2000000008888 jjjjuuuuvvvveeennnniiiillleeee pppp … · that excellence in the quality of court...

22222222000000000000000088888888

JJJJJJJJUUUUUUUUVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLEEEEEEEE PPPPPPPPRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTIIIIIIIIOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN

AAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNUUUUUUUUAAAAAAAALLLLLLLL RRRRRRRREEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRTTTTTTTT

James RielandJames RielandJames RielandJames Rieland

DirectorDirectorDirectorDirector

Kim Berkeley ClarkKim Berkeley ClarkKim Berkeley ClarkKim Berkeley Clark

Administrative JudgeAdministrative JudgeAdministrative JudgeAdministrative Judge

Allegheny County Juvenile Probation -At A Glance-

Staff

Number of Probation Officers

� Community Based: 46

� School Based: 40

� Intake/Investigation: 15

� Specialty: 9 � Warrant 2

Total 112

Number of Administrators and Supervisors: 39

Number of CISP Program Staff: 78

Number of Support Staff: 52

Number of Hearing Officers: 5

Total Number of Juvenile Probation Staff: 286

Number of Juvenile Court Judges: 10

As of December 31, 2008

Number of juveniles under Court Supervision: 4,522

Average for one day in 2008

Number of Juveniles in Placement

� Private Providers 345 � Youth Development Centers 71

� Shuman Detention Center 126

Totals for 2008

Total number of Juvenile Probation Referrals: 6,091

Total Amount of Restitution, Fees and Fines Collected: $349,665

Allegheny County

Allegheny County Total Population: 1,281,666

Allegheny County Juvenile Population (ages 10 to 18 years): 130,710

(Source: US Census Bureau 2000)

Table of Contents

Introduction: ................................................................................................. 3

75th Anniversary............................................................................................ 7

Juvenile Probation Statistics ...................................................................... 9 Referral History ............................................................................................................ 9 Referrals to Juvenile Probation .................................................................................. 10 Shuman Center for Secure Detention ........................................................................ 12 Electronic Home Monitoring / Home Detention .......................................................... 14 Detention Hearings .................................................................................................... 15 Probation Officers ...................................................................................................... 16 Special Services Unit (SSU) ...................................................................................... 18 Drug and Alcohol Unit ................................................................................................ 19 Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP).................................................... 20 The Academy............................................................................................................. 21 Private Placement Services ....................................................................................... 22 State Placements ....................................................................................................... 23 Warrant Unit ............................................................................................................... 24 Educational Specialist-Aftercare Initiative .................................................................. 25 WorkBridge ................................................................................................................ 26 Victim Services........................................................................................................... 27 Case Closing Information........................................................................................... 28 Financial Information.................................................................................................. 29

Judicial Overview....................................................................................... 30 Judicial Assignments.................................................................................................. 30

Delinquency Petitions ................................................................................ 31

Ancillary Petitions...................................................................................... 32 Act 53......................................................................................................................... 32 Mental Health Procedures Act Petitions..................................................................... 32

Special Events/Activities/Projects/Committees........................................ 33 Provider Trips............................................................................................................. 33 PACTT ....................................................................................................................... 33 SNAP ......................................................................................................................... 33 Take Your Child to Work Day..................................................................................... 33 Probation Officer Swearing In Ceremonies ............................................................... 34 Probation Officer Workshop , Support Staff Retreat and CISP Workshop ................ 34 Operation FALCON.................................................................................................... 34 Comprehensive Plan Training.................................................................................... 35 Juvenile Justice Week................................................................................................ 35 JCJC Nominations ..................................................................................................... 35 Rookie of the Year Awards ........................................................................................ 35 Community Education Initiative.................................................................................. 36 Music Festival ............................................................................................................ 36 Visitors to Juvenile Probation..................................................................................... 36 Website ...................................................................................................................... 36

Organizational Chart .................................................................................. 37

The Mission of the Allegheny County Juvenile

Probation Depa rtment

To reduce and prevent juvenile crime;

promote and maintain safe communities; and improve the welfare of youth and families who are served

by the court.

The principal beliefs supporting the Mission are: � That the disposition of juvenile offenders always takes into account the best interest of

public safety. � That juvenile offenders be held accountable for the harm they cause to individuals as

well as the community at large. � That the primary objective of treatment is to improve and develop the juvenile

offender’s competency skills. � That community residents and organizations be actively engaged by the court in a

cooperative effort to seek solutions to juvenile crime. � That excellence in the quality of court services requires sensitivity to the racial, ethnic,

and cultural diversity of the client population. • That victims are an integral part of the justice system and should have their rights

protected during all phases of the court proceedings including the right to be heard, notified, and restored

2008 Juvenile Probation

Annual Report

Introduction:

The Court continues to advance the Balanced and Restorative Juvenile Justice goals of

community protection, accountability, and competency development in Allegheny

County and across the commonwealth. The highlights described here are a testament

to our staff’s dedication and commitment and ongoing cooperation from our residential

and community-based providers and partners.

The year is marked by significant advancements in our ability to assess and address

factors that put juveniles at risk for further delinquency. Working closely with the

National Center for Juvenile Justice (NCJJ), we implemented various tools to improve

performance. Known as “Case Management Essentials,” the tools move the

department toward more structured decision making while still relying on the

professional judgment of probation staff. The tools include a risk assessment, a needs

assessment with a priority sheet, the single/comprehensive plan, the dispositional

guideline and the case closing report. With the exception of the case closing report, all

of these tools represent a new way of doing business.

The needs assessment tool is a special achievement. Since NCJJ issued the

Competency Development White Paper in 2005, the Court has worked with NCJJ to

create the assessment tool specifically for use with juvenile offenders. The White Paper

defines competency development as the process by which juveniles acquire the

knowledge and skills that enable them to be productive, connected, and law abiding

citizens. Several specific skill domains are also outlined in the White Paper. These

domains represent the areas most closely associated with juvenile delinquency. The

needs assessment tool reflects the five competency skill domains—pro-social, moral

reasoning, academic, workforce development, and independent living —determining

strengths and needs in each relevant area. In addition, the needs assessment looks at

substance abuse, family functioning, and mental health important areas outside the five

competency domains. The Court is currently in the process of developing curricula

options for juveniles that match the needs identified in the assessment. For example, in

2009, we plan to begin using the Aggression Replacement Training for those with

chronically aggressive and anti-social behaviors.

