 Good morning and welcome to Vermont House Judiciary Committee. It is Wednesday, April 14th, and we are continuing our discussion of H317 and actually relating to a staff of the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics and the Bureau of Racial Justice advisory panel a lot first morning and joining us is Professor Abigail Crocker and good morning. Welcome, Professor Crocker. Good morning. Thank you for having me. I'm trying to just go ahead and start talking. Okay. So, so for the record. My name is Abby Crocker. I'm the Director of Research for the National Center on Restorative Justice, which is a federally funded partnership between the Vermont Law School, the University of Vermont and the University of San Diego. I'm also a research assistant professor of statistics at the University of Vermont, where I co-lead the Justice Research Initiative with my colleague Kathy Fox. So I sort of just want to start by saying thank you for the opportunity to be here and thank you for all the work you've put into this bill so far as a committee, as well as the work that our DAP has done here. It's a tremendous amount of work, and it's awesome. And there's still more to go. So thank you for the past and for the work going forward. I'm particularly excited about this bill because of it. It's actually the start of a conversation for true data driven change, which is what we need in Vermont and with true data driven change. What that means is, you know, we can use data to truly understand the scope of issues, identify and target interventions to address them and then measure the outcomes. And so, you know, I really have been listening to these conversations sort of excitedly because I see that as a real possibility here. And one of the things that I really want to commend the group on is, you know, it's hard. Like, if it was easy and everything was like switch, you know, just switch up, you know, flip a switch. We'd be doing it already, but we're not there. So I really am excited to hear how determined you are in these conversations and in your discussions, as well as this sort of can do attitude, we know it's hard, you know, we know we got to get there but how do we do it. So, you know, really looking towards focusing moving forward. So with that in mind, I'd like to comment on three things the data collection, data analysis, and then scope of the entities, in case it's helpful just for your decision making process. So, I'll start with data collection. So I think we've also heard a lot of data collection is going to be the hardest part. And you know what do we mean by the hardest part what is that exactly mean. So there are five things I think we should consider with data collection or I would recommend that you consider. The first is access to the data. So, let's say somebody is going to collect data right now and they say, Okay, I'm going to go down to Department X and get the data. The data aren't just sitting there like waiting for you, you'll have to go in and talk to somebody and they'll have to open you know their system and show you their data show you what they have it might be an Excel spreadsheets it might be behind, you know, some firewall somewhere but it'll be in lots of different places. So, access to that data is going to be influenced by a couple things, it's going to be influenced by that person's willingness to work with you. It's going to be, it's going to be influenced by the capacity that the department has to work to get that data. And then, if there's any logistical issues that go with actually accessing the data like do they need to pay a third party vendor to get that. And what I think is important here to actually work around that is this is where sort of the authority to do this work comes in like who has the authority to go in, recognize the issues, understand where there's a difference between a real obstacle versus a lack of willingness to collaborate. And then what's the solution to get over there. So, I would recommend you consider at this stage, involving sort of that authority person, who's the one who can come in from the beginning. Work with the person pulling the data out and the department to make sure that you know it's a priority balancing the needs of the department understanding if there is a need that we need to troubleshoot what is it and how do we move it forward and sort of engaging in that early means you can move that process forward and everybody understands it versus waiting for it to become a problem, reporting out and then trying to find a solution so sort of that proactive authority in terms of navigating those issues. The next is the data are going to be messy. And that's fine. That's the nature of the beast with operations data like we're used to that. When data are collected to drive operations and systems, you work around it, it's like an Excel database maybe there's a memo field and you put a lot of stuff in there everything's not perfectly collected for research. There'll be inconsistent definitions there'll be gaps. That's totally fine. You know, work with it and build in a quality improvement process as part of this system, like recognize that there's going to be gaps recognize there's going to be inconsistencies. Don't let it stop you, but recognize you just need to build in this quality improvement process. And that's great and that's a way that systems themselves can start improving and getting consistency across definitions and filling gaps. The third is about bringing data sets together. So, one data set might exist in corrections another data set might exist in children and families another data set might exist in law enforcement. And we want those data sets to talk to each other. And this is really important, because I think this is how we actually address upstream causes and downstream effects of interventions it's how we can measure and identify where if we make a change in one point of the system. Where