Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Finance Reform Workgroup OCYF Region Meeting June 11, 2013 Juvenile Justice System.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Finance Reform Workgroup OCYF Region Meeting June 11, 2013 Juvenile Justice System."— Presentation transcript:

1 Finance Reform Workgroup OCYF Region Meeting June 11, 2013 Juvenile Justice System

2 Philosophical Basis for the Operation of Juvenile Justice

3 JJ Mandate / Goals: The protection of the community The imposition of accountability for offenses committed The development of competencies to enable children to become responsible and productive members of the community

4 Community Protection The process of contributing to safe communities through prevention, supervision, and control. Identify the Risk Manage the Risk Minimize the Risk

5 Community Protection, continued …   In order to know which youth can be reasonably managed in the community, juvenile probation must assess the safety risks posed by the juvenile through a review of the youth’s offense history, if any, and other factors that may point to continued delinquent behavior.   A clear understanding of the risks a juvenile poses to public safety helps probation officers and the court make decisions about the setting and the structure required to keep the community safe. It also guides decisions regarding which risk factors to target, and how intensively.

6 ► ► Maintaining the youth in the community also depends on the availability of a wide range of treatment, supervision and control options. ► ► For those posing the least risk, the response might be diversion, consent decree or informal probation. Those assessed at moderate risk levels may be safely maintained in the community but under more intensive supervision and with more structure. Commitment to a physically secure facility is reserved for the highest risk offenders. Community Protection, continued …

7 Accountability Juvenile offenders know and understand: The wrongfulness of their actions The impact of the crime Their responsibility for causing harm

8 Accountability, continued ► ► The Juvenile Act and the Crime Victims Act also give crime victims the opportunity to be active participants in the juvenile justice process and be viewed as clients of the system ► ► Victim Restoration:   Victim Impact Statements   Victim Notifications   Home pass notifications   Input in Decision Making

9 Accountability measures are designed to contribute directly to victim restoration. Whenever possible, the juvenile justice system requires the participation of offenders in accountability-promoting processes: Restitution Community Service Victims Compensation Fund Victim/Community Awareness Curriculum Apologies Accountability, continued

10 Competency Development is… ► ► The process by which juvenile offenders acquire the knowledge and skills that make it possible for them to live productively, pro- socially, and lawfully in their communities. Competency Domains: Pro-Social Academic Workforce Development Independent Living Moral Reasoning

11 Competency Development, continued Pro-Social Skills: Problem solving, impulse control Goal: Better social interactions and problem solving, reduced conflict Academic Skills: Study and learning skills, basic reading, writing and math Goal: Catching up in school, advancing in school, acquiring a diploma or GED Workforce Development Skills: Getting a job, keeping a job, achieving a promotion, technological skills Goal: Economic self-sufficiency

12 Independent Living Skills: Budgeting, housing, health insurance, basic living Goal: Self-sufficient living Moral Reasoning Skills: “Right thinking,” understanding how thinking and values affect behavior Goals: Integrating the difference between right and wrong, making the right decisions for the right reasons Competency Development, continued

13 JJSES: Juvenile Justice System Enhancement Statement of Purpose We dedicate ourselves to working in partnership to enhance the capacity of Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system to achieve its balanced and restorative justice mission by:   Employing evidence-based practices, with fidelity, at every stage of the juvenile justice process,   Collecting and analyzing the data necessary to measure the results of these efforts; and, with this knowledge,   Striving to continuously improve the quality of our decisions, services and programs.

14 Elements of Pennsylvania’s Models for Change Initiatives Juvenile Justice System Enhancement 16

15 Increased Knowledge around “What Works” in Reducing Recidivism Based on over thirty years of research Well–designed programs that meet certain conditions can reduce recidivism.   Risk Principle (Who to Target)   Need Principle (What to Target)   Responsivity Principle (How to Match)   Treatment Principle (Which Programs to Use)

16 8 Evidence-Based Principles of Effective Intervention A Broader View: 8 Evidence-Based Principles of Effective Intervention Assess risk and needs Enhance intrinsic motivation Target interventions Skill train with directed practice using cognitive behavioral treatment methods Increase positive reinforcement Engage ongoing support in natural communities Measure relevant processes and practices Provide measurement feedback SOURCE: Implementing Evidence-Based Practices In Community Corrections: The Principles of Effective Intervention, National Institute of Corrections

17 Differences Between Juvenile Justice System and Children Youth and Families Agency Operations

18 Separation of Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branch of Government  Children, Youth and Family Agency: Under the Executive Branch Administrative Agencies reporting to Commissioners and licensed by OCYF  Juvenile Probation Office: Under Judicial Branch The Judge appoints Chief JPO and all staff

19 Referral Source Children, Youth and Family Agency: The Public or Parents via reports/requests: To obtain services To determine child safety risk Juvenile Probation Office: The Police via Allegation (charges): Begins a legal proceeding (guilt/innocence) Not voluntary involvement Not to obtain services

