remains focused on creating an Academy that balances leadership theory with practical application.

Leadership Versus Management

One of the central themes of the Academy is understanding the distinction between leadership and management.

Both are essential to successful organizations, but they serve different purposes. Managers focus on operations, numbers, data, and reports. Leaders focus on people. They establish cultures of care, empower employees through mastery, autonomy, and purpose, and create environments where individuals can do their best work.

Effective leaders also create cultures where innovation can thrive. They listen before speaking, encourage learning from mistakes, model resilience and wellness, and remain open to new ideas. By fostering trust and empowering employees closest to the work, leaders create organizations capable of continuous improvement while strengthening relationships with courts, stakeholders, and the communities they serve.

Strengthening the Profession

Leadership development extends far beyond individual growth. Strong leaders strengthen agencies, improve staff retention, build succession plans, and create workplaces where talented professionals want to build lasting careers.

The Leadership Workgroup hopes Academy graduates will become leaders who establish healthy organizational cultures, champion evidence-informed practices, and inspire excellence within their agencies. Success will be measured not only by individual leadership growth but also by stronger pretrial agencies and improved outcomes for justice-involved individuals and communities nationwide.

The Academy also directly supports NAPSA's mission by advancing professional development and strengthening executive decision-making grounded in evidence-informed practices. Through leadership development, NAPSA continues to invest in the future of the profession while building a sustainable pipeline of ethical, innovative leaders prepared to guide pretrial services for years to come.

Looking Ahead

The Leadership Academy represents an exciting new chapter for NAPSA and the pretrial profession. Although the program remains under development, the Leadership Workgroup continues to thoughtfully design an experience that equips emerging leaders with the confidence, vision, and practical skills necessary to lead with integrity.

The committee looks forward to sharing more as the Academy continues to take shape and to welcoming its inaugural cohort in the future.

For those considering participating when applications become available, the message is simple: invest in yourself. Leadership is a skill that can be developed, strengthened, and shared. By investing in future leaders today, we strengthen agencies, improve outcomes, and ensure the continued advancement of pretrial justice.

"We need you. Great leadership is rare. Our pretrial justice system needs you, so please take care of yourself and those in your charge."

New Mexico Pretrial Executive Network Summit Strengthens Leadership, Innovation, and Community

Wed, 01 Jul 2026 11:48:40 GMT

Building Leaders, Sharing Innovation, and Strengthening Pretrial Justice Across New Mexico

When people talk about successful pretrial reform, they often focus on legislation, policies, or data. Those elements matter—but lasting change begins with people. It begins with leaders who are willing to learn together, challenge one another, and build a professional community committed to improving justice.

That spirit was on full display at the 2026 New Mexico Pretrial Executive Network (NM PEN) Summit, held June 23–24, where pretrial leaders from across New Mexico and around the country gathered for two days of collaboration, leadership development, and innovation.

A Network Built on Community

The New Mexico Pretrial Executive Network was established in 2020 by Kelly Bradford, Director of the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), with a vision of creating for New Mexico what the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Pretrial Executive Network had long provided nationally—a trusted community where pretrial leaders could connect, learn, solve problems together, and support one another through the complex work of system change.

The NIC Pretrial Executive Network, championed for many years by Lori Eville, demonstrated the value of executive-level collaboration. Lori understood that pretrial leadership requires more than technical expertise. It requires navigating adaptive challenges, leading organizational change, and continuously moving systems forward. Just as importantly, she recognized that the work can sometimes feel isolating.

For many of us, the NIC PEN became far more than a professional network. It became a place to test ideas, seek advice, celebrate successes, and rely on colleagues who truly understood the unique challenges of pretrial leadership.

Nearly all of the national speakers and facilitators who have participated in NM PEN over the years are current or former members of the NIC PEN. They appreciate the importance of maintaining a professional community created by—and for—pretrial practitioners.

When New Mexico began implementing statewide pretrial reforms, leaders recognized that lasting success would require more than policy changes. It would require an ongoing investment in the people responsible for implementing those reforms every day.

Today, that vision has become reality.

NM PEN has grown into a vibrant statewide community representing all 13 Judicial Districts, Administrative Office of the Courts Pretrial Management, and justice system partners who meet monthly to share ideas, address emerging challenges, and strengthen evidence-based practice across New Mexico.

Continuing the Work Through the Annual Summit

The annual NM PEN Summit extends those monthly conversations by providing dedicated time for strategic planning, leadership development, and peer learning.

This year's summit welcomed 27 pretrial executives and justice system partners from New Mexico, Arizona, Indiana, Washington, D.C., and Maine, along with representatives from the Center for Effective Public Policy.

The summit also reflected the strong partnership between state and national leadership. Among those participating were NAPSA Board members Domingo Corona, Hillary Hartoin, and Mike Kainu, as well as Tanya Anderson, APPR, Elizabeth Simoni, Kelly Bradford, Gilbert Jaramillo, and pretrial leaders representing every New Mexico judicial district.

Justice Vigil also joined the summit to recognize the remarkable progress New Mexico has made over the past several years. Having witnessed many of the state's early conversations surrounding pretrial reform, he reflected on how those once-ambitious ideas have grown into meaningful statewide improvements supported by a dedicated community of practitioners.

Leadership Beyond Management

Throughout the summit, participants explored topics essential to modern pretrial leadership, including organizational culture, motivational interviewing as a leadership tool, stakeholder engagement, evidence-based decision-making, and using data to improve both supervision practices and system outcomes.

Sessions emphasized that effective leadership extends well beyond managing operations. It requires building healthy organizational culture, investing in staff, fostering innovation, and creating environments where evidence-based practices can thrive.

Rather than focusing solely on presentations, the summit encouraged discussion among peers facing similar challenges in jurisdictions across the state. Participants shared practical solutions, exchanged experiences, and explored how successful local practices might be adapted elsewhere.

Celebrating Innovation Across New Mexico

One of the summit's highlights was hearing directly from each judicial district about the accomplishments, innovations, and progress made during the past year.

These presentations showcased the creativity and dedication of New Mexico's pretrial professionals while providing opportunities for agencies to learn from one another's successes. Whether implementing new programs, strengthening partnerships, improving data collection, or refining supervision practices, each district demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement.

Participants also took part in an interactive leadership exercise in which they developed and presented mock NAPSA conference workshops. The activity encouraged attendees to think beyond their local jurisdictions and consider how their experiences could contribute to the national conversation surrounding pretrial justice.

The exercise reinforced an important message: every agency has knowledge worth sharing, and leadership includes helping others grow.

Honoring a Legacy of Service

This year's summit also included a special tribute to Kelly Bradford, who will retire in August after 27 years of service to New Mexico's criminal justice system.

Throughout her career, Kelly has been a steadfast advocate for evidence-based pretrial practices, statewide collaboration, and professional development. Her leadership has influenced not only New Mexico's Administrative Office of the Courts but also the national pretrial community through her service as a past president of NAPSA.

Perhaps one of her most enduring contributions is the creation of NM PEN itself.

By investing in relationships, encouraging innovation, and creating opportunities for pretrial professionals to learn from one another, Kelly established a network that continues to strengthen leaders across New Mexico. The community she envisioned in 2020 has become exactly that—a place where practitioners collaborate openly, support one another, and work together to improve justice.

Looking Ahead

As one of only a small number of statewide Pretrial Executive Networks in the country, NM PEN continues to serve as a model for regional collaboration. Its success demonstrates that meaningful reform depends not only on sound policy, but also on sustained investment in leadership, relationships, and professional community.

The 2026 NM PEN Summit was a reminder that the future of pretrial services is built through collaboration. By bringing leaders together to share ideas, challenge assumptions, and celebrate innovation, New Mexico continues to demonstrate what is possible when practitioners are empowered to lead together.

A Better Path to Court Appearance and Public Safety: Motivational Interviewing in Pretrial Services

Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:03:22 GMT

Pretrial supervision serves a clear mandate: ensure individuals appear in court, prevent

new criminal activity, and administer justice equitably for people who are legally presumed

innocent. High functioning pretrial agencies take that mandate seriously — and the evidence

compels us to ask not just what we are trying to achieve, but how we can most effectively

get there.

