2024 Committee Charges & Reporting Schedules
AWARD COMMITTEES
DUTIES, CHARGES, AND REPORTING SCHEDULES
Each of the award committees should develop a list of nominees. Self and ASC member nominations are encouraged. Award committee members cannot nominate individuals for awards given by the award committees on which they serve. Every candidate nominated will be considered, in line with the submission guidelines. Each Committee should request documentation from the nominees; at the very least, obtain a vitae and a brief statement as to why the individuals should be considered to receive the award.
The chair of each award committee needs to communicate the award criteria to all committee members, and discuss the criteria with committee members if necessary. The ranking and voting process articulated in Appendix O, Section 6 is to be used. The chair of the committee must communicate with committee members on procedures and outcomes. If more than one iteration in the ranking process occurs, the results must be communicated to the committee members at each stage. Each award committee is to hold at least one conference call meeting (phone/Zoom, etc.) to deliberate the outcome. The final report to the ASC Executive Board should include a detailed description of the ranking procedures and decision-making process, along with the final outcome. The report should include:
A. The names of each committee member, with the chair identified.
B. The number of individuals nominated by others and the number self-nominated.
C. A list of those nominated in order of merit, and an explanation of the general procedures
used to reach that decision.
D. A detailed discussion of the ranking and decision-making procedures.
E. Identification of the designated number of nominees and a justification/reasons for the
committee decision.
F. Any other information that the chair would like to provide, including any advice for future
committees.
A copy of the vitae of the Committee’s single nominee should also be included in the materials sent to the Board.
Awards committee members are allowed to vote on candidates who are former or current students, previous or current mentors, and departmental colleagues. However, they also should recuse themselves if they feel they cannot be objective.
Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate (or manuscript, in the context of the Carte, Hindelang and Petersilia Awards).
When a member of an award committee resigns or is non-responsive, the President may appoint a new member to the said committee.
While a call for nominations will go out from the Society office via a number of venues, award committees are encouraged to solicit nominations, and to particularly reach out to all Divisions and ask for nominations. At least two nominees are required for each award. If an insignificant number of nominations have been received several weeks prior to the nomination deadline, chairs are encouraged to work with their respective committee members and urge them to renew their efforts to solicit nominations, and to contact Division heads and urge them to send in nominations.
Only individuals, not institutions, shall be considered as candidates for any award (except the President’s Award for Distinguished Contributions to Justice).
Each Awards Committee Chair is to ensure that individuals are not being considered for awards they have already received (except for the Michael J. Hindelang Outstanding Book Award and Joan Petersilia Outstanding Article Award winners who can receive these respective awards more than once). A complete list of previous ASC award recipients is available at www.asc41.org/awdwinrs.html.
The Board will give due consideration to each Committee’s nominations for each award, although the Board is not bound by the slate or the nominee of any Committee. If the Board rejects the nominee, the Award Committee may be asked to suggest another nominee. The Executive Board may decide not to give certain awards in any given year.
Members of the Executive Board are ineligible to receive any awards of the Society, including selection as a Fellow, during their term in office. However, if a current Board member is nominated for either the Michael J. Hindelang Outstanding Book Award or Joan Petersilia Outstanding Article Award, their nomination shall be considered during the first year following their service on the Board.
Members of a said award committee are not eligible to receive that said award.
Following the reporting timetables set forth for each award committee, the chair shall submit to the Executive Director a report of the work of the committee and its single nominee for each award (except in the case of Fellows and Peterson Fellowships). Once the Board has made its decision, the chair of each committee is to inform their respective committee members of the Board decision, and except for the Petersilia chair, contacts non-recipients and informs them of the Board decision.
The President formally notifies award recipients.
HERBERT BLOCH AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Herbert Bloch Award is given to recognize outstanding service contributions to the American Society of Criminology and to the professional interests of criminology.
Nominators should provide a letter evaluating the nominee’s contributions relevant to this award, and the nominee’s curriculum vitae.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Michael A Rocque, Bates College
GENE CARTE AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Gene Carte Student Paper Award is given to recognize outstanding scholarly work by students. Any student currently enrolled on a full-time basis in an academic program at either the undergraduate or graduate level is invited to participate in the Carte Student Paper Competition. Those enrolled in Post-Doc programs are ineligible.
