April 25-26, 2003
Adam’s Mark Hotel
Denver, Colorado

Attending: Bob Bursik, Todd Clear, Frank Cullen, Finn Esbensen, Chris Eskridge, Rosemary Gartner, Lynn Goodstein, Sarah Hall, Candace Kruttschnitt, John Laub, Henry Pontell, Rick Rosenfeld, Larry Sherman, Sally Simpson, Chris Uggen

Meeting called to order at 3:04 by President John Laub.

1. Denver Meeting Report (Sally Simpson).

a. Sally Simpson distributed the program committee report and presented results of a survey of panel chairs from the 2002 meeting. The survey, conducted in November and December of 2002, had a response rate of 49.6 percent. Absenteeism rates (“no-shows”), attendance levels, and attitudes about the new meeting format were discussed. The results showed that presidential panels were better attended than regular sessions, controlling for the time and day of the session. Many respondents made positive comments about the presidential panels (e.g., that presenters and discussants were well-prepared and that full papers were likely to be available), but negative comments about procedural issues (e.g., confusion about the criteria for designating panels as “presidential,” and inadequate room sizes). Based on this feedback, a modified version of the peer-reviewed format was kept for the 2003 meetings, with an effort to resolve procedural and logistical issues and a commitment to further evaluation.

b. ASC President, John Laub, and 2003 Program Chairs, Denise Gottfredson and Sally Simpson, developed a broad-based 85-member program committee and changed the name of peer-reviewed panels from “presidential” to “thematic.” They also reinstated a two-appearance rule for presenters, made arrangements for on-site child-care services, and developed a procedure for evaluating the format of the 2003 meetings (with an evaluation form for each panel placed in each room to be collected at the end of the day). To date, 1254 submissions had been received and 351 sessions scheduled, with additional posters and roundtables to be arranged. On the panel evaluations, the board discussed specific questions to be asked and the logistics of collecting the evaluation forms. On child care, the Board discussed costs to members and possibilities for providing a discounted hourly rate to student members.

2. Executive Director’s Report (Chris Eskridge).

a. Financial Status - Chris Eskridge characterized the financial condition of the ASC as very solid and healthy, but cautioned the Board about expected increases in the costs of publishing Criminology and Public Policy and potentially rising personnel costs in the next two to three years. In addition, the Society lost approximately $13,000 of revenue in 2002 when a library brokerage firm collected subscription fees from libraries but failed to return those funds to the ASC. The Board agreed to provide the missing issues of Criminology to all libraries that had been defrauded. The membership and financial condition of each ASC Division, as detailed in the Executive Director’s report, was also discussed. The financial report on the 2002 Chicago meeting showed that the meeting was well-attended and yielded a profit of $66,600.

b. Online Availability of Journals - The Society also signed a contract with Hein and Company to make all back issues of Criminology and Criminology and Public Policy available online. The ASC already has agreements in place with EBSCO and ProQuest to make these journals available online, but these services have bundled our journals with other products. The Hein and Company agreement allows for individual subscriptions to our journals. The online agreements also require a lag of at least six months so that journal subscription rates will not be adversely affected.

c. Personnel - To improve the benefit compensation available to ASC employees, the Board voted to provide a 20 percent fringe benefit contribution to all those employed at least 80 percent time with ASC.

d. Other Issues – The Board discussed other items in the Executive Director’s Report, including the following: updates of the Policies and Procedures Manual and the ASC Web Page, Ken Adams’ role in organizing the Employment Exchange at the annual meetings, insurance for the 2006 Los Angeles meeting, site visits to Denver and Nashville, site selection for the 2010-2012 meetings, expanding the Society’s international contacts, the Societies of Criminology Key Issues Conference, the ASC’s consultative status within the United Nations’ Economic and Social Council, the Executive Director’s trips to Columbus, expansion of the Criminology and Public Policy mailing list, communications with the ASC Divisions, and future travel plans.

