DOCSLIB.ORG

E-Verify Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
E-Verify Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey 2016 U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey 2016 E-Verify Final Report IA# 20213 A6 March 2017 1 Final Report Table of Contents U.S. Department of Homeland Security ................................................................................................ 1 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services .......................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5 Methodology .............................................................................................................. 5 Findings ..................................................................................................................... 7 Priority Matrix ............................................................................................................ 9 Additional Data ........................................................................................................ 10 Conclusions/Recommendations .............................................................................. 10 DETAILED REPORT ............................................................................................................................... 11 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 11 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 11 Customer Satisfaction Models ................................................................................. 13 Customer Samples and Data Collection .................................................................. 18 DETAILED FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................ 25 Customer Satisfaction Index ................................................................................... 25 Drivers of Satisfaction Results ................................................................................. 28 USCIS E-Verify Customer Satisfaction Models ....................................................... 32 Priority Matrix .......................................................................................................... 34 Non-Modeled Components ..................................................................................... 35 System Integrity ....................................................................................................... 43 Outreach and Communications ............................................................................... 44 Outcomes ................................................................................................................ 49 Overall Findings and Recommendations ................................................................. 50 APPENDIX A: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE .......................................................................................... 52 E-Verify Customer Survey 2016 .............................................................................. 52 APPENDIX B: NON-MODELED RESPONSES ...................................................................................... 70 APPENDIX C: MODELED RESULTS/INDEX SCORE TABLES ........................................................... 95 APPENDIX D: VERBATIM COMMENTS ............................................................................................. 146 POINTS OF CONTACT ......................................................................................................................... 218 2 Final Report Table of Figures Figure 1 - E-Verify CSI Scores ...................................................................................... 7 Figure 2 – New Enrollees Priority Matrix ....................................................................... 9 Figure 3 – Existing Users Priority Matrix ....................................................................... 9 Figure 4 – CSI Model Explanation .............................................................................. 13 Figure 5 – Drivers of Customer Satisfaction ............................................................... 14 Figure 6 – Customer Satisfaction Outcomes .............................................................. 15 Figure 7 – Non Modeled Components ........................................................................ 15 Figure 8 – CSI Model Illustration ................................................................................. 17 Figure 9 – All. Recent. Far Response Rates ............................................................... 19 Figure 10 – New and Existing Users Completes ......................................................... 19 Figure 11 – State Distribution ..................................................................................... 20 Figure 12 – Number of Employees ............................................................................. 22 Figure 13 – Considered Small Business ..................................................................... 22 Figure 14 – Primary Industry ....................................................................................... 22 Figure 15 – Organization Description and Frequency of Use ..................................... 24 Figure 16 – Trending E-Verify CSI Scores .................................................................. 25 Figure 17 - E-Verify Customer Satisfaction Index ....................................................... 26 Figure 18 – ACSI Comparison .................................................................................... 