The document discusses the Cornerstone criminal justice intervention program, established in 1985 to support victims of violence, including domestic violence and human trafficking. It highlights the program's role in providing both direct and indirect support to victims while also addressing ethical issues, such as gender imbalance in leadership and the need for prevention strategies. Recommendations include involving men in the program and focusing more on prevention measures alongside recovery support.

1. Competencies
A
B
C
D
F
1.1: Create oral, written, or visual communications appropriate
to the audience, purpose, and context.
4 points
Key Criteria: Tailors communication to purpose, context, and
target audience. Clearly articulates the thesis and purpose, and
supports the thesis and purpose with authentic and appropriate
evidence. Provides smooth transitions and leaves no awkward
gaps from point to point. Shows coherent progress from the
introduction to the conclusion with no unnecessary sections.
3 points
Key Criteria: Tailors communication to purpose, context, and
target audience. Articulates the thesis and purpose, and supports
the thesis and purpose with authentic and appropriate evidence.
Generally provides smooth transitions and leaves few awkward
gaps from point to point. Shows identifiable progress from the
introduction to the conclusion with no unnecessary sections.
2 points
Key Criteria: Considers the purpose, context, and target
audience. Articulates the thesis and purpose, and shows some
evidence supporting both. Some transitions are not smooth, and
there are occasional gaps or awkward connections from point to
point. There is a sense of progress from the introduction
through the conclusion, but the organization may not be
completely clear.
1 point
Key Criteria: Does not tailor communication well in terms of
purpose, context, and target audience. Provides a weak thesis,
unclear purpose, and little or no evidence to support points.

2. Transitions may be rough or nonexistent, and there are
significant gaps or connections between points that leave
sections incomprehensible. Progress from the introduction
through the conclusion is difficult to decipher, and there may be
some material that is unrelated to thesis and purpose.
0 points
Key Criteria: Does not tailor communication in terms of
purpose, context, and target audience. Lacks a good thesis and
has little or no evidence to support a thesis. Transitions are
rough or nonexistent, and there are few discernable connections
from point to point. There is no identifiable progress from the
introduction through the conclusion, and/or there is substantial
material that is unrelated to thesis and purpose.
1.2: Communicate using appropriate writing conventions,
including spelling, grammar, mechanics, word choice, and
format.
4 points
Uses a format that is highly appropriate to the writing task and
carefully tailors the style and tone to the specific audience.
Aligns both the writing style and grammar usage to standards
appropriate to the task.
3 points
Uses a format that is appropriate to the writing task and tailors
the style and tone to the specific audience. Aligns both the
writing style and grammar usage to standards appropriate to the
task.
2 points
Generally has a clear purpose, but there may be a gap between
the format used and the writing task. Fails to fully align the
style and tone to the audience, or fails to fully define the
audience for the writing task. Has some style or grammar errors
and may not be well aligned to standards appropriate to the
task.
1 point
Lacks an appropriate format for the writing task and fails to
align the style and tone, giving the sense that the audience for

3. the writing task is not identified or misidentified. Features so
many errors in writing style and grammar usage that
communication is obscured.
0 points
Uses a completely inappropriate format for the writing task, or
the intentional use of format is impossible to discern. The work
fails to align with the task or identify the audience. Features so
many egregious errors in writing style and grammar usage that
there is little or no communication.
1.3: Incorporate credible and relevant sources in development
and support of ideas.
4 points
Meaningfully supports, extends, and informs the author's
original thesis or idea using a variety of credible sources.
Evaluates information in the writing for credibility, bias,
quality of evidence, and quality of reasoning, and smoothly
integrates an appropriate balance of original content with
supporting sources.
3 points
Supports, extends, and informs the author's original thesis or
idea using a number of credible sources. Evaluates information
in the writing for credibility, bias, quality of evidence, and
quality of reasoning, and integrates an appropriate balance of
original content with supporting sources.
2 points
Uses sources to support and inform the author's original thesis
or idea, but some sources may not be fully credible or relevant.
Lacks evidence that information has been evaluated for
credibility, bias, quality of evidence, or quality of reasoning,
and may not smoothly integrate sources in some places. Lacks
an appropriate balance of original content with supporting
sources.
1 point
Uses few sources to support and inform the author's original
thesis or idea, and the sources that are used may be irrelevant.