3. ASC Committee Reports.

a. Awards Committees – There was some discussion of the format of the individual award committee reports and the ranking procedures used to determine awardees. The Board encouraged award committee chairs to build some form of interactive discussion among committee members into the selection process. Under one such scenario, for example, individual committee members could first rank all of the candidates and then discuss the finalists in a second stage before reaching a final decision.

3.a.1. Sellin-Glueck Award (submitted by David Farrington) – The Board unanimously accepted the committee recommendation of Jonathan P. Shepherd for the Sellin-Glueck award.

3.a.2. Herbert Bloch Award (submitted by Lynne Goodstein) – The Board discussed the committee recommendation, the very small number of nominations, and the appropriate consideration of nominees who may have a commercial or strictly commercial interest in the Society. The Board voted against awarding the Bloch Award this year, with 1 vote in favor of accepting the committee’s recommendation (and making an award), 8 opposed, 2 abstaining, and 1 recused due to a conflict of interest.

3.a.3. August Vollmer Award (submitted by Jeremy Travis) – The Board unanimously accepted the committee recommendation of Delbert Elliott for the August Vollmer award.

3.a.4. Edwin H. Sutherland Award (submitted by Ron Akers) – The board voted to accept the committee’s recommendation of William Chambliss for the Edwin H. Sutherland Award (with one abstention).

3.a.5. Ruth Shonle Cavan Award (submitted by Mark Warr) – The board voted to accept the committee’s recommendation of Eric Baumer for the Ruth Shonle Cavan Award (with one abstention).

3.a.6. ASC Fellows Awards (submitted by Ray Paternoster) - The committee nominated James Jacobs and Terrie Moffitt as ASC fellows. After reviewing the nominee rankings in the committee report, the Board considered whether nominees in addition to Jacobs and Moffitt should also be named ASC Fellows this year. After some discussion, the Board accepted the committee's recommendation of two Fellows Awards (with one opposed).

3.a.7. Michael J. Hindelang Award (submitted by Tom Bernard) – A total of 11 books have been nominated for the Michael J. Hindelang Award, and the committee recommendation is expected by the end of June.

3.a.8. Presidential Award – The President's Award for Distinguished Contributions to Justice will be given to the Honorable Julian T. Houston. The Board had approved President Laub’s nomination of Judge Houston via email prior to the meeting.

b. Constitution and By-Laws Committee (submitted by Donna Bishop) – The Board considered the committee report, and discussed changing the criteria for the Sellin-Glueck award and the Sutherland Award. The Board decided to make no changes to the criteria for either award at this time.

c. Development Committee – No report was received.

d. Ethical Issues Committee – The ethical guidelines outlined in the committee’s “Statement of Principles” were discussed. The Board noted that we have neither a provision for removing members from the Society, nor the resources to afford insurance that would allow the Society to enforce a formal policy on ethics. After some discussion, the Board suggested that the publications committee and the editors of our two major journals should play a role in articulating at least two of the core principles in the statement: (1) “misleading, false, or deceptive data should never be used in any way;” and, (2) “appropriate credit should be given to others if their work is used in any way.”  The Board expressed appreciation to the committee for its work and referred the charge to the Publications Committee and the two journals. The idea of developing an educational mission for the ethical issues committee was then discussed, with the understanding that the committee could advise the Board and the membership about ethical issues (perhaps in the Criminologist or online). The following motion to amend the charge of the committee was accepted unanimously: “The Ethical Issues Committee develops educational programs, and dialogues among members of the Society regarding ethical issues of concern to criminologists.”

e. Membership Committee (Roger Jarjoura) – There was no news to report from the membership committee.

f. Minority Affairs Committee (submitted by Stephanie Bush-Baskette) – The committee has received approximately 20 Minority Fellowship application packets and is in the process of reviewing the applications.

