Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Community Programs and Court Services Overview and Strategic Direction Teresa Price, Deputy Secretary of Community Programs, Michael Rieder, Deputy Secretary.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Community Programs and Court Services Overview and Strategic Direction Teresa Price, Deputy Secretary of Community Programs, Michael Rieder, Deputy Secretary."— Presentation transcript:

1 Community Programs and Court Services Overview and Strategic Direction Teresa Price, Deputy Secretary of Community Programs, Michael Rieder, Deputy Secretary of Court Services, and William Lassiter, Director of Communications

2 Presentation Objectives Provide an overview of the current structure of community programs and court services Provide an overview of the current structure of community programs and court services Current needs in each DJJDP section Current needs in each DJJDP section What changes would be necessary to successfully implement HB 1414 What changes would be necessary to successfully implement HB 1414

3 Department Overview

4 Department Vision and Mission Our Vision A seamless, comprehensive juvenile justice system which provides the most effective services to youth and their families at the right time in the most appropriate settings. Our Mission To promote public safety and juvenile delinquency prevention, intervention, and treatment through the operation of a seamless, comprehensive juvenile justice system.

5 Department Goals: To promote public safety as the cornerstone of North Carolina's juvenile justice system. To promote public safety as the cornerstone of North Carolina's juvenile justice system. To promote juvenile delinquency prevention, intervention, and treatment at the state and community levels so that juvenile crime and delinquency are reduced. To promote juvenile delinquency prevention, intervention, and treatment at the state and community levels so that juvenile crime and delinquency are reduced. To further develop and maintain a comprehensive, quality-focused juvenile justice system driven by research and evidence-based practices in all budgetary components of the department. To further develop and maintain a comprehensive, quality-focused juvenile justice system driven by research and evidence-based practices in all budgetary components of the department.

6 Overview of Comprehensive Strategy for Juvenile Justice

7 DJJDP System Overview Staff of 1,905 after our most recent RIF. Staff of 1,905 after our most recent RIF. 1,628 in the field in various positions to include: 1,628 in the field in various positions to include: 595 Court Services (Court Counselors, Supervisors, Chiefs, Area Administrators, and Support staff) 595 Court Services (Court Counselors, Supervisors, Chiefs, Area Administrators, and Support staff) 10 Regional Consultants for Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils/Community Programs (there are 99 JCPC’s and a myriad of community “placement” options) 10 Regional Consultants for Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils/Community Programs (there are 99 JCPC’s and a myriad of community “placement” options)

8 DJJDP System Overview 1,161 – Staff associated with Facilities 1,161 – Staff associated with Facilities Includes Professional Staff both regionally and in the facilities Includes Professional Staff both regionally and in the facilities And, ancillary and other staff across the Dept (including maintenance, cooks, Business Officers, transportation drivers, processing and administrative assistants, etc.) And, ancillary and other staff across the Dept (including maintenance, cooks, Business Officers, transportation drivers, processing and administrative assistants, etc.) 149 in the Central Office to support the field (7.8% of workforce supporting 92% of field services) 149 in the Central Office to support the field (7.8% of workforce supporting 92% of field services)

9 DJJDP System Overview 99 Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils 99 Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils 582 programs plus an additional 65 gang assessments/programs that employ approximately 1,250 people 582 programs plus an additional 65 gang assessments/programs that employ approximately 1,250 people Served nearly 30,000 juveniles statewide in FY Served nearly 30,000 juveniles statewide in FY These programs along with other community initiatives have been able to prevent juvenile crime which is at a ten year low These programs along with other community initiatives have been able to prevent juvenile crime which is at a ten year low

10 Complaints Received: CY (Delinquent and Undisciplined Complaints) 8.9% Decrease

11 Juvenile Crime Rate: CY Rate is of Delinquent Complaints Received per 1,000 juveniles age Juvenile Crime Rate in NC has decreased 12% from 2000 to 2008.

12 NC Juvenile Crime Facts Approximately 2-3% of juvenile crime each year are for A-E felonies Approximately 2-3% of juvenile crime each year are for A-E felonies Approximately 69% of complaints received are for misdemeanor offenses; and 12% are for infractions or status offenses Approximately 69% of complaints received are for misdemeanor offenses; and 12% are for infractions or status offenses Of complaints received annually, approximately 75% are committed by males Of complaints received annually, approximately 75% are committed by males

13 Complaints Received Offenses: CY 2008 N=43,797

14 Top Ten Juvenile Crimes CY 2008 Charged Offense# Offenses Simple assault4,417 Larceny - Misdemeanor3,315 Simple affray1,881 Breaking and or entering (f)1,810 Injury to real property1,637 Disorderly Conduct at School1,537 Communicating threats1,369 Ungovernable < 161,306 Truant < 161,200 Larceny after breaking or entering1,180 TOTAL20,760 The top 10 juvenile crimes account for 47% of charged offenses in 2008.