does it impact, how does it, how do we see it how do we see that translating into outcomes across the system. Bringing data systems together is doable, even though we don't have a common identifier across all the systems. There's a lot of things that we can see bringing data systems together. Sometimes it's, it is a unique, you know, it's a unique charge or incident or crime that you see across different areas versus, you know, we're also very fortunate to live in Vermont, but it's pretty small so we have a high success rate with probabilistic matching, which is just names, names, dates of birth and town will get you really far in Vermont. And, yes, it does require a little bit of like rolling up your sleeves and doing it manually, but it's worth it. So, bringing those data systems together is huge. It requires skill to do that though like it's not just anybody can go in and do it. So you just have to make sure that you've got people who can and want to do it. With that comes sort of number four, the data security and confidentiality. All of this is easier said than done. So, if I walked into, you know, if I walked into corrections today and said give me a list of everybody and I want to go and match them to Medicaid. It would be a lot of work to actually do that like technically it wouldn't be hard if I could walk in and just grab the data sets, but navigating the systems to get to that point would be so that's where we really need to think about that data security and confidentiality. So, who can see identifiers at what point. That's going to dictate who can bring the data sets together and where do they go and each department and each sort of data set has different expectations around this and some of those are embedded in sort of internal culture and some of those are embedded in like legalities around that data set. So, sometimes if you want to bring a data set together, you have to physically go to that department, sit there, merge the data sets together, and then strip it of identifiers and then bring it off site. Sometimes, you're not allowed to do that and you have to ask the department to do to do that matching for you, you know, that's an added complication. So, when you're thinking about legislation about how you can actually support this thinking about who can see data at what level and who does the matching and bringing data sets together is really important. And also thinking about that data security so that's like just about who sees things and you know confidentiality and but at the same time it's about having an IT system that can actually maintain that data so you know you've got you know it's one thing if somebody like emails me a file and I put it on my laptop here like I don't want that like that's bad and but if somebody actually you know sends a file to you via secure transfer and you can download onto a like really robust secure server your ability to actually see and deal with protected data goes way up. So, you know, thinking about, you know, how does a secure transfer and a secure server system, allow, allow an entity to do more with more identified data versus having to work strictly with the identified data and relying on the departments to do everything so that will add to capacity and what sort of an entity can do. And sort of what you can and can't do in this sort of movement of data and seeing things really is all dictated by data use agreements and right now the way that data use agreements work or you have an entity like a group like my like research people who who want to work with the state and want to use the administrative data to move things forward. All of the data use agreements are sort of one offs and project based. They all take years to put into place so like we have data sharing agreements or have had in the past with different entities like us in corrections us in the agency of education us down and the Department of Health. Each of them are independent of each other. They each have their own guidance and governance procedures and, and they don't talk to each other so like even though I might have the education data for one project and have the corrections data for another project, can't bring them together. And I don't know the pathway to actually bring them together. So when you're thinking about a data use agreement. You're thinking about how you could actually be more expansive. So instead of it being sort of a one off between like just this project for just this thing. Perhaps consider having it be between like a master agreement between an agency and an organization or the state and an organization and then the level of detail really is at the nuanced level of, you know, if we want to talk about sensitive information, what do we need to be really clear about what do we need to address in this sort of data use agreement so would love to see getting to a point of sort of a master data agreement where we truly can minimize the amount of time we spend on these agreements as well as maximize the use of these data sets. So those are sort of five key things I would say think about with the data collection process. With the data collection processes we know that it's complicated, we know that it's cumbersome, we know that you need sort of that authority and that partner who can work with you throughout it to navigate all of those issues around data security who's going to manage the, the data use agreements and really facilitate moving that forward. I mean, that's a lot of work. But the good news is it's sort of one and done, like once you invest in it and you really really invest in moving it forward. It gets easier over time, and then it starts to flow. So once you've actually worked through that system you now have a system, and you can start getting data flowing to start doing the analysis so when you get to that point and you hand it off to sort of now it's time to do the analysis, you know, this is where like a pause