1. Juvenile Justice Reform in Kentucky
Rachel Bingham, Executive Officer
Department of Family and Juvenile Services
Administrative Office of the Courts
Kathy to introduce session, discuss session objectives, and lead audience introductions?

2. A Call for Reform: Intended Impacts of SB 200

3. Juvenile Justice Reform Overview
A Call for Reform
Juvenile Justice Reform Overview
Kentucky had the 4th highest (among 50 states) for juveniles detained for status offenses.
DJJ spent half of its $102 million dollar budget on out-of-home placements. Detention beds and beds in the youth development centers cost over $100,000 per year.
In addition, DCBS spent $6 million in fiscal year 2012 for out-of-home placement of status offenders.

4. Juvenile Justice Reform Overview
A Call for Reform
Juvenile Justice Reform Overview
Significant resources were used on out-of- home residential placement for low-level status and public offenders.
Time violators/misdemeanants spent out-of- home was about the same as those adjudicated on felonies.
Has increased 31% and 21%, respectively over the past decade.
Lack of community services/alternatives has likely contributed to DJJ and DCBS commitments and more youth being placed out-of-home.

5. Achieve Better Outcomes for Kentucky Youth and Families
Intended Impacts of SB 200
Increase access to diversion
Limit the use of out-of-home placements for youth
Increase and strengthen the use of evidence- based programs, practices and policies in local communities
Increase the use of assessment and structured decision-making tools
Reduce recidivism rates
SB 200 was passed by the legislature in 2014.
Discuss the importance of keeping youth in the community to receive intervention
More natural supports
Ability to practice new skills in natural environment
Connection to more long-term supports
May mention that the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) is providing ongoing technical assistance to reduce recidivism in the context of diversion, including providing training on evidence-based practices in diversion (Principles of Effective Intervention and Graduated Responses)

6. Focus the Most Expensive Resources on the More Serious Offenders
Match the level of intervention with the level of risk of the youth
Maximize cost savings
Reinvest cost savings at the community level
Serve more youth in their local communities
Intended Impacts of SB 200
AOC has significantly invested in SB 200 with the establishment of FAIR Teams, the creation of a Court Designated Specialist position to lead the FAIR Teams and administer needs assessments, and providing diversion to an increased number of youth.
While reinvestment funds have accrued, they have largely not yet been made available to local communities. However, stakeholders are in the process of overcoming barriers to open up these funds for communities, and have begun providing grant opportunities with current unrestricted funds that are available.

7. SB 200 Impact on Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice
Key Policy Changes
SB 200 Impact on Kentucky Department of Juvenile Justice
Prohibit DJJ commitment for most youth adjudicated for probation violation, misdemeanor or Class D felony
Cap probation, commitment and out of home placement length for misdemeanors and Class D felonies
Require use of risk assessment, graduated responses and changes to treatment planning process
DJJ Probation Dispositions down 36% since 2014
Increase in proportion of Black youth among Probation Dispositions (AA=20% in 2012, 29% in 2016) (W=70% in 2012, 61% in 2016)
10% decline in Probation Dispositions for Black youth; 43% decline for White youth since 2014
DJJ Commitments down 43% since 2014
14% increase in proportion of Black youth among DJJ commitments from (AA=28% in 2012 to 42% in 2016) (W=62% in 2012 to 45% in 2016)
25% decline in DJJ commitments for Black youth, 55% decline for White youth since 2014

8. SB 200 Impact on Kentucky Diversion Program
Key Policy Changes
SB 200 Impact on Kentucky Diversion Program
Require Court Designated Workers (CDWs) to utilize screening and assessment and graduated responses in diversion
Codify mandatory diversion for certain youth and restrict county attorney and judge overrides
Establish Family, Accountability, Intervention and Response (FAIR) teams to provide oversight and support youth in diversion

9. Kentucky Diversion Program Overview
CY 2016 Cases Placed on Diversion
Kentucky Diversion Program Overview
Pre Court Process

10. Kentucky Diversion Program Overview
CY 2016 Diversion Outcomes
Kentucky Diversion Program Overview

11. Establishment of FAIR Teams
CY 2016 Referrals to FAIR Team by Case Type
Establishment of FAIR Teams
2,405 total cases reviewed
64 cases were reported to DCBS
Total of 2405 Cases
3% (64) of all cases were reported to DCBS
High Needs – 1145
Unsuccessful – 698
Failure to Appear – 427
Referral from DPP – 70
Other - 65
-Decline Diversion – 17
-Referral from Court – 5
-Other reason - 43
Race Breakdown- Cases Referred to FAIR Team
71% White
21% African American
4% Hispanic
0.2% Asian (5)
0% Native American (0)
2% Multi-Racial
0.7% Other (16)
0.7% Unknown (16)

12. Early Positive Outcomes

13. Early Positive Outcomes
Increased Access to Diversion
Early Positive Outcomes
In CY 2016, 12,652 (56%) of the 22,568 youth who received a complaint were placed on diversion
In CY2013, 9,643 (40%) of the 24,079 youth who received complaints in 2013 had the opportunity to participate in diversion.
This means there has been a 31% increase of youth placed on diversion
In addition, 90 percent of diversions (10,699) closed in 2016 were completed successfully compared to 86 percent (8,201) in 2013.
This confirms that the additional youth who are receiving the opportunity to participate in diversion are appropriate and capable of completing diversion successfully.