Prior Carte Award first place winners are ineligible for any future Carte Award student paper competitions. Previous prize-winning papers (any prize from any organization and or institution) are ineligible. Dual submissions of the same paper for the Carte Award and any other ASC award in the same year (including division awards) are disallowed. Papers can be submitted to only one ASC student competition in the same year. Students may submit only one paper a year for consideration. This includes co-authored works. Multiple authored papers are admissible for Carte Award consideration, as long as all authors are students in good standing at the time of the submission. Papers that have been accepted for publication at the time of submission for the Carte Award are ineligible.
Papers may be conceptual and/or empirical but must be directly related to criminology. Papers may be no longer than 8,000 words (excluding tables and references). All applicants for the Gene Carte Award should receive comments from the Committee. The Committee is responsible for making nominations to the Board for the first, second, and third place winners in this student paper competition. The Committee will rate entries according to criteria such as the quality of the conceptualization, significance of the topic, clarity and aptness of methods, quality of the writing, command of relevant work in the field, and contribution to criminology.
Those who submit papers for the Carte award must sign a statement that verifies that they are the authors of the said piece (ie., the piece is not plagiarized). The students’ academic advisor will also submit a signed statement that to the best of their knowledge, the paper has been authored by the said student and is not plagiarized. If the Carte Committee feels the paper was plagiarized, the Committee Chair may contact the said student’s advisor(s) and indicate that the Carte Committee feels that the paper may have been plagiarized.
The first prize winner shall receive an award of $500. The second prize winner shall receive an award of $300. The third prize winner shall receive an award of $200. The first prize winner will also receive a travel award of up to $500 to help defray costs for attending the Annual Meeting.
There will not be a separate student paper competition for undergraduate students. There should be a strong representation from doctoral granting institutions among the Committee membership. The Committee is urged to connect with the Association of Doctoral Programs in Criminology and Criminal Justice to promote submissions for this paper competition.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of papers nominated along with a single first place, second place, and third place paper nominee. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all submitted manuscripts.
The Executive Board may decide not to give the awards, or to give fewer than three awards, in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the quality of the manuscripts and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular manuscript.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), and submit a final report by August 15.
Chair –
Vanessa Panfil, Old Dominion University
RUTH SHONLE CAVAN AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Ruth Shonle Cavan Young Scholar Award is given to recognize outstanding scholarly contributions to the discipline of criminology by someone who has received a Ph.D., MD, LL.D. or a similar graduate degree no more than five (5) years before the selection for the award, unless exceptional circumstances necessitated a hiatus in their scholarly activities. Eligibility extensions for major career interruptions include but are not limited to giving birth (one year per child, up to two years total), adoption, illness as well as having care responsibilities, which cause a hiatus or significant impediment to scholarly activities. Nomination letters should concisely explain the circumstances justifying the extensions.
If the candidate has multiple graduate degrees, the last five-year period is from the date when the last degree was received.
The award may be for a single work or a series of contributions, and may include co-authored works.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
The following supportive materials needs to be submitted with a nomination:
1. a letter evaluating the nominee’s contributions to the discipline of criminology;
2. when relevant, include an explanation/justification for “major career interruptions;”
3. applicant’s/nominee’s curriculum vitae; and
4. no more than 3 published works, which may include a combination of articles and 1 book (send a hard copy of the book to the Committee Chair).
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Holly Nguyen, Penn State University
FELLOWS COMMITTEE
Charge –
Those designated as Fellows are recognized for their scholarly contributions to criminology and distinction in the discipline. Longevity alone is not sufficient. Examples of contributions may include innovations in public policy as well as enhancing diversity, equity and inclusion within the Society and the field of criminology. In addition, a Fellow must have made a significant contribution to the field through the career development of other criminologists and/or through organizational activities within the American Society of Criminology. Nominees must be members in good standing of the Society.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for those individuals who should be designated as Fellows. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with up to five (5) nominees for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Nominators should provide a letter evaluating the nominee’s contributions relevant to this award, and the nominee’s curriculum vitae.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to be designated as a Fellow during their term in office. The Board may designate up to five (5) persons as Fellows annually. The Board may decide not to designate any Fellows, or to designate fewer than five (5) Fellows, in any given year. Award decisions are to be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Scott Decker, Arizona State University
GRADUATE STUDENT POSTER AWARD
Charge –
This award is given to recognize outstanding scholarly work of students. Any student currently enrolled on a full-time basis in an academic program at the graduate level is invited to participate in the Graduate Student Poster competition. Those enrolled in Post-Doc programs are ineligible. Multiple authored posters are admissible for consideration, as long as all authors are full-time graduate students.
