community programs and court services overview and strategic direction

Community Programs and Court Community Programs and Court Services Services

Overview and Strategic Overview and Strategic Direction Direction

Teresa Price, Deputy Secretary of Teresa Price, Deputy Secretary of Community Programs, Community Programs,

Michael Rieder, Deputy Secretary of Michael Rieder, Deputy Secretary of Court Services, andCourt Services, and

William Lassiter, Director of William Lassiter, Director of Communications Communications

Presentation Objectives Presentation Objectives

Provide an overview of the current Provide an overview of the current structure of community programs structure of community programs and court servicesand court services

Current needs in each DJJDP sectionCurrent needs in each DJJDP section

What changes would be necessary to What changes would be necessary to successfully implement HB 1414successfully implement HB 1414

Department OverviewDepartment Overview

Department Vision and MissionDepartment Vision and Mission

Our Vision A seamless, comprehensive juvenile justice system which provides the most effective services to youth and their families at the right time in the most appropriate settings.

Our Mission To promote public safety and juvenile delinquency prevention, intervention, and treatment through the operation of a seamless, comprehensive juvenile justice system.

Department Goals:Department Goals:

To promote public safety as the cornerstone To promote public safety as the cornerstone of North Carolina's juvenile justice system. of North Carolina's juvenile justice system.

To promote juvenile delinquency To promote juvenile delinquency prevention, intervention, and treatment at prevention, intervention, and treatment at the state and community levels so that the state and community levels so that juvenile crime and delinquency are reduced. juvenile crime and delinquency are reduced.

To further develop and maintain a To further develop and maintain a comprehensive, quality-focused juvenile comprehensive, quality-focused juvenile justice system driven by research and justice system driven by research and evidence-based practices in all budgetary evidence-based practices in all budgetary components of the department.components of the department.

Overview of Comprehensive StrategyOverview of Comprehensive Strategyfor Juvenile Justicefor Juvenile Justice

DJJDP System OverviewDJJDP System Overview

Staff of 1,905 after our most recent RIF.Staff of 1,905 after our most recent RIF. 1,628 in the field in various positions to 1,628 in the field in various positions to

include:include: 595 Court Services (Court Counselors, 595 Court Services (Court Counselors,

Supervisors, Chiefs, Area Administrators, Supervisors, Chiefs, Area Administrators, and Support staff)and Support staff)

10 Regional Consultants for 10 Regional Consultants for JJuvenile uvenile CCrime rime PPrevention revention CCouncils/Community ouncils/Community Programs (there are 99 JCPC’s and a Programs (there are 99 JCPC’s and a myriad of community “placement” myriad of community “placement” options)options)


1,161 – Staff associated with Facilities1,161 – Staff associated with Facilities Includes Professional Staff both Includes Professional Staff both

regionally and in the facilitiesregionally and in the facilities And, ancillary and other staff across the And, ancillary and other staff across the

Dept (including maintenance, cooks, Dept (including maintenance, cooks, Business Officers, transportation Business Officers, transportation drivers, processing and administrative drivers, processing and administrative assistants, etc.) assistants, etc.)

149 in the Central Office to support the field 149 in the Central Office to support the field (7.8% of workforce supporting 92% of field (7.8% of workforce supporting 92% of field services)services)


99 Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils 99 Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils 582 programs plus an additional 65 gang 582 programs plus an additional 65 gang

assessments/programs that employ assessments/programs that employ approximately 1,250 people approximately 1,250 people

Served nearly 30,000 juveniles statewide Served nearly 30,000 juveniles statewide in FY 08-09in FY 08-09

These programs along with other These programs along with other community initiatives have been able to community initiatives have been able to prevent juvenile crime which is at a ten prevent juvenile crime which is at a ten year lowyear low

Complaints Received: CY 2000-2008Complaints Received: CY 2000-2008(Delinquent and Undisciplined Complaints)(Delinquent and Undisciplined Complaints)

44,864

46,389

44,270

45,083

46,041

45,389

48,089

46,231

43,797

41,000

42,000

43,000

44,000

45,000

46,000

47,000

48,000

49,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

8.9% Decreas

e

Juvenile Crime Rate: Juvenile Crime Rate: CY 2000 - 2008CY 2000 - 2008

Rate is of Rate is of DelinquentDelinquent Complaints Received per 1,000 juveniles age 6-15. Complaints Received per 1,000 juveniles age 6-15.Juvenile Crime Rate in NC has decreased 12% from 2000 to 2008.Juvenile Crime Rate in NC has decreased 12% from 2000 to 2008.

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Rate

35.75

36.3

34.61 34.69

35.32

34.86

36.21

34.08

31.52

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

NC Juvenile Crime FactsNC Juvenile Crime Facts

Approximately 2-3% of juvenile crime Approximately 2-3% of juvenile crime each year are for A-E felonieseach year are for A-E felonies

Approximately 69% of complaints Approximately 69% of complaints received are for misdemeanor received are for misdemeanor offenses; and 12% are for infractions offenses; and 12% are for infractions or status offensesor status offenses

Of complaints received annually, Of complaints received annually, approximately 75% are committed approximately 75% are committed by malesby males

Complaints Received Offenses: Complaints Received Offenses: CY 2008CY 2008

N=43,797N=43,797

Minor Misdemeanor

Class 1 - 3, 28,004

Serious Felony Class F - I, Misd.