27 Figure 19 – Using E-Verify Scores .............................................................................. 29 Figure 20 – TNC Resolution Process Scores ............................................................. 30 Figure 21 – Photo Matching Scores ............................................................................ 31 Figure 22 – New Enrollees CSI Model ........................................................................ 32 Figure 23 – Existing Users CSI Model ........................................................................ 33 Figure 24 – New Enrollees Priority Matrix ................................................................... 34 Figure 25 – Existing Users Priority Matrix ................................................................... 34 Figure 26 – Registration Scores ................................................................................. 36 Figure 27 – Tutorial Scores ......................................................................................... 37 3 Final Report Figure 28 – Customer Service – Phone Scores .......................................................... 39 Figure 29 – Customer Service – E-mail Scores .......................................................... 40 Figure 30 – Technical Assistance Scores ................................................................... 41 Figure 31 – Internet Use – Interest in using Internet Help Scores .............................. 42 Figure 32 – System Integrity – Policies and Safeguards Charts ................................. 43 Figure 33 – System Integrity – Policies and Safeguards Tables ................................. 43 Figure 34 – How Did You Learn About E-Verify .......................................................... 44 Figure 35 – How Did You Learn About E-Verify Requirements .................................. 45 Figure 36 – When Did Your Company Sign Up For E-Verify ...................................... 46 Figure 37 – Likelihood To Continue Using E-Verify .................................................... 46 Figure 38 – Preferred Contact Method Charts ............................................................ 47 Figure 39 – Preferred Method About Hearing Changes .............................................. 48 Figure 40 – Preferred Method For Receiving Help...................................................... 48 Figure 41 – Outcome Behavior Scores ....................................................................... 49 Figure 42 - 2015 v 2016 Demographics ...................................................................... 71 Figure 43 - New v Existing Demographics .................................................................. 84 Figure 44 - All (Cross-Section) .................................................................................... 96 Figure 45 - New Enrollees ........................................................................................ 100 Figure 46 - Existing Users ......................................................................................... 104 Figure 47 - Recent Users Score Table ...................................................................... 108 Figure 48 - FAR Users Score Table .......................................................................... 112 Figure 49 - Consider Small Business Scores ............................................................ 116 Figure 50 - How Many Do You Employ Scores ......................................................... 121 Figure 51 - How Many Do You Employ Scores (cont.) .............................................. 125 Figure 52 - When Did Your
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Pacific Coast and the Casual Labor Economy, 1919-1933
    © Copyright 2015 Alexander James Morrow i Laboring for the Day: The Pacific Coast and the Casual Labor Economy, 1919-1933 Alexander James Morrow A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2015 Reading Committee: James N. Gregory, Chair Moon-Ho Jung Ileana Rodriguez Silva Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of History ii University of Washington Abstract Laboring for the Day: The Pacific Coast and the Casual Labor Economy, 1919-1933 Alexander James Morrow Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor James Gregory Department of History This dissertation explores the economic and cultural (re)definition of labor and laborers. It traces the growing reliance upon contingent work as the foundation for industrial capitalism along the Pacific Coast; the shaping of urban space according to the demands of workers and capital; the formation of a working class subject through the discourse and social practices of both laborers and intellectuals; and workers’ struggles to improve their circumstances in the face of coercive and onerous conditions. Woven together, these strands reveal the consequences of a regional economy built upon contingent and migratory forms of labor. This workforce was hardly new to the American West, but the Pacific Coast’s reliance upon contingent labor reached its apogee after World War I, drawing hundreds of thousands of young men through far flung circuits of migration that stretched across the Pacific and into Latin America, transforming its largest urban centers and working class demography in the process. The presence of this substantial workforce (itinerant, unattached, and racially heterogeneous) was out step with the expectations of the modern American worker (stable, married, and white), and became the warrant for social investigators, employers, the state, and other workers to sharpen the lines of solidarity and exclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Day Labor in Las Vegas Employer Indiscretions in Sin City