The comprehensive plan is the centerpiece of the case management tools.

Incorporating the priorities identified in the risk and needs assessment, the

comprehensive plan identifies specific activities the juvenile must complete while under

Court supervision. The activities and timeframes outlined in the comprehensive plan

direct and focus the efforts of all those working with the juvenile offender, including

residential provider staff. The comprehensive plan is a living document that evolves

and becomes more extensive as the youth penetrates the system. Having undergone

training on these Case Management tools over the summer, the Probation Department

is now conducting assessments and preparing comprehensive plans for all juveniles

under court ordered supervision, in residential placement, or on aftercare.

In addition, we have revised and reissued our dispositional guidelines relating specific

offense criteria to levels of residential placement. These tools represent a new and we

believe better way of doing business, facilitating consistency and transparency as the

Court advances the juvenile justice goals.

Since 2004, Pennsylvania has been one of four states working on the MacArthur

Foundation’s “Models for Change” initiative designed to improve the juvenile justice

system in three critical areas: aftercare/re-entry, mental health, and disproportionate

minority contact. Allegheny County Juvenile Court is the only jurisdiction in the state

involved in all three areas. Ongoing work with the “Models for Change” initiative has

resulted in the following: the implementation of a detention assessment for all juveniles

being considered for secure detention; increased use of mental health screens at

several points in the system; a pilot Multisystemic Therapy (MST) program for youth and

families; and the creation of three education specialists whose job is to improve

juveniles’ academic transition to and from residential placement and the home school.

This year the education specialists have focused considerable attention on increasing

the number of school reintegration meetings for juveniles returning home from

placement. These meetings generally take place at the home school several weeks

prior to the planned release date and include the juvenile, the parent, the probation

officer, the education specialist, and key staff from the residential provider and the home

school. The goal is to ensure that juveniles are constructively engaged in academic

programming while in residential placement and that they make a smooth and timely

transition to the home school upon release.

The Models for Change work has also resulted in a first of its kind joint collaboration

with Philadelphia and Allegheny court systems. Grant monies from the Pennsylvania

Commission of Crime and Delinquency, the Stoneleigh Foundation, and the MacArthur

Foundation have enabled Philadelphia and Allegheny counties to combine forces,

building on the reintegration efforts already underway in both counties. The

Philly/Allegheny effort, known as PACTT (Pennsylvania Academic Career and

Technical Training Project), is initially working with nine of the largest residential

providers in the state but will soon be expanded to other providers and additional

probation departments. Primary PACTT goals include aligning residential provider

academic programs with state academic standards and ensuring career and technical

offerings in residential placement are connected to real world workforce opportunities.

The PACTT activities are squarely aligned with the broader juvenile justice goal of

developing youth competencies.

The Court continues to expand its delinquency prevention efforts as well. The Truancy

Prevention Program (TPP) was expanded during 2008 with foundation grants. Working

with the Allegheny Intermediate Unit and DHS, the TPP focuses on non-court involved

youth under age 15 who are chronically truant from school. The TPP offers truancy

abatement services to every school district in Allegheny County.

The Stop Now and Plan Program (SNAP), implemented in early 2008 is modeled after

the highly successful SNAP program developed in Toronto, Canada. Working with

high-risk youth between the ages of 6-11 and their families, this innovative delinquency

prevention program is poised for positive results, redirecting the behavior of youth who

may otherwise be headed for Juvenile Court.

These highlights illustrate why Allegheny County Juvenile Court continues to be

recognized as one of the most successful and innovative Courts in the nation. We look

forward to new challenges in the coming year as we re-dedicate ourselves to protecting

the community, restoring victims, and developing youth competencies.

75th Anniversary

In 1933, the passage of the Juvenile Court Law of Allegheny County was hailed as a landmark for social legislation. Subsequently, The Honorable Gustav L. Schramm took office as the first Presiding Judge of Allegheny County Juvenile Court in 1934. Allegheny County Juvenile Court celebrated Juvenile Justice Week and its 75Th anniversary from Oct. 3-11 beginning with Dollars for Restitution Day and concluding with Juvenile Probation Community Service Day. The

celebration was highlighted by several Did You Know? and Juvenile Justice Trailblazer circulars sponsored by the Allegheny Community Education Initiative. These Trailblazers were an important and defining component of our Juvenile Justice System, and because of their dedication, Allegheny County Juvenile Court is what it is today. Judge Gustav L. Schramm was a key part of the Juvenile Court, serving as the first presiding Judge of this new innovation. He petitioned that all Probation Officers be civil service employees, rather than political appointments, ultimately holding the Probation Officers accountable to the court. Judge Schramm also oversaw the construction and development of a new detention home, courtrooms, and Probation offices. Judge Patrick R. Tamilia was instrumental in developing several programs and resources for use with the dependent and delinquent youth, such as the Neuropsychiatric Assessment Unit for Violent Children, the Parental Stress Center, and the Booth Parenting Program for unwed mothers and several other treatment programs for this population of youth. In 1969, Judge Tamilia was elected to the Court of Common Pleas. He was then elected again in 1983 to a 10-year term as a Judge for the Superior Court where he won retention in 1993. Governor William Scranton appointed Judge Maurice B. Cohill, Jr. Judge of the Juvenile Court of Allegheny County on July 20, 1965. Judge Cohill, Jr. remained there until his appointment to the United States District Court (Western Pennsylvania) on June 1, 1976. Judge R. Stanton Wettick, Jr. served as a full-time judge here at Allegheny County Juvenile court from 1976 to 1980. He then served as Administrative Judge for the Family Division from 1980 to 1990. Judge Wettick, Jr. played a major role in recognizing the need for the Academy Day/Evening Program as a means to divert offenders from other institutions.