"I am so excited to highlight Motivational Interviewing in this post and deeply grateful for Stan Antonelli's leadership in advancing this work. Learning and applying Motivational Interviewing was a turning point in my career—it transformed how I connect and communicate with the people we serve, as well as with colleagues and my family. MI is not just a skill, but an essential foundation for effective communication."

Wendy Venvertloh, NAPSA Executive Director

The Problem with "Business as Usual"

Conventional pretrial supervision was built around enforcement: set conditions, monitor compliance, document violations. That model has a structural flaw. It treats noncompliance as defiance when, more often, it is a symptom of unaddressed need.

The individuals under pretrial supervision are not simply awaiting trial. Many are simultaneously navigating substance use disorders, mental health crises, housing instability, family disruption, and employment barriers. When supervision ignores these realities, predictable outcomes follow:

Pretrial supervision officers spend more time documenting failures than building capacity.
Individuals are sanctioned for circumstances — not for new criminal conduct.
Compliance conditions become harder to meet over time, not easier.
Court appearance and public safety — the very goals of pretrial supervision — are undermined.

This is not a matter of individual officer failure. It is a structural problem, and it demands a structural solution.

What is Motivational Interviewing?

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a clinically validated, evidence-based communication framework designed to strengthen an individual's own motivation for change — meeting people where they are rather than where we expect them to be. It is not a program. It is not a set of scripts. It is a professional orientation that changes the nature of the supervision relationship itself.

MI does not eliminate accountability. It changes how accountability is achieved — shifting from external enforcement to internally driven commitment. Research consistently demonstrates that individuals who are genuinely invested in their own stability are more likely to appear in court, avoid new criminal

activity, and complete supervision successfully.

The Core Principles (RULE)

Resist the righting reflex— refrain from unsolicited correction or directive instruction
Understand the client's motivations — identify and engage what is meaningful to the individual
Listen empathically — maintain non-judgmental, reﬂective engagement
Empower the client — cultivate conﬁdence, self-efficacy, and autonomous decision-making

The Core Skills (OARS)

Open-ended questions — facilitate substantive dialogue rather than binary responses
Affrimations — recognize genuine strengths and demonstrated eﬀorts
Reflective listening — accurately reflect the client's expressed thoughts and feelings
Summaries — consolidate themes, mark transitions, and reinforce progress

What MI Communication Sounds Like: OARS in Action

The shift to MI-informed communication is not just philosophical; it is heard in every interaction. The examples below illustrate the difference across common pretrial supervision contexts.

Without MI: Deficit-Focused

"You missed your last two check-ins. This is a problem."

With MI: Reflective & Curious

"It sounds like the last couple of weeks have been rough. Help me understand what got in the way. I want to figure this out with you."

Without MI: Generic/Hollow

"Good job attending your court hearing."

With MI: Specific Affirmation

"You've attended all your court hearings with a genuinely challenging barriers like childcare and transportation. That reflects real commitment and strength on your part."

Without MI: Confrontational

"If you keep this up, you're going to end up back in front of the judge."

With MI: Values-Based Reflection

"You've told me how important it is to be there for your kids. I want to explore with you what today's choices look like in light of that."

Without MI: Directive/Presumptive

"You need to attend every appointment or I'll have to report a violation."

With MI: Open-Ended & Empowering

"What's been getting in the way of making it to your supervision appointments, and what might make it easier?"

Without MI: Closed/Compliance Check

"Are you in compliance with your court

order?"

With MI: Open-Ended Question

"Tell me about how your last court hearing went last week-what came up for you?"

Without MI: Dismissive of Ambivalence

"You agreed to these conditions. You need to follow through."

With MI: Exploring Ambivalence

"it sounds like part of you wants to make these changes and part of you isn't sure it's possible. That's a reasonable place to be. Tell me more about what feels hardest."

Without MI: Summarizing Failure

"You've missed three appointments, had police contact, and haven't contacted your attorney."

With MI: Affirming Summary

"You've shown up consistently over the last month, you reached out proactively when things got hard, and you've started talking about next steps. That momentum matters- let's build on it."

Without MI: Punitive

"Either you pass this drug test or we have

a serious problem."

With MI: Scaling & Empowering

"On a scale of one to five, how would you rate your ability to manage your sobriety right now- and what would it take to move that number up?"

Pretrial supervision is a unique setting. Participation is often mandated; clients are court-involved and frequently in acute crisis. MI is adapted here to operate alongside — not in opposition to — the court's requirements.

Clarity About What Is Mandatory and What Is a Choice

Conditions of release are non-negotiable and communicated as such. But the degree to which individuals invest in resources — counseling, peer support, goal-setting, skills development — remains their decision. Staff are trained to be explicit about this distinction.

MI in Practice: Pretrial Agencies Can Apply It

"Your conditions are set by the court and are not subject to negotiation. What you choose to invest in beyond those requirements is entirely your decision — and that investment will be visible to the court."

Treating Legally Innocent People as Adults with Agency

Even within mandatory supervision, decision-making authority is returned to the individual wherever appropriate. Scaling questions build self-awareness and personal ownership.

"On a scale of one to five, how would you assess your ability to manage your sobriety right now?"

Connecting Compliance to Personal Values

Sustainable compliance is most reliably achieved when individuals understand how meeting their conditions

serves their own goals-not merely the court's. Staff consistently reinforce these connections.

"You have identified reunification with your children as your primary goal. Let's talk about what today's

choices look like in light of that."

Strengths-Based Engagement

Many individuals arrive in supervision having been identified by systems through a deficit lens. MI-informed

affirmations are specific and evidence-based-not generic encouragement. Reorienting that narrative is

both clinically appropriate and practically effective.

"You have maintained employment for three years- the longest period of your adult life. That reflects

genuine character and capability, and it is directly relevant to the trajectory you are building."

Exploring Ambivalence Rather Than Punishing It

Ambivalence about change is clinically normal, not defiance. When resistance appears, staff explore

rather than confront.

"It sounds as though you recognize the value of making changes while also feeling uncertain about

whether that is achievable. That is a reasonable place to be. I would like to understand more about

what feels most difficult."

Addressing Barriers as a Core Supervision Function

Because supervision failures are frequently rooted in unaddressed need, pretrial agencies should actively

connects individuals to counseling, housing, employment support, transportation, peer recovery services, and family stabilization programs. Addressing barriers is not supplemental- it is central to the mission.

MI in Pretrial Supervision: Key Contexts

During Intake and Initial Contact

The first interaction sets the tone for the entire supervision period. MI-informed intake moves beyond data

collection to genuine engagement. Officers explore the individual's life circumstances, immediate barriers,

and personal goals- establishing a collaborative foundation from day one.

Use open-ended questions to understand what the person is navigating, not just what they are charged with.
Identify intrinsic motivators early: family, employment, housing stability, community connection.
Establish explicit clarity about what is court-mandated versus what support resources are voluntary.

During Ongoing Supervision Check-Ins
Routine contacts are the primary vehicle for MI practice. Rather than functioning as compliance audits, check-ins become opportunities to assess progress, reinforce motivation, and identify emerging barriers before they escalate.

Open every contact with an open-ended question about the person's experience, not their compliance status.
Use reflective listening to signal that you are genuinely hearing what is shared.
Summarize progress and name specific strengths observed since the last contact.
Address missed appointments or conditions with curiosity first, explore before documenting.

When Addressing Noncompliance

MI reframes noncompliance as clinical information rather than moral failure. When a condition is unmet, the MI-informed response is to investigate the barrier, not immediately escalate.

Ask what happened before assuming intent.
Separate the barrier (transportation, childcare, crisis) from the person's willingness.
Explore what support could make compliance achievable going forward.
Be transparent about what must be reported and what remains within the officer's discretion.

"Before we go through the paperwork, I want to understand where things stand for you right now- what's most pressing in your life at this moment?"