Graduate students who wish to enter this competition should adhere to the directions for presenting a poster at the Annual Meeting. In addition, such participants must self-declare their request for award consideration at the time of submission by marking the appropriate box on this poster submission form.
To be considered for this award, participants must also send a brief (2-3 minute) YouTube video to the Graduate Student Poster Award Committee Chair. The Graduate Student Poster Award Committee will judge submissions primarily on scientific merit and secondarily on visual appeal. Ideally submissions should be as complete as possible, with a question, method, data, and (preliminary) results and implications.
Awards for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place will be given. The Executive Board may decide not to give the awards, or to give fewer than three awards, in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the quality of the posters and not on the number of endorsements received for any particular poster.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), and to submit a final report by August 15.
Chair –
Sanja Kutnjak, Michigan State University
MICHAEL J. HINDELANG AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Michael J. Hindelang Outstanding Book Award is given for a book, originally published within three (3) calendar years preceding the year in which the award is made, that makes the most outstanding contribution to research in the field of criminology.
It shall be the responsibility of the Michael J. Hindelang Outstanding Book Award Committee to gather nominations for the award and to make a recommendation to the Executive Board concerning the recipient(s). The Committee shall solicit nominations from the membership and from other persons deemed likely to contribute nominations of interest to the Society. To be considered, books must be nominated by individuals who are members of the American Society of Criminology. Self-nominations by ASC members are acceptable.
The Committee will not consider anthologies and/or edited volumes.
The Chair will need to work with publishers to both acquire enough hard desk copies of the books to distribute to the Committee, and to acquire them in a timely fashion to meet Committee reporting deadlines. The responsibility for distributing the hard desk copies to the Hindelang Committee members rests with the publishers and/or the authors.
The Committee should request nominators to submit a brief statement as to why the book should receive the award.
It shall be the responsibility of each year’s Committee to decide on the procedure to be used to select the book recommended for the award and to establish eligibility criteria (other than year of publication, defined as the officially noted copyright date).
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of all books nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominated books.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. However, if a current member of the Board is nominated for this award, their nomination shall be considered in the first year following their service on the Board.
The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the quality of the books and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular book.
Report –
The Committee is asked to provide a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), and to submit a final report by August 15.
Chair –
Vera Lopez, Arizona State University
MENTOR AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Mentor Award is given to recognize excellence in mentorship in the discipline of criminology. Nominations of individuals at all stages of their academic careers are encouraged.
Any nonstudent member of the ASC is an eligible candidate for the ASC Mentor Award, including persons who hold a full or part time position in criminology, practitioners and researchers in nonacademic settings. The award is not limited to those who participate in the ASC mentoring program.
Nonstudent members may be nominated by colleagues, peers, or students but self-nominations are not allowed. A detailed letter of nomination should contain concrete examples and evidence of how the nominee has sustained a record of enriching the professional lives of others, and be submitted to the Chair of the Mentor Award Committee.
The mentorship portfolio should include:
- A table of contents
- Curriculum Vita and
• Detailed evidence of mentorship by supporting, encouraging and promoting Scholarly research
• Academic publication
• Professional development
• Teaching
• Career guidance
• Research and professional networks
• And other evidence of mentoring achievements.
The letter should specify the ways the nominee has gone beyond their role as a professor, researcher or collaborator to ensure successful enculturation into the discipline of criminology, providing intellectual professional development outside of the classroom and otherwise exemplary support for criminology/criminal justice undergraduates, graduates and post-graduates.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), and to submit a final report by August 15.
Chair –
Jodi Lane, University of Florida
JOAN PETERSILIA AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Joan Petersilia Outstanding Article Award is given for the peer-reviewed article published in the previous calendar year that makes the most outstanding contribution to research in the field of criminology.
It shall be the responsibility of the Joan Petersilia Outstanding Article Award Committee to consider for nomination, each of the articles published in the past calendar year in Criminology, and Criminology & Public Policy, to consider articles of interest published in other journals, to gather additional nominations for the award for articles appearing in other journals, and to make a recommendation to the Executive Board concerning the recipient(s).