A1, 9,638

Violent Felony Class A - E,

1,037

Status, 4,896

Infraction, 222

Top Ten Juvenile CrimesTop Ten Juvenile CrimesCY 2008CY 2008

Charged Offense # Offenses

Simple assault 4,417

Larceny - Misdemeanor 3,315

Simple affray 1,881

Breaking and or entering (f) 1,810

Injury to real property 1,637

Disorderly Conduct at School 1,537

Communicating threats 1,369

Ungovernable < 16 1,306

Truant < 16 1,200

Larceny after breaking or entering 1,180

TOTAL 20,760

The top 10 juvenile crimes account for 47% of charged offenses in 2008.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

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

Weekday Weekend

Time of Juvenile CrimeTime of Juvenile CrimeOffense Times on Complaints Received, CY 2008Offense Times on Complaints Received, CY 2008

N = 38,894N = 38,894

Detention Admissions: Detention Admissions: CY 2002 – CY 2008CY 2002 – CY 2008

Approximately 5,000 distinct juveniles per year are admitted to detention. Approximately 5,000 distinct juveniles per year are admitted to detention. These numbers reflect admissions to State and County facilities.These numbers reflect admissions to State and County facilities.

8,832

8,122

7,921

7,750

8,631

7,8447,936

7,200

7,400

7,600

7,800

8,000

8,200

8,400

8,600

8,800

9,000

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Detention Admissions

1,360

1,217

975

660605

478 473428

486437 469

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

0

1

2

3

# Commitments Rate of YDC Commitment

YDC Commitment Trends and Rate:YDC Commitment Trends and Rate:CY 1998-2008CY 1998-2008

Rate = YDC Commitments per 1,000 juveniles age 10-17.Rate = YDC Commitments per 1,000 juveniles age 10-17.

YDC TrendsYDC Trends

The average length of stay in Youth The average length of stay in Youth Development Centers 10 years ago (1998) Development Centers 10 years ago (1998) was 248 days. By 2008, the average had was 248 days. By 2008, the average had increased to 357 daysincreased to 357 days

The average daily population in 1998 was The average daily population in 1998 was 925 juveniles. YDC commitments have 925 juveniles. YDC commitments have drastically decreased, as the 2008 average drastically decreased, as the 2008 average daily population was 439 daily population was 439

The average rate of commitment is 0.48 per The average rate of commitment is 0.48 per 1,000 juveniles age 10-171,000 juveniles age 10-17

Risks of Juveniles Disposed in CourtRisks of Juveniles Disposed in Court*All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points *All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points

each year; and 2% on average are not assessedeach year; and 2% on average are not assessed

The overall needs level of juveniles disposed in court each year is approximately: LowLow Risk – 42% Risk – 42% MediumMedium Risk – 41% Risk – 41% High RiskHigh Risk – 15% – 15%

It is therefore imperative that prevention and It is therefore imperative that prevention and intervention programs remain in place to ensure intervention programs remain in place to ensure that the proportion of high risk offenders remains that the proportion of high risk offenders remains small.small.

Risks of Juveniles Disposed in CourtRisks of Juveniles Disposed in Court(cont)(cont)

*All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points *All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points each year; and 2% on average are not assessedeach year; and 2% on average are not assessed

11% of juveniles were under 12 when 11% of juveniles were under 12 when they received their first referralthey received their first referral

27% had some type of assault 27% had some type of assault history prior to the current complainthistory prior to the current complaint

32% had some type of substance 32% had some type of substance abuse history that is being treated or abuse history that is being treated or needs further assessment/treatmentneeds further assessment/treatment

Risks of Juveniles Disposed in CourtRisks of Juveniles Disposed in Court(cont)(cont)

*All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points *All totals are approximate and fluctuate 1-2 percentage points each year; and 2% on average are not assessedeach year; and 2% on average are not assessed

61% reportedly had 61% reportedly had seriousserious problems; 21% had problems; 21% had moderatemoderate problems; and 8% had problems; and 8% had minorminor problems in schoolproblems in school

13% of assessments revealed gang 13% of assessments revealed gang membership or association (overall membership or association (overall this number is about 9% of distinct this number is about 9% of distinct juveniles)juveniles)

34% of parents were either unwilling 34% of parents were either unwilling or unable to supervise their own or unable to supervise their own childrenchildren

School-Based Complaints: School-Based Complaints: FY 08-09FY 08-09

N=40,621N=40,621

17,037 (42%)

23,584 (58%)

School-Based Non-School Based

The proportion of school-based offenses increased 2% since CY 2008.

