Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Abby Anderson Exec.Dir., Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance Co-Chair, National Juvenile Justice Network Executive Committee.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Abby Anderson Exec.Dir., Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance Co-Chair, National Juvenile Justice Network Executive Committee."— Presentation transcript:

1 Abby Anderson Exec.Dir., Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance Co-Chair, National Juvenile Justice Network Executive Committee

2 Two Hats: NJJN member and national efforts: – change economic incentives, and – use economic crisis as an opportunity to push reform Connecticut strategies: – change the dialogue, and – address economic realities using: data Strategic partnerships Top secret strategy revealed here for the first time

3 Wait. Is it all about the Money?

4 Our main goal is to do what is right for kids and for public safety. Economic strategy is only ONE tool in the tool box.

5 If it is only about saving money now, as advocates we’ve already lost. “…our short-term election cycle discourages long-term systems change. In brief, politicians are rewarded at the voting booth for cutting ribbons today, rather than cutting recidivism rates tomorrow.” Jonathan Greenblatt, Huffington Post, May 10, 2011 Doing the right thing is not always today’s cheapest option. It is ALWAYS the most fiscally responsible thing to spend money EFFECTIVELY today to SAVE MONEY later.

6 Changes that do save states money: Fiscal realignment models “Rightsizing” institutions Evidence-based practices

7 “The Real Costs and Benefits of Change” NJJN paper published in 2010 digs into fiscal issues related to reform. – Discusses strategies to achieve reform, even during difficult fiscal times. – Includes a profile of successful fiscal realignment models. – Shows that downsizing institutions can create a new revenue stream. – Discusses proven, cost-effective evidence- based practices. Available at www.njjn.org

8 Fiscal Realignment Models Provide local jurisdictions with financial incentives to keep youth out of state facilities. Encourage localities to treat young offenders through community- and evidence-based programs rather than simply to lock them up in state-funded institutions.

9 RECLAIM Ohio Created in 1993. Counties receive funding based on: 1.Average felony adjudications, to ensure counties with higher crime rates can ensure public safety AND 2.How many youth are sent to the state institutions – the fewer you send one year the more money you get the next year to spend on community programs Since RECLAIM’s enactment, Ohio has reduced the number of youth committed to secure state facilities by 42% and the average daily population of DYS institutions has dropped by more than 1,000 youth. DYS estimates that every dollar spent on RECLAIM saves between $11 and $45 in commitment and processing costs. Sources: Amanda Petteruti, Nastassia Walsh, and Tracy Velázquez, “The Costs of Confinement: Why Good Juvenile Justice Policies Make Good Fiscal Sense,” Justice Policy Institute (May 2009), citing “2008 Directory of Adult and Juvenile Correctional Departments, Institutions, Agencies, and Probation and Parole Authorities,” American Correctional Association (2008): 5. - “Average DYS Institutional Population by Fiscal Year,” Ohio Department of Youth Services (2006). 2010 data from DYS public meeting held on January 28, 2010.

10 Redeploy Illinois Began in 2004 Counties agree to cut by 25% the number of youth they send to state juvenile prisons. (Using the prior 3-year average) Then, the state reimburses counties for the funds spent to maintain the youth locally. During the first three years, Redeploy sites: – Diverted 382 youth from commitment; – Lowered the number of commitments by an average of 51%; – And saved $18.7 million. Source: “Redeploy Illinois Annual Report: Implementation and Impact,” legislative report (November 2008), available at.

11 Growth of Fiscal Realignment Models Redeploy Illinois is now a statewide, permanent program. Ohio continues to expand RECLAIM. New York bill, Re-Direct New York, is pending in the legislature. Michigan is exploring changing their state/county reimbursement model to encourage the use of evidence- based, best practice models.