Joseph Daugerdas became a Juvenile Probation Officer in 1969. He was then promoted to Supervisor of the Southern District office then Regional Supervisor and finally to Director of Court Services. While in this position, Mr. Daugerdas was a key element in creating Home Detention, High Impact Probation, the Drug and Alcohol Unit, the Sex Offenders Unit, The CISP, and School-Based Probation. The implementation of Balanced and Restorative Justice was also created, the mission statement of our Court that drives our everyday work. James Rieland, Director, has been an integral part of Allegheny County Juvenile Court since the start of his career here in 1974 as a student intern. Mr. Rieland has been key in developing much needed services and ideas, such as an additional CISP center in McKeesport, placing CVVC staff in each of the district offices, the initiation of the Warrant Unit, and several other aspects and expansions of the Balanced and Restorative Justice principles. The 75th Anniversary Reception program was conducted on October 7, 2008 and comprised remarks by Administrative Judge Kim Berkeley Clark, President Judge Joseph James, Court Administrator Raymond Billotte and Director James Rieland. Guests were able to view the recently updated museum and memorabilia displays. In addition, guests were the first to view the historical video of Allegheny County Juvenile Court. Probation Officer Mark Yon interviewed several Judges, current staff and former staff on the development of Allegheny County Juvenile Court. Supervisor Shawn Forbes videotaped the interviews and edited the film. All of the Trailblazers were recognized for their efforts and commitment to the youth of Allegheny County at the ceremony. A second 20-minute video was made titled “Words of Wisdom” whereas many Probation Officers give advice to new Probation Officers concerning the important job of a Probation Officer. All guests were able to take home with them a video featuring the newly filmed history of Juvenile Court, Words of Wisdom, the Realities of Juvenile Justice and a video made in 1957 featuring Judge Schramm. In addition, a commemorative booklet was distributed documenting various milestones in Allegheny County Juvenile Probation. All of the events during JJW were sponsored by the Community Education Initiative, the 75th Anniversary sub-committee and the Museum Committee: Connie Przybyla, Chairperson, Nate Almond, Liz Bailie, Ray Bauer, Avis Beck, Jamie Bendik, Randi Brand, Kim Clark, Ron Dziuban, Melissa Ferraro, Shawn Forbes, Angie Lang, Mark Yon, Kathy Leahy, Val Ketter, George Kinder, Ron McKeever, James Miller, Tom O’Connor, Ron Seyko, Jess Smerkol, Marlo Svidron, and Leah Vallone. This celebration was truly a recognition of the importance of the work we do each day as integral parts of the Allegheny County Juvenile Court.

Juvenile Probation Statistics REFERRAL HISTORY

Yearly Comparison 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 281 297 288 287 336

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT ON TEACHER 104 124 179 245 260

ARSON 12 20 34 31 31

AUTO THEFT RELATED 425 396 368 202 156

BURGLARY 345 353 272 253 309

CARJACKING 15 10 9 14 4

CRIMINAL MISCHIEF / INSTITUTIONAL VANDALISM 109 115 126 105 180

CRIMINAL/DEFIANT TRESPASS 98 108 114 94 110

DISORDERLY CONDUCT 104 113 143 90 86

DRUG CHARGES (INCLUDING CRACK) 343 614 642 630 598

DUI 28 24 40 32 41

ESCAPE 12 16 20 10 18

ETHNIC INTIMIDATION 3 3 4 4 2

FAILURE TO ADJUST ALLEGATIONS 308 381 489 430 363

FIREARM UNLICENSED OR POSSESSION

79 98 121 114 136

HARASSMENT 46 31 25 30 23

NONPAYMENT OF FINES 880 1,454 1,082 834 1,066

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY 136 148 111 156 128

RETAIL THEFT 15 46 66 83 96

ROBBERY & RELATED 203 188 213 256 272

SEX OFFENSES 77 97 100 90 106

SIMPLE ASSAULT 598 555 489 519 550

TERRORISTIC THREATS 165 148 126 159 122

THEFT & RELATED (CONSPIRACY/ATTEMPT) 131 153 141 184 187

TRANSFERRED FROM OTHER COUNTY 124 115 117 95 66

VIOLATION OF PROBATION ALLEGATIONS

262 356 401 397 390

WEAPONS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY 119 144 188 166 139

ALL OTHER CHARGES 670 242 282 302 316

TOTAL REFERRALS 5,692 6,349 6,190 5,812 6,091

REFERRALS TO JUVENILE PROBATION 2008 Referrals MALE FEMALE

Most Serious Charge Black White Other Total Black White Other Total TOTAL

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 170 43 1 214 99 20 3 122 336 AGGRAVATED ASSAULT ON TEACHER 141 17 2 160 88 10 2 100 260 ARSON 14 15 0 29 1 1 0 2 31

AUTO THEFT RELATED 92 47 0 139 10 7 0 17 156

BURGLARY 179 116 6 301 4 4 0 8 309 CARJACKING 2 1 0 3 1 0 0 1 4 CRIMINAL MISCHIEF / INSTITUTIONAL VANDALISM 64 93 4 161 8 10 1 19 180 CRIMINAL/DEFIANT TRESPASS 73 27 0 100 7 3 0 10 110

DISORDERLY CONDUCT 36 15 1 52 31 3 0 34 86 DRUG CHARGES (INCLUDING CRACK) 339 173 8 520 29 49 0 78 598

DUI 3 24 0 27 0 14 0 14 41

ESCAPE 10 6 0 16 2 0 0 2 18

ETHNIC INTIMIDATION 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 FAILURE TO ADJUST ALLEGATIONS 261 37 4 302 53 8 0 61 363 FIREARM UNLICENSED OR POSSESSION 118 15 2 135 1 0 0 1 136

HARASSMENT 12 2 1 15 5 3 0 8 23

NONPAYMENT OF FINES 498 183 16 697 277 86 6 369 1,066 RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY 59 45 0 104 17 7 0 24 128

RETAIL THEFT 16 3 0 19 53 21 3 77 96

ROBBERY & RELATED 214 25 4 243 26 2 1 29 272

SEX OFFENSES 59 39 1 99 5 2 0 7 106

SIMPLE ASSAULT 209 124 5 338 156 49 4 212 550

TERRORISTIC THREATS 50 33 1 84 24 13 1 38 122 THEFT & RELATED (CONSPIRACY/ATTEMPT) 95 62 1 158 19 9 1 29 187 TRANSFERRED FROM OTHER COUNTY 21 24 1 46 9 10 1 20 66 VIOLATION OF PROBATION ALLEGATIONS 249 68 5 322 51 15 2 68 390 WEAPONS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY 49 34 0 83 44 12 0 56 139