The Committee shall solicit nominations from the membership and from other persons deemed likely to contribute nominations of interest to the Society. Self-nominations by Society members are acceptable. The Committee should request nominators to submit a brief statement as to why the article should receive the award.
It shall be the responsibility of each year’s Committee to decide on the procedure to be used to select the article recommended for the award and to establish eligibility criteria (other than year of publication).
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of the nominees.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. However, if a current member of the Board is nominated for this award, their nomination shall be considered in the first year following their service on the Board.
The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the quality of the manuscripts and not on the number of endorsements received for any particular manuscript.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), and to submit a final report by August 15.
Chair –
Chris Smith, University of Toronto
RUTH D. PETERSON FELLOWSHIP COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Ruth D. Peterson Fellowships are given to encourage students of color, especially those from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in the field, to enter the field of criminology and criminal justice, and to facilitate the completion of their degrees.
Applicants are to be from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in the field, including but not limited to, Asians, Blacks, Indigenous peoples, and Latinas/os. Applicants need not be members of the American Society of Criminology. Individuals studying criminology or criminal justice issues are encouraged to apply.
The recipients of the fellowships must be accepted into a program of doctoral studies in the general area of criminology or criminal justice. Individuals may reapply for the fellowship if they have not received it previously.
A complete application must contain (1) proof of admission to a criminal justice, criminology, or related program of doctoral studies; (2) up-to-date curriculum vita; (3) personal statement describing the applicant’s race/ethnicity and its importance in the applicant’s scholarship and/or career plans; (4) copies of undergraduate and graduate transcripts; (5) statement of need and prospects for financial assistance for graduate study; (6) a letter clearly articulating career plans, salient experiences, and motivations within criminology and criminal justice that fit in line with the Fellowship’s purpose; and (7) three letters of reference. All application materials should be submitted to the Peterson Fellowship Committee Chair in electronic format as a single pdf attachment.
Merit is to be the most important factor in making the recommendations, and among those of high merit, consideration will be given to financial need, the relationship of the individual’s interest to those of the Society, and the existing dis-proportionality of ethnic minorities in the field. In addition to the official award guidelines specified above, the members of the Committee have, while exercising their professional judgment, generally use other criteria in reaching a decision, such as motivation for pursuing the degree based upon articulated desires and experiences, capabilities as demonstrated by GPA and recommendations, research topics related to race and ethnicity as applied to crime and justice issues, demonstrated financial need, ASC affiliation and activity, other professional association activity, etc.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with three nominees for the Fellowship. The Committee must include in its report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Up to three (3), $8,000 fellowships can be awarded annually. The Executive Board may decide not to award the fellowships, or to give fewer than three (3) fellowships, in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Rita Shah, Eastern Michigan University
PRESIDENT’S JUSTICE AWARD
Charge –
The President’s Award for Distinguished Contributions to Justice is given to an individual or organization who, through either a single initiative or over a longer period of time, has made significant and distinguished contributions to the cause of justice. In the case of joint efforts, co-recipients may be named. The President submits a nominee for Board approval. The President should provide a statement identifying the main reasons for the recommendation along with the nomination. The Board may accept or reject the nominee. The Society will pay transportation and rooming costs for the recipient to attend the Annual Meeting, but no honorarium.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year.
Report –
The President is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Val Jenness, University of California, Irvine
SELLIN-GLUECK AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Sellin-Glueck Award is given to recognize criminological scholarship that considers problems of crime and justice as they are manifested outside the United States; internationally or comparatively. Preference is given for scholarship that analyzes non-U.S. data, is published predominantly outside of U.S. criminological journals, and in granting the award, brings new perspectives or approaches to the attention of the members of the Society. The recipient need not speak English, however, their work must be available in part at least, in the English language (either by original publication or through translation).
Nominators should provide a letter evaluating the nominee’s contributions relevant to this award, and the nominee’s curriculum vitae.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
The Board particularly encourages the Division on International Criminology to submit names of nominees for this award.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Ben Crewe, University of Cambridge
EDWIN H. SUTHERLAND AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Edwin H. Sutherland Award is given to recognize outstanding contributions to theory or research in criminology on the etiology of criminal and deviant behavior, the criminal justice system, corrections, law, or justice. The distinguished contribution may be based on a single outstanding book or work, on a series of theoretical or research contributions, or on the accumulated contributions by a senior scholar.