g. National Policy Committee (submitted by Jeffrey Fagan) – The Board noted the committee’s informational report on the sociology of policy making.

h. Nominations Committee (submitted by Wayne Osgood) – The call for nominations will appear in the next two issues of the Criminologist, with September 1 as the nomination deadline.

i. Student Affairs Committee – (submitted by Ruth Triplett) -- The Board discussed student membership and participation in the annual meetings, noting that students make up approximately one-third of the Society’s membership. A full report is expected in fall.

k. Student Awards Committee (Submitted by Pamela Lattimore) – The committee reported that 10 papers had been received for the Gene Carte award competition and that these were being distributed to committee members in late April.

l. Publications Committee (Chris Eskridge) – The Board discussed the arrangements with vendors (Hein and Company, EBSCO and ProQuest) to provide online access to back issues of our journals.

m. Representatives to other societies -- The Board received an informational report (submitted by Christy Visher), updating the Board on COSSA activities concerning the Bureau of Justice Statistics/National Institute of Justice outsourcing issue.

4. CRIMINOLOGY Report (submitted by Robert Bursik). From April 1, 2002 to March 31, 2003, the journal received 242 submissions (142 new submissions and 100 revisions), a slight decline from the previous year. The average time to decision was 51 days, none longer than 99 days. The journal is highly selective, with a publication rate of 13.3 percent in the most recent volume. Criminology was again ranked first in the world by citation count and sixth in the social sciences/sociology. To facilitate the transition to the new editorship, Raymond Paternoster, and the new managing editor recently visited the Criminology editorial offices. The Board unanimously accepted a motion to provide $26,642 for journal operating expenses.

5. CRIMINOLOGY & PUBLIC POLICY (submitted by Todd Clear). A grant proposal to the National Institute of Justice requesting approximately $116,000 for work on a third volume was recently submitted. The second volume is included as part of the social science citation index. The journal acceptance rate is 32 percent, a decline from the previous year. The journal format is crystallizing, with most issues including 2 to 3 feature articles along with reaction essays discussing the topic, and commentary.

[The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 pm, and continued at 8:30 am Saturday, April 26.]

Attending: Bob Bursik, Todd Clear, Frank Cullen, Finn Esbensen, Chris Eskridge, Rosemary Gartner, Lynn Goodstein, Candace Kruttschnitt, Sarah Hall, John Laub, Henry Pontell, Rick Rosenfeld, Larry Sherman, Chris Uggen

Meeting called to order at 8:30 by President John Laub.

6. ASC Division Reports.

a. Corrections and Sentencing (submitted by Pam Lattimore).

b. Critical Criminology (submitted by Walter DeKeseredy).

c. International Criminology (submitted by Rosemary Barberet). The Board discussed whether ASC-sponsored ambassadors should be required to submit reports on their travel to the meetings of other societies, an issue raised on page 7 of the Division of International Criminology report. In an effort to reach out to a growing international community in our field, the ASC has sent officers (e.g., Vice Presidents) to international societies, sponsored receptions, and set up tables in exhibit halls. The Board suggested ambassadors provide a brief report (e.g., one to two paragraphs) to be published in The Criminologist describing the ASC role and their activities at each meeting. In addition to the goal of advancing knowledge on these trips, the Board thought it beneficial to have an ambassador spend time in face-to-face communication with the leadership of other societies to represent our organization favorably for mutual benefit. To advance the goal of greater exchange among the membership, it was suggested that the ASC could provide information to the membership about avenues for accessing international travel funding (e.g., in the Criminologist). The expertise of the DIC and others in this area could be enormously valuable to the membership. For example, a website might include links to national and international funding sources, or perhaps even university-by-university resources for international travel. The Board will encourage reports from ambassadors in the future, but also ask DIC to assist in educating our members about opportunities for international conference travel. Chris Eskridge and John Laub will discuss these matters and prepare guidelines and a response to the DIC’s concerns about such trips. It was announced that Finn Esbenson will serve as the ASC representative and an organizer for the Societies of Criminology Key Issues Conference to be held in Paris in 2004.

d. People of Color and Crime (submitted by Stephanie Bush-Baskette).

e. Women and Crime (no report was received).