    JANUARY 2018 Day Labor in Las Vegas Employer Indiscretions in Sin City NIK THEODORE BLISS REQUA-TRAUTZ UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO NATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S This report was commissioned by the National Day Laborer Organizing Network and the ¡Arriba! Las Vegas Worker Center. This report would not have been possible without the diligent data-collection efforts of the survey team: Janet Favela, Cal Soto, Francisco Pacheco, Omar Leon, Adam Bradlow, Ana Raya, Sonia Gutierrez, Omar Henriquez, Pablo Alvarado, Paloma Guerrero and Lin Soriano. Thanks also to Matthew Spurlock and Pablo Alvarado for comments on an earlier draft of this report. Photo credits and thank you to Liliana Trejo Vanegas for the images in this report. This report was designed by Angel Sandoval A B O U T T H E A U T H O R S Nik Theodore Professor of Urban Planning and Policy at the University of Illinois at Chicago, Senior Associate at the UIC Great Cities Institute, and Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Affairs in the College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs. His current research focuses on economic restructuring and labor standards, and he has been a lead researcher on projects examining conditions in low-wage labor markets, including day labor, domestic work, temporary staffing, and the state of workplace protections in low-wage industries. Contact: [email protected] Bliss Requa-Trautz Director of the ¡Arriba! Las Vegas Worker Center. The mission of the Las Vegas Worker Center is to organize, educate, and empower worker and migrant communities to take action to defend their rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigrant Day Labor Characteristics and Prospects for Employment
    The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies CCIS University of California, San Diego Working on the Margins: Immigrant Day Labor Characteristics and Prospects for Employment By Abel Valenzuela, Jr. University of California, Los Angeles Working Paper 22 May 2000 1 permission of author. Comments are welcomed and can be directed to author at [email protected] I am responsible for all interpretations and s hortcomings found in this article. Working on the Margins: Immigrant Day Labor Characteristics and Prospects for Employment* Abel Valenzuela Jr. This article presents for the first time findings from the Day Labor Survey. Drawing upon 481 randomly surveyed immigrant day workers at 87 hiring sites throughout Southern California, I examine key demographic, social, and labor market characteristics of this burgeoning informal market. The findings suggest that not all day laborers are desperate, bottom of the barrel, recently arrived job seekers. Day laborers are diverse in family structure, recency of arrival, tenure in day work, and human capital. Earnings among day laborers are mixed; hourly rates are higher than federal or state minimum wage ceilings, however this advantage is clearly offset by unstable work patterns. These findings suggest that for a significant number of immigrant day laborers, work in this informal market may be an alternative to work in the low-skill, formal labor market. Day labor work is a burgeoning market in immigrant filled cities and regions (Gearty, 1999; McQuiston, 1999; Visser, 1999). In Southern California, between 15,000 and 20,000 day laborers, spread over 100 hiring sites, exist (Valenzuela, 1999). This market is almost entirely comprised of men, mostly immigrants, who wait patiently on street corners, empty lots, or home- improvement stores every morning to informally exchange labor for the day for individually negotiated wages.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenging Exploitation and Abuse: a Study of the Day Labor Industry in Cleveland
    Challenging Exploitation and Abuse: A Study of the Day Labor Industry in Cleveland Daniel Kerr Ph.D. candidate in history, Case Western Reserve University Chris Dole Ph.D. candidate in anthropology, Case Western Reserve University September 4, 2001 Report prepared for Cleveland City Council Acknowledgements We would like to thank first and foremost the 77 people who shared their experiences, often times in explicit detail, in spite of the pervasive fear that workers would be retaliated against for collaborating with this project. Secondly, we would like to thank the fifteen volunteers who helped us conduct the interviews: J.E. Avery, Priscilla Bell, Doran Blinderman, Eddie Boyte, Geri Chessler, Roxanne Feldman, Mark Hennigan, Don Messitt, Robert Molchan, Beverley Reed, Stephanie Shelton, Dina Sherman, Lara Wixon, Katie Woznicki, and Pamela Zwolinsky. The many evenings and weekends they spent doing interviews are greatly appreciated by us and the working poor of the city of Cleveland. The assistance David Quintana and Jude Crocker provided in organizing the focus groups was enormously helpful. Brian Davis and Angela Joyce of the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the homeless have been key supporters of this research project from the beginning. They have also provided much needed advice in crafting the questionnaires. Sing Vang and Joe Bercik deserve most of the credit for developing the questionnaires and guidelines for interviewers. Angelo Anderson at the Salvation Army, Sister Corita Ambro at St. Augustines, and Sharon Fields at Bishop Cosgrove Center have all been instrumental to this study by allowing us to conduct interviews in the facilities they oversee. Each of them has recognized the importance of the day labor issue for the client population they serve.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 California Employer's Guide
