No result found
Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice;
Sentences in Vermont are indeterminate and have both a minimum and a maximum term imposed by the court. Vermont does not have sentencing guidelines or a sentencing commission. Vermont's incarcerated population tripled between 1990 and 2007; the state credits their 2007 Justice Reinvestment Act for reversing (or at least leveling off) this trend. Some form of conditional release has existed in Vermont since 1777 when the power to grant pardons was vested in the governor by the state constitution. In 1898, the legislature gave the Board of Prison Commissioners the power to grant conditional pardons formerly held only by the governor; three years later, the law was declared unconstitutional. It appears that the governor held the power to grant conditional release until 1971, when the Vermont Parole Board was established.
In 2014, the Vermont legislature passed a bill requiring all Vermont law enforcement agencies to collect traffic stop data so as to make it possible to identify and track any racial disparities in policing. The first round of data became available in 2016, and "Driving While Black and Brown in Vermont" (Seguino and Brooks 2017), an analysis of that data wasreleased in January 2017.The report has generated wide-ranging conversations about the role of race in policing. Several Vermont law enforcement agencies have responded by taking the initiative to invest in training to address potential implicit bias in policing and to improve the quality of their data. At the same time, there have been questions raised by some observers about the quality of the data and methodology used in the 2017 study, and a concern that the study does notaccount for the context of traffic stops that may justify the racial disparities found in the original report.In this brief, we address these questions and report results from a logistic regression analysis that accounts for other factors beyond race that may influence the probability of being searched and of contraband being found. We also present new results of an analysis of race and the types of contraband found in 2016 Vermont State Police vehicle searches.
University of Vermont;
Vermont is perceived to be a political outlier in the United States. It was the first state to outlaw slavery in 1777. And in our more recent history, Vermont was one of the first states to legalize civil unions and to push (unsuccessfully) for a single payer health care system. When it comes to race relations, it is assume d that Vermont is equally liberal and as result, racial bias towards people who are Black and Hispanic, evident in other parts of the country, should largely be absent here. This paper investigates that assumption. In particular, the authors analyze police traffic stop data to assess the extent, if any, of racial disparities in policing. This task is made possible by legislation passed in the Vermont House that required police departments to begin to collect traffic stop data by race as of September 2014.
A cross-sector coalition in Vermont is working together to make progress on critical statewide issues: childhood hunger and nutrition, education, obesity and wellness, farm viability and environmental quality. Sixty statewide partners are collaborating to understand these complex challenges and advance solutions together—much faster than they could alone.
For more than a century, Vermont has operated a viable and popular voucher system in 90 towns across the state. During the 1998-99 school year, the state paid tuition for 6,505 students in kindergarten through 12th grade to attend public and private schools. Families chose from a large pool of public schools and more than 83 independent schools including such well-known academies as Phillips Exeter and Holderness. As more attention is given to vouchers in mainstream discussions about education reform, critics contend that vouchers are a new, untested concept and therefore must be implemented, if at all, on an extremely limited, experimental basis. Critics also argue that vouchers will lead to the establishment of fringe schools, skim the best and brightest students from public schools, and drain public schools of revenue. Vermont's long-standing program has done none of those things. Vermont's voucher program has been running since 1869, nearly as long as the monopolistic public education model. It is worth noting that the voucher program has been a welcome part of the educational landscape for so long that the state collects no more information on voucher students than it does on students generally. And no hue and cry has been raised for more information to be compiled to justify the system's continuation. To the contrary, Vermonters generally assume that it is a parent's prerogative to select a child's school, and the burden of proof is on those who seek to take that choice away. This paper describes Vermont's voucher system and draws numerous lessons for education reformers and policymakers.
We have analyzed the likely impact on voter turnout should Vermont adopt Election Day Registration (EDR). Under the system proposed in Vermont, eligible voters who miss the current six-day deadline for registering by mail may be able to register to vote on Election Day. The availability of Election Day Registration procedures should give voters who have not previously registered the opportunity to vote. Consistent with existing research on the impact of EDR in the other states that use this process, we find that EDR would likely lead to substantial increases in voter turnout. We offer the following voter turnout estimates for Vermont under EDR: Overall turnout could go up by 4.8 percentTurnout among those aged 18 to 25 could increase by 10.2 percent.Turnout for those who have moved in the last six months could increase by 8.6 percent. Turnout among the poorest citizens could increase by 6.1 percent, while turnout among the wealthiest citizens would likely increase by only 3.3 percent.
The Carsey Institute;
This brief highlights trends related to the economic and labor force characteristics of Vermont's workers. It is produced in cooperation -- and its release coincides -- with the Economic Policy Institute's (EPI) national report, The State of Working America 2005/2006.
