Read this if you have a responsibility for acquiring and implementing victim notifications for your jurisdiction.
In the first article of this three-part series we explored the challenges and risks associated with utilizing multiple victim notification systems across your state. In this article we will explore what the choices are to address these challenges.
System elements to consider
Many jurisdictions are under the impression that there are only one or two choices for victim notification systems. Though there are certainly market leaders in this space, you should select a system model that best meets your jurisdiction’s profile. The profile may include some of these elements:
- Risk aversion (i.e., How risk averse is your organization regarding system implementations?)
- Budget (i.e., How will the initial project be funded? Does your jurisdiction prefer an annual subscription model, or a traditional perpetual license with annual maintenance and support fees?)
- Staff (Who do you need to implement and maintain the operational system?)
- Time (i.e., Are you already out of compliance with state statutes?)
- Hosting environment (i.e., Do you want to host in the cloud or on premise?)
- Victim notification reach (i.e., state-wide, single jurisdiction, multiple justice partners)
- Victim notification policy and statute complexity
- Data ownership (i.e., To what degree does your jurisdiction enable the selling of victim notification data outside of the jurisdiction?)
Victim notification solutions range from hosted commercial off the shelf (COTS) solutions, which are typically least expensive; to custom solutions developed to address jurisdiction-specific needs. The latter tend to be more expensive, riskier than turnkey solutions, and take longer to operationalize. However, if your jurisdiction has unique requirements for victim notification, this may be a viable option. Unless you plan to engage the development vendor in a long-term contract for maintenance of this type of system, you must consider the impact on your existing IT staff. “Platform” solutions are a hybrid of COTS and custom development. With these solutions, there is typically a platform (i.e., Customer Relationship Management or CRM) on which the victim notification system is developed. Using a platform de-risks the development of the application’s architecture, may be a slightly less costly approach, and may simplify the maintenance of a system that is addressing unique requirements.
You may also already have licenses for victim notification capabilities, and not even realize it. Some offender management systems (OMS), jail management systems (JMS), and even prosecution systems (that support victim advocacy functions) may have built-in victim notification functionality included for the licensing price you are currently paying, or may include the option to purchase an add-on module.
Advantages of using victim notification capabilities packaged with an existing system may include:
- Lower acquisition and maintenance costs
- Tighter integration with the OMS, JMS, or prosecution system may result in more seamless utilization of offender and victim data
- You have a single contract, with a single vendor, reducing contract management overhead
A likely disadvantage, however, is the victim notification functionality may not be a robust as a point solution, or custom-built system. Additionally, if the “reach” of the JMS is a single county, then victim notification capabilities built into your JMS may not suffice for statewide use. However, if the built-in functionality meets your needs, then this is certainly a viable path to consider.
As mentioned in the first article, regardless of your approach the integration between your victim notification system and the JMS, OMS, prosecution system, and court system is critical to reducing redundancy and increasing the timeliness with which both offender and victim data is entered into the victim notification system―and used to trigger the notifications themselves.
Determining the best option for your victim notification system
So how do you determine which choice is best for your jurisdiction? The first step is to determine your jurisdiction’s risk profile versus the need to for jurisdiction-specific functionality.
Mature market-based solutions are typically less risky to implement, since multiple jurisdictions are likely successfully using them to support their victim notification operations. However, these solutions may not be customizable or flexible enough to address your specific needs.
“Build” models (using platform solutions or other application development models) tend to be a bit more risky (as many “from scratch” development projects can be); however these are more likely to address your specific needs. Here are a few questions that you should ask before making a determination between a COTS solution and a custom-build:
- Do we really have jurisdiction-specific victim notification needs?
- Can a COTS solution meet the statutes and policies in our jurisdiction?
- How risk-averse is our jurisdiction?
- Do we have time to develop a customized solution?
- Do we have the talent and capacity to maintain a custom solution?
Budget considerations
The next step is to determine your budget. We recommend you assess a budget over a 10-year total cost of ownership. The cost of a traditional, perpetual license-based COTS solution, including initial acquisition and implementation, will be higher in the first few years of use, but the ongoing annual fees will be lower. The cost of a custom-build solution will be even higher in the first few years, but annual maintenance should drop off dramatically. The cost of a subscription-based COTS solution will be relative even year over year. However, if you model these costs over 10 years, you will have a reasonable sense for how these costs trend (i.e., the cost of a subscription-based model will likely be higher over 10 years than the perpetual license model).
The other consideration is how you plan to fund the system. If there are capital funds in the budget for initial acquisition and implementation, this may benefit the perpetual license model more than the subscription-based model. Regardless of the funding approach, you will likely be using the selected victim notification method for a significant period of time, so don’t settle.
Finally, determine how to acquire the system (or systems integration vendor that will help you develop the system), which is the subject of the third article in our series.
If you have questions about your specific situation, please contact our Justice & Public Safety team. We’re here to help. To learn more about other choices in victim notification procedures and systems, stay tuned for our third article in this series where we explore the process (and pitfalls) of procuring a statewide victim notification system.