20 Case Focus Children, Youth and Family Agency: Family/Parents = Responding to parental behavior/risk/needs Juvenile Probation Office: Juvenile = Responding to juvenile’s behavior/risk/needs

21 Intake Children, Youth and Family Agency: I Investigates the report and makes determination of involvement and/or recommends services Juvenile Probation Office: Reviews charges, recommends diversion (Informal Adjustment Consent/Consent Decree) or files petition and does background investigation to assist with disposition, if there is adjudication

22 Age 18 Children, Youth and Family Agency: 18 and out unless voluntarily remain Juvenile Probation Office: Commit Delinquent Act between the age of 10 & 18 Can stay under supervision until age 21

23 Out of Home Placement Children, Youth and Family Agency: Put the child in placement to insure the safety of the child Juvenile Probation Office: Put the youth in placement to insure the protection of the community Includes the option for Secure Residential Placement Sanction Placements

24 Day Treatment JPO uses a variety of Day Treatment programs to insure the protection of the community Not a “Mental Health” service Similar to placement services offered evenings and weekends Placement Alternative and/or aftercare Detention/Shelter Alternative

25 Attorney Representation  Public Defender ( JJ) versus Guardian Ad Litem (CYF)  Private Attorney for the Juvenile (JJ and CYF)  District Attorney ( JJ) versus CYF Solicitor (CYF) (CYF legal standing in a Dependency hearing)  No Parent Attorney ( JJ)  No JPO Solicitor ( JJ)

26 Funding Implications

27   OCYF’s Revenue Maximization efforts sought to shift as many CY/JJ services as possible into uncapped federal funding streams such as Medical Assistance and Title IVE   While expressly appropriate for CY agencies servicing dependent children, this funding stream does not fit well with JJS

28 Funding Implications, continued Child Welfare goals do not align with the JJ goals 148/NBB funding has shifted expenditures to be compatible with goals of Safety, Permanency, and Well Being The majority of the youth served by the JJS are not IVE eligible and therefore JJ benefits little from the funding Laudable goals for dependent children, but not in keeping with BARJ or JJSES

29 Funding Implications, continued JJ runs afoul of the Federal requirements: By relying on the use of congregate care for the higher risk offenders By using step-down programming – disruptions in placements By re-placing offenders (re-entry) who violate the terms of their Aftercare (parole) By trying to satisfy our BARJ goals

30 Funding Implications, continued Interpretation of Shared Case Responsibility bulletin has lead to inconsistencies: In statewide implementation Perception of CY/JPO roles in shared cases Identification and selection of shared cases Case management responsibilities Regulatory compliance responsibilities – record keeping, hearings, AFCARS reporting, etc.

31 Funding Implications, continued Medical Assistance Residential service providers were encouraged to “flip” into the MA funding stream and become licensed as RTF’s Approximately $77 million of 148 funds were used as the MA match to increase BH services Mental Health is now looking to reduce the number of RTF’s by encouraging them to pursue a higher level licensure: PRTF This is a more costly service to deliver with a much higher per diem rate

32 Funding Implications, continued Medical Assistance (Continued) MA funding cuts have lead to increasing denials for Service Authorizations With denials of Service Authorizations, the cost of services will return to the NBB/County Will a portion of the MA match funds be restored to the Act 148 pool if further MH cuts reduce Court access to services?

33 Funding Implications, continued JJSES Funding Issues : JJSES and JPO’s shift to EBP are not in keeping with Federal child welfare goals Emphasis is on using structured decision making to appropriately assess risk and connect needs with services proven to reduce risk SPEP will align service offerings with research data to improve effectiveness with focus on service delivery, quality and service duration SPEP could increase the duration of services needed to be effective at reducing risk

34 Funding Implications, continued Secure Detention = Maximum Security / Temporary Confinement   Lower utilization increases per diem   Must have them ‘Right Sized”, but able to take all required juveniles. Expected utilization rate   Shelter = Non-Secure / Temporary Holding   An alternative to secure detention   Need alternative to secure detention in all jurisdictions

35 Practice Changes

36 Structured Decision Making Detention Risk Assessment Instrument: DRAI   Assesses Static Risk factors to determine the likelihood of re-offending prior to court, and appearance in court   Structured decision-making   Addresses DMC concerns   Includes consideration of alternatives to detention

37 Structured Decision Making YLS – Youth Level of Service Criminogenic Needs are Identified in YLS Assessment Top 4 + one 1. Attitudes/Orientation 2. Personality/Behavior 3. Peer Relations 4. Family Circumstances Prior/Current Offenses (static) Next 4 1. Substance Abuse 2. School/Education 3. Employment 4. Leisure

38 Risk/Needs Continuum of Services Least Restrictive Alternatives Risk determines system penetration Needs determine services within each level Intake Fence Secure Diversion CDProbation Day Treatment (CISP) Group Home Non-Secure Residential

