Raise the Age Lessons from the first 2 years

Background: CT added 16-year-olds to the juvenile system January 1, 2010

Impact on system size: Manageable Impact on public safety: Positive Impact on kids: Incalculable

System Size Even with 16-year-olds added, the system only returned to the level it was at in the mid-1990s

New Juvenile Court Cases 1995–2010

Detention Admissions

Daily Detention Population

Juveniles Committed to DCF

Admissions to Connecticut Juvenile Training School, (secure facility for boys)

CJTS Average Daily Population

Average Daily Parole Population

Even with the addition of 16-year-olds, the system is smaller across the board than it was in The exception is parole, indicating a healthy preference for managing kids in their own communities.

Impact on Public Safety Short term

Recidivism 12-month rearrest rates for juveniles on probation Recidivism continued to decline after 16-year-olds joined the juvenile system.

Comparing 16-year-olds with younger kids RTA Probation Outcomes

Many programs, like MST, are normed for older teens. So it makes sense that 16- and 17-year-olds would have superior outcomes. Before RTA, the state had one of the youngest juvenile justice programs in the country.

Impact on Public Safety Long term 16-year-olds treated as juveniles are less likely to reoffend and less likely to escalate into violent crime. The Comparative Advantage of Juvenile vs. Criminal Court Sanctions on Recidivism Among Adolescent Felony Offenders, Jeffrey Fagan, Law and Policy, Vol. 18 # 1 and 2, Jan/Apr "Bishop, Donna, "Juvenile Offenders in the Adult Criminal System," 27 Crime and Justice 81 (2000)

Impact on Kids 16-year-olds diverted from adult system (through October 2011) 7400

7,400 Kids Less likely to be rearrested Less likely to be injured in an adult facility More likely to complete high school Not frozen out of college, jobs or military service by an adult record

What have we learned?

Raise the Age does not happen in a vacuum It’s an opportunity to improve your whole system Prevention and diversion made room in the system for older teens

Older teens are a lot like younger teens Many feared 16-year-olds would be more “hardened.” In fact, they have slightly better outcomes. National data suggest that older and younger teens engage in similar behaviors. Snyder, Howard N. and Melissa Sickmund. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (2006)

Data now. Data later. Data showed that there was room for 16-year-olds in the juvenile system Tracking the impact makes a strong case for bringing 17-year-olds in Keeping a watch on system size and outcomes shows taxpayers that reform works

Are we there yet? 17-year-olds still need to be brought into the juvenile system They’ll be safer More likely to reform

Are we there yet? We’re shrinking the system by diverting SOME kids who don’t belong there. But disparate treatment of kids by race and the high number of school arrests shows there is MUCH MORE WE CAN DO to right-size the system.

How do we get there? By keeping our promise to 17-year-olds By making decisions based on good data By looking for ways to support healthy development