School-Based Complaints: School-Based Complaints: FY 08-09FY 08-09

N=17,037N=17,037

6,695

8,369

1,087

378 342 42 72 14 380

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

Black White Latino Multi-racial

NativeAmerican

Other Asian PacificIslander

Unknown

Black White Latino Multi-racial Native American

Other Asian Pacific Islander Unknown

Suspension and Expulsion Data

National Data Over 3 million students are suspended

per year (3.3 million in 2006). The average number of suspensions per

state is over 64,000. The average number of suspensions and

expulsions as a percent of enrollment is 6.9%.

Source : National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2008 http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009020.pdf

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009020.pdf


North Carolina 2007-08 One out of every 10 students were

suspended from North Carolina public schools

A total of 308,010 short-term suspensions given to 156,072 different students

A total of 5,225 long-term suspensions given to 4,182 different students

Source: N.C. DPI Consolidated Data Report: 2007-08

http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/research/discipline/reports/consolidated/2007-08.pdf



Minority Suspension Trends Black / Multiracial students received

over half of all short-term suspensions since the 2000-2001 school year





Minority Suspension Trends Black males are the most likely of any

single group to be suspended Black males make up 15.7% of the

student population in the state and accounted for 55% of all short-term suspensions




From Risk and Needs to Current From Risk and Needs to Current PracticesPractices

One of the most significant legislative One of the most significant legislative changes made this past session was the changes made this past session was the mandatory closing of many Level III and IV mandatory closing of many Level III and IV mental health youth group homes.mental health youth group homes.

According to a survey done through the According to a survey done through the Court Services Division of DJJDP, there are Court Services Division of DJJDP, there are a potential a potential 500+ 500+ youth that will need an youth that will need an alternative, long-term, residential alternative, long-term, residential placement. placement.

Court Counselors are already working hard Court Counselors are already working hard through Child and Family Support Teams through Child and Family Support Teams to try and find immediate, appropriate to try and find immediate, appropriate placement options.placement options.

DJJDP’s Current Budget DJJDP’s Current Budget

2009-11 Certified Budget:2009-11 Certified Budget: 2009 = $148,752,858 (8% reduction 2009 = $148,752,858 (8% reduction

from 2008)from 2008) An Additional 4% was held back by An Additional 4% was held back by

The Office of Budget and Management The Office of Budget and Management or an additional $5.92 Million. or an additional $5.92 Million. Remaining allocation Remaining allocation $142,672,000$142,672,000

2010 = $147,183,945 (9% reduction 2010 = $147,183,945 (9% reduction from 2008)from 2008)

DJJDP’s Budget HistoryDJJDP’s Budget History

$147,206,016 $147,183,945

$100,000,000

$110,000,000

$120,000,000

$130,000,000

$140,000,000

$150,000,000

$160,000,000

$170,000,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Youth Population and DJJDP Allocation Trends: Youth Population and DJJDP Allocation Trends: 1999-20081999-2008

750,000

800,000

850,000

900,000

950,000

1,000,000

1,050,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Po

pu

lati

on

$0

$40,000,000

$80,000,000

$120,000,000

$160,000,000

$200,000,000

All

oca

tio

n

10-17 Pop DJJDP Allocation

DJJDP Budget CutsDJJDP Budget Cuts

What we lost in the 2009 – 2011 budget?What we lost in the 2009 – 2011 budget? Support Our Students (statewide Support Our Students (statewide

afterschool programming) afterschool programming) Governor’s One-on-One (statewide Governor’s One-on-One (statewide

mentoring for at-risk and court-mentoring for at-risk and court-involved youth)involved youth)

Center for the Prevention of School Center for the Prevention of School Violence (statewide technical Violence (statewide technical assistance to schools for violence assistance to schools for violence prevention and crisis planning)prevention and crisis planning)

DJJDP Budget CutsDJJDP Budget Cuts

2 Eckerd Wilderness Camps 2 Eckerd Wilderness Camps 2 Multipurpose Group Homes 2 Multipurpose Group Homes Critical Youth Development Critical Youth Development

Center/Central Office/Court staff Center/Central Office/Court staff positionspositions

Cuts to other contractors (Project Cuts to other contractors (Project Challenge, Boys and Girls’ Club, Juvenile Challenge, Boys and Girls’ Club, Juvenile Assessment Center)Assessment Center)

Substantial & critical losses in operating Substantial & critical losses in operating capital (continuation funding), repairs / capital (continuation funding), repairs / renovations funds, training dollars, & all renovations funds, training dollars, & all capital for the 5capital for the 5thth new YDC new YDC

Good News Good News

New additions to DJJDP via the New additions to DJJDP via the Governor’s Office and Commerce Governor’s Office and Commerce through ARRA (“Recovery”) funding –through ARRA (“Recovery”) funding – $6 million gang reduction/intervention $6 million gang reduction/intervention

pilot program. Involves 2 regions in the pilot program. Involves 2 regions in the state and 2 YDC’s (Cabarrus/Jackson and state and 2 YDC’s (Cabarrus/Jackson and Edgecombe)Edgecombe)

$5 million in JCPC/county funding $5 million in JCPC/county funding targeting gang prevention, intervention targeting gang prevention, intervention and assessmentsand assessments

Good News (cont)Good News (cont)