Nominators should provide a letter evaluating the nominee’s contributions relevant to this award, and the nominee’s curriculum vitae.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Sara Wakefield, Rutgers University
TEACHING AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Teaching Award is given to recognize excellence in undergraduate and/or graduate teaching over the span of an academic career. This award is meant to identify and reward teaching excellence that has been demonstrated by individuals either (a) at one educational institution where the nominee is recognized and celebrated as a master teacher of criminology and criminal justice; or, (b) at a regional or national level as a result of that individual’s sustained efforts to advance criminological/criminal justice education. Any faculty member who holds a full-or part-time position teaching criminology or criminal justice is eligible for the award, inclusive of graduate and undergraduate universities as well as two- and four-year colleges. In addition, faculty members who have retired are eligible within the first two years of retirement. Faculty may be nominated by colleagues, peers, or students, or they may self-nominate, by writing a letter of nomination to the chair of the Teaching Awards Committee. Letters of nomination must include a statement in support of nomination of not more than three pages. The nominee and/or the nominator may write the statement. Nominees will be contacted by the chair of the Teaching Award Committee and asked to submit a teaching portfolio of supporting materials, preferably in electronic form. The teaching portfolios should include:
- A table of contents,
- Curriculum Vita, and
- Evidence of teaching accomplishments, which may include:
• student evaluations, which may be qualitative or quantitative, from recent years or over the course of the one’s career,
• peer reviews of teaching,
• nominee statements of teaching philosophy and practices,
• evidence of mentoring,
• evidence of research on teaching (papers presented on teaching, articles published on teaching, teaching journals edited, etc.),
• selected syllabi,
• letters of nomination/reference, and
• other evidence of teaching achievements.
The materials in the portfolio should include brief, descriptive narratives designed to provide the Teaching Award Committee with the proper context to evaluate the materials. Student evaluations, for example, should be introduced by a very brief description of the methods used to collect the evaluation data and, if appropriate, the scales used and available norms to assist with interpretation. Other materials in the portfolio should include similar brief descriptions to assist the Committee with evaluating the significance of the materials.
Letters of nomination (including statements in support of nomination) should be submitted to the Teaching Award Committee Chair in electronic format and must be received by April 1. The nominee’s portfolio and all other supporting materials should also be submitted to the Teaching Award Committee Chair in electronic format and must be received by June 1.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year meeting (typically due April 15) and to submit a final report by August 15.
Chair –
Danielle Rudes, Sam Houston State University
AUGUST VOLLMER AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The August Vollmer Award recognizes an individual whose scholarship and professional activities have made outstanding contributions to justice and/or to the treatment or prevention of criminal or delinquent behavior.
Nominators should provide a letter evaluating the nominee’s contributions relevant to this award, and the nominee’s curriculum vitae.
The Committee is responsible for making a nomination to the Board for the Award. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated along with a single nominee for the award. The Committee must include in its’ report, a statement outlining the reasons for its recommendations, information regarding procedures followed, and a rank ordering of all nominees.
Members of the ASC Board are ineligible to receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board meeting. Typically, the report is due April 15.
Chair –
Bianca Bersani, University of Maryland
W. E. B. DU BOIS AWARD COMMITTEE
Charge –
The W.E.B. Du Bois Research Award is given to recognize transformative scholarship that engages criminology, criminal justice and race/ethnicity. The scholarship may be based on research that investigates in the intellectual tradition of Du Bois, such as an examination of race/ethnicity-related issues through methodology, theory development/critique, historical analysis, and/or ethnographic scholarship. The award, which may be given to an individual or collaborators, may be based on a single book, a single article, a thread of related research, or the body of work of a senior scholar. Members of the ASC Board may not receive this award during their term in office. The Executive Board may decide not to give the award in any given year. Award decisions will be based on the strength of the nominees’ qualifications and not on the number of nomination endorsements received for any particular candidate.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting. Typically the report is due April 15.