    2020 CALIFORNIA EMPLOYER’S GUIDE DE 44 Rev. 464 (1-(1-1208) (INTERNET) Cover + 118 pages CU Important Information Electronic Reporting and Payment Requirement: All employers must electronically submit employment tax returns, wage reports, and payroll tax deposits to the Employment Development Department (EDD). For more information, visit the e-file and e-pay mandate and related noncompliance penalties (edd.ca.gov/EfileMandate) or refer to page 49. e-Services for Business: Employers can file, pay, and manage their employer payroll tax account online. For more information, visit e-Services for Business (edd.ca.gov/e-Services_for_Business) or refer to page 50. State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES): Employers and third-party administrators can elect to electronically receive and respond to the EDD Notice of Unemployment Insurance Claim Filed (DE 1101CZ) using SIDES. For more information, visit SIDES (edd.ca.gov/SIDES). New Employee Registry (NER): All employers are required by law to report all newly hired or rehired employees to the NER within 20 days of their start-of-work date. For more information, visit NER FAQs (edd.ca.gov/payroll_taxes/faq_-_california_new_employee_registry) or refer to page 53. Tax Seminars: The EDD offers no-cost seminars to help employers comply with state payroll tax laws. For more information, visit payroll tax seminars (edd.ca.gov/payroll_tax_seminars) or refer to page 1. Fraud Prevention, Detection, Reporting, and UI Rate Manipulation: For information on how to prevent and detect UI fraud, visit UI Fraud (edd.ca.gov/unemployment/fraud_and_penalties_what_you_need_to_ know) or refer to page 84. Improper Payment of UI Benefits is a serious problem that has a financial impact on employers and can result in higher UI taxes for all employers.
    [Show full text]
  • How Communities Can Best Address a Growing Day-Labor Workforce
    371 “We Are Your Neighbors”: How Communities Can Best Address a Growing Day-Labor Workforce Amy Pritchard1 We build the buildings, we do the hardest jobs, and still they don’t want us. —Juan Ignacio Gutiérrez, day laborer On September 4, 2007, the town of Herndon, Virginia, voted to close its day-laborer center that had become the focus of local controversy and national attention.2 Less than two years before, Herndon established the center in response to chaos caused by large numbers of men congregating along local streets seeking employment as day laborers,3 workers who are hired for and paid by the day. In order to eliminate this congregation, Herndon enacted ordinances prohibiting solicitation along town streets4 and attempted to funnel the workers and potential employers to the day-laborer center.5 Many local residents opposed the center—primarily because it did not verify the immigration status of workers—and ultimately voted to unseat the mayor and city council members who created it.6 The newly elected governmental officials committed themselves to reforming the center to exclude all clients who did not verify that they were legally authorized to work in the United States.7 Local residents responded to Herndon’s day-laborer center and antisolicitation ordinances with a series of lawsuits. A group of local residents, with the help of conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, filed an action to enjoin the use of taxpayer funds for the day-laborer center 372 SEATTLE JOURNAL FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE if it continued serving undocumented
    [Show full text]
  • Day Labor in the United States
    ON THE CORNER: Day Labor in the United States Abel Valenzuela Jr. UCLA Center for the Study of Urban Poverty Nik Theodore University of Illinois at Chicago Center for Urban Economic Development Edwin Meléndez New School University Milano Graduate School of Management and Urban Policy Ana Luz Gonzalez UCLA Center for the Study of Urban Poverty January 2006 The National Day Labor Study was made possible through generous support from The Ford Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation, The Community Foundation for the National Capital Region’s Washington Area Partnership for Immigrants and UCLA’s Center for the Study of Urban Poverty through the dean of social sciences. The report can be viewed or downloaded at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/issr/csup/index.php or http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/uicued ON THE CORNER: Day Labor in the United States Executive Summary This report profiles, for the first time, the national phenomenon of day labor in the United States. Men and women looking for employment in open-air markets by the side of the road, at busy intersections, in front of home improvement stores and in other public spaces are ubiquitous in cities across the nation. The circumstances that give rise to this labor market are complex and poorly understood. In this report, we analyze data from the National Day Labor Survey, the first systematic and scientific study of the day-labor sector and its workforce in the United States. This portrait of day labor in the United States is based on a national survey of 2,660 day laborers. These workers were randomly selected at 264 hiring sites in 139 municipalities in 20 states and the District of Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Written Statement of the National Employment Law Project on the Subject of Employment and Labor Protections for Day Laborers