ALL OTHER CHARGES 168 78 5 251 37 26 2 65 316

TOTAL REFERRALS 3,201 1,350 68 4,619 1,060 385 27 1,472 6,091

Juveniles Referred

While there were a total of 6,091 referrals to Juvenile Court in 2008, 390 were for juveniles currently under supervision with an allegation of Violation of Probation and 363 were for Failure to Adjust to a Court ordered placement. There were 3,798 juveniles who were alleged to have committed the remaining 5,338 allegations.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Referral by Gender

Male Female

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Referral by Race

White African American Other

Admission by Gender

83%

17%

Male Female

SHUMAN CENTER FOR SECURE DETENTION

When it is necessary to protect the community from the juvenile, the youth is placed in detention at Shuman Center. Shuman Center has a licensed capacity of 130 beds.

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

2,800

3,000

3,200

3,400

3,600

3,800

Shuman Admissions

Admissions: 3,341 3,537 3,646 3,310 3,193 3,146

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

1,700

1,750

1,800

1,850

1,900

1,950

2,000

Unduplicated Shuman Admissions

Admissions: 1,805 1,914 1,954 1,937 1,956 1,887

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Admission by Age

2%64%

34%

12 & Under

13 to 15

16 & Over

Admission by Race

1%

83%

16%

Black White

Other

DETENTION ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM The program targets youth between the ages of ten to fourteen years of age who have been charged with a delinquent act that would justify placement in secure detention. The program diverts these youth from secure detention by providing intense in-home mentoring services to the youth and their family. Community safety is assured through strict community supervision and school attendance is also monitored. This short-term program is primarily to provide services before the adjudication hearing. The Probation Department contracts with two community organizations to provide these services.

0102030405060708090

2005 2006 2007 2008

Gender

Detention Alternatives

Female

Male

0102030405060708090

2005 2006 2007 2008

Race

Detention Alternatives

Other

White

African American

ELECTRONIC HOME MONITORING / HOME DETENTION

An alternative to keeping juveniles in Shuman Center is release utilizing Electronic Home Monitoring (EHM) or Home Detention (HD). This service is also used for increased supervision of youth placed in Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP) and The Academy. This program is operated by the Probation Department.

Referrals 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

EHM 390 409 554 479 462

EHM High Risk 215 259 337 276 331

Home Detention 383 446 452 380 364

HD High Risk 86 120 227 278 257

Sanctions 150 221 328 348 359

Total Referrals 1,224 1,455 1,898 1,761 1,773

2006 2007 2008 Discharges

Total % Successful Total %

Successful Total % Successful

EHM 552 80% 449 84% 496 77%

EHM High Risk 304 76% 270 81% 368 73%

Home Detention 414 77% 370 72% 399 71%

HD High Risk 196 69% 262 69% 328 72%

Sanctions 320 86% 336 89% 363 83%

Total Discharges 1,786 78% 1,687 78% 1,954 75%

Referrals

19%

14%

20%

21%

26% EHM

EHM High Risk

Home Detention

HD High Risk

Sanctions

Referral Comparison

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

DETENTION HEARINGS

There were 2,612 Detention Hearings during 2008. The results of those hearings can

be seen below:

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Released toParent's Control -w/o condition

Released toParent's Control -EHM / HD

Remain at Shuman

Detention Hearings 2008

Released to Electronic

Monitoring (EHM)18%

Released7%

Released House Arrest

3%Released to Home Detention

13%

Detained59%

PROBATION OFFICERS

Probation Officers are referred to as the backbone of Juvenile Court. Probation Officers are responsible for supervising offenders at home, school, in their communities and in court ordered placements. The Probation Officer assures that the juvenile offenders follow any orders by the court. Probation Officers hold the youth accountable to repay their victims and restore their communities, in addition to providing the youth with opportunities to develop competency skills. Furthermore, Probation Officers are responsible to assure that communities are safe. In order for this to be accomplished Probation Officers assess each juvenile’s risk and needs and develop a comprehensive plan designed to protect the community, restore the victim and community, and develop skills that lead to positive citizenship. The Intake and Investigations Department are responsible for processing new referrals to Juvenile Court. The Intake Unit is comprised of one Supervisor and seven Intake Probation Officers. The Investigations Department is comprised of one Supervisor and five Investigative Probation Officers. The Investigation Department consists of three Shuman Detention Center Intake Officers. The Community Based Probation Offices are staffed with two Community Based Intake Officers. Additionally, there is an Intake Officer in the Special Services Unit and two Intake Officers in the Drug and Alcohol Unit. School Based Probation Officers process school based intake referrals. Community-Based Probation Officers are responsible for supervising the largest percentage of juvenile offenders under the jurisdiction of the Court. As of December 31, 2008, thirty-seven Community-Based Probation Officers in seven geographically dispersed supervisory units were working with an average caseload of thirty-eight juveniles in a broad range of categories (see chart). The School-based Probation Unit includes forty-one Probation Officers in six supervisory units and a Coordinator. With Probation Officers in twelve city schools and twenty-one school districts, the Allegheny County Juvenile Probation’s School-Based program is the largest in the Commonwealth and is believed to be the largest in the nation. School-Based Probation Officers typically manage an average caseload of approximately twenty-five cases, providing daily supervision and handling intake to youth in school. On December 31, 2008 School-Based Probation Officers were supervising 1,022 juveniles. The unit processed 674 intakes during 2008