Chair – This award will not be given until 2025
STANDING COMMITTEES
PROGRAM COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Program Committee has the responsibility to organize the substantive content (ie., the sessions) of the Annual Meeting, in coordination with the Program Committee Chair(s). The Program Committee Chair(s) generally insure that this substantive program portion of the Annual Meeting is appropriately structured and coherent. The Program Committee Chair(s) carry out the President’s theme for the Annual Meeting. In implementing this theme, the Program Chair(s) work closely with the President, and the Executive Director. The Program Committee Chair(s) coordinate with the Deputy Director as the Deputy Director schedules the sessions.
Report –
The Program Committee Chair(s) are asked to prepare a formal progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15).
Co-Chairs –
Charis Kubrin, University of California, Irvine
Jenn Macy, California State University, Dominguez Hills
STANDING COMMITTEES WITH MULTI-YEAR TERMS
CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Constitution and By-Laws Committee ensures that the Society operates in accordance with its Constitution and By-Laws. The Committee recommends revisions in the Constitution and/or By-Laws to meet changing circumstances in the operations of the Society.
Report –
The Committee does not file a regular report with the Executive Board, but is asked to do so when they deem necessary and/or when asked by the Executive Board.
Chair –
Jonathan Kremser, Kutztown University
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Diversity and Inclusion Committee is to explore means and mechanisms that can encourage participation of historically under-represented racial and ethnic groups in the field of criminology. The Chair of this Committee will serve on the Program Committee.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), a final report by October 15, and to submit interim reports and recommendations as occasion requires.
Chair –
Breea Willlingham, University of North Carolina Wilmington
ETHICS COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Ethics Committee serves to educate members with respect to ethical expectations, general principals, and standards as detailed in the society’s Code of Ethics. Such education, among others, may be accomplished by placing articles in the Society newsletters and on the Society website, organizing conference sessions and workshops, and advertising the Annual Meeting Code of Conduct. The Chair of this Committee shall serve as the Chair of the Program Committee Ethics Area. In that capacity, they will be responsible to organize sessions and possible workshops at the Annual Meetings that deal with ethics-related issues.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), a final report by October 15, and to submit interim reports and recommendations as occasion requires.
Chair –
Sonja Siennick, Florida StateUniversity
FINANCE COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Finance Committee will oversee the Society budgetary and fiscal policy matters, as well as the audits of our financial records. The Committee will ensure that the Society is operating in a financially responsible fashion. There are three particular duties with respect to the audits:
- Insure that audits are undertaken once every three to five years, and more frequently if concerns arise which would necessitate more frequent external reviews.
- Insure that the audits are conducted by a reputable and properly licensed entity.
- Review the audit and report to the Executive Board.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Board subsequent to their review of the audit, and at any other time as they deem necessary.
Chair –
Val Jenness, University of California, Irvine
LONG-RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Long-Range Planning Committee is charged with preparing a long-range plan for the Society. The new plan shall propose an Executive Director transition plan and a financial plan associated with that transition. The Committee shall use the materials from the earlier Long Range Planning Committees as a point of departure and build upon the careful thought and deliberations associated with this previous work. As part of this plan, the committee shall examine the formal structure of the Society, enumerate the core offices (elective and administrative) and delineate their functions. The recommendations of the Committee that are approved by the Board shall be implemented without delay. In addition, the Committee shall provide guidance on the development of a vision for the future of the organization that attends to the needs and expectations of the membership, including identifying priorities in strategic initiatives, communications, and branding. The Committee can request relevant materials from the Executive Office and the Board as well as external materials as needed. Ideally, the first report will have addressed the transition plan that, if approved by the board, can commence; and the second report shall lay out a more fully developed vision for the future of the organization.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), a final report by October 15, and to submit interim reports and recommendations as occasion requires.