"Walk me through how the last couple of weeks have gone-what went well, and where did things get

hard?"

"You missed your last check-in; I want to understand what got in the way. Help me see what happened so we can figure out what needs to change."

Preparing Court Recommendations

MI-informed practice fundamentally changes the nature of court recommendations. Rather than presenting a binary compliance record, officers are positioned to offer a richer, more accurate account of the individual's trajectory, one that serves the court's genuine interests.

Document engagement, not just compliance. Note when a person has proactively identified barriers, sought support, or demonstrated insight, even when formal compliance has been inconsistent.
Reflect individual context. A missed appointment means something different for someone managing a mental health crisis than for someone who simply disengaged. The recommendation should reflect that distinction.
Connect behavior to motivation. Where possible, describe how the person's stated goals and values have (or have not) aligned with their behavior, giving the court a fuller picture of readiness and risk.
Be specific and evidence-based. Reference concrete observations: "Proactively contacted the office when he anticipated a scheduling conflict" carries more weight than "generally cooperative."
Frame barriers as context, not excuses. Courts benefit from knowing whether instability drove noncompliance; this is relevant to proportionate, effective judicial decision-making.

Example Conventional Recommendation Language:

"Client missed two scheduled check-ins and failed to provide documentation of employment. Recommend modification of release conditions."

Example MI-Informed Recommendation Language:

"Client missed two check-ins during a period of acute housing instability following eviction. Upon

contact, he proactively disclosed the circumstances, identified transportation as a barrier, and participated

in connecting with a housing resource. He has maintained sobriety and employment throughout. Supervision recommends continued release with support-focused conditions rather than modification, based on demonstrated engagement and a stabilizing trajectory."

The differences between these two approaches are not cosmetic. They represent fundamentally diﬀerent theories of how court appearance and public safety are best achieved.

Side by Side: Conventional Supervision vs. MI-Informed Practice

What This Means for Court Appearance and New Arrests

The evidence is consistent: when individuals feel respected, seen, and supported, they are more likely to engage meaningfully in supervision — and more likely to achieve the outcomes the court requires. MI reduces resistance, increases engagement in treatment and support services, and improves outcomes among justice involved populations. For stakeholders focused on the court's core objectives, the implications are direct.

Court appearance rates improve when individuals have a genuine stake in their own outcomes and are

not managing avoidable crises. Where conventional supervision may issue a sanction for a missed

appointment, MI-informed practice asks why the appointment was missed and addresses the barrier

before it becomes a failure to appear.

New criminal activity decreases when underlying drivers are addressed proactively rather than ignored. Substance use disorders, mental health crises, housing instability, and unresolved trauma are among the most consistent predictors of new arrests. Conventional supervision monitors for new arrests; MI-informed practice works to prevent the conditions that make new arrests more likely.

Equitable justice is better served when individuals who are legally presumed innocent receive support

proportionate to the challenges they face, rather than being penalized for circumstances that predate and

contribute to their court involvement.

Long-term recidivism declines through the development of intrinsic motivation and durable life skills-

outcomes that short-term behavioral compliance cannot produce on its own.

Judicial objectives are directly supported . Individuals who are actively engaged in their own stabilization present differently to the court — because they are genuinely invested in a different outcome.

"I appreciate the resources you provide. For the first time, I felt like someone was actually in my corner, cared and wanted me succeed."

- Former Pretrial Release Participant

The Bottom Line for Stakeholders

Motivational Interviewing is not a departure from accountability — it is a more rigorous, evidence-

informed, and humane operationalization of it. Where conventional supervision asks, " Did this

person comply? ", MI-informed pretrial practice asks, " Did this person grow — and are they better

positioned to appear in court, stay out of trouble, and succeed? " Those are not competing questions. In the right framework, they have the same answer.

About the Author:

Stan Antonelli III, PhD, LCSW , is a Licensed and Academy Certified Psychotherapist and Clinical Addiction Specialist. He specializes in the treatment of co-occurring disorders, anxiety, depression, complicated grief, and substance use disorders. With advanced training in CBT, TF-CBT, Adoption-Competent Therapy, and CISM, Stan brings extensive expertise to his practice. He combines his law enforcement background with his clinical skills as a former Special Deputy with the Cass County, Indiana Sheriff's Department. Stan holds degrees from Indiana University and Andrews University in psychology, sociology, and clinical social work. In November 2024, he partnered with Cass County Court & Pretrial Services to launch a new Therapeutic Services Division aimed at promoting equal access to voluntary supportive services and treatment in the pretrial field. This division is led by Mr. Antonelli as Treatment Director, along with the clinicians of Psychotherapy Associates of Kokomo, his private clinical practice. He regularly accompanies the Cass Court Services Director at national conferences, where he shares best practices in trauma-informed care and person-centered supervision strategies within the criminal justice system. His presentations focus on the application of evidence-based, trauma-responsive approaches to community supervision, with a particular emphasis on pretrial services. Through training and consultation, he helps justice professionals develop practices that enhance engagement, accountability, and positive outcomes for individuals involved in the criminal legal system.

This piece was developed and is informed by evidence-based Motivational Interviewing (MI) principles, including the work of William R. Miller and Stephen Rollnick and widely used MI tools such as RULE and OARS. It also reflects broader research and best practices related to pretrial supervision, behavior change, and strengths-based engagement with justice-involved individuals. The examples and applications included here were adapted specifically for the work in the pretrial services field.

Meet the NAPSA Board: Past President Kelly Bradford

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 18:44:31 GMT

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Kelly Bradford

Board Role/Title: Past President

Term of Service: 2024- Present

Location (City/State): Albuquerque, NM

Professional Role/Organization: Court Services Division Director, New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

I’ve spent more than 27 years working in New Mexico’s criminal justice system, and much of my career has been shaped by a desire to improve how our system serves both communities and the individuals involved in it. I began my career at the Second Judicial District Attorney’s Office as a Victim Advocate, where I worked closely with victims of crime to ensure their rights were recognized and that they were supported throughout the court process.

In 2012, I transitioned to Bernalillo County as the Adult Detention Reform Coordinator. In that role, I worked with justice system partners to better understand why people were in jail and to develop strategies that could safely reduce the jail population. Through collaborative efforts across the courts, law enforcement, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and community partners, we were able to implement numerous initiatives that significantly reduced the jail population while maintaining and improving public safety outcomes.

I later joined the Second Judicial District Court, where I oversaw the Pretrial Services Program and several treatment court programs. In 2019, I joined the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts to lead the development of the statewide Pretrial Justice Program. Today, I serve as the Director of the Court Services Division at the Administrative Office of the Courts, where I work with talented teams across the state to support courts and advance practices that strengthen public safety, fairness, and trust in the justice system.

Since that time, much of my work has focused in the pretrial space—working to strengthen our justice system and advance practices that promote equity, fairness, and better outcomes for individuals navigating the criminal justice system. My passion is helping build a system that is fair, just, and grounded in practices that support both public safety and equity.

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

My involvement with NAPSA grew out of the work I was doing in pretrial reform in New Mexico. As we began implementing evidence-based pretrial practices and building a statewide framework, it became clear how important it was to connect with others across the country who were doing similar work. NAPSA provided that space to learn from practitioners, share experiences, and stay connected to national best practices in the field.

Earlier in my career in pretrial justice, I attended the NAPSA conference and remember seeing members of the Board and realizing that I needed to connect with many of those individuals. They were leaders in the field, and I knew there was a great deal I could learn from them. Building those relationships became incredibly valuable. Through those connections, I was able to learn from experienced practitioners, vet ideas, and bring new perspectives back to the work we were doing in New Mexico.

What inspired me most was the commitment of the NAPSA community to improving pretrial justice in a way that balances public safety, fairness, and the law. Being part of the organization allowed me not only to learn from others but also to contribute to broader conversations about how we can continue to strengthen pretrial systems. Over time, that connection grew into deeper involvement through leadership opportunities and collaboration with colleagues across the country.

NAPSA has been an important professional community for me, and the relationships and shared learning within the organization have played a meaningful role in helping advance the pretrial work we’ve been able to accomplish in New Mexico.