I see Martin's hand is up. Yeah, I just wanted to catch you before you moved on to data analysis. If you're done with data collection I do have a couple questions and thank you Abby for being here. The, the issue that I've been struggling with or we've been struggling with among the issues is something you've identified and really explained very well and I really appreciate that. And that is the point of authority, the who has the authority to make sure that all these various entities are cooperating. And so, I guess that one question I have and it's a fairly broad question I'm not expecting you to necessarily have an answer is, is that the kind of authority that can be placed in an entity such as UVM. I mean, can it be placed with the department that. All right, we have given this department or this entity at UVM the authority to get this data from the courts from the state's attorneys from the administration. So, so, is that even something that is done or as possible. Yeah, I think that the, it's a good question thank you and I think that the, the answer is like well it depends, you know it depends on the details. And I think that's where sort of the details come in is, suppose you did say, we want UVM to do this, we have written it in off, there you go, you're going to do this. But what if I show up and somebody doesn't, or, you know who holds them accountable, I, you know who do I go to to then say, can you help me with this, or what if we show up and somebody says, you know I really want to help you with this, but I have a thousand other things on my plate right now where is this in the priority how who tells me where this sits on my own priority. And then the other is, what if funds are needed to actually do something different within a department you know, we can access that data but the way we access it is we pay this third party person and they do a download for us, and then we get this. Or that's going to be a custom report and we need to do this and so we're going to need $3,000 like, I think so it's like there's a technical capability and then the, like sort of power to do it. And then also that idea around that that master sort of data sharing agreement which would be. But the, the big thing is like, who do we go to if it's not working and like who helps us troubleshoot. And that's, that's the, that's the question mark is, is that person and I don't think that's within UVM I think that's somewhere else. Right and that that is what. Yeah, and it's kind of interesting because I really have thought and one of the, I know that our DAP has a list that they've actually presented to us here's all the different options. Starting out, I really thought that the agency of digital services and specifically the chief data officer that that made a lot of sense but that isn't even necessary I mean it could be the best place. But again, they only have so much authority, they don't necessarily have the authority they don't over the courts and their data they don't. They don't have the authority if any over the state's attorneys and these are two entities that really need to provide that data. Yeah, they're, you know, the legislature works with the executive branch as far as the budget for, you know, so that obviously there is some, some authority over states as much, but so the concept of an independent agency, you know, and I was considering UVM as perhaps an independent, you know, could be deemed independent has that trouble like you've just identified. But I mean do you have any input as far as it's something like the agency of digital services or whether that's a good place for, for the data collection component of what we're talking about where that should be or do you have any other ideas of where that authority could rest. Yeah, and I think there's I actually so like maybe and, and I think it's like sort of these issues to consider, and then, you know, a broader conversation about who what when and where. And I think, you know, the big thing for me is it's a partnership amongst multiple entities, and you know agency of digital digital services will be a key component because you know they also, you know what I've, I've signed different sort of data sharing contracts they manage a lot of that transfer process and monitor that so like they'd be a big part of it. The, I could envision it being sort of a multiple roles kind of thing like you need the, you need somebody who can go in, build and understand a data set. And then, and you know like maybe somebody, maybe somebody who would do an analysis would be part of that conversation, but it's going to be the departments themselves and the agencies themselves who actually identify the data. But then it's whoever can give the power to the department to troubleshoot as needed. And I guess I might ask someone there, who would that be like, what is it that what is it that drives your priority list like, what is it like if you need help moving a stubborn person, or an obstacle like, you know, a new data system or in and I don't want to say new data system because those are expensive and I don't think they're necessary for research or policy decision making they're good for operations, but if somebody needs that help, who helps them through it. And I think that's, that's, that's I don't know like I know if I, if I showed up somewhere by myself, I might get a different reaction than if I showed up somewhere with one of you, you know, and that would change the priority kind of thing and I, and I think that's, you know, who's that entity or person that can be that I don't, I don't have an answer right now. So, let me ask just one other follow up question and then I know that others have questions. So the master data agreement. Is that something that could be put into legislation not necessarily, you know, the whole master agreement but hitting on a lot of those points that might be needed for such an agreement. I mean, is that