$1.5 million for time-limited Court $1.5 million for time-limited Court Counselors and supervisors (new staff)Counselors and supervisors (new staff)

$950,000 in Dept. of Labor / Workforce $950,000 in Dept. of Labor / Workforce Development funding for vocational Development funding for vocational services in YDC’sservices in YDC’s

Other GCC & ARRA dollars to improve / Other GCC & ARRA dollars to improve / overhaul our grants management, overhaul our grants management, reporting, client tracking and web reporting, client tracking and web interaction servicesinteraction services

DMC DMC

Legend

Relative Rate Index by CountyComplaints Petitioned (Approved) for Court

Relative Rate Index for Minority Youth forComplaints Petitioned (Approved) for Court FY 05-06

Description of the Relative Rate IndexA relative rate index value that is: Less than 1 indicates that minority youth were less likely to be represented at that decision point Exactly 1 indicates that white and minority youth were equally likely to be represented at that decision point More than 1 indicates that minority youth were more likely to represented at that decision point

Legend

Relative Rate Index by CountyDetention Admissions

Relative Rate Index for Minority Youthfor Detention Admissions FY 05-06


Legend

Relative Rate Index by CountyYouth Development Center

Relative Rate Index for Minority Youthfor YDC Commitments FY 05-06


Legend

Relative Rate Index by CountyComplaints Received

Relative Rate Index for Minority Youth forComplaints Received by the Department of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention FY 05-06


Adding Adding

16 and 17 Year Olds 16 and 17 Year Olds

Population Pathways

42

Arrests of Persons 16 and 17 Years of Age

30,702

Detention

3,611 (12%)

Post-release Supervision

550 (2%)

Community Supervision

8,720 (28%)

Adjudication

9,270 (30%)

Diversion

5,324 (17%)

Commitment (YDC)

550(2%)

Outcomes of Serving in Juvenile System

30,702

Detention

5,913 (19%)


288 (1%)


4,555 (15%)

Adjudication

10,935 (35%)

Prison/Jail

1,825 (6%)

Unsupervised Probation

3,495 (11%)

Other

e.g., Com. Svc, Restitution)

1,060 (3%)

Outcomes of Serving in Adult System

30,702

Total receiving services*:

14,594(48%)

Total receiving services*: 6,935

(23%)

* Includes services prior to and after adjudication. Does not include unsupervised probation, as it is not a service; also does not include detention. Because it was not possible to separate out the proportion of offenders receiving community service or restitution, this category has not been counted. Does not include post-release services because this would double count services. The juvenile calculation excludes persons transferred to the adult system.** It is unclear whether these persons ultimately were prosecuted; therefore, deferred prosecution is calculated as an additional cost and not a population pathway. If these persons were prosecuted, they would be included in the adjudication population; if they were not, they would be included in the dismissal pathway.

Age 16- 3,924 Age 16- 281

Age 16- 281 Age 16- 130

Age 16- 2,050 Age 16- 1,573

Age 16- 477

Age 16- 821

Age 16- 4,205Age 16- 2,396

Age 16- 1,625

Age 16- 4,921

Age 16- 2,661

Age 16– 4,444

Dismissal

19,767 (65%)

Age 16– 8,895

Closure

6,157 (20%)

Dismissal

9,876 (32%)

Age 16- 2,771

Transfers to Adult Jurisdiction

40 (< 1%)

Deferred Prosecution

**555 (2%)

Community Community Programs Programs

Community Programs

Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Eckerd Wilderness Education Program Project Challenge Juvenile Assessment Center SOS (Support Our Students) Governor’s One-on-One Center for the Prevention of School

Violence Boys and Girls’ Clubs

DJJDP Community Programs DJJDP Community Programs FY 09-10FY 09-10

Programs eliminated

Programs cut

Programs not cut

Juvenile Crime Juvenile Crime Prevention Councils Prevention Councils

Part 6. Juvenile Crime Part 6. Juvenile Crime Prevention CouncilsPrevention Councils

§ 143B‑543. Legislative intent.§ 143B‑543. Legislative intent.It is the intent of the General Assembly to prevent It is the intent of the General Assembly to prevent

juveniles who are at risk from becoming juveniles who are at risk from becoming delinquent. The primary intent of this Part is to delinquent. The primary intent of this Part is to develop community‑based alternatives to youth develop community‑based alternatives to youth development centers and to provide development centers and to provide community‑based delinquency, substance abuse, community‑based delinquency, substance abuse, and gang prevention strategies and programs. and gang prevention strategies and programs. Additionally, it is the intent of the General Additionally, it is the intent of the General Assembly to provide noninstitutional dispositional Assembly to provide noninstitutional dispositional alternatives that will protect the community and alternatives that will protect the community and the juveniles.the juveniles.

JCPC Funded Programs JCPC Funded Programs

Keeping 1% of those Keeping 1% of those served by JCPC funded served by JCPC funded programs out of YDCs programs out of YDCs represents a cost savings represents a cost savings equal to more than the equal to more than the total budget for JCPCs.total budget for JCPCs.