What motivated you to serve on the NAPSA Board?

My motivation to serve on the NAPSA Board really grew out of the relationships and learning I experienced early in my involvement with the organization. When I first attended NAPSA conferences, I had the opportunity to connect with leaders in the field who were generous in sharing their knowledge and experiences. Those conversations helped shape my thinking, challenged my ideas, and ultimately strengthened the work we were doing in New Mexico.

Serving on the Board felt like an opportunity to give back to the organization and the community that had supported my own professional growth. I wanted to contribute to the continued advancement of pretrial justice and help ensure that practitioners across the country have a place to learn from one another, share ideas, and navigate the challenges that come with this work.

Pretrial justice is constantly evolving, and strong professional communities are essential to that progress. Through board service, I hoped to support NAPSA’s mission, contribute to thoughtful conversations about the future of the field, and help create opportunities for others—especially those earlier in their careers—to connect, learn, and grow just as I did.

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

One area of NAPSA’s work that I am especially passionate about is advancing equity and fairness within the pretrial system while supporting public safety through legal and evidence-based practices. Using data to guide decisions and improve outcomes is critical to ensuring that pretrial systems are fair, transparent, and effective.

I am also deeply interested in the future of the field and supporting the next generation of pretrial practitioners. I believe NAPSA plays an important role in providing mentorship, professional support, and a space for practitioners and leaders to learn from one another. Through my experience, I have especially enjoyed working with new sites and professionals as they implement pretrial programs and practices, helping provide the guidance and support that are often critical to success.

Supporting mentorship and the continued growth of the field is something I care deeply about, and NAPSA helps create those opportunities for connection, learning, and leadership development.

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

One of the biggest challenges and opportunities facing pretrial services today is continuing to strengthen systems in ways that are both fair and effective while maintaining public trust. As jurisdictions implement or refine pretrial practices, it is critical that decisions remain grounded in legal principles, evidence-based practices, and reliable data. I believe it is especially important for the field to stay the course on these practices, regardless of the outside climate or shifting narratives around criminal justice.

At the same time, there are important opportunities to continue improving pretrial systems through education, transparency, and innovation. Strengthening stakeholder understanding, using data to guide decisions, and expanding connections to supportive services can all help improve outcomes while supporting both public safety and fairness within the justice system.

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

The Board is made up of practitioners who are actively working in the field every day operationalizing best practices, applying national standards, and navigating real-world challenges such as staffing, stakeholder engagement, and sustaining programs over time.

Throughout my career, I have worked across several parts of the justice system from the prosecutor’s office to county government, the courts, and now at the statewide level. My experience has included working on jail population initiatives, understanding the financial and operational impacts of incarceration, facilitating stakeholder collaboration, and advancing legislative, data, and performance improvements. I have also been involved in implementing new programs as well as expanding and strengthening existing ones.

What I’ve learned along the way is that collaboration is essential to success. The work is never about one individual it’s about strong teams working together, learning from one another, and staying focused on the mission.

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

One of the things I am most proud of in my career is the opportunity I’ve had to work with so many amazing people. Throughout the years, I’ve been fortunate to be surrounded by talented professionals who have been willing to share their knowledge, challenge my thinking, and work together to improve the justice system.

That has been especially true in the work we’ve done to build and expand pretrial programs across New Mexico. Seeing teams come together across courts, counties, and communities to implement legal and evidence-based practices and watching those efforts grow into a statewide system has been incredibly rewarding. There have certainly been difficult challenges along the way. Anytime meaningful change is implemented, there will inevitably be obstacles, but the progress that has been made and the impact it has had have made the work well worth it.

What I’ve learned throughout this experience is that the most meaningful accomplishments rarely come from one person they come from strong teams working toward a shared goal. Being able to learn from others, collaborate on difficult challenges, and see the collective impact of that work is something I value deeply and am very proud to have been part of.

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

My advice to someone new to pretrial services or NAPSA would be to stay curious and take every opportunity to learn from the people around you. The field is full of experienced practitioners who are incredibly generous with their knowledge, and building those relationships can make a big difference in your growth.

I would also encourage people to stay grounded in the core principles of pretrial justice focusing on legal and evidence-based practices while remaining open to new ideas and innovation. Organizations like NAPSA provide a great space to connect with others in the field, ask questions, share ideas, and learn from the experiences of colleagues across the country. Those connections can provide mentorship, support, and perspective that are invaluable as you grow in the field.

And lastly, don’t give up when faced with roadblocks. Meaningful change takes time. Sometimes you may feel like you are taking three steps back in order to move five steps forward. Implementing new practices and shifting culture across systems does not happen overnight, but when you begin to see the dots connect, even in small ways, it can be incredibly rewarding and often becomes the springboard for lasting system change.

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

I hope NAPSA members know that the Board is made up of practitioners who care deeply about the field and the work being done across the country. Much of the work happens behind the scenes, but the focus is always on supporting NAPSA’s mission and ensuring the organization continues to provide value to its members.

The Board is a collective of passionate professionals who take seriously their responsibility to the field and the membership. We collaborate to help guide the organization, support professional development, and create opportunities for practitioners to connect and learn from one another.

We also genuinely enjoy working together. When we are all in the same room, there is a lot of collaboration, great conversation, and, usually a considerable amount of candy involved while discussing pretrial justice. That shared commitment and positive energy help us stay focused on supporting NAPSA and the broader pretrial community.

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

Outside of work, I enjoy spending time with my husband and kids and finding opportunities for new adventures together. We love traveling and exploring new places whenever we can. I’m also a big fan of live music, so going to concerts and music festivals is something I really enjoy.

I also appreciate the quieter moments, sometimes my favorite thing is just relaxing at home with my husband and our dog, Luna. I enjoy getting outside for a good hike or exploring a trail in the New Mexico sun. I’ve always been someone who loves learning, especially about history and the events that shaped the world before us. I’m also naturally curious about what’s on the horizon and enjoy staying informed about what’s happening around me.

Closing

Kelly Bradford is the Director of the Court Services Division for the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts.

Bradford served as the NAPSA President from 2024–2026 and currently serves as Past President. She previously served as the NAPSA Southwest Regional Director. She is also a member of the National Institute of Corrections Pretrial Executives Network and the Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research (APPR) Pretrial Professional Network.

Seeing the Whole Person: Trauma-Informed Care in Pretrial Supervision

Tue, 02 Jun 2026 13:10:30 GMT

How recognizing trauma improves court appearance, reduces new arrests, and strengthens the justice system legitimacy

Trauma-informed care is not a trend in pretrial services. It is a framework that recognizes a clear reality: many individuals entering the justice system have experienced significant trauma, instability, addiction, violence, poverty, mental illness, or systemic harm long before they ever enter a courtroom. For pretrial professionals, embracing trauma-informed supervision means balancing accountability with humanity — while still advancing the core mission of pretrial services: maximizing court appearance, maximizing release, and maximizing public safety.

INSTEAD OF ASKING . . .

"What is wrong with this person?"
Trauma-informed care asks:

"What happened to this person?"

That shift changes everything

Why this Question Matters for Pretrial Outcomes

Many justice-involved individuals operate in a constant state of survival. Trauma can affect memory,

emotional regulation, communication, trust, decision-making, and even an individual's ability to comply with expectations. A missed appointment, a defensive reaction, or difficulty engaging may not simply be "noncompliance." Sometimes it is the manifestation of unresolved trauma, fear, shame, or chronic instability.

This does not excuse behavior — but it should inform how we respond.

In pretrial supervision, our interactions either reinforce distrust and fear, or help create pathways

toward stability and engagement. Research consistently shows that people are more likely to comply with court obligations when they feel respected, heard, and treated fairly. Procedural justice and trauma-informed approaches work hand in hand.