12 Rightsizing Remove kids from institutions who don’t REALLY need to be there. Many states have drastically reduced facility populations Results More efficient use of fewer dollars Better outcomes for kids Increased public safety

13 Alabama Rightsizing: The average daily DYS population shrank 43% from 2006 – 2010. 1 Wiser spending: Decreased incarceration rates allowed DYS to absorb a budget cut and still increase the percentage of its remaining appropriations dedicated to non-residential community-based services to the tune of $2.4 million between 07-10. 2 Increasing public safety: As commitments to DYS decreased between 2006 and 2009, juvenile arrests also declined by 3%. 3 1.Allen Peaton, “Shrinking Smart: Increasing Fiscal Responsibility in Grants for Community-Based Services,” JDAI National Inter-Site Conference (October 6, 2010). 2.Ibid. 3.“Crime in Alabama 2006,” Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center (2006): 10, available at and “Crime in Alabama 2009,” Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center (2009): 11, available at.

14 Texas Rightsizing: Between 2006 and 2010, TYC’s residential population decreased 62%. 1 Wiser Spending: The closure of two facilities saved TYC $115 million, $45.7 million of which was reinvested in juvenile probation. 2 Increasing public safety: Juvenile arrests in Texas declined by 8.6 percent from 2006 to 2009. 3 1.“TYC Population Trends,” Texas Youth Commission, available at. 2.Marc Levin, “Texas Criminal Justice Reform: Lower Crime, Lower Cost,” Texas Public Policy Foundation Center for Effective Justice (January 2010): 2, available at. 3.“Crime in Texas 2006,” Texas Department of Public Safety (2007): 83, available at and “Crime in Texas 2009,” Texas Department of Public Safety (2010): 66, available at.

15 Fiscal Policy Center The National Juvenile Justice Network’s new Fiscal Policy Center will ensure that state advocates: – Fully understand their state budget process and implications – Have tools and skills to influence state budget process – Can serve as in-state experts regarding how to maximize Federal reimbursement opportunities The center will also help advocates to ensure that their jurisdiction is ready - in terms of skills and data collection - to take advantage of cost-benefit analysis tools available through Vera’s Cost-Benefit Analysis Unit and Knowledge Bank.

16 Evidence and Community-Based Programs Are Cost-Effective Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care provides a $88,953 net benefit to crime victims and taxpayers per participant. Functional Family Therapy provides a $49,776 net benefit to crime victims and taxpayers per participant and reduces a juvenile’s recidivism rate by 18.1 percent. Multi-Systemic Therapy provides a benefit of $13.36 for every dollar spent as well as an $17,694 net benefit to crime victims and taxpayers per participant. Source: Elizabeth K. Drake, Steve Aos, and Marna G. Miller, “Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Crime and Criminal Justice Costs: Implications in Washington State,” Victims and Offenders (4:170-196, 2009): 186, available at.

17 National Polls Support Fiscal Messages Recent polls show that the general public believes that rehabilitation and treatment can reduce crime AND is willing to pay extra taxes to provide those services. Source: “Polling on Public Attitudes About the Treatment of Young Offenders,” National Juvenile Justice Network, June 2010, available at http://njjn.org/media/resources/ public/resource_633.pdf

18 How to Deliver the Message Messages need to have balance Don’t focus only on cost savings Recent Florida message from The Children’s Campaign: “From a financial perspective, investments in children bring the highest rate of return. Conversely, cuts to their programs and services result in the most burdensome down the road costs due to failure on many levels. It’s not whether we pay but when!”

19 Connecticut Reform when the refrain is always, “It’s too expensive!” Change the dialogue Use data to undermine popular myths and prove cost efficiencies Mystery strategy

20 Connecticut Change the dialogue Strategy: Win the talking point battle so that “it’s too expensive” is a less palatable argument Example: Diana Gonzalez’ testimony in 2006

21 David Burgos 1988 - 2005 Diagnosed with bi-polar disorder and depression, David hung himself with a sheet after spending 4 months in adult jail awaiting trial on a probation violation.