Community Based Probation Caseload

16%20%

4%

53%

7%

Probation PrivatePlacement

ConsentDecree

StatePlacement

Day Treatment

School Based Probation Officers as of December 31, 2008

Pittsburgh School District

Allderdice ………… 2 Probation Officers Arsenal ………… 1 Probation Officer Brashear/South Hill MS ………… 2 Probation Officers Carrick ………… 2 Probation Officers Clayton ………… 2 Probation Officer Langley ………… 2 Probation Officers McNaugher ………… 1 Probation Officer Oliver ………… 2 Probation Officers Peabody ………… 2 Probation Officers Perry ………… 1 Probation Officer Schenley ………… 1 Probation Officer Student Achievement Center ………… 3 Probation Officers Westinghouse ………… 1 Probation Officers Other Schools in Allegheny County Baldwin …………… 1 Probation Officer Chartiers Valley …………… 1 Probation Officer Fox Chapel …………… 1 Probation Officer Hampton / Pine Richland …………… 1 Probation Officer Highlands …………… 1 Probation Officer Keystone Oaks …………… 1 Probation Officer McKeesport High School …………… 2 Probation Officers Moon / West Allegheny …………… 1 Probation Officer North Allegheny …………… 1 Probation Officer North Hills …………… 1 Probation Officer Penn Hills …………… 1 Probation Officer Shaler …………… 1 Probation Officer Steel Valley …………… 1 Probation Officer Sto-Rox High School …………… 1 Probation Officer West Mifflin …………… 1 Probation Officer Wilkinsburg …………… 1 Probation Officer Woodland Hills Jr./Sr. High …………… 2 Probation Officers

School Based Probation Officers continue to integrate themselves within their assigned schools. They participate in activities such as School Safety Committee, co-facilitating D&A Groups, serving as club sponsors, acting as assistant coaches, supporting extra curricular activities and participating in the School’s Student Assistance Team. School Based Probation Officers attempt to divert youth from the formal Court process by using the Intake Adjustment process and by referring to the Court’s Victim Offenders Mediation Program. They are involved in other divisionary activities such as serving as instructors in the FBI Adopt A School Program and teaching Juvenile Justice classes within their schools. For the fifth consecutive summer, School Based Probation Officers helped facilitate a week long Boy Scout Camp for 70 inner-city youth who have not had a scouting experience.

SPECIAL SERVICES UNIT (SSU)

The SSU is designed to effectively supervise and provide specialized treatment services for adjudicated sexual offenders through community monitoring and intensive individual and group counseling. Specifically, the SSU addresses treatment issues with adjudicated sexual offenders who are in the community under probationary supervision, and with offenders on aftercare status following release from a Court ordered residential placement for sex offenders. The unit is composed of five Probation Officers, and a Supervisor. SSU/WPIC Program Since 1998, the SSU has collaborated with Western Psychiatric Institute & Clinic (WPIC) to provide enhanced services to first time and less serious sex offenders placed on probation. Youth in the program undergo an assessment and participate in weekly clinical sessions conducted by WPIC. In addition, these youth attend weekly group sessions run by SSU Probation Officers. SSU Probation Officers and WPIC clinicians meet regularly to discuss the best course of action for each offender involved in the program.

2008 SSU Aftercare Recidivism

New Non-Sexual Offense

0%

New Sexual Offense

0%

No New Offenses100%

SSU Juveniles Served

0

50

100

150

200

250

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Education

Aftercare

Community

DRUG AND ALCOHOL UNIT

Two Drug and Alcohol Intake Officers are assigned all new drug and alcohol related allegations for non-detained youth that are referred with drug and alcohol specific charges. Three community based Drug and Alcohol Intensive Supervision Probation Officers maintain a caseload of youth that have been identified as having an abusive relationship with drugs and/or alcohol. The Aftercare Probation Officer works intensively with youth who are placed in drug and alcohol treatment programs and their family. In addition, these specialists conduct individual and group assessments, victim awareness curriculum, educational programming in the community and Parent Survival Skills Training (PSST) and the Coffee House Nation (CHN). The D & A Unit also conducts the Parent Survival Skills Training (PSST) is designed to empower parents who have been held hostage by their teenage substance abusers. The group is open to any parent in Allegheny County and is currently being offered six times per month at three different locations: Wilkinsburg, Greentree and Wexford. This group offers support, skill building, suggestions, ideas and education. In 2008, 130 new parents were referred to PSST and 75 families attend the PSST group regularly. The parents who attend PSST created and maintain an informational web blog that is open for public viewing and input at www.gopsst.org. We have come to believe that parents that attend PSST become stronger parents. Stronger parents can better help their teenager to make good decisions about drugs and alcohol.

D & A Assessments

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Group Assessments Individual Assessments

Assessment Results

0

50

100

150

200

250

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Users Abusers Chemically Dependent

Coffee House Nation (CHN) was started in early 2007 as a sober-fun activity group. Its membership consists of young people in recovery from serious addiction who also happened to be labeled Juvenile Delinquent. In general, our teens have trouble making relationships independently and often resort back to old friends. By creating this alternative, members can have a safe place to make friendships with other positive peers in recovery. In addition, teens early in recovery need to relearn how to have sober-fun. This group helps them learn how to do that by attending monthly meetings, planning social events and having fun. At the same time, part of their recovery is giving back to the community. The members of CHN like to do public speaking. Once the members have significant clean time and are stable, they are asked to speak to small groups and deliver their often very powerful message.

COMMUNITY INTENSIVE SUPERVISION PROGRAM (CISP)

The Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP) is operated by Juvenile Probation and in 2008 completed its eighteenth year of operation. It is designed to reduce the need for juveniles to be removed from their homes and placed in a residential program, yet still provide close supervision. The program also provides aftercare services for male offenders who are returning to the community after placement. In 2008 there were a total of 211 youth committed to the CISP program and 227 youth discharged as follows:

Commitments Discharges Center Total % Total %

Garfield 48 23% 48 21% Hill District 33 16% 42 19% Homewood 52 25% 54 24% McKeesport 24 11% 27 12% Wilkinsburg 54 26% 56 25%

Total 211 227

Discharge History

0

50

100

150

200

250

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

OtherNegativePositive

Since its inception, CISP has continued to engage the community and has developed strong ties. CISP youth routinely perform community service in their neighborhood. Youth and staff have helped to restore a church and a women’s shelter, among other projects. Additionally, they visit nursing homes on a regular basis and help senior citizens get to the voting polls on election days. CISP participates in many innovative projects. CISP has held an annual carwash to raise money and awareness about victim issues for the Center for Victims of Violence & Crime for the past ten years. This year CISP was able to wash cars and donate $1,350 to them. An article appeared in The McKeesport Daily News concerning the renovation of a World War II Tank. Youth spent two days painting the Historical World War II Army tank located at Renzie Park in McKeesport.