15 Time of Juvenile Crime Offense Times on Complaints Received, CY 2008 N = 38,894

16 Detention Admissions: CY 2002 – CY 2008 Approximately 5,000 distinct juveniles per year are admitted to detention. These numbers reflect admissions to State and County facilities.

17 YDC Commitment Trends and Rate: CY Rate = YDC Commitments per 1,000 juveniles age

18 YDC Trends The average length of stay in Youth Development Centers 10 years ago (1998) was 248 days. By 2008, the average had increased to 357 days The average length of stay in Youth Development Centers 10 years ago (1998) was 248 days. By 2008, the average had increased to 357 days The average daily population in 1998 was 925 juveniles. YDC commitments have drastically decreased, as the 2008 average daily population was 439 The average daily population in 1998 was 925 juveniles. YDC commitments have drastically decreased, as the 2008 average daily population was 439 The average rate of commitment is 0.48 per 1,000 juveniles age The average rate of commitment is 0.48 per 1,000 juveniles age 10-17

19 Risks of Juveniles Disposed in Court *All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points each year; and 2% on average are not assessed The overall needs level of juveniles disposed in court each year is approximately:  Low Risk – 42%  Medium Risk – 41%  High Risk – 15% It is therefore imperative that prevention and intervention programs remain in place to ensure that the proportion of high risk offenders remains small. It is therefore imperative that prevention and intervention programs remain in place to ensure that the proportion of high risk offenders remains small.

20 Risks of Juveniles Disposed in Court (cont) *All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points each year; and 2% on average are not assessed 11% of juveniles were under 12 when they received their first referral 11% of juveniles were under 12 when they received their first referral 27% had some type of assault history prior to the current complaint 27% had some type of assault history prior to the current complaint 32% had some type of substance abuse history that is being treated or needs further assessment/treatment 32% had some type of substance abuse history that is being treated or needs further assessment/treatment

21 Risks of Juveniles Disposed in Court (cont) *All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points each year; and 2% on average are not assessed 61% reportedly had serious problems; 21% had moderate problems; and 8% had minor problems in school 61% reportedly had serious problems; 21% had moderate problems; and 8% had minor problems in school 13% of assessments revealed gang membership or association (overall this number is about 9% of distinct juveniles) 13% of assessments revealed gang membership or association (overall this number is about 9% of distinct juveniles) 34% of parents were either unwilling or unable to supervise their own children 34% of parents were either unwilling or unable to supervise their own children

22 School-Based Complaints: FY N=40,621 The proportion of school-based offenses increased 2% since CY 2008.

23 School-Based Complaints: FY N=17,037

24 Suspension and Expulsion Data National Data Over 3 million students are suspended per year (3.3 million in 2006). The average number of suspensions per state is over 64,000. The average number of suspensions and expulsions as a percent of enrollment is 6.9%. Source : National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2008

25 Suspension and Expulsion Data North Carolina One out of every 10 students were suspended from North Carolina public schools A total of 308,010 short-term suspensions given to 156,072 different students A total of 5,225 long-term suspensions given to 4,182 different students Source: N.C. DPI Consolidated Data Report:

26 Suspension and Expulsion Data Minority Suspension Trends Black / Multiracial students received over half of all short-term suspensions since the school year Source: N.C. DPI Consolidated Data Report:

27 Suspension and Expulsion Data Minority Suspension Trends Black males are the most likely of any single group to be suspended Black males make up 15.7% of the student population in the state and accounted for 55% of all short-term suspensions Source: N.C. DPI Consolidated Data Report:

28 From Risk and Needs to Current Practices One of the most significant legislative changes made this past session was the mandatory closing of many Level III and IV mental health youth group homes. According to a survey done through the Court Services Division of DJJDP, there are a potential 500+ youth that will need an alternative, long- term, residential placement. Court Counselors are already working hard through Child and Family Support Teams to try and find immediate, appropriate placement options.