39 SPEP Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol   SPEP is a scoring system that can be used to assess the capacity a juvenile justice program may have on reducing recidivism   SPEP was developed from the extensive research and analysis conducted by Dr. Mark Lipsey, Vanderbilt University on JJ programming   SPEP provides “home grown” programs an opportunity to see how their services compare with like services that effectively reduce recidivism   SPEP offers providers guidance to incrementally improve their service offerings

40 SPEP, continued Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol SPEP measures the four characteristics of juvenile programs that reduce recidivism 1. 1.Service Type   Group 5: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy   Group 4: Group counseling, Mentoring, Behavioral Contracting, Contingency Management   Group 3: Family Counseling, Family Crisis Counseling, Mixed Counseling, Social Skills Training, Challenge Programs, Mediation   Group 2: Restitution, Community Service Work, Remedial Academic Programs   Group 1: Individual counseling, Job-related training

41 SPEP, continued Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol 2. 2.Quality of Service Delivery   Program/curriculum integrity 3. 3.Amount of Service (Dosage)   Duration   Contact hours 4. 4.Risk Level of Youths Served   Higher Risk = High Dosage of Intervention

42 Cost Center Discussion

43 Act 148 Categories The broader Act 148 Service Categories of In-Home Services, Community Based Placement, and, Institutional Placement are being used for this discussion There is statewide variation relative to the specific cost centers in which JJ services should be included – especially In-Home Services

44 Act 148 Categories, continued Reducing risk to reoffend, and addressing the criminogenic needs of the offender determine: The level of service needed What service is needed Appropriate service match for offender Dosage needed to have best results at reducing risk to reoffend

45 Act 148 Categories, continued JJSES implementation is at different stages at the county level Counties will eventually have the capacity to measure relevant processes and practices Use data to analyze effectiveness Shift programming to service offerings that have been shown to reduce recidivism when properly aligned with the offender’s need(s)

46 Act 148 Categories, continued The slides that follow list the services grouped into the larger 148 Service Categories They also provide, where possible, a link to a BARJ Principle, JJSES/Evidence Based Practice (EBP) or a SPEP Service Category As JJ departments move through the stages of JJSES, you are likely to see requests for similar service offerings It is hoped that regional OCYF professionals will find these listings helpful in their local discussions

47 In-Home Services   Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Programs (SPEP: Group 5)   Group Counseling (SPEP: Group 4)   Mentoring (SPEP: Group 4)   Behavioral Contracting; Contingency Management (SPEP: Group 4)   Family Counseling (SPEP: Group 3)   Family Crisis Counseling (SPEP: Group 3)   Mixed Counseling Services (SPEP: Group 3)   Social Skills Training (SPEP: Group 3)   Mediation (SPEP: Group 3)

48 In-Home Services, continued   Electronic Monitoring (Community Protection, Accountability)   Challenge Programs (Competency; SPEP: Group 3)   Reporting Centers (Community Protection, Competency; SPEP: Group 3)   Remedial Academic Programs (SPEP: Group 2; Competency)   YLS Assessment Instrument (Assessment)

49 In-Home Services, continued   Cognitive-Based Intervention Curriculum/Tools (Competency Development/Risk Reduction), i.e.   Carey Guides   Crossroads   Bits   Thinking for a Change   Employment Readiness Assessment/Employment Readiness/Skill Development (SPEP: Group 1, Competency Development)   PACTT   Goodwill   Vocational Counseling   Job training

50 In-Home Services, continued PACTT: Pennsylvania Academic and Career Technical / Training Alliance (SPEP: Group 2, Competency)   Important regardless of Risk Level   Credit Recovery and Academic Advancement   Career and Technical Training   For those entering placement – o o Curriculum Alignment and Credit Recovery o o CTE o o Transition to Home School/Tech Training/Job   Additional component for residential and in-home program descriptions

51 Community Based Placement   Detention Alternatives (Community Protection, JDAI)   Shelter (Community Protection, JDAI)   Alternative Treatment Programs (Competency Development, SPEP: Group 3)   Foster Family (Community Protection, Accountability, Competency)   Community Based (Community Protection, Accountability, Competency)   Independent Living (Competency Development, SPEP: Group 5-1)

52 Institutional Placement   Residential Services   Secure Residential Services   YFC   YDC   Detention   The higher the risk to reoffend, the more structure and/or security is needed.   Specialized programming to address needs – See SPEP Service Categories

53 Adjustment Suggestions

54 Resources Juvenile Court Judges Commission: ty/5030 PA Council of Chief Juvenile Probation Officers: SPEP: Standard Program Evaluation Protocol: PACTT: Pennsylvania Academic and Career Technical/Training Alliance:

55 JJ Contacts Cynthia A. Wess, Director: Cambria Robert J. Stanzione, Chief: Bucks David Evrard, Assistant Chief: Allegheny

56 Thank You for joining our discussion !


Download ppt "Finance Reform Workgroup OCYF Region Meeting June 11, 2013 Juvenile Justice System."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google