    Written statement of the National Employment Law Project on the Subject of Employment and Labor Protections for Day Laborers Written Statement of the National Employment Law Project On the Subject of Employment and Labor Protections for Day Laborers Washington, D.C. September 26th, 2002 Luna M. Yasui National Employment Law Project 55 John Street, 7th Fl. New York, NY 10038 Phone: (212) 285-3025 x105 Fax: (212) 285-3044 1 Written statement of the National Employment Law Project on the Subject of Employment and Labor Protections for Day Laborers Statement of the National Employment Law Project About NELP The National Employment Law Project (NELP) is a nonprofit law and policy organization based in New York City. NELP has advocated on behalf of low wage, unemployed and immigrant workers for nearly 30 years. The Immigrant Day Laborer Project is part of NELP’s Immigrant Worker Project which provides technical support and legal resources to community organizations, organized labor, advocates and policy makers interested in protecting and expanding the rights of immigrant workers. In this capacity, NELP is currently working with members of the National Day Labor Organizing Network (NDLON) and Representative Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill) to introduce legislation that would address the exploitative working conditions of day laborers. Executive Summary Day labor is not a new phenomena in the United States. Historically, employers have relied on day laborers to perform manual labor such as construction work, landscaping and to provide domestic services. More recently, the downturn in the economy has resulted in a growing number of workers turning to day labor as their only viable employment option.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigrant Labor in the Forest Industry: the Impacts of H-2B Employment on Local Livelihoods
    Immigrant Labor in the Forest Industry: The Impacts of H-2B Employment on Local Livelihoods by Arnold M. Brodbeck IV A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Auburn, Alabama May 7, 2016 Keywords: H-2B, immigrant, labor, livelihoods, forestry Copyright 2016 by Arnold M. Brodbeck IV Approved by Wayde Morse, Co-Chair, Assistant Professor, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences L. Conner Bailey, Co-Chair, Professor, Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology Becky Barlow, Associate Professor, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences Ken McNabb, Professor, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences Abstract The production of timber requires labor, with peak labor demands coming during reforestation. Much of the labor used in tree planting in the United States (US) is provided by migrant workers. The overall purpose of this dissertation is to examine how the opportunity to work in the US affects migrant workers in their home communities. The specific focus of this study is on migrant workers from Guatemala who work in the southeastern US (South) under H- 2B visas issued by the US Department of Immigration. Migrant laborers working under the H-2B guest worker visa program plant an estimated two million acres every year in the South. In 2004 migrant labor constituted 84% of the forest management labor in the southern forest industry. H-2B labor provides relatively cheap, productive, and reliable labor that enables the forest products industry to remain competitive. The purpose of this study is threefold: First, to describe the role, impact, and importance of H-2B forest workers to Alabama’s forest industry from the perspective of professional foresters; second, to document laborers’ background and explain why immigrant labor from Guatemala participates in the H-2B program; and third, to describe the impacts that earnings associated with H-2B forest employment have on the livelihoods of participating workers, their families, and communities.
    [Show full text]
  • DAY LABORERS, FRIEND OR FOE: a SURVEY of COMMUNITY RESPONSES Mauricio A
    Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 30 | Number 6 Article 5 2003 DAY LABORERS, FRIEND OR FOE: A SURVEY OF COMMUNITY RESPONSES Mauricio A. Espana Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj Part of the Labor and Employment Law Commons Recommended Citation Mauricio A. Espana, DAY LABORERS, FRIEND OR FOE: A SURVEY OF COMMUNITY RESPONSES, 30 Fordham Urb. L.J. 1979 (2003). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss6/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Urban Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DAY LABORERS, FRIEND OR FOE: A SURVEY OF COMMUNITY RESPONSES Cover Page Footnote J.D. 2003, Fordham University School of Law; Associate, Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw (as of September 2003). I would like to thank everyone who supported and encouraged me as I strived to carry on my endeavors. I would like to express special gratitude to my mother, father, family, and friends for their unending support, tolerance, and understanding. This article is available in Fordham Urban Law Journal: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss6/5 DAY LABORERS, FRIEND OR FOE: A SURVEY OF COMMUNITY RESPONSES Mauricio A. Espafia* INTRODUCTION A landscaper named Ausencio is hanging seventy-five feet in the air suspended by only a two-inch rope as he attempts to trim a tree.' In one hand, he holds a chainsaw while with the other he tries to keep himself stable.2 As he works diligently to cut down this tree, the rope becomes untied and he plummets to his death.' Under normal circumstances, Ausencio's co-workers and employer would run to his aid and summon an ambulance to help him.
