Federal Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice Preliminary Results from the 2006 Annual Request for Information October 23, 2006

THE RESPONSE RATE TO THIS YEAR’S ANNUAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION INCREASED COMPARED WITH LAST YEAR. In 2005, 37 of 56 States and Territories completed the paper-based Request for Information. In 2006, 42 out of 56 States and Territories completed the web-based Request for Information. We want to begin by thanking all of you for your time and effort in responding to this year’s Annual request for Information. This is the first time we have entered the Information Age by using a web-based data collection application. While the experience was not without its problems, we have learned some lessons we will apply next year. Most importantly, we will include a “Save and Continue” button at the bottom of each page (question) that will allow you to save your work at several points as you respond to the request for information. We will also include a feature that will allow you to print a paper copy of your completed response for your records. Despite the problems a few of you encountered, overall our response rate was higher this year, as you can see from this chart. There are also a few other States we have talked to who plan to submit their data this week. We are giving you until October 27 to get your responses into CSR for inclusion in the national report. So for those of you who haven’t yet finished your submission (and you know who you are!), you have the rest of this week to get your data in for the report. We hope you will!

QUESTION #1: Key Current and Emerging Issues Identified by 42 States These are the frequencies for each of the key current or emerging issues identified by the 42 States and Territories through the 2006 Request for Information. As can be seen from this chart, the three most frequently endorsed choices were disproportionate minority contact, mental health assessment and treatment, and detention reform. Only one State (OK) cited a problem with Native American Pass-through funding, and no States endorsed Right to a Competent Trial. We suspect the latter category might have been endorsed more frequently had we re-stated it as a right to effective and informed counsel, in fact one State (VA) did write this in under ‘Other’.

COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2006 EMERGING AND CURRENT ISSUES We were able to compare the percentage of States and Territories endorsing the several of the same issues in 2005 and 2006, which provides a better picture of the emerging importance of these issues. For each of the five issues shown above, there is a clear increase in the percentage of States reporting this as an emerging or current issue. The increase is particularly notable in the case of mental health assessment and treatment, which increased from less than half the states (41 percent) in 2005 to three-fifths of the States in 2006.

“OTHER” KEY CURRENT AND EMERGING ISSUES IN 2006 Treatment and management of juvenile sex offenders (KY, UT) Legislative and administrative reform issues concerning existing laws on juvenile justice (GU) Noncompliance with Federal OJJDP core requirements (PR) Need for more community-based treatment and residential treatment facilities (GU, SD) Prevention and early intervention programming (SD, VT) Engagement of Tribes in collaborative juvenile justice activities and programs (SD) Improving the quality and availability of effective legal representation for juveniles (VA) Culturally sensitive and appropriate assessment instruments and practices (WI) Increased funding for community supervision (KS) Nine States and Territories reported other emerging or current issues, and in this slide we note these issues and the States reporting them.

QUESTION #2: 2006 RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT AND TO CONGRESS We turn now to Question 2 (Recommendations to the President and to Congress). The most frequent recommendation was to increase funding, made by 69 percent of the States and Territories responding. Again we see that mental health assessment and treatment is seen as a major issue by the States, 29% of who urged further funding and expansion of services in this area.

2006 RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT AND TO CONGRESS A CLOSER LOOK AT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUNDING Here we take a closer look at the content of the recommendations grouped under “Funding” (29 States). Because States could offer more than one recommendations, the numbers above do not sum to 29.

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT AND TO CONGRESS COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2006 RECOMMENDATIONS In this chart we compared the percentage of States making several recommendations in 2005 and 2006. The most important change is the dramatic increase in the percentage of States recommending emphasis on evidence-based programming, from 5 percent in 2005 to 33 percent in 2006. Here we take a closer look at the content of the recommendations grouped under “Funding” (29 States). Because States could offer more than one recommendations, the numbers above do not sum to 29.

QUESTION #3: 2006 RECOMMENDATIONS TO OJJDP As this chart shows, States offered a variety of recommendations to OJJDP for action over the coming year. In addition to those on this chart, States also offred recommendations concerning the need for treatment for juvenile sex offenders ((DE, KY), a greater advocacy role for OJJDP (LA, ME), gangs (NJ, NY), more research (NM, SC), greater dissemination of research findings and statistics (OK, PA), an end to term limits on FACJJ members (CO), local planning needs (GU), greater flexibility on use of Medicaid funds (ME), female juveniles (MT), assistance for Courts with graduated sanctions (MT) and accountability-based sanctions NM), increasing alternatives to detention NE), more research on brain development (NJ), and increased focus on child protection services (NC). This year’s data reflect some changes over the 2005 recommendations, as will be seen in the following chart.

COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2006 RECOMMENDATIONS TO OJJDP This chart compares the percentage of States & Territories offering various recommendations to OJJDP from last year (2005) and this year (2006). The number of States for each issue has been converted to a percentage to provide an equivalent comparison. The chart shows that there have been some changes in the nature of recommendations from 2005 to 2006. Some issues were recommended less often this year (for example, Tribal Issues, the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice, OJJDP Program Administration). For some issues (for example, OJJDP Program Administration), this could mean that there has been some improvement. Other issues appear to have become more important this year, such as coordination at the local and state/federal levels, Disproportionate Minority Contact, and Evidence-based Practice.

WHAT OJJDP CAN DO TO HELP THE SAGs: Evidence-based Programs The question on recommendations to OJJDP contained a new follow-up question: For each recommendation offered, we asked you to indicate which of a series of actions you felt that OJJDP could take to help you address this issue. In the following slides, we present a summary of some of these responses for four different issues: Evidence-based programs, mental health assessment and treatment and substance abuse, and disproportionate minority contact. This chart shows the responses given by the 13 States that recommended increased emphasis on evidence-based programs. Each State could identify more than one activity for OJJDP. As this chart shows, the two activities States would like to see most from OJJDP are continued development of evidence-based programs and programmatic training and technical assistance on existing EBP models.

WHAT OJJDP CAN DO TO HELP THE SAGs: Mental Health Assessment & Treatment and Substance Abuse This chart compares the recommended OJJDP actions for Mental Health and Substance Abuse among juveniles. While the States stressed equally the importance of disseminating the results from research as well as conducting new research for both mental health and substance abuse problems, there were some interesting differences. Recall that more States had identified mental health problems as an emerging or current issue than substance abuse. The data above show that the States are strongly interested in obtaining valid and reliable tools for assessing mental health problems in juveniles, which is reflected here in the higher percentage of States recommending the development of assessment tools for mental health issues. A higher proportion of respondents indicated the need for development of evidence-based programs for substance abuse treatment, and there is a strong endorsement of a need for programmatic technical assistance as well.

WHAT OJJDP CAN DO TO HELP THE SAGs: DISPROPORTIONATE MINORITY CONTACT This chart describes the recommended OJJDP actions for Disproportionate Minority Contact, which 11 States identified as an emerging or current issue. Clearly this is an issue for which the States see continuing need for programmatic technical assistance. Other suggested actions include developing evidence-based programs, and dissemination of research, state models, etc.. States are also looking for tools they can use to assess their facilities and agencies.

QUESTION #4: TOP THREE PROBLEMS LISTED IN MOST RECENT THREE-YEAR PLAN The final question in our request for information concerned the problems listed in each State’s most recent three-year plan. We have presented the most frequently endorsed problems here. Disproportionate minority contact is clearly the most frequently endorsed problem by an almost 3:1 margin.