4. No evidence that source information has been evaluated for
credibility, bias, quality of evidence, or quality of reasoning,
and lacks smooth integration of sources. Substantially lacks
balance of original content with supporting sources.
0 points
Lacks sources to support and inform the author's thesis or idea.
Fails to evaluate information for credibility, bias, quality of
evidence, or quality of reasoning
1.4: Make clear the relationship between information obtained
from others and content created by you, and attribute all sources
ethically and legally.
4 points
Accurately and appropriately identifies sources and
distinguishes them from original content. Conveys source
content using summary, paraphrase, and quotes as most
appropriate to the task, and maintains an excellent balance of
each. Cites sources correctly in accordance with disciplinary
conventions.
3 points
Identifies sources and distinguishes them from original content.
Conveys source content using summary, paraphrase, and quotes
as appropriate to the task, and generally maintains a balance of
each. Generally cites sources correctly in accordance with
disciplinary conventions, although there may be a few minor
errors in citation style.
2 points
Makes an effort to distinguish between original content and
sources, but there may be a few places where the distinction is
unclear. Attempts to summarize, paraphrase, or use quotes as
appropriate to the task, but there may be an overabundance or
under use of quotes. Attempts to cite all sources correctly in
accordance with disciplinary conventions, but there may be
lapses or gaps in citation.
1 point
Fails to distinguish between original content and sources or the
distinction is obscured. Uses few instances of summary,

5. paraphrase, or direct quotes, and cited sources are substantially
incorrect.
0 points
Fails to distinguish between original content and sources.
Shows no effort to summarize, paraphrase, or quote material.
Fails to cite sources, or cites sources that are not related to the
work.
2.1: Identify and frame a problem or issue.
4 points
Accurately and thoroughly identifies and summarizes the
problem, using supporting details. Thoroughly identifies
potential underlying causes or conditions contributing to the
issue or problem, and meaningfully and accurately considers the
context. Integrates insightful, original, or well-formulated
questions that inform the direction of the investigation of the
problem or question. Includes information that is highly
relevant to the issue or problem.
3 points
Identifies and summarizes the problem, using supporting
details. Identifies potential underlying causes or conditions
contributing to the issue or problem, and considers the context.
Potential underlying causes or conditions contributing to the
issue or problem are identified and the context is considered.
Integrates questions that inform the direction of the
investigation of the problem or question into the evaluation.
Includes information that is highly relevant to the issue or
problem.
2 points
Summarizes the issue or problem with some supporting details.
Attempts to identify some potential underlying causes or
conditions contributing to the issue or problem; the context is
considered but may be lacking in thoroughness. Questions that
inform the direction of the investigation of the problem or
question are considered, although they may not be fully
integrated into the evaluation. Includes information that is
somewhat relevant to the issue or problem.

6. 1 point
Attempts to summarize the issue or problem, but the work is
weak and there are few, if any, supporting details. Barely
touches upon underlying causes or conditions contributing to
the issue or problem, and the context is not considered. Partially
considers questions that inform the direction of the
investigation of the problem or question. Lacks much relevant
information.
0 points
Fails to identify the issue or problem is not identified and lacks
supporting details. Fails to examine potential underlying causes
or conditions contributing to the issue or problem, and context
is not considered. Lacks questions that inform the direction of
the investigation of the problem, and there is little or no
evidence of gathering information.
2.2: Select evidence relevant to a problem or issue.
4 points
Provided details on how machine learning and data analytics
applied to the APT assigned could have prevented or reduced
the impact of the breach, according to criteria specified and
provides supporting details.
3 points
Provided details on how machine learning and data analytics
applied to the APT assigned could have prevented or reduced
the impact of the breach, but does not provide all the facts.
2 points
Partially completes assignment; however unable to provide all
the details.
1 point
Partially completes assignment; however contains significant
mistakes.
0 points
No submission.
2.3: Evaluate the influence of context and assumptions on a
problem or issue.
4 points