something that's could be legislated, or how much could that be legislated. I think so, and I would love to see that legislated. And I think that that would get the ball rolling to then put the details in place at a more granular level. So this is, so this is, I'm sorry, so this is our data collection operation in wherever that authority is, and here's actually the some of the details at least for how that data is going to transfer among these agencies in other words what would be in the master agreement, is that exactly. All right, thanks. I'm sure I'll have some more questions but I appreciate that. Barbara. Hi, Abby, very nice to meet you. I also have some questions related to gathering the data and it must say from my own experience of trying to get data, including this week. I can relate to everything you're saying, and I got pushed back when I did a meeting with my intern. So I was thinking who can I bring with me that could get data. So, some of my questions are obviously there's a confidentiality agreement that gets signed so there's a workaround for that. I used to go to the Burlington opioid task force. And they had people come in, I can't remember if it was Massachusetts or Connecticut, and they were collecting data between departments in a way that has been impossible to do here. And offered to provide guidance and I remember following up with them. I don't know if you know, because there are some states that are doing this pretty well right now right. And there's, you know, and everybody, everybody has their own issues like everybody has their own systems, everybody has their own history and everybody has their own capacity, but there are models out there and there's not in a perfect one for us to copy but, you know, there's legislation in Maine that says, you know, sort of like what Representative Alon was talking about like an overarching, you know, legislation that says do all of these things and then their systems. There are systems that are bringing this together there's also I can't remember the name of it off the top of my head but there's a whole organization devoted to exactly this, like, supporting people navigating the logistics of bringing data together because I really think that's what this is is a logistics issue, not so not so much a data issue it's a logistics issue. It's a but it's also it seems either a fear issue or like I don't know. I mean I was trying to get data from DMV. And it's hard to have them understand. I'm not trying to find fault with them I'm trying to see how many people take advantage of a law that we have. But there's a lot of kind of resistance and fear and I don't know how to put people at ease because again sometimes when you collect data. It does point to systems that are not, you know quality improvement. And it's the back. It's sort of when it doesn't work when you're a legislator because it's like, oh my gosh they're going to want to take our funding away or something. And in this case it's paper files it's not even online. So, one of the things I'm wondering because so many different departments that we've worked with right now are buying computer systems, not for the data but for operations as you say. And one of the things that seems frustrating is afterwards it's like, oh but our system doesn't talk to that system. And so my hope was that we could sort of mandate something when people buy it that makes it more like hey everybody's going to know all of these systems will speak the universal it language of blank and I don't know if there's any advice that you could give us in terms of questions we should be asking our main businesses that we work with government to say, does your system have blah blah blah so that we can make sure we're not investing in something that we could have invested in that would have made it 10 times easier. And, you know, it's a good question and it touches upon a couple different things. And I'll address first the, the issue you raised about sort of sensitivity with sharing data, and I want to respect that is very real, like, if somebody came and took my laptop right now I'd be like, I got to clean this up first You know, it's like, it's like pulling the curtain back and at the same time, I think, you know, you know, I think some of it is is around like, are you going to take this out of context, and you don't understand how we use these fields I need to explain that to you And, and, you know, there's a balance between that like as a as a data person, you know, pulling data systems together going through it understanding there's a local context and interpretation that translates all context and field. But there's also that very true reality of, we use this field this way. So, you know, I think what's important is when you're pulling together this data system is to include the current data users as as partners, you know, I want to hear what people have to say about their data. I want to hear the caveats I want to hear how you use it so we don't misinterpret it because I think that that drives some of that tendency is like, you're going to misinterpret this. You know, you're going to take out of context and, you know, how do we, how do we, how do we combat that or push back on that. And then the other part you mentioned about sort of data systems and you know, for operations, it would be awesome to have a great system where they could flow together that would be great. It's very expensive, it will take decades to get there. But we can be doing a lot more now, as people are buying systems individually and maybe they don't talk to each other real time for operations, but things to consider, I would think would be how did the data get out of the system. Oftentimes we know how they get into the system, and you can get one record at a time, but how it gets out of the system and what is the unique identifier used at each level of analysis at each level of export, because that's the thing you could