Youth Population and JCPC Allocation Trends: Youth Population and JCPC Allocation Trends: 1999-20081999-2008

750,000

800,000

850,000

900,000

950,000

1,000,000

1,050,000

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

po

pu

lati

on

$0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

JC

PC

fu

nd

ing

10-17 Pop JCPC Allocation

Overview of Comprehensive StrategyOverview of Comprehensive Strategyfor Juvenile Justicefor Juvenile Justice

JCPC Program Types JCPC Program Types

Residential ProgramsResidential Programs

Restorative ProgramsRestorative Programs

Clinical Treatment ProgramsClinical Treatment Programs

Structured ActivitiesStructured Activities

JCPC Residential ProgramsJCPC Residential Programs

Group HomesGroup Homes

Temporary Shelter CareTemporary Shelter Care

Runaway ShelterRunaway Shelter

Specialized Foster CareSpecialized Foster Care

Temporary Foster Care Temporary Foster Care

JCPC Restorative ProgramsJCPC Restorative Programs

Teen CourtTeen Court

Restorative InterventionRestorative Intervention

MediationMediation

Restitution (Monetary and Restitution (Monetary and Community Service)Community Service)

JCPC Clinical Treatment JCPC Clinical Treatment ProgramsPrograms

Individual/Group/Family TherapyIndividual/Group/Family Therapy

Home-Based Family CounselingHome-Based Family Counseling

Substance Abuse TreatmentSubstance Abuse Treatment

Sex Offender Treatment Sex Offender Treatment

JCPC Structured ActivitiesJCPC Structured Activities

Structured Day ProgrammingStructured Day Programming MentoringMentoring Parent/Family Skill BuildingParent/Family Skill Building Interpersonal Skill BuildingInterpersonal Skill Building Experiential Skill BuildingExperiential Skill Building Tutoring/Academic EnhancementTutoring/Academic Enhancement Vocational Development Vocational Development

Multipurpose Juvenile Multipurpose Juvenile HomesHomes

Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Multipurpose Juvenile Homes

The program has been contracted to Methodist Home for Children since 1993

All youth received in the Multipurpose Homes are referred by their local juvenile court and range in age from 11 to 17

Two-thirds of those youth admitted are still enrolled in school but are performing poorly in all academic pursuits

Alamance

Alexander

Alleghany

Anson

Ashe

Avery Bertie

Bladen

Brunswick

Buncombe

Burke

Cabarrus

Caldwell

CamdenCaswell

CatawbaChatham

Cherokee

Chowan

Clay

Cleveland

Columbus

Craven

Cumberland

Currituck

Dare

Davidson

Davie

Duplin

Durham

Edgecombe

Forsyth Franklin

Gaston

Gates

Graham

Granville

Greene

Guilford

Halifax

Harnett

Haywood

Henderson

Hertford

Hoke

Hyde

Iredell

Jackson

Johnston

Jones

Lee

Lenoir

Lincoln

Mcdowell

Macon

MadisonMartin

Mecklenburg

Mitchell

MontgomeryMoore

Nash

New Hanover

Northampton

Onslow

Orange

Pamlico

Pasquotank

Pender

Perquimans

Person

Pitt

Polk

Randolph

Richmond

Robeson

Rockingham

Rowan

Rutherford

Sampson

Scotland

Stanly

StokesSurry

Swain

Transylvania

Tyrrell

Union

Vance

Wake

Warren

Washington

Watauga

Wayne

Wilkes

Wilson

Yadkin

Yancey

1

1

Multipurpose Juvenile Home ProgramDepartment of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Beaufort

4Carteret

Franklin Home Judicial District 30

*

*

*

*

*

Lumberton Home Judicial Dist. 16A&16B Goldsboro Home

Judicial Dist. 8

Winton Home Judicial Dist. 6A&6B

Edenton Home Judicial Dist. 1 & 2

Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Multipurpose Juvenile Homes

86% of discharged youth were readmitted to their home schools

35 of the 44 youth served in continuing care had no violations of their community supervision standards while receiving continuing care

Evaluation data show that in the six months prior to admission to a Multipurpose Home, 108 adjudications occurred, but during the six months subsequent to discharge, only 28 adjudications occurred

Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Multipurpose Juvenile Homes Parental accountability/involvement was

improved in a vast majority (72%) of cases

27% of the admitted youth were functioning at grade level in reading at the time of admission, with 48% functioning at grade level at the time of discharge

Two youth received a post-secondary scholarship through Methodist Home for Children

Eckerd Wilderness Education Eckerd Wilderness Education ProgramProgram


Since 1978, EYA has contracted with NC to Since 1978, EYA has contracted with NC to provide Foster Care Camp services to youth provide Foster Care Camp services to youth with behavioral, emotional, and delinquency with behavioral, emotional, and delinquency problemsproblems

For the current fiscal year, EYA is operating For the current fiscal year, EYA is operating 5 Wilderness Camps providing 275 beds for 5 Wilderness Camps providing 275 beds for males and females. Youth must be at least males and females. Youth must be at least 10 and no older than 16.5 at time of 10 and no older than 16.5 at time of screeningscreening