7. Presents a logical explanation for findings and addresses most
of the questions. Uses correct grammar and spelling.
3 points
Presents a logical explanation for findings and addresses some
of the questions. Only one or two grammatical or spelling
errors.
2 points
Presents an illogical explanation for findings and addresses only
a few of the proposed questions.
More than two grammatical or spelling errors.
1 point
Presents an illogical explanation for findings and does not
address any of the questions.
Numerous grammatical and/or spelling errors.
0 points
No submission
2.4: Formulate and support conclusions on a problem or issue.
4 points
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited
sources. Reference list entries and intext citations are correctly
formatted using the appropriate IEEE style for each type of
resource. The description appropriately used information from 3
or more authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or
trade publications, news articles, industry or government white
papers and authoritative Web sites.
3 points
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited
sources. One or two minor errors in IEEE format for in-text
citations and/or reference list entries. The description
appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative
sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade publications,
news articles, industry or government white papers and
authoritative Web sites.
2 points

8. Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited
sources. No more than 5 minor errors in IEEE format for in-text
citations and/or reference list entries. The description
appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative
sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade
Work publications, news articles, industry or government white
papers and authoritative Web sites.
1 point
Work contains a reference list containing entries for cited
sources. Work contains no more than 5 minor errors in IEEE
format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. The
description appropriately used information from 2 or more
authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade
publications, news articles, industry or government white papers
and authoritative Web sites.
0 points
Reference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure
to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for
information used in the paper.
The description appropriately used information from 0 or more
authoritative sources, i.e. journal articles, industry or trade
publications, news articles, industry or government white papers
and authoritative Web sites.
2.5: Assess the implications and consequences of particular
conclusions.
4 points
Makes excellent use of information sources to increase
familiarity on the topic and focus inquiry and seeks out
additional information to apply it productively to the topic.
Clearly identifies contradictory information or inconsistent data
and strives to reconcile contradictions.
3 points
Makes good use of information sources to increase familiarity
on the topic and focus inquiry and seeks out additional

9. information to apply it to the problem. Identifies information or
inconsistent data and tries to reconcile contradictions.
2 points
Attempts to use information sources to increase familiarity on
the topic and tries to focus inquiry. Seeks additional
information but leaves gaps in how that information was
applied. Fails to fully reconcile contradictory information or
inconsistent data.
1 point
Inadequately attempts to use information sources to increase
familiarity on the topic and tries to focus inquiry. Includes
numerous areas where contradictory information and
inconsistent data that is not acknowledged. Includes numerous
contradictions.
0 points
Fails to use information sources to increase familiarity on the
topic or to focus inquiry. Fails to determine if gaps exist or to
seek additional information to address gaps. Leaves
contradictory information or inconsistent data may be clearly
evident and fails to identify such issues or reconcile
contradictions.
13.1.5: Explain the security implications of machine learning.
4 points
Clearly articulates the benefits and limitations of data analytics
and machine learning to cybersecurity challenges.
Provides an in-depth explanation of how machine learning could
have been applied to prevent the advanced persistent threat
(APT) or minimize the impact.
Successfully analyzes the existing machine learning products
that provide cutting-edge tools and techniques, and
cybersecurity value to the organization.
3 points
Clearly articulates the benefits and limitations of data analytics
and machine learning to cybersecurity challenges.

10. Analyzes how machine learning could have been applied to
prevent the advanced persistent threat (APT) or minimize the
impact.
Provides a description of the existing machine learning products
that provide cutting-edge tools and techniques, and
cybersecurity value to the organization.
2 points
Evaluates the benefits and limitations of data analytics and
machine learning to cybersecurity challenges.
Explains how machine learning could have been applied to
prevent the advanced persistent threat (APT) or minimize the
impact.
Provides a limited description of the existing machine learning
products that provide cutting-edge tools and techniques, and
cybersecurity value to the organization
1 point
Attempts to explain the benefits and limitations of data
analytics and machine learning to cybersecurity challenges.
Attempts to explain how machine learning could have been
applied to prevent the advanced persistent threat (APT) or
minimize the impact.
Does not provide a limited description of the existing machine
learning products that provide cutting-edge tools and
techniques, and cybersecurity value to the organization.
0 points
Does not evaluate the benefits and limitations of data analytics
and machine learning to cybersecurity challenges.
Does not explain how machine learning could have been applied
to prevent the advanced persistent threat (APT) or minimize the