29 DJJDP’s Current Budget Certified Budget: Certified Budget: 2009 = $148,752,858 (8% reduction from 2008) 2009 = $148,752,858 (8% reduction from 2008) An Additional 4% was held back by The Office of Budget and Management or an additional $5.92 Million. Remaining allocation $142,672,000 An Additional 4% was held back by The Office of Budget and Management or an additional $5.92 Million. Remaining allocation $142,672, = $147,183,945 (9% reduction from 2008) 2010 = $147,183,945 (9% reduction from 2008)

30 DJJDP’s Budget History

31 Youth Population and DJJDP Allocation Trends:

32 DJJDP Budget Cuts What we lost in the 2009 – 2011 budget? What we lost in the 2009 – 2011 budget? Support Our Students (statewide afterschool programming) Support Our Students (statewide afterschool programming) Governor’s One-on-One (statewide mentoring for at-risk and court-involved youth) Governor’s One-on-One (statewide mentoring for at-risk and court-involved youth) Center for the Prevention of School Violence (statewide technical assistance to schools for violence prevention and crisis planning) Center for the Prevention of School Violence (statewide technical assistance to schools for violence prevention and crisis planning)

33 DJJDP Budget Cuts 2 Eckerd Wilderness Camps 2 Eckerd Wilderness Camps 2 Multipurpose Group Homes 2 Multipurpose Group Homes Critical Youth Development Center/Central Office/Court staff positions Critical Youth Development Center/Central Office/Court staff positions Cuts to other contractors (Project Challenge, Boys and Girls’ Club, Juvenile Assessment Center) Cuts to other contractors (Project Challenge, Boys and Girls’ Club, Juvenile Assessment Center) Substantial & critical losses in operating capital (continuation funding), repairs / renovations funds, training dollars, & all capital for the 5 th new YDC Substantial & critical losses in operating capital (continuation funding), repairs / renovations funds, training dollars, & all capital for the 5 th new YDC

34 Good News New additions to DJJDP via the Governor’s Office and Commerce through ARRA (“Recovery”) funding – New additions to DJJDP via the Governor’s Office and Commerce through ARRA (“Recovery”) funding – $6 million gang reduction/intervention pilot program. Involves 2 regions in the state and 2 YDC’s (Cabarrus/Jackson and Edgecombe) $6 million gang reduction/intervention pilot program. Involves 2 regions in the state and 2 YDC’s (Cabarrus/Jackson and Edgecombe) $5 million in JCPC/county funding targeting gang prevention, intervention and assessments $5 million in JCPC/county funding targeting gang prevention, intervention and assessments

35 Good News (cont) $1.5 million for time-limited Court Counselors and supervisors (new staff) $1.5 million for time-limited Court Counselors and supervisors (new staff) $950,000 in Dept. of Labor / Workforce Development funding for vocational services in YDC’s $950,000 in Dept. of Labor / Workforce Development funding for vocational services in YDC’s Other GCC & ARRA dollars to improve / overhaul our grants management, reporting, client tracking and web interaction services Other GCC & ARRA dollars to improve / overhaul our grants management, reporting, client tracking and web interaction services

36 DMC

37 Legend Relative Rate Index by County Complaints Petitioned (Approved) for Court Relative Rate Index for Minority Youth for Complaints Petitioned (Approved) for Court FY Description of the Relative Rate Index A relative rate index value that is:  Less than 1 indicates that minority youth were less likely to be represented at that decision point  Exactly 1 indicates that white and minority youth were equally likely to be represented at that decision point  More than 1 indicates that minority youth were more likely to represented at that decision point

38 Legend Relative Rate Index by County Detention Admissions Relative Rate Index for Minority Youth for Detention Admissions FY Description of the Relative Rate Index A relative rate index value that is:  Less than 1 indicates that minority youth were less likely to be represented at that decision point  Exactly 1 indicates that white and minority youth were equally likely to be represented at that decision point  More than 1 indicates that minority youth were more likely to represented at that decision point

39 Legend Relative Rate Index by County Youth Development Center Relative Rate Index for Minority Youth for YDC Commitments FY Description of the Relative Rate Index A relative rate index value that is:  Less than 1 indicates that minority youth were less likely to be represented at that decision point  Exactly 1 indicates that white and minority youth were equally likely to be represented at that decision point  More than 1 indicates that minority youth were more likely to represented at that decision point