then potentially bring together. So if everybody had a different system that's fine but you could all get it out by hitting export, and your, your ID looks like this your ID looks like this you could pretty go to, you know, just somewhere else and bring those systems together that way so I'd really focus on the how do you export data from that system. That's great. And it's hard to know. Again, like, I want data. It's not available and people are busy they're like, Oh, we don't have time to go count the data. It's like, Okay, I'd be happy to come in and do it, you know. I don't know privacy privacy, and it's sort of like, Okay, who, and I think you're right it's got to be in the legislation like, even if there is privacy and I'm not talking about HIPAA I'm talking about driver privacy. What ask, who do we give the permission to, and as you said, who do you go to to, because if we don't pick the right person to go to we're not going to be any better. You know what I mean, like I don't know if we're going to be better off and. Yeah. So it might be good to, like, if you have examples of ones that have worked really well, what we can embed in in our bills when we're trying to collect data which we're always trying to do, and people start wringing their hands because it's so much work don't make us do it you know you know how much work this is going to be and it's. I don't know how much work it's going to be but I feel like okay, we're smaller than other states that are doing it. So, I just again if there's boilerplate stuff, or a place to reference for us to be able to push. And thank you for your great explanations. Thank you. Martin. Yeah, a couple follow up questions, and they may be a little bit overlapping what I've already asked but I just want to make sure I understand this. So, what is your, what is your view of. Well, let me put this out how important is it to have somebody perhaps within the system in the administration versus independent individual for the data collection component of it because what I'm, I feel I heard from you is that there's real advantages to having somebody who may have closer ability to manage the purse strings with respect to the data collection but I want to put words in your mouth but I'm just trying to understand because there's this push as far as independence. versus actually getting something done because of the authority and the ability to fund. And I wonder if you can comment on that any further, in particular with respect to your experience in these kinds of situations. So, so where I think independence is really important and I'll highlight in a few minutes is around the analysis. I less I don't feel that as much with the data collection. So, the data collection itself is embedded and you know we were all working in systems right now how do we, who knows those data the best, how can we pull it out and how can we give it to someone to do something with. You know, and that's sort of the issue that representative Rachel sin was talking about like everybody's asking for it is overwhelming to be asked for the same thing 15 different times when you've got a full to do list so how do we get it to somebody who can then be that that independent trusted entity, and ask them the logistics of getting there. I think that's where I don't I don't necessarily think the data collection part needs to be independent, I think you need the authority to get somebody to, to mandate that it happens and I don't mandate this wrong word because I think it's a balance between mandate and collaboration like people who work with these systems are the ones who are going to really make this fly or not. But then have somebody who sits in the independent side, be part of that data collection conversation, just to make sure we get the right data that's going to be useful, because if we get data that's not useful. You know when you go through all this process and it comes over here and you're like, I can't do anything with it so I think that's like, it needs to be a conversation so that's like that idea sort of a partnership where there's people who play different roles but they work together. You know, strengthening what their roles are. I think that would be a great thing to pursue and the roles I'd be thinking about would be like the authority to make it happen. The people with the expertise inside the system who know these systems right now and how can they be part of it to make sure that the actual logistics of the day to day of getting this pulled up and moved over happen. The authority person has to be the one that's like, make sure it's happening, avoid the troubleshooting navigate the logistics but then it goes over to sort of the independent piece. And that's where I think that's really important as an analysis component. Great, thank you. Great, this is really, really helpful and way out of my league so it's really appreciate your your expertise and helping us. And just through, because it is so so important to, to not only this committee but really, really the entire state. Looking for not seeing other hands at this time. I'm going to need to hop off in about five minutes and vice chairman Tom bird it will, will take over and then we'll have a break at around 10. So, so please continue I'm not seeing any other hands at this point. Sorry, and, and thank you for listening to me I could talk about this for hours I don't mean to drone on, but I'll go to the next section on data analysis. So again so now let's say we've just done all that hard work invested all that time, gotten through the rough part of getting the data now it's to somebody else. And this is actually where the fun part starts and I'd say there are five things here as well that I think we should consider. The first is handing it to someone in an entity that is really skilled in data analysis you need that rigorous high quality multivariate approach of people who have that methodological