Information Point: Both the Division on People of Color and Crime and the Division on Women and Crime expressed a preference for greater diversity onstage at the Minority Fellowship dance.  Names of several Latino bands in the Denver area were give to Chris Eskridge. The Board discussed this request.  Issues concerning costs, logistics of possibly three groups performing on one stage, timing of the dance event following the Presidential reception, space considerations, as well as other issues were discussed in some detail.  The sense of the Board was that John Laub and Chris Eskridge should explore this further and see what could possibly be done for the Denver meeting.

7. 2004 ASC Committee Appointments (Frank Cullen). President-elect Cullen articulated his goal of crafting committees that are diverse socially and intellectually. The Board discussed the desirability of having the major awards committees chaired by people who have won the award in the past, and the importance of devising a fair ranking system in determining award winners. The Board unanimously accepted a motion approving the committee nominations.

a. 2004 Meetings - The Program Committee will be larger for the 2004 meetings, with the theme of Taking Stock: The Science of Criminology and the Pursuit of Justice. Papers from the Taking Stock panels may be pulled together into a volume. Electronic submission of abstracts, with online submission forms, will be centralized and presorted into areas and topics within those areas. Sarah Hall and Chris Eskridge will discuss the technical issues involved in online submissions, and Melissa Moon is currently researching details. The Board suggested having people designate a first and second area and perhaps a third. The program committee will not be putting all of the papers or panels together, but will be proactively organizing panels in their areas (at least one), serving as panel chairs, and assisting with evaluations of panels. The Board discussed the terms of the “two appearance rule” and its implications for online submission and peer review of submissions. Chris Eskridge and Sarah Hall agreed to check the Calls for Papers to understand the history and evolution of this rule.

b. Peer Review - The Board discussed whether to retain some form of peer review in the submission process, whether longer abstracts that included data and findings should be encouraged, situations in which abstracts may be rejected by organizers and resubmissions encouraged. As long as the procedures are transparent and the criteria are consistent, the Board members saw merit in retaining “thematic” sessions, which require a preview paper on the theme of the session, or “presidential” sessions. The Board also discussed ways of encouraging panels from all Divisions, and encouraging program committee members to be active in soliciting papers and panels, along with ways to incorporate evaluative data from the 2003 meeting in the 2004 program.

c. Saturday Activities - The Board also discussed Saturday activities that would enliven the final day of the meeting. Ideas discussed included a closing Saturday activity, a full day of activities with a few premier events (e.g., a Saturday brunch presidential plenary), shifting the book exhibit from Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday to Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, a later Saturday start-time (e.g., 9 or 10 o’clock), and a closing cocktail party. Chris Eskridge pointed out that we have contracts signed through 2010 that specify that we close the meeting by 1 pm, but noted that the Society may be able to negotiate these terms.

The Board unanimously accepted a motion approving the program committee. Any subsequent changes will be forwarded by President-elect Cullen to the Board as a point of information.

8. Wadsworth Proposal (Chris Eskridge).

The Board considered a proposal by Wadsworth/ITP to establish a memo of understanding with the ASC to identify experts and assist in surveying its membership on crime and criminal justice issues and disseminating this information to the press. The Board thanked Wadsworth for considering such a partnership, but was reluctant to establish a formal endorsement or arrangement between the ASC and a commercial organization in supplying expertise.

9. ASC Media Policies (John Laub).

The Board considered ways to facilitate the access of media representatives to our annual meetings. The Board accepted the following motion (with 1 opposed): “Credentialed media representatives if they so request may receive a program book and name badge at no cost. They will be asked to submit a copy of the published article to the ASC offices.” The Board also discussed contacting the Associated Press local representative approximately one month in advance of the meetings, and the role of the publications committee and our major journal editors in preparing press releases.