40 Legend Relative Rate Index by County Complaints Received Relative Rate Index for Minority Youth for Complaints Received by the Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention FY Description of the Relative Rate Index A relative rate index value that is:  Less than 1 indicates that minority youth were less likely to be represented at that decision point  Exactly 1 indicates that white and minority youth were equally likely to be represented at that decision point  More than 1 indicates that minority youth were more likely to represented at that decision point

41 Adding 16 and 17 Year Olds

42 Population Pathways 42 Arrests of Persons 16 and 17 Years of Age 30,702 Detention 3,611 (12%) Post-release Supervision 550 (2%) Community Supervision 8,720 (28%) Adjudication 9,270 (30%) Diversion 5,324 (17%) Commitment (YDC) 550(2%) Outcomes of Serving in Juvenile System 30,702 Detention 5,913 (19%) Post-release Supervision 288 (1%) Community Supervision 4,555 (15%) Adjudication 10,935 (35%) Prison/Jail 1,825 (6%) Unsupervised Probation 3,495 (11%) Other e.g., Com. Svc, Restitution) 1,060 (3%) Outcomes of Serving in Adult System 30,702 Total receiving services*: 14,594(48%) Total receiving services*: 6,935 (23%) * Includes services prior to and after adjudication. Does not include unsupervised probation, as it is not a service; also does not include detention. Because it was not possible to separate out the proportion of offenders receiving community service or restitution, this category has not been counted. Does not include post-release services because this would double count services. The juvenile calculation excludes persons transferred to the adult system. ** It is unclear whether these persons ultimately were prosecuted; therefore, deferred prosecution is calculated as an additional cost and not a population pathway. If these persons were prosecuted, they would be included in the adjudication population; if they were not, they would be included in the dismissal pathway. Age 16- 3,924 Age Age Age 16- 2,050 Age 16- 1,573 Age Age Age 16- 4,205 Age 16- 2,396 Age 16- 1,625 Age 16- 4,921 Age 16- 2,661 Age 16– 4,444 Dismissal 19,767 (65%) Age 16– 8,895 Closure 6,157 (20%) Dismissal 9,876 (32%) Age 16- 2,771 Transfers to Adult Jurisdiction 40 (< 1%) Deferred Prosecution **555 (2%)

43 Community Programs

44 Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Eckerd Wilderness Education Program Project Challenge Juvenile Assessment Center SOS (Support Our Students) Governor’s One-on-One Center for the Prevention of School Violence Boys and Girls’ Clubs

45 DJJDP Community Programs FY Programs eliminated Programs cut Programs not cut

46 Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils

47 Part 6. Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils § 143B ‑ 543. Legislative intent. It is the intent of the General Assembly to prevent juveniles who are at risk from becoming delinquent. The primary intent of this Part is to develop community ‑ based alternatives to youth development centers and to provide community ‑ based delinquency, substance abuse, and gang prevention strategies and programs. Additionally, it is the intent of the General Assembly to provide noninstitutional dispositional alternatives that will protect the community and the juveniles.

48 JCPC Funded Programs Keeping 1% of those served by JCPC funded programs out of YDCs represents a cost savings equal to more than the total budget for JCPCs. Keeping 1% of those served by JCPC funded programs out of YDCs represents a cost savings equal to more than the total budget for JCPCs.

49 Youth Population and JCPC Allocation Trends:

50 Overview of Comprehensive Strategy for Juvenile Justice

51 JCPC Program Types Residential Programs Residential Programs Restorative Programs Restorative Programs Clinical Treatment Programs Clinical Treatment Programs Structured Activities Structured Activities

52 JCPC Residential Programs Group Homes Group Homes Temporary Shelter Care Temporary Shelter Care Runaway Shelter Runaway Shelter Specialized Foster Care Specialized Foster Care Temporary Foster Care Temporary Foster Care

53 JCPC Restorative Programs Teen Court Teen Court Restorative Intervention Restorative Intervention Mediation Mediation Restitution (Monetary and Community Service) Restitution (Monetary and Community Service)

54 JCPC Clinical Treatment Programs Individual/Group/Family Therapy Individual/Group/Family Therapy Home-Based Family Counseling Home-Based Family Counseling Substance Abuse Treatment Substance Abuse Treatment Sex Offender Treatment Sex Offender Treatment

55 JCPC Structured Activities Structured Day Programming Structured Day Programming Mentoring Mentoring Parent/Family Skill Building Parent/Family Skill Building Interpersonal Skill Building Interpersonal Skill Building Experiential Skill Building Experiential Skill Building Tutoring/Academic Enhancement Tutoring/Academic Enhancement Vocational Development Vocational Development