experience, who know what's appropriate when I want to emphasize the importance of a multivariate approach, meaning you're not looking at just the relationship between two things, you want to look at the relationship between two things, and all the potential factors that could influence that you also want to be able to look at things over time, and really tease out what what sort of the causal factor is and in order to do that you need sort of that that that skill set which comes with a group that has sort of that rigorous approach. But grounded it in sort of the content piece as well, you know just being a strong mathematician or something like that isn't super useful it's a skill but you need to be with people who know what we're talking about. So I think that sort of group or entity that has you know a combination of skills, you know, multiple different approaches to analysis things are that are statistics and multivariate analyses as well as qualitative analyses and survey collection and knows how to balance those things, but also has that that skill set to, to put forth a rigorous analysis. I also really recommend embedding community stakeholders in the conversation so you might have a team of people who can actually do this an entity that can move this forward, but any analysis is going to be stronger by people who are going to use the information or people who drive the information so embedding a community stakeholder approach to work is part of this would be great. The third thing really touches upon that concept of independence. And this is where I think independence is really important in that if these data get handed off to somebody else like independent entity who has these skills who works with community stakeholders. That independence piece means we can do an objective analysis and nobody's going to stop us from publishing the results. It's not going to be used to advocate for one person's opinion versus another. This is true objective information and that true objective information is truly what's needed to drive to drive change and evaluate change so that idea of independence. Really I think speaks to that idea of being true to what the data say. You really need to trust sort of the rigor, because in order for it to be able to truly have the data speak for themselves, you need to be able to trust that it was done well and done right. And that's where I think you have to, to pick, you know, to to consider an entity that is doing things well and doing things right is core and one of the, the strengths of this I think is in a transparency process, as well as in a peer review system. So, you know, a highlight of working at you know, there are a lot of pros and cons with working with sort of a higher ed system, but one of the things is this concept of a peer review like, you know, what you do is transparent so everybody can look at it and see it and if you did something wrong, I want to know so we can fix it not I don't want you to know because then I'll feel embarrassed like you know really having that transparency and that concept of peer review and independence I think is really key here, because it means we'll be able to really trust the results and I think everybody trust the results when when we all have that expectation and there are some systems that are set up for that and others that aren't. So I think that independence is key. The other thing to consider is how do you report the findings how do you do it in a way that is that people will find useful like you know this is a lot of complicated stuff and you can get easily bogged down in the weeds like. And so you really want to be able to communicate findings in a way that are useful to different audiences and and thinking about that reporting mechanism, and also how we set up a system for, you know, reporting an outcome doing something about it, and then following up to see what the impact of that was so really not just a sort of one and done kind of thing, but a long term sort of follow up because oftentimes we make change and then we sort of wash our hands of it and move on but this would be like let's make sure we don't want to drive an outcome. Let's see if we impacted that outcome and continue to do it over time. If we didn't, we need to change course, and make sure at the same time that something didn't go awry, like if we made have wanted to change this outcome, but accidentally we screwed up this like you got to sort of have those balance measures that you're looking at so I think that's really important as sort of that reporting and longitudinal communication process. And finally when we're thinking about data analysis thinking about data governance, so that means who owns these data and what can be done with them and that's a tricky conversation because like, think about this in theory. In theory we've done all this great work to get this data collected it's been transferred to some independent entity. Now we have it. And it falls from like Idaho and says I hear you have this great data set can I use it. What's the answer, like, who can use these data for what and when. And, you know, I think it's, you know, that's those are the kinds of things to be thinking about. When we think about all of these things you know I don't I don't think we have the answers to all of these things and or, you know there's lots of different directions that can be that we can go with this analysis piece. But when we start thinking and I'm going to move to sort of my third last section here in terms of, you know what is the scope and the vision for this bureau. So we know there's things to think about with collection we know there's things to think about with analysis but what about the entities themselves. So the first thing I'd like to say is, you know, this is such a great opportunity, and it's one where don't let perfection be the enemy of good, like we want to, we want this, but let's maybe start here have some