Applying Trauma-Informed Principles in Pretrial Services

Safety

Individuals entering pretrial supervision often feel overwhelmed, uncertain, and fearful. Creating emotional and psychological safety starts with simple but meaningful practices:

Explaining the court process clearly and in plain language
Setting expectations without unnecessary intimidation
Maintaining professional consistency across all interactions
Using calm, respectful communication at every contact

Safety extends to physical environments as well. Waiting rooms, reporting spaces, and offices should avoid unnecessarily escalating stress or shame.

Trustworthiness and Transparency

Trust is often difficult for individuals with trauma histories. Pretrial professionals build trust by:

Being honest and consistent
Following through on commitments
Clearly explaining conditions and the reasoning behind decisions
Avoiding punitive responses that appear arbitrary

Transparency promotes buy-in and increases engagement — two factors directly linked to court appearance and compliance.

Peer Support and Human Connection

One of the most powerful tools in trauma-informed supervision is connection. Peer Recovery

Specialists and individuals with lived experience can bridge distrust in ways traditional systems

sometimes cannot. In Cass County, incorporating Peer Recovery Specialists into pretrial services has

strengthened connections to treatment, recovery support, and stabilization services — while

reinforcing accountability.

Programs that integrate peer support consistently see improved engagement because participants feel understood by someone who has navigated similar struggles.

Empowerment, Voice, and Choice

Trauma often involves a loss of power and control. Trauma-informed supervision restores appropriate autonomy wherever possible:

Allowing clients to participate in case planning
Offering options for service referrals
Using motivational interviewing techniques
Building on strengths rather than focusing exclusively on deficits
Recognizing progress, not just violations or instances of noncompliance

Pretrial supervision should not simply monitor risk — it should identify opportunities for success.

Collaboration and Mutuality

Trauma-informed systems understand that outcomes improve when agencies work collaboratively rather than in silos. Effective pretrial agencies partner with behavioral health providers, treatment agencies, peer supports, housing and transportation resources, veterans services, and community organizations.

No single agency can address the complex needs many individuals bring into the system. Collaboration is not optional — it is essential.

Cultural, Historical, and Gender Considerations

Trauma does not occur in a vacuum. Historical inequities, discrimination, poverty, and community violence all influence how individuals experience the justice system. Effective trauma-informed supervision requires awareness of:

Historical distrust of institutions and systems
Gender-responsive needs and responses
Cultural barriers to treatment and communication
The impact of adverse childhood experiences and generational trauma

ADDRESSING A COMMON MISCONCEPTION

Trauma-informed care does not mean "soft on crime." In reality, it can improve accountability — because it increases engagement, communication, and compliance.

Pretrial professionals still assess risk, monitor compliance, report violations, protect public safety, and uphold court orders. The difference is how those responsibilities are carried out. A trauma- informed approach avoids unnecessarily escalating situations and focuses on responses that are effective, proportional, and behavior-focused. Respectful supervision and public safety are not competing goals.

Side by Side: Conventional vs. Trauma-Informed Pretrial Supervision

The distinction between these two approaches is not one of leniency versus strictness — it is one of effectiveness . Both aim at the same goals. Only one is built to reliably reach them.

What This Means for Court Appearance and New Arrests

Court appearance rates improve when supervision builds trust rather than fear. Where conventional supervision may interpret a missed appointment as defiance, trauma-informed practice asks what got in the way — and addresses it before a failure to appear becomes a warrant.

New criminal activity decreases when underlying drivers are addressed rather than ignored. Substance use disorders, mental health crises, housing instability, and unresolved trauma are among the most consistent predictors of new arrests. Conventional supervision monitors for those outcomes; trauma-informed supervision works to prevent the conditions that create them.

Engagement in services increases when individuals feel treated as human beings rather than case numbers. That voluntary engagement — in treatment, recovery, housing, transportation and employment — is itself a public safety outcome.

The legitimacy of the justice system is strengthened when individuals who are legally presumed innocent experience consistency, dignity, and fairness. Procedural justice is not separate from pretrial release's effectiveness— it is one of its foundations.

Long-term recidivism declines through the development of stability, connection, and personal agency — outcomes that surveillance and enforcement alone cannot produce.

"People respond better to systems that see them as human beings — not just case numbers. In pretrial services, that humanity matters."

- Stan Antonelli, Cass County Treatment Director, III, PhD, LCSW

The Broader Picture

Pretrial professionals are often the first point of contact individuals have with the courts inside the justice system. That interaction shapes how someone engages — with supervision, with supportive services, and with the court — moving forward.

When individuals feel dehumanized, unheard, or immediately judged, disengagement increases. When they experience consistency, empathy, dignity, and fairness, they are more likely to participate meaningfully in supervision and voluntary services.

As pretrial services continues to evolve nationally, trauma-informed supervision is becoming an essential component of evidence-based practice. It aligns with risk-needs-responsivity principles, procedural justice, and the broader mission of creating safer communities through smarter, more humane interventions.

The Bottom Line for Stakeholders

Trauma-informed supervision is not a departure from the pretrial mission — it is one of the most eﬀective tools for achieving it.

Court appearance improves when people trust the system.
New arrests decrease when underlying needs are addressed.
Public safety is better served when supervision is built on engagement rather than fear.

The question is never whether to hold people accountable. The question is whether the way we hold them accountable actually works.

About the Author

Telling the Story of Pretrial Justice: The Role of the NAPSA Communications Committee

Thu, 28 May 2026 17:01:41 GMT

Why Communication Matters in Pretrial Justice

Communication is essential in pretrial justice because of the collaborative nature of the criminal justice system. Pretrial professionals work closely with courts, attorneys, law enforcement, treatment providers, community organizations, and defendants themselves to support informed decision-making and successful outcomes from arrest through case disposition.

Effective communication is especially important in the pretrial field because decisions directly impact individual liberty, public safety, and confidence in the justice system. Much of pretrial work happens behind the scenes, making it critical that practitioners clearly explain what they do, why they do it, and how outcomes are measured. Thoughtful communication helps shape public understanding, dispel misconceptions, and build trust through transparency and accessibility.

Consistent messaging grounded in evidence-based practice not only educates stakeholders and the public, but also supports system improvement by aligning partners around shared goals and informed decision-making.

What Is the NAPSA Communications Committee?

The NAPSA Communications Committee serves as a resource for sharing information with NAPSA members, partners, and the broader pretrial community. Its mission is to strengthen how the organization communicates, tell the story of pretrial justice, and promote engagement across the field.

The committee is responsible for developing and maintaining clear, consistent messaging across multiple platforms. This includes:

Member newsletters and email updates
Social media engagement
Blog and website content
Highlighting practitioner accomplishments
Promoting trainings, webinars, and conferences
Supporting outreach and public engagement efforts

The committee also works collaboratively with other NAPSA committees to ensure communications align with organizational priorities and accurately reflect developments in the field.

Committee members bring diverse perspectives from across the country, including practitioners, leaders, and system partners, helping ensure that NAPSA’s communications reflect the evolving needs and expertise of the pretrial profession.

The Work: Expanding Communication and Engagement

Over the past year, the Communications Committee has focused on expanding the ways NAPSA connects with members and stakeholders.

One of the committee’s newer initiatives is The Standard , NAPSA’s blog platform, which highlights developments across the pretrial field. Blog topics include updates to standards, spotlight features on practitioners, innovative local practices, and broader discussions impacting pretrial justice nationally.

In addition to blog content, the committee develops newsletters, social media content, and member-focused updates designed to inform, engage, and support practitioners in their daily work.

The committee also explores communication technologies and tools that strengthen outreach and engagement, helping NAPSA connect more effectively with members, partners, and the public in an increasingly digital environment.

Impact on the Field

NAPSA’s communication efforts directly support practitioners by providing timely and relevant information that can be applied locally—from policy development to program implementation and stakeholder engagement.

Sharing information nationally helps strengthen local pretrial systems by giving jurisdictions access to ideas, strategies, and practices that may not otherwise be within reach. Communication also plays a key role in advancing evidence-based practices and innovation by highlighting research, elevating promising approaches, and creating opportunities for collaboration across the field.

Strong communication helps ensure that successful practices, lessons learned, and emerging ideas are not isolated to a single jurisdiction, but instead contribute to broader system improvement nationwide.