56 Multipurpose Juvenile Homes

57 The program has been contracted to Methodist Home for Children since 1993 All youth received in the Multipurpose Homes are referred by their local juvenile court and range in age from 11 to 17 Two-thirds of those youth admitted are still enrolled in school but are performing poorly in all academic pursuits

58 Alamance Alexander Alleghany Anson Ashe Avery Bertie Bladen Brunswick Buncombe Burke Cabarrus Caldwell CamdenCaswell Catawba Chatham Cherokee Chowan Clay Cleveland Columbus Craven Cumberland Currituck Dare Davidson Davie Duplin Durham Edgecombe Forsyth Franklin Gaston Gates Graham Granville Greene Guilford Halifax Harnett Haywood Henderson Hertford Hoke Hyde Iredell Jackson Johnston Jones Lee Lenoir Lincoln Mcdowell Macon Madison Martin Mecklenburg Mitchell Montgomery Moore Nash New Hanover Northampton Onslow Orange Pamlico Pasquotank Pender Perquimans Person Pitt Polk Randolph Richmond Robeson Rockingham Rowan Rutherford Sampson Scotland Stanly Stokes Surry Swain Transylvania Tyrrell Union Vance Wake Warren Washington Watauga Wayne Wilkes Wilson Yadkin Yancey 1 1 Multipurpose Juvenile Home Program Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Beaufort 4 Carteret Franklin Home Judicial District 30 * * * * * Lumberton Home Judicial Dist. 16A&16B Goldsboro Home Judicial Dist. 8 Winton Home Judicial Dist. 6A&6B Edenton Home Judicial Dist. 1 & 2

59 Multipurpose Juvenile Homes 86% of discharged youth were readmitted to their home schools 35 of the 44 youth served in continuing care had no violations of their community supervision standards while receiving continuing care Evaluation data show that in the six months prior to admission to a Multipurpose Home, 108 adjudications occurred, but during the six months subsequent to discharge, only 28 adjudications occurred

60 Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Parental accountability/involvement was improved in a vast majority (72%) of cases 27% of the admitted youth were functioning at grade level in reading at the time of admission, with 48% functioning at grade level at the time of discharge Two youth received a post-secondary scholarship through Methodist Home for Children

61 Eckerd Wilderness Education Program

62 Since 1978, EYA has contracted with NC to provide Foster Care Camp services to youth with behavioral, emotional, and delinquency problems Since 1978, EYA has contracted with NC to provide Foster Care Camp services to youth with behavioral, emotional, and delinquency problems For the current fiscal year, EYA is operating 5 Wilderness Camps providing 275 beds for males and females. Youth must be at least 10 and no older than 16.5 at time of screening For the current fiscal year, EYA is operating 5 Wilderness Camps providing 275 beds for males and females. Youth must be at least 10 and no older than 16.5 at time of screening The camps provide staff secure, residential therapeutic programs as an alternative to more restrictive settings The camps provide staff secure, residential therapeutic programs as an alternative to more restrictive settings

63 Alamance Alexander Anson Ashe Avery Bertie Bladen Brunswick Buncombe Burke Cabarrus Caldwell Caswell Catawba Chatham Cherokee Chowan Cleveland Columbus Craven Cumberland Currituck Dare Davidson Duplin Edgecombe Forsyth Franklin Gates Granville Guilford Halifax Harnett Haywood Henderson Hertford Hoke Hyde Iredell Jackson Johnston Jones Lenoir Lincoln McDowell Macon Madison Martin Mecklenburg Mitchell Montgomery Moore Nash New Hanover Northampton Onslow Pamlico Pasquotank Pender Perquimans Pitt Randolph Richmond Robeson Rockingham Rowan Rutherford Sampson Scotland Stanly StokesSurry Transylvania Tyrrell Union Vance Wake Warren Watauga Wayne Wilkes Wilson Yadkin Yancey Eckerd Wilderness Education Program Camps and Regions in North Carolina Eckerd Youth Alternatives, Inc. Alleghany 1 1 Greene Beaufort Carteret Polk Graham Swain South Central Co-Ed North Central Boys Southeast Boys North Central Camp Boys Kathi Grenough, Director Camp E-MUN-TALEE 235 Ramey Orchard Road Lowgap, NC South Central Camp Co-Ed Erica Cook, Director Camp E-KU-SUMEE 500 E-KU-SUMEE Drive Candor, NC Southeast Camp Boys Ted Wisniewski, Director Camp E-TIK-ETU 1086 Susie Sand Hill Road Elizabethtown, NC Northeast Camp Boys Karla Kiburz, Director Camp E-TEN-ETU 633 Shepard’s Way Lane Manson, NC Northeast Boys Revised Camden Northwest Co-Ed Northwest Camp Co-Ed Daniel Wanta, Director Camp E-MA-ETU 4654 High Rock Road Boomer, NC Clay Davie Orange Person Gaston Durham Washington Lee