wins like build and go for it so like start small add to it and have that template to do that so pick a project, make it work go through the system, learn from that, add to it. That will help move things forward in a way that feels productive and sets you up for a strong foundation. The next thing to think about is, I know that there's been conversations around, you know, what if other areas of Vermont want to do something like this you know thinking about this, this is a big system that you're setting up. And my, the thing I would think about is, you know, is making the scope broad enough that you're not going to end up someday with like a Bureau of justice to you know racial disparity statistics and a Bureau of opioid crisis a Bureau of this a Bureau of that where you are repeating the same infrastructure, based on different content domains, and another way to consider approaching it is to say you know we're creating this this entity this this data collection data analysis, partnership that we do over time. You know, it does, and that's an awesome thing to think about, but embed the scope of it with the primary aim of addressing racial disparities, because that means racial disparities are truly embedded in everything we do. They don't get pushed to the side as oh they're doing that over there in the Bureau of racial disparities like we're doing opioids stuff over here, you're doing racial stuff over there. It doesn't change it to make it a broader scope, but embed the primary aim of racial disparities and everything you do. It's a way to highlight it across everything. And embedding it everywhere and that's sort of where I think the national conversation is going in terms of addressing racial disparities through data is make it a priority make it the grounding factor in everything you do. And to the side as that's that small project, it's everything so it's just a different way of thinking about it where, you know, it's, it's the focus and the group, you know the thing that got us where we are here, and a way to make sure it truly is impactful everywhere. So, sort of in conclusion, I would say, you know where we take this today is is is exciting and you know if we think about where you want to be five years from now you could be anywhere on a spectrum you could be like, oh shoot it didn't work. We've got lost in the logistics that didn't happen to somewhere like, you know we have three measures we track over time and some flat reports to maybe further along the spectrum where you have a true interdisciplinary team of, you know, doing cross sector data analysis to drive to the next stage. And to you know and that's, that's a that's a lofty vision but I actually think we can get there. And I think you know in Vermont, we are, we have the right motivations across the board to get there and. And so I commend the work that you're doing and I really appreciate it and if I can be helpful in any part of the process I'm happy to. And I'm done talking sorry. Martin question. Yeah, I just want to thank you very much Abby and you've given us a lot I think to ponder think about. I don't have a specific question it's just that I want to probably give the heads up that we will probably be. It's probably not the last time we're going to need to hear from you as we are navigating this because setting up the Bureau I mean we're already heading into some headwinds as far as the structure we understand the data we need I think we've done well at that. And this the suggestion of the Bureau, the way it is in the bill 317 was really a conversation starter and something to focus on but, but we're really looking at how best to put this into place and so they're really, this may be an iterative process is what I'm saying so, but I really appreciate the testimony today. Thank you, thank you for the opportunity. Okay, great. Thank you. We have on our agenda we have of course the order on there, and I had a suggestion to maybe bring Susanna Susanna up next. But first I'm going to ask if, if David, or, or Judge Greerson or Karen had a time constraint where they needed to go first representative I am scheduled in Senate Judiciary at 1015. But I'm, you know, happy to work around it and try to try to jump back and forth if needed. Well, why don't you go next and David because we're going to be taking our break about 10 o'clock anyway. And then of course we'll be back at 1015 and you would be gone so so why don't we go go and order and and have you go next. Thank you. Thank you representative. If I can just interrupt for a second. Sure. I've got to be in house corrections at 10. Okay, Senate Judiciary at 1115. So what I could do is, when you break it 10 I'll go to house corrections I don't think I'll be long there and I'll try to join back in before my 1115 with Senate judiciary. Okay, great. Thank you. All right. David. Thank you representative and thanks everybody. Appreciate the accommodation here at the. I'll be pretty brief so I don't think that I'm going to push the time at all here. You know this. We certainly turned general's office certainly support the concept behind this bill and we understand there's work to be done to iron it out and make it flesh it out into a final proposal. We were a man we are this this proposal is really driven by and coming from the racial disparities panel and the work that it's done. The studies it's done and the, you know, really intensive involved conversations that it's had, and we are one member of that panel. We supported the proposal as it came, you know, both of the studies that are sorry both of the reports that have come out we were signatories to we helped draft the report that ultimately resulted in this bill. Because of that, however, because we are one member of a panel. And I think that we help, we are involved in and helped produce the work product for. I don't want to actually want to spend too much time speaking independently because on things like