11. impact.
Does not provide a limited description of the existing machine
learning products that provide cutting-edge tools and
techniques, and cybersecurity value to the organization
CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERVENTION PROGRAM
2
Criminal Justice Intervention Program
Name
Institution
Running head: CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERVENTION
PROGRAM 2
Criminal Justice Intervention Program
Violence is one of the vices that sickens the world today.
Violence is one of the major killers of the victims, especially
those who do not quickly receive justice at the earliest time

12. possible. The criminal intervention programs, therefore, because
sometimes there can be a delay in receiving justice since
sometimes it can be very challenging and overwhelming for the
victims of atrocities like domestic violence, sexual violence,
and human trafficking to navigate the legal system
(Cornerstonemn.org, 2019). The criminal justice intervention
programs therefore go and stand in the space for such people
who usually receive underwhelming support due to the shame
that they typically suffer and hence do not want to share about
the ordeals that they go through. The staff of the members of
the program does not just help with the obtaining of the justice,
but they also provide the survivors with the necessary supported
help that they need to go through the healing process
successfully. The kind of services that the bodies provide is
both indirect and direct support. They can also help by
protecting some of the victims who sometimes are also
witnesses in criminal cases in which they were involved. This
paper is going to give an in-depth look into Cornerstone
Criminal Justice Program.
Cornerstone is an anti-violence criminal justice program which
was established in January 1985, when they began their first
safe housing in Minnesota. The program has helped house
several crime victims and their children. Cornerstone has a
program called Day One which national referral system which
provides referrals to the victims who are seeking help.
Cornerstone has its main office in Bloomington southern
Hennepin County, another office in Brooklyn, and the other is
in Minneapolis (Cornerstonemn.org, 2019). The programs
executive director Ms. Schnabel is a lot of experience with the
interpersonal violence since she has worked in the field for 20
and more years. The programs Emergency Services Manager is
Carmen Anderson. Anderson has had experience working with
violence victims in hospitals or even in the court. Pamela
Maldonado is the victim advocacy, program manager. She uses
her extensive knowledge in public policies and social change to
ensure that the victims are adequately represented in the courts

13. and are served the of the justice that they deserve. Community
advocacy and training manager is Cheryl Kolb-Untinen. She
uses her knowledge in behavioral science and counseling to help
the victims of the domestic violence crimes to cope and to walk
them towards healing. She provides speeches in and training to
various audiences on domestic violence and compassion fatigue.
Apart from advocacy and counselling, Cornerstone provides
anti-violence training to both adults and youths.
Gender imbalance and feminism is one of the ethical issues that
may arise when evaluating the Cornerstone program. Despite
the fact the program was initiated and founded by both men and
women, the current system and structure of leadership are quite
discriminative (Dobash & Dobash, 2000). The administration
comprises of women only, and that may cause some other men
that the main agenda is about women and it is no longer about
intervening criminal justice and helping the survivors instead it
is about protecting the women exclusively. Another ethical
issue is designing as they focus more on the cure than
prevention. For them to reduce the number of abusers, they
should also focus on training the perpetrators against it.
The best way to deal with the ethical issues is by involving the
men who are interested in the program so that they do not feel
left out by the program. Most men are interested in the issues
that pertain in the protection of both genders against violence
(Dobash & Dobash, 2000). Leaving such men out does not only
condemn them but also tell the male gender that they do not
need any protection against anything. It is, therefore, a very
prudential thing for the Cornerstone group to consider revising
their leadership and organizational structures to become more
gender sensitive. On the second issue, they should probably
start working on more preventive measures then putting more
resources on the recovery process. The recovery process is very
helpful, but they should work on ways of protecting people and
preventing them from having to go through the heinous
atrocities as their fellas have before.

14. References
Cornerstonemn.org. (2019). Cornerstone comprehensive adult
programs | Cornerstone. Retrieved from
https://cornerstonemn.org/for-adults/
Dobash, R., & Dobash, R. (2000). Evaluating Criminal Justice
Interventions for Domestic Violence. Crime & Delinquency,
46(2), 252-270. doi: 10.1177/0011128700046002007