THE ACADEMY

When a juvenile does not reside in a Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP) neighborhood and the Court determines that the juvenile is in need of day treatment programming or aftercare services, the juvenile may be ordered to participate in The Academy program. This program is structured similar to the CISP program operated by Juvenile Probation. However, because these juveniles reside throughout the county, this program provides transportation both to and from the program site.

Academy Discharges

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Negative

Positive

The Academy Juveniles At Risk Program (AJAR) The AJAR Program is a partnership between the Academy, the Court, WPIC, and Human Services Administration Organization (HASO) that provides mental health services for adjudicated youth committed to the Academy Day Treatment program. Youth are typically referred to AJAR by probation officers or Academy staff who believe mental health treatment may be necessary. All youth referred to AJAR receive a psychiatric assessment and an evaluation regarding their mental health needs. Youth with more intensive mental health needs are placed in the AJAR program, while those with less intensive needs are referred for community-based health treatment. Youth in the AJAR Program receive a host of services including individual, group, and family therapy. A psychiatrist is available to prescribe and monitor medication if necessary. In addition, probation officers and HSAO case managers work together to ensure that, when necessary, youth receive follow up mental health services upon release from the Academy.

PRIVATE PLACEMENT SERVICES

The majority of Allegheny County youth in placement reside in non-secure settings. During 2008 there was an average of 345 youth in private placement on any given day.

The chart below shows the number of youth in placement on the last day of each month. At the end of January 2008 there were 370 youth in placement and by the end of December 2008 that number dropped to 295.

Average Youth in Placement

325

345

365

385

405

425

445

465

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Number of Youth in Placement on Last Day of Month

290

310

330

350

370

390

410

430

450

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2006 2007 2008

STATE PLACEMENTS

When it is necessary to protect the community from a juvenile, the youth may be placed in a facility operated by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These are either secure facilities or Youth Forestry Camps located throughout the Commonwealth. During 2008, there were 132 juveniles placed and 147 juveniles discharged.

There were 74 juveniles in placement at the beginning of the year and 58 in placement at the end of the year. The average number of juveniles in placement for 2008 was 71.

Placements / Discharges

02468

101214161820

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Placed Discharged

Youth in State Placement on last day of the Month

50

70

90

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2006 2007 2008

WARRANT UNIT

The Warrant Unit began operations in 2004 with the goal of improving community protection. The Warrant Unit is comprised of Probation Officers, Supervisors, and Administrators who have full-time responsibilities in addition to their Warrant Unit activities. The Unit works closely with local law enforcement, particularly the City of Pittsburgh - Bureau of Police and the Allegheny County Sheriff’s Department, to actively pursue offenders who have absconded, failed to appear for Court, or violated the conditions of supervision. Through December 31, 2008, over 88% of those sought by the Warrant Unit have been apprehended and detained at Shuman pending a Court appearance.

Additionally, the Warrant Unit has confiscated numerous assault weapons, handguns, ammunition, illicit narcotics, and gang paraphernalia.

Warrant Unit Results Since Inception

Still AWOL6%

Turned in by Parents after WU Sw eep

11%

Apprehended41%

Subsequently Located by

Police42%

EDUCATIONAL SPECIALIST-AFTERCARE INITIATIVE

Focus on Education The Department has three Education Specialists who work closely with Probation Officers, residential providers, home school staff, and the Allegheny Intermediate Unit to improve education reintegration for delinquent youth exiting residential placement. Completing the fourth year of this PCCD grant funded program in 2008, the Education Specialists are helping the Department advance important education objectives including the following:

• Gathering and updating key information regarding education programming available through our residential providers;

• Working closely with the Allegheny Intermediate Unit to ensure all relevant

school information is promptly transferred to the residential provider upon commitment and back to the home school upon release;

• Collaborating with Pittsburgh Public Schools and other school districts to

establish a consistent protocol for reintegration, curriculum alignment, and credit transfer;

• Establishing the Probation Officer’s role in developing a “Single Plan” in

consultation with the provider and home school; the Single Plan will include education goals, objectives, and activities that begin in placement and continue through the aftercare (post release) phase when the youth returns to the home school;

• Refining the roles of the Probation Officer and Education Specialist in facilitating

and overseeing education plans for those entering and exiting residential facilities.

• Scheduling and facilitating School Reintegration Meetings to ensure a smooth

transition from out-of-home placement back to the juvenile’s home school. In addition, the Department is working in conjunction with the Philadelphia Juvenile (PACTT) Probation Department to help create statewide agreement and engagement on many of these important education objectives.

WORKBRIDGE

COMMUNITY SERVICE:

Number of Referrals Received:

1,500

Total Number of youth that service was provided to: 1,472

Average age of the youth referred: 16

Average Number of hours ordered:

51.12

Total Value to community: $431,283 Number of CS Sites: 2,011 Number of Positive discharges: 1,592 Retention: 98%

Hours of Community Service

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

STIPEND COMPONENT:

Number of referrals received: 588 Number of successful discharges:

565

Community Service Hours: 10,603 Restitution Paid on behalf of Stipend: $66,279

COMMUNITY REPAIR CREW:

Number of referrals: 65 Number of Youth served:

65

Average Age: 17 Number of positive discharges: 51

Community Service Referrals

1380

1400

1420

1440

1460

1480

1500

1520

1540

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

EMPLOYMENT INITIATIVE: Number of Referrals Received: 224 Total Number of youth that service was provided to: 220

Average age of the youth referred: 17

Number of Positive discharges: 214 Average Number of days each youth was in Program: 140

Retention: 95% Number of Paid Employment Sites:

728

Restitution Collected: $70,259

Restitution Collected

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

VICTIM SERVICES

Victims of juvenile offenders are entitled to many rights in the Juvenile Justice System. In order to provide these services to victims of juvenile offenders, Juvenile Probation has established contracts with both the Center for Victims of Violence and Crime (CVVC) and Pittsburgh Action against Rape (PAAR).