Chair –
Steve Messner, University at Albany
MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Membership Committee reaches out to criminology and related disciplines to increase the membership of the Society. The Committee periodically conducts membership surveys, assists in the development of brochures, serves as greeters at the Annual Meeting, obtains mailing lists from other organizations, and contacts a wide variety of academic departments and research institutions in an attempt to solicit more members for the Society. The Committee is encouraged to coordinate efforts with the Student Affairs Committee. Of special importance is the need to maintain a significant measure of gender, racial and ethnic diversity in the society, and efforts should be undertaken to achieve this end.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Annual Board Meeting. Typically, the report is due October 15, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Jordan Pickering, California State University, Fresno
MENTORING COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Mentoring Committee is to connect students and young scholars with more experienced professionals who have volunteered to serve as mentors. This is done primarily through the on-line mentoring site, based on the ASC webpage. The Mentoring Committee is to oversee the Keys to Success column in The Criminologist, and is to provide periodic updated information for the on-line mentoring site. The Mentoring Committee serves as the ASC liaison with other professional organization mentoring programs.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year and Annual Board Meetings. Typically, those reports would be due April 15 and October 15 respectively, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Chenelle Jones, Franklin University
NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Nominations Committee shall oversee development of a slate of candidates for elected office, subject to the approval of the Executive Board. The Committee shall provide the Board with a list of those nominated, along with the preferred candidates (two (2) for President; two (2) for Vice President; six (6) for Executive Counselor). It shall be the responsibility of the Nominations Committee to prepare a report outlining the procedures the Committee followed in obtaining nominations and recommending a slate of candidates to the Executive Board.
In an effort to reflect the diversity of Society membership, the Nominations Committee should consider the following factors in developing the slate of candidates: gender, ethnicity, geographic region, type of academic institution and/or employment setting, and orientation to the field.
Usually the Nominations Committee does not submit the names of current Board members as part of the slate. Members of the Nominations Committee may not self-nominate, and cannot be considered as candidates for any elected office. Those nominated must agree to the nomination and be willing to run for office, must be active members in good standing at the time of the nomination, and must have been active members in good standing for at least one (1) year prior to nomination.
Society members and Nominations Committee members are encouraged to submit nominations, but those nominations must be submitted before the nomination deadline. Only nominations from Nomination Committee members can be considered after the deadline and then only if an insufficient number of nominations have been received and/or an insufficient number of individuals agree to run for office (two candidates for each position, ie., two for President, two for Vice President, and two for each Executive Counselor position).
The Chair of the Nominations Committee is to contact those nominated for Vice President and Executive Counselor and ascertain their willingness to run for office. The current ASC President is to contact those nominated for President and ascertain their willingness to run for office.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), a 2nd progress report by August 15, and submit a final report by October 15, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Lee Slocum, University of Missouri–St. Louis
POLICY COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Policy Committee shall consider issues related to crime and justice policy and make recommendations to the ASC Executive Board that further the ASC’s abiding interest in strengthening free and independent scientific inquiry, and support for crime and justice research. The Committee will have a role in vetting individuals for the media resources list. The Chair of the Policy Committee is on the Program Committee and is to take the lead in developing the Presidential Policy Panels at the Annual Meetings. They are asked to coordinate with the Editors of Criminology & Public Policy in this effort. The Policy Committee is also responsible for the Policy Corner column in The Criminologist.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year and Annual Board Meetings. Typically those reports would be due April 15 and October 15 respectively, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Beth Huebner, Arizona State University
PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Publication Committee’s principal role is to oversee the Society’s publication activities. For example, it makes recommendations to the Executive Board on such matters as editors, publishers, and publishing arrangements for the journal. The Publication Committee, with Executive Board approval, may commission intellectually stimulating works of major importance. Such works may cover the entire range of intellectual activity in criminology.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year and Annual Board Meetings. Typically, those reports would be due April 15 and October 15 respectively, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Lisa Broidy, University of New Mexico
RUTH D. PETERSON FELLOWS’ DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Ruth D. Peterson Fellows’ Development Committee will provide a set of activities oriented to enhancing the academic success of recipients of the Ruth D. Peterson Fellowship for Racial and Ethnic Diversity. The specific activities may vary overtime. However, they will include undertakings (e.g., annual professional development workshop, connection with mentors, participation in associated conferences) that help to prepare Fellows for a successful research career by improving their knowledge of how academia works, what makes for a successful research career, expertise in Fellows’ areas of interest, integration into the ASC and the discipline of criminology, and participation in associated professional networks and organization within and outside of ASC that promote advancements in research on crime and justice and diversity and inclusion in scholarship on this topic.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), a final report by October 15, and to submit interim reports and recommendations as occasion requires.