    [Show full text]
  • Amended Complaint
    Case 3:12-cv-03247-O Document 15 Filed 10/10/12 Page 1 of 25 PageID 70 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CHRISTOPHER L. CRANE, DAVID A. ) ENGLE, ANASTASIA MARIE ) CARROLL, RICARDO DIAZ, ) LORENZO GARZA, FELIX ) LUCIANO, TRE REBSTOCK, ) FERNANDO SILVA, SAMUEL ) MARTIN, JAMES D. DOEBLER, and ) Civil Action No. 3:12-cv-03247-O THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, by and ) through GOVERNOR PHIL BRYANT ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) AMENDED COMPLAINT JANET NAPOLITANO, in her official ) capacity as Secretary of Homeland ) Security, JOHN MORTON, in his ) official capacity as Director of ) Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ) and ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, in his ) official capacity as Director of United ) States Citizenship and Immigration ) Services ) ) Defendants. ) INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiffs are law enforcement officers of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), as well as the State of Mississippi by and through Governor Phil Bryant, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. §§ 7-1-5(n) and 7-1-33. 2. On June 15, 2012, Defendant Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued a Directive entitled “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect to Individuals Who Came to the United States as Children” (hereinafter “the Directive”). The Directive, attached to Case 3:12-cv-03247-O Document 15 Filed 10/10/12 Page 2 of 25 PageID 71 this Complaint as Appendix A, instructs ICE officers to refrain from placing certain aliens who are unlawfully present in the United States (“illegal aliens”) into removal proceedings, and to take actions to facilitate the granting of deferred action to aliens who are unlawfully present in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Day Laborer Hiring Sites C O N S T R U C T I V E a P P R O a C H E S T O C O M M U N I T Y C O N F L I C T
    DAY LABORER HIRING SITES C O N S T R U C T I V E A P P R O A C H E S T O C O M M U N I T Y C O N F L I C T RO B I N T O M A & JI L L E S B E N S H A D E L O S A N G E L E S CO U N T Y BO A R D O F S U P E RV I S O R S GLORIA MOLINA FIRST DISTRICT YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE SECOND DISTRICT ZEV YAROSLAVSKY THIRD DISTRICT DON KNABE FOURTH DISTRICT MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH FIFTH DISTRICT C O M M I S S I O N O N H U M A N R E L AT I O N S RAY BARTLETT • DONNA BOJARSKY • REV. ZEDAR E. BROADOUS VITO CANNELLA • JUDY COFFMAN • SUSANNE CUMMING ALBERT DEBLANC • ADRIAN DOVE • MORRIS KIGHT • LEE ANN KING RUBEN LIZARDO • ROBERTO LOVATO • ELEANOR R. MONTAÑO • HAY YANG ROBIN S. TOMA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RON WAKABAYASHI EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (1994-1999) This project was supported by grant number - - - , aw a r ded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Of fi ce of Justice Prog ra m s , United States Department of Justice. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a comp o nent of the Office of Justice Prog ra m s , wh i c h includes the Bureau of Justice Sta t i s t i c s , Nat i o nal Institute of Ju s t i c e , Of fi ce of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven t i on , an d the Office of Victims of Crim e s .
    [Show full text]