Home  |  Help  |  Contact Us  |  Site Map   |  Glossary Researchers and Reviewers

All Lead Researchers and Study Reviewers have extensive subject-matter and research methodology expertise. On this page, learn about:

Lead Researchers

Lead Researchers select the studies that comprise a program's evidence base and coordinate the review process for a given topic area. They also ensure that any scoring discrepancies between Study Reviewers are resolved and that consensus is achieved before a program is assigned a final evidence rating. Lead Researchers are experts in the following justice-related topics:

  • Crime and Crime Prevention
  • Corrections and Reentry
  • Courts
  • Drugs and Substance Abuse
  • Juveniles
  • Law Enforcement
  • School Safety
  • Victims and Victimization

List of Lead Researchers

  • Stephen Gies — Development Services Group, Inc.
  • Jennifer Grotpeter — Development Services Group, Inc.
  • Rob Guerette — Florida International University
  • Eoin Healy — Development Services Group, Inc.
  • Edward Latessa — University of Cincinnati
  • Edward Maguire — American University
  • Carol Petrie — Development Services Group, Inc.
  • Alissa Worden — University at Albany

Study Reviewers

Study Reviewers are responsible for reviewing and rating the individual studies that comprise a program's evidence base. Reviewers are assigned on the basis of their area of expertise. Our Study Reviewers are subject-matter and research methodology experts. Each Study Reviewer is trained and certified prior to reviewing studies.

As minimum qualifications, each Study Reviewer must:

  1. Possess a Ph.D. (or other comparable advanced degree), preferably in a social science-related field of study such as sociology or criminal justice, but other fields of study will be considered.
  2. Be subject-matter experts and have substantial knowledge of research in at least one or more of the following seven topic areas: corrections and reentry, courts, crime and crime prevention, drugs and substance abuse, juvenile justice, law enforcement, and crime victims and victimization.
  3. Have extensive knowledge about research methodology.
  4. Be available to complete reviews up to five days per year.

List of Study Reviewers

  • Eileen Ahlin — Penn State University
  • Todd Armstrong — University of Nebraska Omaha
  • Gisela Bichler — California State University
  • Jeff Bouffard — Sam Houston State University
  • Kate Bowers — University College London
  • Gary Cordner — Kutztown University
  • Nicholas Corsaro — Southern Illinois State University
  • Richard Dembo — University of South Florida
  • Laura Dugan — University of Maryland
  • William Feyerherm — Portland State University
  • James Frank — University of Cincinnati
  • Adrienne Freng — University of Wyoming
  • Randy Gainey — Old Dominion University
  • Leon Geter — Berkley College
  • Dennis Giever — Indiana University of Pennsylvania
  • Thomas Harig — Independent consultant
  • Lana Harrison — University of Delaware
  • Jan Hill—Jordan — Independent consultant
  • Alex Holsinger — University of Missouri
  • Shane Johnson — University College London
  • Catherine Kaukinen — University of Colorado
  • Kevin Knight — Texas Christian University
  • Deborah Koetzle — John Jay College of Criminal Justice
  • Joseph Kuhns — Independent Consultant
  • Aaron Kupchik — University of Delaware
  • Robin LaSota — Development Services Group, Inc.
  • Daniel Lee — Indiana University of Pennsylvania
  • Shelley Listwan — University of North Carolina
  • Tamara Madensen — University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  • Douglas Marlowe — National Association of Drug Court Professionals
  • David Myers — Indiana University of Pennsylvania
  • Kenneth Novak — University of Missouri — Kansas City
  • Jeremy Olson — Mansfield University of Pennsylvania
  • Brian Ostrom — National Center for State Courts
  • J. Bryan Page — University of Miami
  • Allison Payne — Villanova University
  • Shannon Phaneuf — Indiana University of Pennsylvania
  • Alex Piquero — University of Texas at Dallas
  • Judy Pokorni — Development Services Group, Inc.
  • Ráchael Powers — University of South Florida
  • Travis Pratt — University of Cincinnati
  • Leora Rosen — Independent Consultant
  • Danielle Rudes — George Mason University
  • William Sousa — University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  • Yumi Suzuki — Wichita State University
  • William Terrill — Michigan State University
  • Heather Turner — University of New Hampshire
  • Vince Webb — Sam Houston State University
  • Sandra Jo Wilson — Peabody Research Institute
  • John Wooldredge — University of Cincinnati
  • John Worrall — University of Texas at Dallas
  • Solomon Zhao — Sam Houston State University

How We Handle Conflicts of Interest

Researchers and Reviewers agree to provide notification of any actual or apparent financial or personal conflicts of interest with programs or evaluation studies they are given to review. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, present and past employment connections, financial interests in program materials or implementation, and conducting, authoring or being an advisory member on any part of an evaluation study or article. If a Study Reviewer has a conflict of interest, he or she is required to inform the Lead Researcher in writing before beginning the study review and then may be recused from the review of that program.