64 Alamance Alexander Anson Ashe Avery Bertie Bladen Brunswick Buncombe Burke Cabarrus Caldwell Caswell Catawba Chatham Cherokee Chowan Cleveland Columbus Craven Cumberland Currituck Dare Davidson Duplin Edgecombe Forsyth Franklin Granville Guilford Halifax Harnett Haywood Henderson Hertford Hoke Hyde Iredell Jackson Johnston Jones Lenoir Lincoln McDowell Macon Madison Martin Mecklenburg Mitchell Montgomery Moore Nash New Hanover Northampton Onslow Pamlico Pasquotank Pender Perquimans Pitt Randolph Richmond Robeson Rockingham Rowan Rutherford Sampson Scotland Stanly StokesSurry Transylvania Tyrrell Union Vance Wake Warren Watauga Wayne Wilkes Wilson Yadkin Yancey Eckerd Wilderness Education Program Camps Serving Females in North Carolina Eckerd Youth Alternatives, Inc. 1 1 Durham Beaufort Carteret Polk Graham Swain South Central Co-Ed South Central Camp Co-Ed Erica Cook, Director Camp E-KU-SUMEE 500 E-KU-SUMEE Drive Candor, NC Revised 9/3/09 Camden Northwest Co-Ed Northwest Camp Co-Ed Daniel Wanta, Director Camp E-MA-ETU 4654 High Rock Road Boomer, NC Clay Orange Person Gaston Washington Lee Davie Alleghany Greene Gates

65 Eckerd Wilderness Education Program EYA Educational Programs allow youth to earn educational credits and assist youth with re- entry into public schools EYA Educational Programs allow youth to earn educational credits and assist youth with re- entry into public schools For FY 2008, 70% or 279 youth completed their identified treatment goals and objectives and completed the program For FY 2008, 70% or 279 youth completed their identified treatment goals and objectives and completed the program Using the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Achievement at entry and exit, the average change for youth was 1.4 grade levels in reading and 1.1 grade levels in math for FY 2008 Using the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Achievement at entry and exit, the average change for youth was 1.4 grade levels in reading and 1.1 grade levels in math for FY 2008

66 Eckerd Wilderness Education Program Of the 357 youth completing the program in FY 2007, 14% or 42 youth had subsequent juvenile justice involvement at 12 months post completion Of the 357 youth completing the program in FY 2007, 14% or 42 youth had subsequent juvenile justice involvement at 12 months post completion Seventy-six percent of youth completing the program in FY 2007 were either attending school, working, or both at 12 months post completion Seventy-six percent of youth completing the program in FY 2007 were either attending school, working, or both at 12 months post completion

67 JCPC Demonstration Projects

68 The purpose is to provide alternatives to commitment services locally through JCPCs for youth who have been committed to, or who potentially may be committed to, youth development centers. The purpose is to provide alternatives to commitment services locally through JCPCs for youth who have been committed to, or who potentially may be committed to, youth development centers. Prescriptive service planning Prescriptive service planning Community-based services Community-based services Wrap-around services Wrap-around services Strong collaboration with court personnel Strong collaboration with court personnel