The camps provide staff secure, residential The camps provide staff secure, residential therapeutic programs as an alternative to therapeutic programs as an alternative to more restrictive settingsmore restrictive settings

Alamance

Alexander

Anson

Ashe

AveryBertie

Bladen

Brunswick

Buncombe

Burke

Cabarrus

Caldwell

Caswell

Catawba Chatham

Cherokee

Chowan

Cleveland

Columbus

CravenCumberland

Currituck

DareDavidson

Duplin

Edgecombe

Forsyth Franklin

Gates

Granville

Guilford

Halifax

Harnett

Haywood

Henderson

Hertford

Hoke

Hyde

Iredell

Jackson

Johnston

Jones

Lenoir

Lincoln

McDowell

Macon

MadisonMartin

Mecklenburg

Mitchell

Montgomery

Moore

Nash

New Hanover

Northampton

Onslow

Pamlico

Pasquotank

Pender

Perquimans

Pitt

Randolph

Richmond

Robeson

Rockingham

Rowan

Rutherford

Sampson

Scotland

Stanly

StokesSurry

Transylvania

Tyrrell

Union

Vance

Wake

WarrenWatauga

Wayne

Wilkes

Wilson

Yadkin

Yancey

Eckerd Wilderness Education ProgramCamps and Regions in North Carolina

Eckerd Youth Alternatives, Inc.

Alleghany

1

1

Greene

Beaufort

Carteret

Polk

Graham

Swain

South Central Co-Ed

North Central Boys

SoutheastBoys

North Central Camp BoysKathi Grenough, DirectorCamp E-MUN-TALEE235 Ramey Orchard RoadLowgap, NC 27024336-352-3111

South Central Camp Co-EdErica Cook, DirectorCamp E-KU-SUMEE500 E-KU-SUMEE DriveCandor, NC 27229910-974-4183

Southeast Camp BoysTed Wisniewski, DirectorCamp E-TIK-ETU1086 Susie Sand Hill RoadElizabethtown, NC 28337910-588-4407

Northeast Camp BoysKarla Kiburz, DirectorCamp E-TEN-ETU633 Shepard’s Way LaneManson, NC 27553252-456-2900

Northeast Boys

Revised 9-02-09

CamdenNorthwest Co-Ed

Northwest Camp Co-EdDaniel Wanta, DirectorCamp E-MA-ETU4654 High Rock RoadBoomer, NC 28606 336-921-3300

Clay

Davie

Orange

Person

Gaston

Durham

Washington

Lee

Alamance

Alexander

Anson

Ashe

AveryBertie

Bladen

Brunswick

Buncombe

Burke

Cabarrus

Caldwell

Caswell

Catawba Chatham

Cherokee

Chowan

Cleveland

Columbus

CravenCumberland

Currituck

DareDavidson

Duplin

Edgecombe

Forsyth Franklin

Granville

Guilford

Halifax

Harnett

Haywood

Henderson

Hertford

Hoke

Hyde

Iredell

Jackson

Johnston

Jones

Lenoir

Lincoln

McDowell

Macon

MadisonMartin

Mecklenburg

Mitchell

Montgomery

Moore

Nash

New Hanover

Northampton

Onslow

Pamlico

Pasquotank

Pender

Perquimans

Pitt

Randolph

Richmond

Robeson

Rockingham

Rowan

Rutherford

Sampson

Scotland

Stanly

StokesSurry

Transylvania

Tyrrell

Union

Vance

Wake

WarrenWatauga

Wayne

Wilkes

Wilson

Yadkin

Yancey

Eckerd Wilderness Education ProgramCamps Serving Females in North Carolina

Eckerd Youth Alternatives, Inc.

1

1

Durham

Beaufort

Carteret

Polk

Graham

Swain

South Central Co-Ed

South Central Camp Co-EdErica Cook, DirectorCamp E-KU-SUMEE500 E-KU-SUMEE DriveCandor, NC 27229910-974-4183

Revised 9/3/09

CamdenNorthwest Co-Ed

Northwest Camp Co-EdDaniel Wanta, DirectorCamp E-MA-ETU4654 High Rock RoadBoomer, NC 28606 336-921-3300

Clay

Orange

Person

Gaston

Washington

Lee

Davie

Alleghany

Greene

Gates


EYA Educational Programs allow youth to EYA Educational Programs allow youth to earn educational credits and assist youth earn educational credits and assist youth with re-entry into public schoolswith re-entry into public schools

For FY 2008, 70% or 279 youth completed For FY 2008, 70% or 279 youth completed their identified treatment goals and their identified treatment goals and objectives and completed the programobjectives and completed the program

Using the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Using the Woodcock Johnson III Tests of Achievement at entry and exit, the Achievement at entry and exit, the average change for youth was 1.4 grade average change for youth was 1.4 grade levels in reading and 1.1 grade levels in levels in reading and 1.1 grade levels in math for FY 2008math for FY 2008


Of the 357 youth completing the Of the 357 youth completing the program in FY 2007, 14% or 42 youth program in FY 2007, 14% or 42 youth had subsequent juvenile justice had subsequent juvenile justice involvement at 12 months post involvement at 12 months post completioncompletion

Seventy-six percent of youth Seventy-six percent of youth completing the program in FY 2007 completing the program in FY 2007 were either attending school, working, were either attending school, working, or both at 12 months post completion or both at 12 months post completion

JCPC Demonstration JCPC Demonstration ProjectsProjects

JCPC Demonstration ProjectsJCPC Demonstration Projects

The purpose is to provide alternatives to The purpose is to provide alternatives to commitment services locally through commitment services locally through JCPCs for youth who have been committed JCPCs for youth who have been committed to, or who potentially may be committed to, or who potentially may be committed to, youth development centers. to, youth development centers.