VICTIM OFFENDER DIALOGUE

During 2008, Allegheny County Juvenile Probation referred 53 cases to the Victim Offender Dialogue (VOD) program, which involved 71 victims and 64 juvenile offenders. There were 11 individual pre-mediation caucuses, and 11 mediations. All cases that went to final mediation were successfully completed. CAP

After a thorough assessment of the Community Accountability Panels (CAP), it was determined that the project funding would best be utilized for a CVVC Restorative Justice Coordinator. This position partners with Juvenile Court Probation to ensure that restorative justice programs are fully developed and implemented. Based on CAP Panel feedback, input from the court, and dialogues with Juvenile Court Administration, CVVC determined that the original CAP model needed to be placed on hold while models such as Youth Aid Panels or Restorative Group Conferencing are being explored to determine their effectiveness and possible fit to the needs of Allegheny County.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

CVVC Comprehensive Victim Services

Victims Witnesses Significant Others0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2005 2006 2007 2008

Victims Served by PAAR Comprehensive Victim Services

VOD Referrals

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2005 2006 2007 2008

Victims Offenders

CASE CLOSING INFORMATION

During 2008 information was reported for 2,040 youth whose cases were closed.

Case Closing Information 2008

Number of Cases Closed 2,040

Average Length of Supervision: Probation

17.1 months

Average Length of Supervision: Consent Decree 8.46 months

Accountability Factors

Number of Youth

Ordered Amount Ordered

Amount Completed/ Paid

% That Completed/ Paid in Full

% That Completed/ Paid 50% or

more

Community Service Hours 1,533 90,672 Hours 91,481 Hours* 96% 97%

Restitution 674 $336,361 $223,465 81% 84%

Completed the three hour Victim Awareness Curriculum

1,479 73% 1,464 99%

Public Safety Number of

Youth

% Of Closed Cases

Skill Building Number of Youth

% of Closed Cases

Violation of Probation 288 14%

New Adjudication 396 19%

* Youth perform Community Service over and above the amount ordered by the Court.

Attending School, Vocational Program, or

GED Training or Employed at time of Case Closing

1,097 62.4%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Paid Full Restiutution Completed all Community Service No New Adjudications

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

The Administrative Services Department is designated as the fiscal support service to the Juvenile Probation system. The unit is comprised of one Supervisor and four staff positions. Administrative Services is responsible for processing payroll information for 286 full and part-time staff with $13,306,924 paid in salaries and benefits for Probation’s operational staff, the Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP), the Electronic Monitoring staff, and the School Based Program staff. There are five budgets, the largest of which includes the placement costs for delinquent youth, totaling $43,240,552. The department also monitors several grant-funded projects that interface with state and federal funding sources. In addition, the Administrative Services Department is also responsible for all reports and distribution of restitution and fines collected by Probation Officers. During 2008 a total $349,665 was collected and dispersed. Every effort is made to have a youth pay in full their obligations. If a youth does not comply with his restitution obligation, the department is responsible for indexing the judgment with the Department of Court Records when the youth turns 21 years of age.

Funds Collected

$61,448

$199,080

$34,478

$811

$16,507

$7,852

$23,785

$5,704

Restitution Victim Compensation Fund

Stipend Fund Substance Abuse Fund

DNA Fund Victim Curriculum

Crime Lab Other

Judicial Overview Allegheny County Juvenile Court is the Juvenile Section of the Family Division of the Court of Common Pleas. There are four Judges who exclusively hear Juvenile Court cases and six Judges who hear cases from both the Juvenile Section and Adult Section of the Family Division. The Court also has one delinquency Hearing Officer and four dependency Hearing Officers. The Judges are responsible for hearing both Juvenile Probation/delinquency cases and Children Youth and Family/dependency cases.

JUDICIAL ASSIGNMENTS As of December 31, 2008

Judge Kim Berkeley Clark, Administrative Judge Judges:

Kelly Eileen Bigley John T. McVay Jr. Guido A. DeAngelis Kathleen R. Mulligan Thomas E. Flaherty David N. Wecht Kathryn M. Hens-Greco Dwayne D. Woodruff Alan D. Hertzberg

Chief Hearing Officer: • Cynthia Franklin

Delinquency Hearing Officer:

• Robert Banos

Dependency Hearing Officers: • James Alter • Mark Cancilla • Carla Hobson

Court Schedule Delinquency cases are scheduled every Monday, Tuesday and Thursday. Dependency cases are scheduled on Wednesday and Friday. Dual cases (a youth is both delinquent and dependent) are scheduled on Mondays. Shelter hearings are scheduled every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 8:30 a.m. Detention hearings are scheduled every day at Shuman Center. A monthly Court calendar is published on the Court’s website: http://www.alleghenycourts.us/docupost/juvenile_calendar.asp

Delinquency Petitions

There were a total of 3,769 petitions alleging delinquency filed with the Court during 2008. This is an increase of 224 petitions from the total number filed during 2007.

2008 Delinquency Petitions

050

100150200250300350400450

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne July

Augus

t

Septe

mbe

r

Octobe

r

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Delinquency Petitions History

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Ancillary Petitions

ACT 53

In 1997 Pennsylvania legislators closed the “gap” in our Court system regarding drug and alcohol treatment for addicted teenagers who have not been declared either delinquent or dependent through Juvenile Court. ACT 53 addresses the issue of involuntary commitment of minors into drug and alcohol treatment. The ACT 53 procedure is a collaboration between Allegheny County Juvenile Court and the Allegheny County Department of Human Services, Drug and Alcohol Services Unit. The parent/legal guardian of the teenager must be a resident of Allegheny County and the child must be between the ages of 12 and 18. The success of the program is evident in three unique areas. First, teenagers who are unable or unwilling to ask for help are offered treatment. Second, the majority of teens who are headed for “the system” are helped before they reach that point. Thirdly, Allegheny County has implemented one of the only successful ACT 53 processes in the State of Pennsylvania.

MENTAL HEALTH PROCEDURES ACT PETITIONS

Juvenile Section Judges also hear Mental Health Procedures Act petitions for youth requiring in-patient mental health treatment. This process is coordinated with the Allegheny County Department of Human Services – Office of Behavioral Health.