22 Testimony of David’s Mother “I’m tired of reading the articles in the paper and realizing that this is all about money – that people think a change is too expensive. I’m here today to tell you that it isn’t about the money. It’s about doing the right thing.” -Diana Gonzalez, March 13, 2006

23 Diana’s testimony continued: We do spend money now, but wrongfully and foolishly We must invest in things we want (business model) Invest -> do the work -> see rewards -> save money in long run by doing it right the first time The phrase “It is too expensive” purports that: – Our priorities are firstly, money; and secondly, children. – Youth aren’t worth the cost or effort to change If it was your child, would it be worth the investment?

24 Connecticut Diana’s testimony changed the public debate. No legislator in the building willing to go on record saying he or she opposed Raise the Age CT because “it’s too expensive.”

25 Connecticut Reality that fiscal ramifications DO have to be considered as part of the equation. Our strategy for doing that: – Show them the data – Tell them what the data says – Partner with folks who will surprise them

26 Connecticut Strategy Implementation: Report Dec. 2010 – Safe and Sound Presentation at the Legislative Office Building Jan 2011

27 Connecticut Report released in December 2010

28 Connecticut Work with state agency partners to get: Details on system utilization Long term changes and trends Information on specific programs Examples they want to highlight – showing success and economic efficiency In CT that meant partnering with: Judicial Branch, Court Support Services Division Department of Children and Families

29 Connecticut Source: CT Department of Children and Families Juveniles Committed Delinquent

30 Given that the average confinement in the Connecticut Juvenile Training School costs taxpayers about $133,920*, dropping from just under 600/year to just over 200/year represents significant savings. *Per diem of $744 multiplied over and average stay of six months. (FYI, this per diem used to be a lot higher. It was $1,000/day in 2005) Connecticut Source: CT Department of Children and Families, CJTS Advisory Board reports, 2005 and 2010

31 Connecticut Source: State of CT Judicial Branch

32 Connecticut Detention averages about $377/day in Connecticut. Average detention stay is 14-days. Every kid kept out of detention should save the state $5,300. With 493 status offenders in detention in FY 06-07, and zero by FY 08-09, that’s $2.6 million in savings. $1.1 million was spent to create diversion programs in the states four largest “feeder” communities.

33 Connecticut Source: State of CT Judicial Branch Each percentage point drop in recidivism means about 110 fewer delinquent acts, 110 fewer police calls, court cases, and so on.

34 Connecticut Presentation at Legislative Office Building in Hartford, CT on January 2011 Sponsored by Appropriations Committee co-chairs 100 attendees Worked off of Safe and Sound report philosophy Specific to Raise the Age Implementation

35 The Impact of 16-year-olds Projected system increase:40% Actual system increase:22% Note that the system is smaller than it was just a few years ago. Source: Judicial Branch

36 Financial Impact is Less Than Anticipated Unspent money to implement Raise the Age in FY 2010 $7.1 million Estimated unspent in FY2011 $4.7 million Total $11.8 million Source: Office of Fiscal Analysis

37 What does all this mean? There was room to absorb 16-year-olds There IS much more room to absorb 17-year-olds than we anticipated, and at a LOWER COST than anticipated

38 Connecticut’s TOP SECRET Strategy Revealed

39 Connecticut Have Stupidly Good Luck Work in the only state to “turn blue” in the 2010 elections Get a Governor committed to JJ reform who makes your first legislative champion his deputy writing the criminal justice portion of his budget. Have your two biggest legislative champions co-chair the Appropriations Committee Strategy: Avoid screwing up the above

40 Contact Information Abby Anderson Executive Director 2470 Fairfield Avenue Bridgeport, CT 06605 203-579-2727 (p) abby@ctjja.org www.ctjja.org Sarah Bryer Director 1710 Rhode Island Ave., NW, 10 th Floor Washington, DC 20036 bryer@juvjustice.org www.njjn.org


Download ppt "Abby Anderson Exec.Dir., Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance Co-Chair, National Juvenile Justice Network Executive Committee."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google