Chair –
Natasha Frost, Northeastern University
SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Scientific Integrity Committee is to formulate and recommend principles and procedures to the Board to guide the Society in a continuing review of issues that affect scientific freedom and scientific responsibility, and to search for means that will effectively bring these issues to the attention of Society members. It is to collect information on restrictions of scientific freedom and of the ability of scientists to carry out their responsibilities, and to make such information available to scientists, scientific societies, and others who may be interested in taking action to counter these restrictions. It is to develop statements of principles governing professional conduct, and to recommend policies, procedures, and educational activities to the Board designed to encourage scientists to accept their professional responsibilities both with regard to safeguarding the integrity of science and with regard to the application of science in the promotion of general welfare. It is to conduct an analytic review of emerging situations, cases, and circumstances where scientific integrity concerns are especially significant for the Society. It is to report its activities and its general assessment of significant developments during the year that affect scientific freedom and scientific responsibility and that call for examination, discussion and possible action. It is to coordinate with the Publications, Ethics, Student Affairs, and Mentoring committees to identify workshops or sponsored forums on emerging issues in scientific freedom and responsibility for the annual meeting.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), a final report by October 15, and to submit interim reports and recommendations as occasion requires.
Chair –
Laura Dugan, The Ohio State University
STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Student Affairs Committee is to assist in the integration of student members into the activities of the Society. More specifically, the Student Affairs Committee is to oversee the student affairs column that appears in The Criminologist, and to organize sessions at the Annual Meeting dealing with topics oriented to student interests. The Chair of the Student Affairs Committee serves as the Chair of the Program Committee, Professional Development/Students Meet Scholars Area.
Report –
The Committee is asked to prepare a report for the Mid-Year and Annual Board Meetings. Typically, those reports would be due April 15 and October 15 respectively, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Jessica Huff, University of Nebraska Omaha
TEACHING COMMITTEE
Charge –
The Teaching Committee is to engage in three primary activities:
1. Oversee the Teaching Tips Column in The Criminologist.
2. Per the Teaching Committee members’ interests and envisioned need, the Teaching Committee may organize sessions/workshops at the Annual Meeting.
3. Oversee the web-based syllabi collection project, including the collection of ancillary teaching-related items such as associated assignments, class exercises, film recommendations, etc.
In addition, the Committee is asked to take the lead in all teaching related issues that might arise, including serving as a liaison with other relevantentities and organizations that have teaching related functions and interests.
Report –
The Committee is asked to provide a progress report for the Mid-Year Board Meeting (typically due April 15), and a final report by October 15, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires.
Chair –
Brandon Golob, University of California, Irvine
LIAISONS TO RELATED SOCIETIES
Charge –
These individuals serve as the Society liaison with various professional organizations that have criminology-related interests. The Liaisons foster communication between the Society and these various professional entities. They are responsible for setting up panels at the meetings of these various organizations when requested, and appraising the Board of these and other relevant activities that would have a bearing on the Society and the field of criminology in general. While various organizations may utilize the “representative” terminology, Society Liaisons do not represent the Society, nor the Society leadership in the literal sense of the word, ie., they cannot speak for the Society, nor can they enter into any binding agreement on behalf of the Society. Liaisons generally serve a three (3) year renewable term.
Two of the Liaisons have specific duties, as follows:
1. AAAS – This individual is responsible for setting up panels on behalf of ASC at the annual AAAS meetings, and appraising the Board of these
activities.
2. United Nations – This individual works with the Society Divisions and individual members to inform them of relevant U.N. meetings, and attends and reports on these meetings. They are also to organize sessions at the ASC Annual Meetings that have United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) activity relevance, and/or are of interest to the larger mission of the United Nations. See Appendix N for more details.
Report –
The Liaisons are asked to prepare a report for the Mid Year and Annual Board Meetings. Typically, those reports would be due April 15 and October 15 respectively, with interim reports and recommendations submitted as occasion requires. In addition, the Liaisons are asked to submit at least one (1) article a year to The Criminologist in which they outline their activities, and inform the Society members of the organizations’ activities and meetings.
Current Liaisons are as follows:
AAAS – William Pridemore, University at Albany
COSSA – Min Xie, University of Maryland
Oral History Project – Rod Brunson, University of Maryland
United Nations (Main Representative) – Jay Albanese, Virginia Commonwealth University
United Nations (Alternate Representative) – Sesha Kethineni, Prairie View A&M
AD HOC COMMITTEES
Charge –
Ad Hoc Committees are appointed by the Board as needed, with committee composition and terms appropriate to the task.
Report –
Ad Hoc Committees are to report to the Board as directed by the Board.
