1 Juvenile Corrections Population Forecasting Advisory Committee Wednesday, March 24, 2010

2 Committee Members Mark Eddy – OR Social Learning Center Judge Tom Hart - Marion Donna Keddy – DHS David Koch – Mult Co. (on phone) Jeff Lichtenberg – Jefferson Co. Torri Lynn – Linn Co. Colette Peters - OYA

3 Introductions Committee Business – Chairperson Roundtable – Possible forecast issues, Juvenile justice trends Background – DOC, PSR, DCC (discretionary) Populations Demand Forecast –Options Close Custody Populations Prior, Preliminary Forecast Statistical Summary Next Meeting: Wednesday September 1 st, 1:30 BAM Conference Room

4 Background Close Custody Groups: –Adult Court Beds – “DOC” –Public Safety Reserve Beds – “PSR” –Discretionary Close Custody – “DCC” (DBA) DOC and PSR: direct forecasts. DCC forecast is for bed “demand”. Committee defines “current demand” Objective measure is desirable

5 Demand Forecast April 2010 forecast –Continuation of past approach –Based on info from Referrals (Abuse?, JCP?) –Index applied to demand used for April 2009 forecast –Provide “Level of Service” indices? Discuss options (different approach) –Lack maturity – better to wait –Availability of forecaster resource –Algorithmic / Purely Objective –“Level of Service” indices –County Resource Levels (David)

6 Demand Forecast April 2010 Forecast DCC bed demand of 550 in early 2009 Index approach 2009 to 2010 and forecast –Simple index graphs (# felonies) Reduction to around 500 Question assumption of future demand increase

7 Demand

8

9 Close Custody – DCC, DOC, PSR

10 Close Custody – DCC, DOC, PSR

11 Forecasts – DCC, DOC, PSR Index Adjusted to Reference=550 in Early 2009 Prior DCC Forecast Preliminary DCC Forecast DOC and PSR – Essentially Unchanged

12 Demand Forecast Option One Based on Referral, JCP, Abuse information Indices for Serious, Moderate, Low Examples, Number in DCC over time Committee input on factors –What matters for “demand” OYA or Committee justify appropriate connection to beds

13 Demand Forecast Option Two Based on above Plus County/Community treatment availability “ascertain relationship between youth’s risk and access to services” Aggregate criminality in excess of available service? OYA vs overall need? Complex

14 Demand – Bottom Line Absolute measure does not exist Index measures: –Can quantify youth characteristics –Can compare to available services –Can quantify entry/stay from history –Can compare now relative to past Interpretation of Index –Subjectivity connecting index measures to number of beds.

15 Other Forecast Issues Include Low, Mid, High indices (if possible) –Input on factors? Planned update to community forecast Unlikely to change Provide with regular forecast Appendix or something – thoughts?

16 Prison Intakes by Age

17 Prison Intakes by Age

18 Statistical Summaries Decade 2000 Referrals (felony, misdemeanor, violation, other) Rate shows stronger decline Felony Referral Graphs –A/B/C and Person/Other

19 Statistical Summaries Decade 2000 Felony Referrals by Year and Class

20 Statistical Summaries Decade 2000 Felony Referrals – Person Related / Other

21 Statistical Summaries Decade 2000 Felony Referrals – Person Related / Other Person Related: Sex Offense Assault Homicide Related Weapons Robbery Person Other Other: Arson Burglary Theft Criminal Mischief Substance/Alcohol Other 53% Drop 30% Drop

22 Statistical Summaries Decade 2000 Felony Referrals -- Race and Type Other Person Related

23 Juvenile Incarceration Rates State Comparisons Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement Number of committed juveniles – total Includes state, local, public, private Calculated Rate: number per 100,000 Using ages 9-17 for total population Rates and change in rates: 1999 and 2006 “Includes juveniles in placement in the facility as part of a court-ordered disposition. Committed juveniles may have been adjudicated and disposed in juvenile court or convicted and sentenced in criminal court.” Sickmund, Melissa, Sladky, T.J., and Kang, Wei. (2008) "Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement Databook." Online. Available:

24 Juvenile Incarceration Rates State Comparisons Rate per 100,000 – Year

25 Juvenile Incarceration Rates State Comparisons Rate per 100,000 – Year

26 Juvenile Incarceration Rates State Comparisons Change in Rate – 1999 to % -19%

27 Possible Factors Demographics Current Offense Prior Offenses Previous OYA Supervision JCP Assessments DHS’s Abuse

28 Possible Factors

29 Explanatory Ability How much better than chance alone… Demographics – 3x (race/ethnic, sex, county) Current Offense – 3x OYA history, JCP, Abuse history – 11x Prior Offenses – 12x (DB: youth in state??) Current, OYA, JCP, Abuse – 12x Demographics, OYA, JCP, Abuse – 13x Current, Prior, OYA, JCP, Abuse – 15x “Everything” – 16x ***Age*** (can’t remember)

30 Demand