Frustration simmers as officials tasked with improving alerts to crime victims continue to disagree over how the state’s automated alert system, VINE, should be managed.
The dissent began after the Department of Corrections, which pays for and manages the system, made staffing changes to its victim services unit without consulting others who interact with VINE and are tasked with changing it.
It isn’t the first time that the Corrections Department has quietly made changes without consulting members of a task force, who were assigned by lawmakers to fix high-stakes errors in victim alerts. And when the department has made changes in the dark, advocates for victims rights have repeatedly said those changes will do more harm than good.
Crime victims in Vermont have the legal right to get timely notifications about the movements of those charged with or convicted of harming them. But conversations with lawmakers this spring illuminated that victims sometimes got incorrect alerts from VINE, which stands for Victim Information Notification Everyday. Victims can receive alerts from VINE via call, text or email.
But sometimes VINE alerts went out to the wrong people or didn’t go out at all. In some instances, errors in the system caused victims life-altering harm.
To address the issue, lawmakers created a task force to convene officials from throughout the justice system and survivors who used the system to make improvements to VINE.
The task force allows employees from other departments to scrutinize VINE and give their two cents on changes. But the fact that the notification system is solely paid for and managed by the Department of Corrections has recently caused tensions.
On Oct. 15, Jon Murad, commissioner of the Corrections Department, sent out a memo to task force officials proposing that other departments share the cost of the VINE system, which he estimates to cost the department $70,000 annually. Specifically, he sent the memo to officials from the Center for Crime Victim Services, the Department for State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs and the Department of Public Safety.
“I am seeking feedback from your organizations on whether a cost-sharing model would
support the future sustainability of this technology and ensure all parties can exercise ownership over this critical system,” Murad wrote.
Further down in the memo, Murad explains that part of making data improvements to its VINE system involves increasing compatibility with the state’s attorneys data system. His department “does not have additional funds or staff to perform unbudgeted IT work on behalf of other parts of state government,” he wrote.
Murad also wrote that the department “plans to create a fulltime dedicated position to support the operations and maintenance of VINE.” That person will work on fixing errors in the system and educating department staff, he said.
Then, during a Thursday task force meeting, Meredith Pelkey, who directs corrections victim services, said that instead of filling two vacant victim services specialist positions, the department would fill only one position. The second position would go mostly toward VINE data work.
Meghan Place, a state’s attorney victim advocate in Windsor County, responded, asking, “We’re cutting a position?” And Pelkey said yes.
In an interview, Place said she was “shocked” by the change.
Place formerly worked as a victim specialist at the Corrections Department. And she thinks that having fewer victim specialists will limit options for victims, she said. Victim specialists can provide emotional support for victims, connect them with other resources and provide victims with trauma-informed communication about their offender.
It’s concerning that a point of human contact is being taken away to work on a flawed automated system, said Jenn Poehlmann, the executive director for Crime Victim Services who chairs the task force.
Haley Sommer, a spokesperson for the department, said the department made the change because effectively improving the VINE system involves a lot of data management and improving the data quality of the automated notifications.
“It’s not going to take away services that we provide to victims,” Sommer said.
VINE is a tool the department uses to meet its legal obligations to serve victims, Sommer said. Other victim specialists, along with other department employees, will be doing the work of that former victim specialist position, she said.
When asked why the Corrections Department didn’t consult with others before making the change, Sommer said it’s routine for government departments to internally repurpose positions to meet their priorities.
“I don’t think it’s accurate to say that we’re trying to replace human engagement with more technological systems, we’re really just trying to focus on improving the system that we have,” Sommer said.
Place agreed that VINE is a tool, but emphasized its limitations. Victims have vocally resented the fact that calls through VINE come from a cold robotic voice reading an automated message.
The automated system lacks the “smooth touch” that real people can provide, she said.
Tim Lueders-Dumont, executive director of the Department for State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs, said he shot down the idea that his department would share the cost of the VINE system. His department doesn’t rely on VINE to perform its legal duties and can’t afford the price tag, he said.
Sommer said that cost-sharing the system with other departments isn’t expected to happen this budget cycle after the Corrections Department put out the “feeler” in the memo.