Mental Health Hearings Comparison

77

191

65114

45

56

148

124165

70

183

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Act 53 Cases

Special Events/Activities/Projects/Committees

PROVIDER TRIPS

Allegheny County Probation Administration and Juvenile Court Judges visited seventeen facilities in Pennsylvania. These trips are unique to Allegheny County. Director Rieland began the Provider Trips approximately sixteen years ago as a way for Judges to view first-hand the provider programs. Judges and Administration staff have the opportunity to not only speak to provider staff, but talk to youth who have been placed into the various programs.

PACTT

Allegheny and Philadelphia Probation departments jointly received grants from PCCD – The McArthur Foundation and the Stoneleigh Foundation to fund the Pennsylvania Academic and Career/Technical Training Alliance. The purpose of the project is to improve the career and technical training for youth in the largest private programs in the state.

SNAP

Stop Now and Plan began operation at Auberle and Holy Family. Both programs have exceeded the expectations of the developers. Local foundations and the United Way have contributed $850,000 for this two-year pilot.

TAKE YOUR CHILD TO WORK DAY

On April 24, 2008, Allegheny County Probation sponsored their eighth annual Take Your Child to Work Day. Over 74 children of employees attended a full day of activities to teach the children about Juvenile Probation and Juvenile Court. The day ended with the ever-popular mock trial.

Pictured in Photo: Jess Smerkol, Liz Boland and Christine Jimenez

Getting ready for “Are you a Good Witness” segment of the program.

Pictured in Photo: Asst. Adm. Ted Kairys, Judge Clark, Director Rieland and Provider

PROBATION OFFICER SWEARING IN CEREMONIES

In 2008 six new Probation Officers officially took the oath of office at ceremonies attended by Judges, Probation Administration, staff and family

PROBATION OFFICER WORKSHOP , SUPPORT STAFF RETREAT

AND CISP WORKSHOP

In addition to the numerous training opportunities extended to all employees, in 2008 three separate all day workshops/retreats were held to enhance staff’s skills. Each was unique in their own way and reinforced to staff how important each and every person is to making Juvenile Probation run in an efficient manner.

OPERATION FALCON Probation staff participated in Operation FALCON – a national project – Federal and local police organized nationally. (Over the course of the seven-day operation, Deputy U.S. Marshals, teamed with federal, state, and local law enforcement partners, arrested 107 fugitives – including a Pittsburgh man charged with homicide, nine sex offenders and three documented gang members – and cleared 132 warrants. Over $70,000, two firearms, 153 stamp bags of heroin (from a juvenile) and approximately 100 grams of crack cocaine were also seized. Probation Officers Greg Willig and David Mink was directly involved in several of these significant apprehensions.

Pictured in Photo: Judge McVay, Judge Woodruff, PO Jones, Judge Clark, PO Brown, Director

Rieland, Deputy Director Carlino, Ray Bauer, Kim Booth, Mary Hatheway, and Ted Kairys

Pictured in Photo: Bob Konesky, Michele Howard, Chris Lisko, Shannon Gabos,

John Bout and Bert Hatheway

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRAINING In September of 2008 the “Comprehensive” Plan application was launched. Each of the five competency development domains (Pro-Social Skills, Moral Reasoning Skills, Education, Workforce Development, and Independent Living) are incorporated in the plan.

Probation Officers must update progress/compliance no less than every three (3) months or more often if directed by the

supervisor. The level of progress is documented in the Plan.

JUVENILE JUSTICE WEEK

In October, the Community Education Initiative sponsored a number of events to celebrate Juvenile Justice Week. The week began with BARJ into your Lives Day (a day youth and staff volunteered community service), Tuesday the 75th Anniversary reception was held in the rotunda. On Wednesday approximately 500 students visited Juvenile Probation’s Open House. At Thursday evening’s ceremony Pittsburgh Steeler Anthony Madison was the guest speaker, during the ceremony youth essay contest winners were recognized as well as the Rookies of the Year and Parent of the Year. The week ended with a luncheon and talent show.

JCJC NOMINATIONS

Congratulations to the following Allegheny County Juvenile Probation nominees: Supervisor of the Year : Lisa Rusko Probation Officer of the Year : Gary King Support Person of the Year : Brenda Harden Court-Operated Program of the Year : SSU/WPIC Community Based Program of the Year : Wesley Spectrum Family Counseling Residential Program of the Year : George Junior Republic – RTF Meritous Service Award : Ken Sutton

ROOKIE OF THE YEAR AWARDS

Congratulations to our Rookies of the Year: Rookie Probation Officer of the Year: Callie Shattuck Rookie Support Staff Person of the Year : Christine Jimenez

Pictured in Photo: Paul Hawthorne & Tom O’Connor

COMMUNITY EDUCATION INITIATIVE

The Community Education Initiative was formed in 2003. Its mission is to educate the communities of Allegheny County to become aware of and identify opportunities to assist Juvenile Probation’s efforts to implement the principles of Balanced and Restorative Justice. In 2008 they published a “75th Anniversary - Did You Know?” booklet, organized a Department photo project, produced two videos, “75th Anniversary” and “Words of Wisdom” and created a Juvenile Probation Jeopardy game for Probation Officers to use when visiting schools, in addition to sponsoring numerous events throughout the year.

MUSIC FESTIVAL

For the last eight years Juvenile Probation staff has volunteered at the annual Allegheny County Music Festival. This festival is dedicated to raising funds and/or seeking goods and materials to enhance the quality of life for needy children in Allegheny County. Over the years approximately $225,438 has been raised from this concert to help the children of Allegheny County.

VISITORS TO JUVENILE PROBATION

In 2008 Juvenile Probation hosted a number of Juvenile Justice professionals from as far away as Portugal. These visitors were interested in studying the way Allegheny County Juvenile Probation operates.

WEBSITE

For more information and downloads visit the Allegheny County Probation website at: http://www.alleghenycourts.us/family/juvenile/juvenile.asp

Pictured in Photo: DHS Director Marc Cherna, Justice Baer, Judge Clark,

Director Rieland, Judge Mulligan and Judge Hertzberg

Pictured in Photo: Director Rieland with Portugal delegation

Organizational Chart

2000000008888 jjjjuuuuvvvveeennnniiiillleeee pppp … · that excellence in the quality of court...

Documents