14. Early Positive Outcomes
Reductions in the Number of Commitments to State Custody
Early Positive Outcomes
When comparing CY 2016 to CY 2013, there has been a 38 percent decrease in public and status offenses referred to court
Youth housed in juvenile detention centers and other out-of-home placements has drastically reduced
When comparing CY 2016 to CY 2013, there has been a 38 percent decrease in public and status offenses referred to court.
CY 2016
8,123 court referrals: 7,260 public and 863 status
CY 2013
13,151 court referrals: 10,230 public and 2,921 status
The greatest impact has been in status cases. The 2,921 status cases referred to court in CY 2013 dropped to 863 by CY 2016 – a 70 percent decrease!

15. Early Positive Outcomes
Reduced Recidivism Rates
Early Positive Outcomes
In FY 2015, 75% of youth who had successfully completed their diversion had not received a subsequent complaint within the following year
Youth who were unsuccessful in completing their diversions recidivated at a higher rate, with 40% of youth receiving a subsequent complaint within the following year /

16. CY 2016 Case Outcomes for FAIR Team Referrals
Impact of FAIR Teams
2897 cases closed
Successful – 900
Referral to Court – 1054
Dismissed – 188
If Jefferson County were removed:
51% Successful (831)
7% Dismissed (113)
42% Referred to Court (682)
(Jefferson County 2016 FAIR Outcomes)
13% Successful (69)
15% Dismissed (75)
72% Referred to Court (372)

17. Unintended Consequences: Disproportionate Minority Contact in Kentucky

18. Slightly Higher Proportion of Black Youth Represented Among Complaints
DMC in
Kentucky
The first point where you start to see racial disparities is at the point of complaints coming into the system
Remember, Kentucky’s youth population is about 82% white, 11% black
These disparities have been pretty consistent over time, but have increased slightly in recent years for youth of color.
The racial disparities are much larger for public complaints – black youth have greater representation among public offenses (30%) than status offenses (18%). This is true over time as well.
Data provided by Crime and Justice Institute (CRJ)

19. Black Youth Have Higher Representation Among Diversion Overrides
DMC in
Kentucky
There are also substantial racial disparities among diversion overrides – again , remember, this is not just about higher level charges – even looking at misdemeanor, status or violation offenses, you see higher representation for black youth among diversion overrides (and you compare this to youth who commit those offenses and get diverted, you see much less representation)
Data provided by Crime and Justice Institute (CRJ)

20. 14 Percentage Point Increase in Proportion of Black Youth Among DJJ Commitments from 2012-2016
DMC in
Kentucky
Data provided by Crime and Justice Institute (CRJ)

21. Higher Proportion of Black Youth Are Detained for Felony Offenses
DMC in
Kentucky
Data provided by Crime and Justice Institute (CRJ)

22. Black Youth Account for More than Half of Youthful Offender Referrals
DMC in
Kentucky
Data provided by Crime and Justice Institute (CRJ)

23. SB 200 Fiscal Incentive Plan

24. Reinvestments: SB 200 Fiscal Incentive Plan
Any savings achieved by the Department of Juvenile Justice as a result of a reduction in the population in Department of Juvenile Justice facilities shall be reinvested
Funds local efforts that enhance public safety while reducing juvenile justice system costs
Identification of a local committee, either newly formed or already existing responsible for application and implementation

25. SB 200 Fiscal Incentive Plan
Grant Application Review
SB 200
Fiscal
Incentive
Plan
Criteria to include (but not limited to):
Whether grant funds will be used to leverage existing funding resources or increase access to existing resources;
Geographical distribution;
The number of youth potentially served by the program or service;
The cost of the program or service; and
The existence of similar services in the judicial district

26. SB 200 Fiscal Incentive Plan
Grant Application Review
SB 200
Fiscal
Incentive
Plan
Criteria to include (but not limited to):
How the program reduces commitments;
How the program reduces out-of-home placements;
How the program reduces recidivism;
How the program establishes or utilizes educational, vocational, substance abuse, behavioral health, mental health, or family intervention services, and local alternatives to detention

27. For additional information, contact:
Rachel Bingham, Executive Officer
Department of Family & Juvenile Services
Administrative Office of the Courts