Why Excluding “Justice-Tech” Nonprofits Like Season of Justice from the Criminal Justice Ecosystem Is a Mistake.
Angela Mew, Executive Director
October 2025
Within the criminal justice nonprofit world, most organizations fall into three familiar categories:
- Advocacy and reform groups – organizations that work to change laws, policies, and public perception of the justice system.
- Research institutes – organizations that study systemic inequities, data trends, and the impact of criminal justice practices.
- Direct-service providers – organizations that support victims, offenders, or families affected by incarceration.
But there’s another category, where organizations like Season of Justice (SOJ) fall into. An organization that funds and supports the use of technology and science to strengthen fairness, accuracy, and truth in the justice process. Too often, these nonprofits are seen as outliers instead of integral partners. That separation is a mistake and one that limits the nonprofit field’s collective impact and here’s why:
1. It Narrows What “Justice Work” Means
The criminal justice nonprofit ecosystem has largely defined itself around people and policy, not process and science. Advocacy and service programs are essential, but by focusing almost entirely on reform and reentry, the field overlooks a key dimension of justice: accuracy. DNA testing, forensic genetic genealogy, and other emerging tools can solve violent crimes and prevent wrongful convictions and further harm in the community. Yet because “justice-tech” organizations don’t fit neatly into existing funding or advocacy categories, their work is often treated as peripheral. This narrow definition keeps the ecosystem from embracing the full picture of what justice requires.
2. It Reinforces Silos Between Reform and Results
Most reform nonprofits work to fix systemic problems like racial bias, over-incarceration, sentencing disparities. At the same time, nonprofits like SOJ focus on solving cases and advancing truth through science. These two missions may seem different, but they actually serve the same goal: a justice system that is fair, accountable, and credible. When tech-driven groups are excluded, the ecosystem becomes siloed. Reform nonprofits miss the chance to pair policy change with concrete outcomes like case closures or data-driven improvements in investigations. Additionally, justice-tech organizations miss the benefit of non-forensic focused advocacy networks that could amplify ethical, privacy, and equity standards. Integration strengthens both.
3. It Limits Collaboration and Learning
By keeping forensic innovation at the margins, the nonprofit ecosystem loses valuable opportunities for shared learning. Advocacy groups could use data from solved cold cases to illustrate where system failures occur. Victim-support organizations could collaborate with groups like SOJ to bring closure to families. Academic or policy nonprofits could study the social impact of modern investigative methods. Instead, each sector works in isolation, researchers studying problems, advocates demanding change, and forensic nonprofits doing casework, when, together, they could form a more complete and responsive justice network.
4. It Creates Barriers to Funding and Visibility
Many funders organize their portfolios around familiar categories like criminal justice reform or victim services. Justice-tech organizations rarely fit those definitions. As a result, they are often overlooked in grant programs or excluded from strategic coalitions that shape funding priorities.
This undercuts innovation and slows progress. If funders recognized justice-tech nonprofits as legitimate parts of the ecosystem, alongside advocacy, research, and service groups, they could invest in a more balanced and evidence-based approach to justice.
5. It Misses a Critical Opportunity for Public Trust
Public confidence in the justice system depends on two things: fairness and accuracy. Advocacy nonprofits strengthen fairness by challenging bias and inequity. Justice-tech nonprofits strengthen accuracy by ensuring the right people are held accountable and the innocent are cleared. When these missions are disconnected, the public sees a fragmented effort, some groups fighting the system, others operating around it. But when they’re aligned, they model a holistic vision of justice and one that is compassionate, transparent, and grounded in truth.
The Path Forward
The nonprofit ecosystem should expand its definition of “criminal justice work” to include technological and forensic innovation as a core component.
That means funders, coalitions, and policy leaders should:
- Invite justice-tech organizations like SOJ into strategic networks and national conversations.
- Fund cross-sector collaborations between science, policy, and community work.
- Frame case-solving, DNA testing, and accuracy efforts as justice equity tools, not niche technical projects.
Justice is not just about reforming the system, it’s about improving its reliability and restoring faith in its outcomes. Excluding nonprofits like Season of Justice leaves that work unfinished.
In solidarity,
Angela Mew
Executive Director, Season of Justice