Supporting NAPSA’s Mission

The Communications Committee supports NAPSA’s mission of promoting pretrial justice and public safety through rational, evidence-informed decision-making by ensuring that the organization’s standards, resources, and priorities are communicated clearly and consistently.

Through cohesive branding, thoughtful public engagement, and accessible messaging, the committee helps translate complex research and practices into practical information for members and stakeholders.

The committee also collaborates closely with NAPSA’s Education, Standards, and Accreditation Committees to highlight training opportunities, evidence-based guidance, and resources that help strengthen pretrial systems across the country.

Looking Ahead

The Communications Committee continues to explore new ways to expand engagement and strengthen outreach.

Current and upcoming efforts include:

Enhancing digital content and engagement
Increasing member-driven storytelling
Highlighting innovations and promising practices from the field
Exploring new communication platforms and tools
Improving accessibility and audience reach

As communication needs continue to evolve, the committee remains focused on delivering timely, relevant, and user-friendly content that supports learning, connection, and innovation in pretrial justice.

Resources for Members

NAPSA members can stay connected through a variety of communication platforms and resources, including:

These channels provide updates on trainings, emerging practices, practitioner spotlights, and developments within the field.

Members are also encouraged to share their own work, innovations, and lessons learned to support peer-to-peer learning and elevate promising practices nationally

Member Voice Matters

NAPSA’s communications are strongest when they reflect the experiences and perspectives of practitioners working directly in the field.

The Communications Committee welcomes feedback on topics, trends, and resources members would like to see highlighted. Stories that showcase innovation, collaboration, problem-solving, and local impact are especially valuable in helping advance the conversation around pretrial justice.

Practitioner-driven communication helps ensure that NAPSA’s messaging remains relevant, responsive, and grounded in the realities of the work being done every day across the country.

Get Involved

NAPSA members interested in joining the Communications Committee or contributing content are encouraged to get involved.

Whether you have legislative updates from your jurisdiction, a blog idea, a publication to share, or a story about innovative work happening locally, your voice can help strengthen the field and support peers nationwide.

To contribute ideas or learn more, contact NAPSA at info@ napsa .org .

Setting the Standard: How the NAPSA Standards Committee Shapes Pretrial Justice

Wed, 20 May 2026 13:42:17 GMT

Why Standards Matter in Pretrial

In pretrial services, decisions made in a matter of hours can have lasting consequences. In a system that has historically been marked by inconsistency, subjectivity, and inequity, national standards serve as a critical anchor.

The NAPSA Standards provide that anchor—a framework, or “North Star,” guiding jurisdictions toward practices that are fair, transparent, and effective. Built on legal and evidence-based foundations, they help ensure that pretrial decision-making is rooted not in guesswork, but in principles that prioritize both individual rights and public safety.

By emphasizing individualized decision-making and discouraging outcomes driven by bias or socioeconomic factors, the Standards promote fairness. By encouraging the use of validated assessments, they improve consistency. And by focusing on court appearance and arrest-free behavior, they support public safety in a meaningful, measurable way.

What Is the NAPSA Standards Committee?

Behind these national benchmarks is the NAPSA Standards Committee—a group tasked with ensuring the Standards remain relevant, credible, and grounded in real-world practice.

The committee’s mission is straightforward but essential: to ensure the Standards reflect current research, legal developments, and best practices while helping jurisdictions build effective and equitable pretrial systems.

Its work includes:

Drafting and revising Standards
Monitoring emerging research and legal trends
Incorporating stakeholder and practitioner input
Ensuring alignment with constitutional principles and evidence-based practices

Made up of national leaders—including practitioners, agency directors, and policy experts—the committee brings together diverse perspectives from across jurisdictions. This ensures the Standards are not only aspirational, but practical and achievable.

What the Committee Actually Does

Updating national standards isn’t a quick or simple process—it requires ongoing research, collaboration, and a deep understanding of how policy translates into practice.

The Standards Committee continuously reviews:

New research and evidence
Changes in case law and legislation
Emerging challenges faced by practitioners

Just as importantly, the committee listens—to practitioners working in the field every day. Their feedback helps ensure the Standards reflect real-world conditions, not just theory.

Recent focus areas include:

Behavioral health and social service integration
Virtual court and remote supervision practices
Caseload standards and agency capacity
Equity-focused language and approaches
Performance measurement and data tracking

Updates occur periodically to keep pace with a rapidly evolving field, ensuring the Standards remain both credible and actionable.

Real-World Impact on the Field

The NAPSA Standards are not just theoretical—they are actively shaping pretrial systems across the country.

Agencies rely on them to:

Develop policies and procedures
Guide the creation of new pretrial programs
Support and defend practices in legal and policy settings

In fact, the Standards are widely recognized as the “gold standard” in pretrial justice. They are frequently referenced in litigation, policy reform efforts, and system design—including major reforms such as those seen in New Jersey and the Illinois SAFE-T Act.

For practitioners and courts, the Standards offer both clarity and flexibility:

The Standards (“black letter”) define what should be done
The Commentary explains how and why to implement those practices

This combination makes them both authoritative and practical—bridging the gap between principle and practice.

Advancing NAPSA’s Mission

NAPSA’s mission is to advance pretrial justice and public safety through evidence-based practices—and the Standards Committee is central to that effort.

The committee’s work:

Defines what evidence-based pretrial practice looks like
Provides the foundation for training, certification, and accreditation
Supports system-wide reform through a shared national framework

It also works closely with other NAPSA committees. For example, the Education Committee uses the Standards as the foundation for training content, while feedback from those trainings informs future revisions—creating a continuous loop of improvement.

At its core, this work transforms abstract ideals—like fairness and due process—into actionable, day-to-day guidance for practitioners.

What’s Ahead

The Standards Committee continues to look forward, identifying emerging issues and opportunities for refinement.

Current areas of focus include:

Revisiting caseload ratios and workload guidance
Simplifying language to improve accessibility
Exploring the role of AI in pretrial services
Clarifying positions on supportive services
Examining how to measure and account for non-willful failures to appear

These efforts reflect the committee’s commitment to keeping the Standards relevant in a rapidly changing landscape.

Resources for Members

NAPSA members have direct access to the Standards and a variety of tools to support implementation.

Practitioners can use the Standards to:

Guide policy development
Improve court recommendations
Structure supervision practices
Advocate for meaningful system reform

Additional support is available through webinars, conferences, and ongoing training opportunities designed to help agencies put the Standards into practice.

Get Involved: Shaping the Future of Pretrial

The strength of the NAPSA Standards lies in their connection to real-world practice—and that depends on practitioner engagement.

There are many ways to contribute:

Be a part of the Standards Committee
Participate in webinars
Provide feedback or respond to surveys

Even small contributions help ensure the Standards remain practical, relevant, and impactful.

Final Thought

The NAPSA Standards are more than guidance—they are a roadmap for transforming pretrial justice.

And the Standards Committee is the group helping chart that path—ensuring that as the field evolves, the foundation it stands on remains strong, evidence-based, and grounded in fairness.

From Supervision to Support: Advancing a Coaching Model in Pretrial Services

Fri, 15 May 2026 13:18:19 GMT

What if the biggest opportunity in pretrial services isn't what we do—but how we do it?

Across the country, pretrial agencies are under pressure to do more: protect public safety, uphold due process, and improve outcomes—all within systems built decades ago around monitoring and compliance. We're part of a growing movement reexamining that foundation.

The result is a shift from supervision to support. From surveillance to coaching. And the evidence behind it is compelling.

The Old Model: Built to Catch Failure

For decades, pretrial supervision has operated from a compliance-first playbook:

Monitor behavior
Detect violations
Report outcomes

It's a "referee model"—and while accountability matters, this approach asks only one question: Did you follow the rules?

What it rarely asks is: What got in the way? What can I do to support you to be successful?

This distinction turns out to make all the difference. Accountability matters, but too often the focus becomes perfection instead of understanding what barriers may be impacting success.