10. NRC Rankings (Todd Clear).

As President of the Association of Doctoral Programs in Criminal Justice, Todd Clear reported that the National Research Council decided against ranking criminal justice programs for the upcoming round of reviews. The NRC does not currently envision criminal justice as an arts and science Ph.D., in part because many criminal justice programs are in separate schools or in public policy or education schools, rather than departments within arts and sciences units. The Board expressed concern that criminology may lose resources (within or outside institutions) as long as these programs remain unranked. The Board suggested meeting with representatives of the NRC to determine what steps must be taken to improve our chances in the next round, or drafting a letter based on data about these programs to address the assumptions and rationale for the inclusion of criminology and criminal justice programs in future rankings. One strategy involves working through graduate schools of institutions offering programs in criminology and criminal justice, and Todd noted that he received letters of support from four university presidents.

11. Minority Undergraduate Scholar/Mentor Undergraduate Award Initiative (Todd Clear).

The undergraduate scholar/mentor proposal is expected to cost $136,000 over 4 years, or $34,000 per year. Discussion centered on the best avenue for securing the needed funds. The Board discussed funding the program from operating revenues, raising membership dues, journal subscription rates, meeting registration fees, and voluntary check-off boxes on the membership and meeting forms that would allow for tax deductible contributions. For example, raising the subscription fees for Criminology by $5 to $125 per year (and $145 internationally) would raise approximately $6,000 to help defray the costs of the minority undergraduate awards. Board members from the University of Missouri-St. Louis came forward with a one-time contribution of $20,000 in UMSL criminology endowment funds to the ASC to defray the costs of the program.

The Board voted unanimously to accept the undergraduate awards proposal, subject to final operational details (e.g., the financial aid implications, eligibility criteria, and procedure for evaluating and selecting candidates) to be provided by a special ad-hoc  committee of Orlando Rodriguez, Ron Huff, Todd Clear, Stephanie Bush-Baskette, and Lynne Goodstein. The committee will report to the Board by email for final approval. The Board also made special note of the generous UMSL contribution.

12. BJS/NIJ Outsourcing Update (John Laub).

The board discussed the issue of the outsourcing of personnel from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Institute of Justice. The proposal would eliminate a substantial proportion of employees at these agencies.

13. ASC Award Policies and Procedures (John Laub/Chris Eskridge).

a. The Board voted unanimously to rescind the ASC policy that “One person is not to be given two (2) major awards in any given year.”

b. The Board voted unanimously to rescind the ASC Policy that “Nominees for any society office are ineligible to receive any Society award during the pendency of the election.”

c. The Board also discussed the varying number of letters received for nominees for varying awards, but elected not to change current policy at this time.

14. Nashville Site Visit and Program Report (Frank Cullen/Chris Eskridge).
Chris Eskridge, Melissa Moon, and Bonnie Fisher visited the Nashville convention center and Renaissance Hotel. Chris Eskridge was commended for his efforts in securing these arrangements.

15. Next Meetings of the ASC Board.

a) Tuesday, November 18, 3:00 pm (Adam’s Mark Hotel, Denver).
b) Saturday, November 22, Noon (Adam’s Mark Hotel, Denver).
c) Friday, April 16, 2004 (Nashville).
d) Saturday, April 17, 2004 (Nashville).

16. New Business – Sellin-Gluek Award Criteria.

The Sellin-Glueck award criteria specify that the award be “given to those who reside outside of North America for their contributions to international criminology.” The Board noted that the spirit of the award is to honor work that is not widely recognized in the United States. The Board unanimously accepted a motion to change the criteria to specify that the award be “given to those who reside outside of the United States for their contributions to international criminology.” Changes to award criteria are bylaws, requiring two votes by the Board. A second vote will be taken at the next meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 3:00.