69 Alamance Alexander Alleghany Anson Ashe Avery Beaufort Bertie Bladen Brunswick Buncombe Burke Cabarrus Caldwell Camden Carteret Caswell Catawba Chatham Cherokee Chowan Clay Cleveland Columbus Craven Cumberland Currituck Dare Davidson Davie Duplin Durham Edgecombe Forsyth Franklin Gaston Gates Graham Granville Greene Guilford Halifax Harnett Haywood Henderson Hertford Hoke Hyde Iredell Jackson Johnston Jones Lee Lenoir Lincoln McDowell Macon Madison Martin Mecklenburg Mitchell Montgomery Moore Nash New Hanover Northampton Onslow Orange Pamlico Pasquotank Pender Perquimans Person Pitt Polk Randolph Richmond Robeson Rockingham Rowan Rutherford Sampson Scotland Stanly Stokes Surry Swain Transylvania Tyrrell Union Vance Wake Warren Washington Watauga Wayne Wilkes Wilson Yadkin Yancey NC Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention JCPC Demonstration Projects FY Dare County Schools (Safe Systems) Methodist Home for Children (Family Preservation Services) Onslow County Youth Services (Day Services) LEGEND JCPC Demonstration Project Sponsoring Agency Alamance County Dispute Settlement and Youth Services Cumberland County CommuniCare, Inc. Dare County Schools Family Services of Davidson County Appalachian Family Innovations Methodist Home for Children Onslow County Youth Services Rockingham County Youth Services

70 JCPC Demonstration Projects At six and twelve months after exiting the Demonstration Projects, recidivism rates for youth served in the programs were low. Eighty-one percent (81%) had no complaints or warrants filed six months after exiting the projects, and seventy percent (70%) had no complaints or warrants filed twelve months after exiting the projects. At six and twelve months after exiting the Demonstration Projects, recidivism rates for youth served in the programs were low. Eighty-one percent (81%) had no complaints or warrants filed six months after exiting the projects, and seventy percent (70%) had no complaints or warrants filed twelve months after exiting the projects.

71 JCPC Demonstration Projects Seventy percent (70%) of the youth exiting the projects completed their programming at a high or acceptable level of participation and achievement of behavior improvement goals. Seventy percent (70%) of the youth exiting the projects completed their programming at a high or acceptable level of participation and achievement of behavior improvement goals. The average annual cost per youth in the Demonstration Projects in FY was $7,013 while the average annual cost per youth during the same fiscal year in a youth development center was $104,542 The average annual cost per youth in the Demonstration Projects in FY was $7,013 while the average annual cost per youth during the same fiscal year in a youth development center was $104,542

72 Community Programming Addressing DMC

73 Legislative Intent Special Provision ESTABLISH YOUTH ACCOUNTABILITY PLANNING TASK FORCE ESTABLISH YOUTH ACCOUNTABILITY PLANNING TASK FORCE SECTION (f) Duties of Task Force. (3) Proposals to eliminate the racial disparity in complaints, commitments, community program availability, utilization and success rates, and other key decision and impact points in the juvenile justice process.

74 Efforts to Reduce DMC Study by Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy at Duke University, 2003 Contributing factors to DMC in North Carolina   Dysfunctional family situations   Inadequate services in educational institutions   Poor socio-economic conditions   Accumulated disadvantages for people of color   Differential offending   Systemic issues within the juvenile justice system

75 Current Initiative “Race Matters Toolkit”

76 Where Can I Find the Race Matters Toolkit? The Toolkit is on the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Website: blicationsSeries/RaceMatters.aspx

77 Roles of JCPCs in Reducing DMC Annual planning process Identification of underserved populations/communities Decisions on what program types to fund Community awareness

78 Ways Community Programs Can Impact DMC Referrals/admissions from integrated systems Prescriptive service planning for individual needs Flexibility to address contributing factors outside the juvenile justice system Treatment-oriented environment to prevent deeper involvement in the juvenile justice system Advocacy across systems

79 Community Programming Needs

80 Current Community Programming Needs Full continuum of services for each county Full continuum of services for each county Expansion of Demonstration Projects model Expansion of Demonstration Projects model More evidence-based services (opportunities and funding for training) More evidence-based services (opportunities and funding for training) Intentional focus on DMC by JCPCs and community programs Intentional focus on DMC by JCPCs and community programs Enhanced compliance monitoring and quality assurance Enhanced compliance monitoring and quality assurance Funding for Departmental staff Funding for Departmental staff Continuous training for JCPC oversight of programs Continuous training for JCPC oversight of programs

81 Community Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds Approximately 20 additional staff (field and central support office) Approximately 20 additional staff (field and central support office) Additional placements and beds Additional placements and beds Program enhancements and additions Program enhancements and additions Risk management for program personnel Risk management for program personnel Separation of younger teens from older youth in residential and community programs Separation of younger teens from older youth in residential and community programs