this I really think it's appropriate for the chair of the panel to be the voice of the panel. And I don't want to privilege our voice above the panel's voice as a whole. I will defer today, mostly to chair a tonus read and long goes testimony. I thought he did a good job of summarizing some of the panel discussions as the committee remembers, even in the panel there is not unanimity about where exactly or how exactly this should be structured. The chair testified that the panel is really looking at this through a lens of five different issues that are at five different priorities that all need to be balanced and hopefully achieved. Those are independence, trust in the results, competence, sufficient authority and sufficient financial resources. And if those things can be achieved in some balance and held with some equal priority. I think the panel would feel that the aims of this bureau will be achieved in ways that are fair and accurate and serve the Vermont as we would like it to be served. I also would love, you know, I, we are happy to be helpful in other ways, but in terms of some of these questions that that are that are primarily in some ways political in terms of how how and where this gets placed and how we achieve these aims we we do defer to the panel as a whole and I think the discussion they had was an important one and those priorities are a good summary of what needs to be balanced. I cannot bring the sort of extraordinary expertise that the professor just brought in terms of the real details and input and I think that of how data gets collected and I think that expertise like that is going to be essential to doing a good job on this. And the professor, I hope and assume will be a part of this process that goes forward and others like her. But that's that's really the summary of my testimony just reiterating some of the key points from the chairs testimony. We are one member of the panel and we do support the work product is put it has put forward and support the conclusions of its discussions which we were a part of. Great, thank you. Any, any questions for David. Thank you, David. Thank you. Judges are enough time. I think so, I think I can be as brief as can be as brief as as David. I hope anyway, for the record Brian Greerson chief superior judge, but the committee should also be aware of, as David said I was also am am also a member of our debt and was involved in the discussions, relating to the report certainly relating to this bill. So, in one sense I'm before the committee wearing two hats. And for that reason, I will just say to the committee that with respect to the data portion of this bill or the collection of data. I think the committee would be fair and looking at the data that's being requested as really involving various decision points along the process, whether it's juvenile or criminal, where the decisions are made and therefore that's those areas are identified as as areas where we want to collect the data. Having said that I think what you're going to find is one of the real question is data that's being requested in there because certainly not all entities have have that data and so it will be part of the process will be to determine who actually has the data that is called before by this bill and I know it's early in the discussion but I wanted to alert the committee to that. There is, there's one section that I also want to bring to the committee's attention because I brought it to the attention of our depth. And for it, it's appears in both the under the juvenile section, juvenile data section criminal law but by way of example page six of the bill is introduced. Down online. Beginning at line eight paragraph number 10 says data regarding sanctions and disciplinary actions against juvenile justice system participants, including law enforcement officers prosecutors Defense Council judges do see and DCF officers. There's a discussion during the certainly during the ARDAT meetings, and what I'm sure that the committee members are aware of that. A lot of that type of information specifically is governed by other rules and procedures statutes. That relates to union information and for instance, with specific regard to the judicial disciplinary actions those are conducted through the judicial conduct board, and to a great extent they are confidential. So, at some point in this process, it will require a further discussion of what information can be made available under the existing rules. The only other point I would make with respect to the placement of this Bureau. I would offer my the thoughts that I expressed during the ARDAT meetings. And that was that I thought the appropriate place was within the Office of Executive Director of Equity. That was a personal opinion that I expressed during the course of the ARDAT proceedings. And since then, obviously the judiciary much like Mr. Chair was indicating does not take a position. And with respect to the bill that's before this committee, because it truly is a policy decision on a part of the legislature. Having having said that, it would seem that the appropriate place for this new Bureau would be within the Susanna Davis's office whether or not that office should continue as part of the administration or independent I think is really the question that the committee is going to have to come to grips with. So, having said that I will tell you that the judiciary does not take a position, a formal position on whether the bill as proposed should be adopted or some other form but those are certainly issues that the committee will have to wrestle with. And that represented for that is essentially what what I can offer on this bill. Any questions for Judge Greerson. And I would expect the committee would understand the position that judiciary is in with respect to the placement of the Bureau. If it is adopted. Okay, since there's no questions, why don't we go to our break and meet back up at 10.