Prescriptive service planningPrescriptive service planning Community-based servicesCommunity-based services Wrap-around servicesWrap-around services Strong collaboration with court personnelStrong collaboration with court personnel

Alamance

Alexander

Alleghany

Anson

Ashe

Avery

Beaufort

Bertie

Bladen

Brunswick

Buncombe

Burke

Cabarrus

Caldwell

Camden

Carteret

Caswell

CatawbaChatham

Cherokee

Chowan

Clay

Cleveland

Columbus

Craven

Cumberland

Currituck

DareDavidson

Davie

Duplin

Durham

Edgecombe

Forsyth Franklin

Gaston

Gates

Graham

Granville

Greene

Guilford

Halifax

Harnett

Haywood

Henderson

Hertford

Hoke

Hyde

Iredell

Jackson

Johnston

Jones

Lee

Lenoir

Lincoln

McDowell

Macon

MadisonMartin

Mecklenburg

Mitchell

MontgomeryMoore

Nash

New Hanover

Northampton

Onslow

Orange

Pamlico

Pasquotank

Pender

Perquimans

Person

Pitt

Polk

Randolph

Richmond

Robeson

Rockingham

Rowan

Rutherford

Sampson

Scotland

Stanly

StokesSurry

Swain

Transylvania

Tyrrell

Union

Vance

Wake

Warren

Washington

Watauga

Wayne

Wilkes

Wilson

Yadkin

Yancey

NC Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionJCPC Demonstration Projects

FY 2009-2010

Dare County Schools (Safe Systems)

Methodist Home for Children (Family Preservation Services)

Onslow County Youth Services (Day Services)

LEGEND

JCPC Demonstration Project Sponsoring Agency

Alamance County Dispute Settlement and Youth Services

Cumberland County CommuniCare, Inc.

Dare County Schools

Family Services of Davidson County

Appalachian Family Innovations

Methodist Home for Children

Onslow County Youth Services

Rockingham County Youth Services


At six and twelve months after exiting At six and twelve months after exiting the Demonstration Projects, recidivism the Demonstration Projects, recidivism rates for youth served in the programs rates for youth served in the programs were low. Eighty-one percent (81%) were low. Eighty-one percent (81%) had no complaints or warrants filed six had no complaints or warrants filed six months after exiting the projects, and months after exiting the projects, and seventy percent (70%) had no seventy percent (70%) had no complaints or warrants filed twelve complaints or warrants filed twelve months after exiting the projects.months after exiting the projects.


Seventy percent (70%) of the youth Seventy percent (70%) of the youth exiting the projects completed their exiting the projects completed their programming at a high or acceptable level programming at a high or acceptable level of participation and achievement of of participation and achievement of behavior improvement goals.behavior improvement goals.

The average annual cost per youth in the The average annual cost per youth in the Demonstration Projects in FY 2007-2008 Demonstration Projects in FY 2007-2008 was $7,013 while the average annual cost was $7,013 while the average annual cost per youth during the same fiscal year in a per youth during the same fiscal year in a youth development center was $104,542youth development center was $104,542

Community ProgrammingCommunity ProgrammingAddressing DMCAddressing DMC

Legislative Intent Legislative Intent

Special Provision Special Provision ESTABLISH YOUTH ESTABLISH YOUTH

ACCOUNTABILITY PLANNING ACCOUNTABILITY PLANNING TASK FORCETASK FORCE SECTION 18.9. (f) Duties of Task Force.

(3) Proposals to eliminate the racial disparity in complaints, commitments, community program availability, utilization and success rates, and other key decision and impact points in the juvenile justice process.

Efforts to Reduce DMC

Study by Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy at Duke University, 2003

Contributing factors to DMC in North Carolina Dysfunctional family situations Inadequate services in educational institutions Poor socio-economic conditions Accumulated disadvantages for people of color Differential offending Systemic issues within the juvenile justice

system

Current Initiative

“Race Matters Toolkit”

Where Can I Find the Race Matters Toolkit?