What a Coaching Model Actually Means

A coaching model doesn't eliminate accountability. It changes how accountability is delivered.

Instead of acting solely as rule enforcers, pretrial professionals become:

Coaches who support behavior change
Partners in problem-solving
Navigators who connect people to the resources they need

The shift is from " Did you comply? " to " What do you need to succeed? "

This isn't a soft approach. It's a smarter one—and the research backs it up.

What the Data Shows

The most important thing to understand about missed court dates? Most of them aren't about defiance.

Most missed court dates are usually not driven by someone intentionally trying to avoid court. Research consistently shows failures to appear are frequently tied to transportation issues, work conflicts, childcare responsibilities, unstable housing, behavioral health challenges, fear, or confusion about the court process itself.

If we truly want to maximize court appearance, we have to focus on reducing barriers to success—not simply responding after failure occurs. People are more likely to return to court when systems are designed to help them succeed. Court reminders, clear communication, transportation assistance, and respectful engagement all matter.

Research continues to show that unnecessary pretrial detention destabilizes people quickly through job loss, housing disruption, family separation, and worsening mental health. Even short periods of detention can increase the likelihood of future criminal justice involvement, especially among lower-risk individuals. Keeping people stable in the community produces better public safety outcomes than detaining them.

Agencies that have implemented coaching-oriented models are reporting:

FTA reductions of 10–25%
Technical violation reductions of 15–30%
Increased voluntary engagement with services
No significant increase in new criminal activity

The Science Behind It: Why Coaching Works

It Matches How Behavior Actually Changes , but resets how we think about it. We start with responsivity first, not last. Starting with responsivity shifts our perspective from seeing high risk people to people who are struggling who have a higher risk of failure without support.T he Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model —one of the most replicated frameworks in criminal justice research—tells us three things:

Deliver support in a way people can receive it. Collaborative, motivational approaches produce better outcomes than directive or confrontational ones. How you engage matters as much as what you offer.

Match supervision intensity to risk level. Supervising low-risk individuals too intensively doesn't make the community safer. It disrupts employment, housing, and family stability—the very things that prevent reoffending. Research shows that over-supervising low-risk individuals increases recidivism by 10–30% .

Target the right needs. Effective interventions address the specific factors driving someone's risk—things like substance use, lack of stable employment, or antisocial thinking patterns. Generic programming doesn't move the needle.

Fairness Predicts Compliance

Here's something that surprises a lot of people: whether someone shows up to cour t is strongly predicted by whether they feel treated fairly —not by how severe the consequences are.

Legal scholar Tom Tyler spent decades researching what he called procedural justice. His findings are consistent across courts, law enforcement, and supervision settings:

People comply more when they feel heard
People comply more when decisions are made transparently
People comply more when they're treated with respect
People comply more when they believe the system is trying to help them

The practical implication is direct: how a pretrial officer speaks to a client on their first meeting predicts whether that client appears in court. Procedural justice isn't a feel-good concept. It's an evidence-based compliance strategy.

The Cost of the Status Quo

It's worth being honest about what surveillance-only systems actually produce.

Even a few days of pretrial detention triggers a cascade of consequences: job loss, missed rent, family separation, worsening mental health. Every one of those consequences is a direct predictor of future failure to appear and new criminal activity. A system that creates instability and then supervises people through it isn't a public safety strategy—it's a cycle.

The Pretrial Phase: A Window We Can't Afford to Waste

The period between arrest and case resolution is one of the most destabilizing moments in a person's life. People are navigating uncertainty about their case, disruptions to work and housing, behavioral health challenges, and acute fear and stress.

It's also one of the greatest windows of opportunity we have.

When agencies respond to this moment with intentional support—connecting people to services, addressing barriers early, building trust—individuals stabilize faster. And people who are stable are far more likely to appear in court and stay out of trouble.

The pretrial phase isn't just a waiting room. It's where outcomes are shaped.

What This Requires of Us

Shifting to a coaching model isn't just a policy change. It's a culture change.

Even the best practices fail in environments that are control-heavy, deficit-focused, or transactional. Building a coaching culture means:

Leadership modeling coaching behaviors every day
Staff trained and supported in motivational interviewing, trauma-informed engagement, and cognitive-behavioral approaches
Daily interactions —not just written policies—reflecting the values of the model

It also means investing in our people. Pretrial officers in a coaching model are change agents, system navigators, and relationship builders. That requires real skill—and real support.

The Bigger Picture

The coaching model isn't a departure from pretrial principles. It's their evolution.

It reinforces the presumption of release. It supports least restrictive conditions. It honors individualized decision-making. And it reframes the fundamental purpose of pretrial services:

Not just to monitor behavior—but to improve outcomes.

People appear in court when they feel treated fairly. People comply when their barriers are addressed. People stabilize when systems are designed to support stability.

The question for every pretrial agency is the same:

Are we building systems designed to catch failure—or to create success?

If you would like to learn more, please review our resource, First Step Forward , which outlines a support-oriented pretrial framework designed to help courtroom partners reduce barriers to court attendance and more effectively support individuals navigating the pretrial process.

This post draws on research from NAPSA, Arnold Ventures, the Risk-Need-Responsivity framework, Tom Tyler's procedural justice research, and the Coach Referee Model for Change (CRMC).

About the Author:

Dr. Brian Lovins is the President for Justice System Partners (JSP). He earned his PhD in Criminology from the University of Cincinnati. He is currently President-Elect for the American Probation and Parole Association (APPA). Prior to JSP, Dr. Lovins worked for Harris County CSCD as the Assistant Director. He was tasked with developing and implementing agency wide change plans to drive increased successful completion rates. In addition, he has the Associate Director for the University of Cincinnati’s Corrections Institute—the School of Criminal Justice’s training and research department. He has developed a state-wide juvenile risk assessment (Ohio Youth Assessment System: OYAS) and adult risk assessment (Ohio Risk Assessment System: ORAS), as well as validation of a series of pretrial risk assessments. Dr. Lovins has been invited to present to over 200 agencies and routinely trains agencies in the principles of effective intervention, risk assessment, and the delivery of cognitive-behavioral interventions. Dr. Lovins has received the Dr. Simon Dinitz Award for his work and dedication in helping correctional agencies adopt evidence-based programs and the David Dillingham Award, as well as a being recognized as a Distinguished Alumnus from the University of Cincinnati. His publications include articles on risk assessment, sexual offenders, effective interventions, and cognitive-behavioral interventions.

Meet the NAPSA Board: Vice President Domingo Corona

Fri, 15 May 2026 13:18:01 GMT

Meet the NAPSA Board: Q&A Spotlight

Name: Domingo Corona

Board Role/Title: Vice President

Term of Service: 2025- Present

Location (City/State): Tucson, Az

Professional Role/Organization: Director, Pretrial Services, Arizona Superior Court of Pima County

Tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.

I started with Pretrial Services in Pima County in August of 1998, but getting there is important for me to share. My original goal was to attend law school with the desire to become a prosecutor, with the long-term goal of becoming a judge. My goals changed during an internship with the Arizona Attorney General’s Office in the Victim Services division. I realized I had a desire for casework and working one-on-one with individuals. I also was very interested in the leadership persona of our internship coordinator. In fact, she was the person that directed me to Pretrial Services. With Pretrial, I started working at our jail office working a graveyard shift. I was assigned to our initial appearance and pre-booking release team. I loved pretrial work; however, I always wanted to move into a leadership role. In about a year, I was assigned to be a lead. Three years later I was a supervisor. Five years after that I was promoted to what is now an Assistant Director. I have been Director for just about twelve years. In my assignments I have overseen the initial appearance team as well as the supervision team. I now serve as director of the entire agency and have implemented and help manage our diversion program. I am also dedicated to helping with planning an leadership in my court. So, while in the pretrial community I am known for my work, I would like to think I am also making an impact to court work in general. .

What inspired you to get involved with NAPSA?

