Evidence-Based Decision Making (EBDM) Initiative

Overview

The Evidence-Based Decision Making (EBDM) Initiative helps justice systems focus on decision-making that reduces harm, improves community safety, and uses justice system resources more effectively. Developed by the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) in partnership with CEPP, the EBDM Framework provides a clear, research-based roadmap for aligning policies, practices, and systemwide collaboration.

Since its launch, the Initiative has helped counties, states, and policymakers nationwide develop shared goals, strengthen their data capabilities, and improve decision-making throughout the justice system. EBDM is not a one-time project—it is a long-term, sustainable approach that changes how teams collaborate, use information, and solve problems.

Today, EBDM continues to guide jurisdictions seeking a practical, results-oriented framework for achieving measurable, best-practice improvements across their justice systems.

Our Approach

The EBDM Initiative is grounded in the belief that justice systems function most effectively when stakeholders collaborate, utilize data to inform decisions, and pursue systemic change as a long-term commitment.

To advance this vision, NIC partnered with CEPP to develop the EBDM Framework and support jurisdictions committed to reducing harm, improving outcomes, and strengthening community well-being.

In August 2010, NIC selected seven communities to pilot the Framework. In partnership with NIC, CEPP provided guidance and hands-on technical assistance to these communities. Based on their successes, the initiative was expanded to an additional 21 teams in three states, including three state-level policymaking teams.

Building on this foundation, CEPP later supported Indiana’s Local Justice Reinvestment Councils (JRACs), helping counties apply EBDM principles to strengthen cross-system collaboration, improve data use, and embed evidence-based processes in local operations. Through this effort, the core components of the EBDM Framework were scaled into a statewide infrastructure for coordinated, data-informed policymaking. 

Across all EBDM sites, CEPP’s support includes:

• Facilitating collaborative policy teams representing all justice partners

• Coaching teams through the development of vision/mission statements, system mapping, and shared goals for change

• Strengthening data capacity and building meaningful performance measures

• Supporting teams as they test, implement, and refine policy and practice changes

• Establishing structures that sustain collaboration and learning, long after formal TA ends

As jurisdictions work to align their policies and practices with the EBDM Framework, CEPP encourages teams to adopt clear, consistent, and person-centered language to support collaboration and shared understanding. Our new Language Guide for Community Supervision offers practical guidance to help jurisdictions communicate about people, decisions, and outcomes in ways that reflect EBDM principles and strengthen systemwide alignment.

Through this approach, CEPP helps jurisdictions build safer and fairer justice systems.

Explore EBDM Resources

CEPP maintains a national collection of free EBDM tools and discipline-specific guides for justice partners, including prosecutors, defenders, judges, pretrial leaders, probation officers, law enforcement, legislators, and victim service providers. These briefs highlight each stakeholder’s role in strengthening harm-reduction outcomes and advancing evidence-based decision making.

Access the full EBDM resource library here.

Includes guides such as:

• Overview for Prosecutors
• Overview for Defense Attorneys
• Overview for Judges
• Overview for Law Enforcement
• Overview for Pretrial Executives
• Overview for Probation
• Overview for Victim Service Providers
• Overview for State & County Legislators

The Impact

For more than 15 years, the EBDM Initiative has helped jurisdictions rethink their approach to work—moving from siloed decision-making to shared accountability, transparent data use, and collaborative problem-solving. Practitioners often describe EBDM not as a project, but as a cultural and operational transformation.

A Meaningful, Lasting Culture Shift

Practitioners across EBDM sites consistently emphasized the depth of this change:

• “This was a process worth the challenge and opportunity.”
• “What we achieved was a whole different way of working—a structure and relationships to deal with issues.”
• “EBDM wasn’t just a project. It was a culture change… I use EBDM every day. It is embedded in what we do.”
• “EBDM is not ‘rinse and repeat.’ It’s a lifestyle change.”
• “If you don’t have data, decisions default to whoever has the most power or influence.”
• “Collaboration is essential to our work—like brick and mortar.”

These reflections echo what CEPP observes across sites: strong collaboration, a shared language, and durable structures that continue to guide decision-making long after the formal conclusion of technical assistance. 

Transforming Data Use

Many jurisdictions began EBDM work with limited data capacity or inconsistent measurement. With CEPP’s support, teams built shared data systems, created performance measures, and established expectations that decisions be grounded in clear evidence:

• “Data was tough. Numbers came out, and it meant nothing to them. Now, we insist on the data before we make decisions.”

This shift continues to improve decision quality, consistency, and transparency across system partners.

Impact Across States and Systems

The EBDM Initiative has helped jurisdictions in Virginia, Wisconsin, Colorado, Minnesota, and Oregon align policies, strengthen collaboration, and embed evidence-based practices across the justice system.

• Charlottesville/Albermarle County, Virginia, implemented an actuarial assessment tool in the regional jail, which led to expanded programming to address the most commonly assessed criminogenic needs and more strategic use of jail resources.
• Eau Claire County, Wisconsin, implemented a diversion program for people likely to succeed without further criminal justice system intervention. In its first four years, more than 1,000 people were diverted, with recidivism rates significantly lower than those of a control group who had similar charges but who were not diverted.
• Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, developed a new research-based approach to sentencing and probation called “dosage probation,” which suggests that the length of supervision should be determined by the number of hours of intervention necessary to increase a person’s likelihood of success, rather than a standard probation term. Results were promising and led to the establishment of additional pilot sites, both within and outside Wisconsin. Learn more about CEPP’s Dosage Probation work here.
• Mesa County, Colorado, reformed its pretrial process by adopting a validated pretrial assessment to inform pretrial release decisions, bond conditions, and the level and type of support from pretrial agencies. These efforts resulted in a significant shift away from financial conditions of release to release on recognizance without a reduction in community safety and well-being rates.
• Ramsey County, Minnesota, has developed structured responses to pretrial violations, enabling pretrial agents to respond to violations in a manner that considers both the person’s likelihood of success and the seriousness of the violation.
• Yamhill County, Oregon, began conducting case analyses to inform sentencing, using information from assessments to help identify people who could live safely in the community with support as needed. This process has been replicated in additional Oregon counties.

Across all states, teams report improved decision-making quality, more consistent policies, clearer expectations, and stronger relationships among justice partners.

Statewide Leadership: The Indiana Example

Grant County, Indiana, one of the original EBDM sites, continues to exemplify how the Framework becomes embedded in daily practice. Practitioners describe EBDM as shaping everything from supervisory policies to interagency collaboration.

Indiana went a step further by becoming the only state in the country to pass legislation codifying key EBDM concepts. House Enrolled Act 1068 (HEA 1068) establishes Local Justice Reinvestment Councils (JRACs) and requires coordinated, data-driven decision-making across counties.

This statutory framework underscores Indiana’s long-standing commitment to evidence-based practice and demonstrates the enduring impact of the EBDM Initiative.

 

Looking for additional resources to strengthen evidence-based supervision?

Visit the Community Supervision Resource Center (CSRC) for free tools, training, guidance, and practical resources that help agencies implement EBDM principles.