82 Community Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds Training needs for community programs Training needs for community programs JCPC, program providers, and residential service providers need training on new target population and developmental needs (age appropriate services) JCPC, program providers, and residential service providers need training on new target population and developmental needs (age appropriate services) Appropriate evidence-based programming for target population Appropriate evidence-based programming for target population Increased capacity of clinical services statewide Increased capacity of clinical services statewide

83 Additional JCPC Services Our estimates show we may need to serve as many as 21,000 additional youth if 16 and 17 year olds are added to the system Our estimates show we may need to serve as many as 21,000 additional youth if 16 and 17 year olds are added to the system This would equate to a near doubling of the current capacity This would equate to a near doubling of the current capacity New programs will need to be more intensive and more directed at court- involved youth New programs will need to be more intensive and more directed at court- involved youth

84 JCPC Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds Functional vocational programs Functional vocational programs Sex offender treatment Sex offender treatment Substance abuse treatment Substance abuse treatment Parenting skills for our target population Parenting skills for our target population

85 JCPC Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds Community-based education Community-based education Structured day programs Structured day programs Transitional/re-entry services Transitional/re-entry services Gang prevention/intervention Gang prevention/intervention Residential placement Residential placement

86 Court Services’ Needs

87 Introduction to Court Services Different in every district Different in every district Travel Travel Collaboration with stakeholders Collaboration with stakeholders Key leadership of the Chief Court Counselor Key leadership of the Chief Court Counselor Interstate Compact for Juveniles Interstate Compact for Juveniles

88 Role of the Court Counselor Intake Intake Information gathering/assessment Information gathering/assessment Determination of legal sufficiency Determination of legal sufficiency Diversions plans and contracts Diversions plans and contracts Detention Detention Recommendations to court Recommendations to court Service planning Service planning Supervision and case management Supervision and case management

89

90 Current Court Services Needs Training Training Risk management Risk management Access to psychological/assessment services for each court district Access to psychological/assessment services for each court district Increase in community-based services Increase in community-based services Quality assurance Quality assurance Additional infrastructure – technology Additional infrastructure – technology GPS and IT GPS and IT Data and research Data and research

91 Population Pathways 91 Arrests of Persons 16 and 17 Years of Age 30,702 Detention 3,611 (12%) Post-release Supervision 550 (2%) Community Supervision 8,720 (28%) Adjudication 9,270 (30%) Diversion 5,324 (17%) Commitment (YDC) 550(2%) Outcomes of Serving in Juvenile System 30,702 Detention 5,913 (19%) Post-release Supervision 288 (1%) Community Supervision 4,555 (15%) Adjudication 10,935 (35%) Prison/Jail 1,825 (6%) Unsupervised Probation 3,495 (11%) Other e.g., Com. Svc, Restitution) 1,060 (3%) Outcomes of Serving in Adult System 30,702 Total receiving services*: 14,594(48%) Total receiving services*: 6,935 (23%) * Includes services prior to and after adjudication. Does not include unsupervised probation, as it is not a service; also does not include detention. Because it was not possible to separate out the proportion of offenders receiving community service or restitution, this category has not been counted. Does not include post-release services because this would double count services. The juvenile calculation excludes persons transferred to the adult system. ** It is unclear whether these persons ultimately were prosecuted; therefore, deferred prosecution is calculated as an additional cost and not a population pathway. If these persons were prosecuted, they would be included in the adjudication population; if they were not, they would be included in the dismissal pathway. Age 16- 3,924 Age Age Age 16- 2,050 Age 16- 1,573 Age Age Age 16- 4,205 Age 16- 2,396 Age 16- 1,625 Age 16- 4,921 Age 16- 2,661 Age 16– 4,444 Dismissal 19,767 (65%) Age 16– 8,895 Closure 6,157 (20%) Dismissal 9,876 (32%) Age 16- 2,771 Transfers to Adult Jurisdiction 40 (< 1%) Deferred Prosecution **555 (2%)

92 Court Services Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds Additional Court Services Staff (Approximately 500) Additional Court Services Staff (Approximately 500) Risk Management Risk Management Training on new target population Training on new target population Additional appropriate community-based programs Additional appropriate community-based programs Office space provided by counties Office space provided by counties Equipment – computers, cars, and other Equipment – computers, cars, and other Review of complaint drafting/complaint receipt processes to possibly include magistrates Review of complaint drafting/complaint receipt processes to possibly include magistrates

93 Questions


Download ppt "Community Programs and Court Services Overview and Strategic Direction Teresa Price, Deputy Secretary of Community Programs, Michael Rieder, Deputy Secretary."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google