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation;
Provides an overview of Vermont's comprehensive health reform and the interim results of a two-year evaluation of its impact on the affordability of coverage and access to services, as well as its sustainability. Discusses lessons learned.
Feeding America (formerly America's Second Harvest);
This report presents information on the clients and agencies served by the Vermont Foodbank. The information is drawn from a national study, Hunger in America 2006, conducted for America's Second Harvest (A2H), the nation's largest organization of emergency food providers. The national study is based on completed in-person interviews with more than 52,000 clients served by the A2H food bank network, as well as on completed questionnaires from more than 30,000 A2H agencies. The study summarized below focuses mainly on emergency food providers and their clients who are supplied with food by food banks in the A2H network. Key Findings: The A2H system served by the Vermont Foodbank provides food for an estimated 66,200 different people annually. 31% of the members of households served by the Vermont Foodbank are children under 18 years old (Table 5.3.2). 35% of client households include at least one employed adult (Table 5.7.1).Among client households with children, 82% are food insecure and 37% are experiencing hunger (Table 6.1.1). 38% of clients served by the Vermont Foodbank report having to choose between paying for food and paying for utilities or heating fuel (Table 6.5.1). 28% had to choose between paying for food and paying for medicine or medical care (Table 6.5.1). 30% of households served by the Vermont Foodbank report having at least one household member in poor health (Table 8.1.1) The Vermont Foodbank included approximately 256 agencies at the administration of this survey, of which 215 have responded to the agency survey. Of the responding agencies, 122 had at least one food pantry, soup kitchen, or shelter. 55% of pantries, 19% of kitchens, and 16% of shelters are run by faith-based agencies affiliated with churches, mosques, synagogues, and other religious organizations (Table 10.6.1). 73% of pantries, 59% of kitchens, and 29% of shelters of the Vermont Foodbank reported that there had been an increase since 2001 in the number of clients who come to their emergency food program sites (Table 10.8.1). Food banks are by far the single most important source of food for the agencies, accounting for 64% of the food used by pantries, 33% of kitchens' food, and 37% of shelters' food (Table 13.1.1). For the Vermont Foodbank, 92% of pantries, 75% of kitchens, and 75% of shelters use volunteers (Table 13.2.1).
Feeding America (formerly America's Second Harvest);
This report presents information on the clients and agencies served by The Vermont Foodbank, Inc. The information is drawn from a national study, Hunger in America 2010, conducted in 2009 for Feeding America (FA) (formerly America's Second Harvest), the nation's largest organization of emergency food providers. The national study is based on completed inperson interviews with more than 62,000 clients served by the FA national network, as well as on completed questionnaires from more than 37,000 FA agencies. The study summarized below focuses on emergency food providers and their clients who are supplied with food by food banks in the FA network. Key Findings: The FA system served by The Vermont Foodbank, Inc provides emergency food for an estimated 61,100 different people annually.33% of the members of households served by The Vermont Foodbank, Inc are children under 18 years old (Table 5.3.2).36% of households include at least one employed adult (Table 5.7.1).Among households with children, 84% are food insecure and 34% are food insecure with very low food security (Table 220.127.116.11).42% of clients served by The Vermont Foodbank, Inc report having to choose between paying for food and paying for utilities or heating fuel (Table 6.5.1).23% had to choose between paying for food and paying for medicine or medical care (Table 6.5.1).25% of households served by The Vermont Foodbank, Inc report having at least one household member in poor health (Table 8.1.1)The Vermont Foodbank, Inc included approximately 252 agencies at the administration of this survey, of which 252 have responded to the agency survey. Of the responding agencies, 162 had at least one food pantry, soup kitchen, or shelter.40% of pantries, 30% of kitchens, and 11% of shelters are run by faith-based agencies affiliated with churches, mosques, synagogues, and other religious organizations (Table 10.6.1).Among programs that existed in 2006, 83% of pantries, 80% of kitchens, and 71% of shelters of The Vermont Foodbank, Inc reported that there had been an increase since 2006 in the number of clients who come to their emergency food program sites (Table 10.8.1).Food banks are by far the single most important source of food for agencies with emergency food providers, accounting for 71% of the food distributed by pantries, 36% of the food distributed by kitchens, and 36% of the food distributed by shelters (Table 13.1.1).As many as 91% of pantries, 91% of kitchens, and 59% of shelters in The Vermont Foodbank, Inc use volunteers (Table 13.2.1).
Annie E. Casey Foundation;
Examines Vermont's city and state social service delivery program, and community partnership initiatives. Outlines how the program's results-based accountability formula facilitates the delivery of services in rural communities.