I must credit former Board President and overall pretrial legend Spurgeon “Kenny” Kennedy for his mentorship and encouragement in directing me to working on national level projects and teams. It was his leadership and friendship, the friendship and guidance of Lori Eville, and a Pretrial 101 class with Judge Bruce Beaudin at the NAPSA Conference in 2004 that really made me feel like national level work was also my calling. The work I do with NAPSA attracts me for two reasons: a sense of personal accomplishment and the amazing cohorts and friends I meet and am privileged to collaborate with. My drive comes from the hope of making an impact in the pretrial field, and the challenging discussions and brainstorming with people I can say are now some of the best friends I have in my life.

What motivated you to serve on the NAPSA Board?

With my increasing involvement in national level work came more interaction with the NAPSA Board, but the thought of serving on the Board was very intimidating early on. I would attend conferences and be in meetings with NAPSA Board members, and it was clear these individuals were polished, knowledgeable, and seemingly fearless public speakers. Naturally, my game plan was to avoid the role. Well, that didn’t last very long. Penny Stinson was the president of NAPSA and she had a need: to temporarily fill the Southwest Region Director role. She reached out to me to discuss temporarily filling the role, and after some encouragement from her and a couple others, including current regional director Joel Bishop, I agreed. If it isn’t obvious by now, it was one of the most impactful career decisions I have made to date. While it started with a sense of duty, it helped with my professional development as much as it helped me contribute to the field in my own way. Oh yeah, I got rid of that pesky crippling fear of public speaking (mostly).

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?

The first and most fundamental challenge is establishing the pretrial agency and profession as a equal and separate entity in all jurisdictions across the county. I think viewing the credibility and importance of pretrial services as a stand-alone and respected profession is the goal. This will help with program growth, recruitment and retention, and overall system improvements. Secondly, developing policies and practices that are evidence-based, data-informed, and generally well-accepted by the public and system partners is both a challenge and an opportunity. I know, that’s a lot of dashes in one sentence.

How does your background or perspective strengthen the Board?

I don’t agree with everyone, and I shouldn’t agree with everyone. We all, however, have similar goals when it comes to growing the field and ensuring we are following the law and data/evidence. I think my strength is that I can effectively navigate these differences of opinions and contribute with solutions. My background is that I come from an established pretrial agency and an extremely supportive court and set of system partners. I know what a great local team, including outside of pretrial, looks like, and I can share that.

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

I am exceptionally proud of the leadership team we have selected and developed in Pima County. I have people that feel comfortable telling me when I’m wrong or slightly off path, but they also support our mission and genuinely care about staff. I would NOT be able to contribute to field like I do without my team, at all. In my personal life, it was hiking the Grand Canyon despite having a crippling fear of heights as a child and teenager. It taught me a lot about confidence and courage.

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

For those new to pretrial services, I would say consider pretrial justice work as a long-term career option. What pretrial services work looks like and its impact on the justice system is open for new ideas and programs. This is a good time to contribute in a meaningful way. Also, the work we do is incredibly important to both the justice system and the community. Regarding connecting with NAPSA, I think you will find that organization’s focus on standards and training will provide you with valuable resources and guidance for your work. You will also find the organization is always looking for feedback as well, so you will be heard as well.

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

The Board is extremely knowledgeable, skilled in many areas as a collective group, and, most importantly, has passion for the work and people in the field. Being on the Board is big commitment, and the members on the Board for the right reason: to help you in your work in pretrial justice.

Outside of work, what do you enjoy doing?

Music is life for me. I like having a daily soundtrack for my life, and I find peace in concerts/live music. I stopped going to concerts for a while, and I have found that was a huge missing element to my work-life balance. I also enjoy sports, and I’m a big Arizona Wildcat fan and (gasp) follow the Dallas Cowboys. I am always up for a good meal at a new restaurant, and I definitely want to travel more!

Closing

In closing, I would like to say thank you to all the pretrial professionals out there for the work you do daily. It’s not an easy or popular field; but, let that drive you. Also, I need to state my appreciation for my pretrial staff. I am very proud of the work we do, and I know I have a talented and dedicated staff. It’s reason I love coming to work every day. Unless it’s March Madness…. But that’s what vacation is for!

Building Knowledge, Advancing Practice: The NAPSA Education Committee

Fri, 01 May 2026 14:47:00 GMT

Why Education Matters in Pretrial

The pretrial field sits at one of the most consequential intersections in the justice system—the space between arrest and case resolution, where decisions made in hours or days can have life-altering consequences for individuals, families, and communities.

In this environment, ongoing education is not a luxury; it is a professional and ethical imperative.

As the field continues to evolve—with new research on pretrial assessment, shifting policy landscapes, and growing attention to equity—staying current through education is what separates good practice from great practice.

Strong professional development doesn’t just benefit individual practitioners. It strengthens outcomes across the entire pretrial ecosystem. Well-trained practitioners deliver more consistent and fair outcomes. Agencies operate more effectively and demonstrate accountability. And communities benefit from a system that balances public safety with individual rights

What Is the NAPSA Education Committee?

The NAPSA Education Committee serves as the engine for professional growth within the pretrial field.

At its core, the committee is responsible for developing, promoting, and delivering the NAPSA Fundamentals Training Track —the foundation of education for pretrial services practitioners. It also supports practitioner certification and advances NAPSA’s standards and evidence-based practices through education.

The committee is currently chaired by Aaron Johnson , with support from Board Liaison Janice Radovick-Dean , and includes members from a wide range of agencies across the country. This diversity ensures that training reflects real-world practice across jurisdictions and roles.

What the Committee Does

The Education Committee’s work spans the full continuum of professional development—from foundational learning for new practitioners to advanced training for seasoned leaders.

Through NAPSA’s broader strategies—including the Annual Conference and Training Institute, certification programs, and technical assistance—the committee helps shape and deliver content that is both practical and evidence-based.

Training is delivered in multiple formats, including:

Webinars
Conference sessions
Certification-aligned coursework

Topics are selected based on what matters most in the field—from pretrial assessment tools and supervision practices to legal updates, equity considerations, and emerging research.

Real-World Impact

The impact of the Education Committee’s work shows up in everyday practice.

From frontline officers to agency directors, practitioners who engage in NAPSA training leave with a stronger understanding of both the history of pretrial in the United States and how to apply that knowledge in real-world decision-making.

Education helps practitioners:

Apply validated tools with greater accuracy
Reduce reliance on bias and inconsistency
Communicate recommendations more effectively to judges, prosecutors, and defense counsel

Ultimately, education creates a feedback loop of improvement—supporting innovation while strengthening consistency and accountability across the field.

Advancing NAPSA’s Mission

The Education Committee is one of the most direct ways NAPSA’s mission comes to life. NAPSA is committed to advancing legal and evidence-based standards and education—and the Education Committee leads the charge in delivering on that promise.

Through its work, the committee helps move the field toward a pretrial system that is:

Fair
Effective
Grounded in evidence

One practitioner, one agency, and one training at a time.

What’s Ahead

The Education Committee continues to evolve alongside the field.

With ongoing webinars and annual conference programming in development, the focus remains on staying ahead of emerging trends and ensuring practitioners have access to timely, relevant training.

Resources for Members

NAPSA offers a wide range of educational resources designed to support professional growth, including:

Practitioner certification programs
Webinars and virtual learning
Annual Conference and Training Institute
Publications and technical assistance

Agencies can integrate these resources into their local training plans—whether through staff meetings, certification pathways, or conference participation.

Get Involved

The Education Committee is driven by its members—and its strength comes from practitioner engagement.

There are many ways to contribute:

Join the committee
Present at a webinar or conference
Share subject-matter expertise

Whether your expertise is in assessment, supervision, behavioral health, data analysis, or another area, your experience can help shape the future of pretrial education.

Member Voice: Shaping the Future

The most valuable resource the Education Committee has is the voice of the field itself.

Practitioners on the front lines know where training gaps exist, where guidance is needed, and where innovation is happening.

Members are encouraged to:

Share ideas for future training topics
Provide feedback on existing programming
Get involved in developing and delivering content

The Education Committee exists to serve the field—and the field is made up of you.

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

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)