The Toolkit is on the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Website:

http://www.aecf.org/KnowledgeCenter/PublicationsSeries/RaceMatters.aspx

Roles of JCPCs in Reducing DMC

Annual planning process

Identification of underserved populations/communities

Decisions on what program types to fund

Community awareness

Ways Community Programs Can Impact DMC

Referrals/admissions from integrated systems

Prescriptive service planning for individual needs

Flexibility to address contributing factors outside the juvenile justice system

Treatment-oriented environment to prevent deeper involvement in the juvenile justice system

Advocacy across systems

Community ProgrammingCommunity ProgrammingNeeds Needs

Current Community Current Community Programming NeedsProgramming Needs

Full continuum of services for each countyFull continuum of services for each county Expansion of Demonstration Projects model Expansion of Demonstration Projects model More evidence-based services More evidence-based services

(opportunities and funding for training) (opportunities and funding for training) Intentional focus on DMC by JCPCs and Intentional focus on DMC by JCPCs and

community programscommunity programs Enhanced compliance monitoring and Enhanced compliance monitoring and

quality assurance quality assurance Funding for Departmental staff Funding for Departmental staff Continuous training for JCPC oversight of Continuous training for JCPC oversight of

programs programs

Community ProgrammingCommunity ProgrammingNeeds for 16 and 17 Year Olds Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds

Approximately 20 additional staff (field Approximately 20 additional staff (field and central support office)and central support office)

Additional placements and bedsAdditional placements and beds Program enhancements and additions Program enhancements and additions Risk management for program Risk management for program

personnelpersonnel Separation of younger teens from older Separation of younger teens from older

youth in residential and community youth in residential and community programs programs

Community Programming Needs Community Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds for 16 and 17 Year Olds

Training needs for community programs Training needs for community programs JCPC, program providers, and residential JCPC, program providers, and residential

service providers need training on new service providers need training on new target population and developmental target population and developmental needs (age appropriate services) needs (age appropriate services)

Appropriate evidence-based Appropriate evidence-based programming for target populationprogramming for target population

Increased capacity of clinical services Increased capacity of clinical services statewide statewide

Additional JCPC ServicesAdditional JCPC Services

Our estimates show we may need to Our estimates show we may need to serve as many as 21,000 additional serve as many as 21,000 additional youth if 16 and 17 year olds are youth if 16 and 17 year olds are added to the systemadded to the system

This would equate to a near doubling This would equate to a near doubling of the current capacityof the current capacity

New programs will need to be more New programs will need to be more intensive and more directed at court-intensive and more directed at court-involved youthinvolved youth

JCPC Programming JCPC Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds

Functional vocational programsFunctional vocational programs

Sex offender treatmentSex offender treatment

Substance abuse treatment Substance abuse treatment

Parenting skills for our target Parenting skills for our target populationpopulation

JCPC Programming JCPC Programming Needs for 16 and 17 Year OldsNeeds for 16 and 17 Year Olds

Community-based educationCommunity-based education

Structured day programsStructured day programs Transitional/re-entry services Transitional/re-entry services

Gang prevention/intervention Gang prevention/intervention Residential placementResidential placement

Court Services’Court Services’

Needs Needs

Introduction to Court ServicesIntroduction to Court Services

Different in every districtDifferent in every district

Travel Travel

Collaboration with stakeholdersCollaboration with stakeholders

Key leadership of the Chief Court Key leadership of the Chief Court Counselor Counselor

Interstate Compact for Juveniles Interstate Compact for Juveniles

Role of the Court Counselor Role of the Court Counselor

IntakeIntake Information gathering/assessmentInformation gathering/assessment Determination of legal sufficiencyDetermination of legal sufficiency Diversions plans and contractsDiversions plans and contracts Detention Detention

Recommendations to courtRecommendations to court Service planningService planning Supervision and case management Supervision and case management

Current Court Services Needs Current Court Services Needs

TrainingTraining Risk management Risk management Access to psychological/assessment Access to psychological/assessment

services for each court district services for each court district Increase in community-based servicesIncrease in community-based services Quality assurance Quality assurance Additional infrastructure – technologyAdditional infrastructure – technology

GPS and IT GPS and IT Data and research Data and research

Population Pathways

91

Arrests of Persons 16 and 17 Years of Age

30,702

Detention

3,611 (12%)


550 (2%)


8,720 (28%)

Adjudication

9,270 (30%)

Diversion

5,324 (17%)

Commitment (YDC)

550(2%)

Outcomes of Serving in Juvenile System

30,702

Detention

5,913 (19%)


288 (1%)


4,555 (15%)

Adjudication

10,935 (35%)

Prison/Jail

1,825 (6%)

Unsupervised Probation

3,495 (11%)

Other

e.g., Com. Svc, Restitution)

1,060 (3%)

Outcomes of Serving in Adult System

30,702

Total receiving services*:

14,594(48%)

Total receiving services*: 6,935

(23%)

* Includes services prior to and after adjudication. Does not include unsupervised probation, as it is not a service; also does not include detention. Because it was not possible to separate out the proportion of offenders receiving community service or restitution, this category has not been counted. Does not include post-release services because this would double count services. The juvenile calculation excludes persons transferred to the adult system.** It is unclear whether these persons ultimately were prosecuted; therefore, deferred prosecution is calculated as an additional cost and not a population pathway. If these persons were prosecuted, they would be included in the adjudication population; if they were not, they would be included in the dismissal pathway.

Age 16- 3,924 Age 16- 281

Age 16- 281 Age 16- 130

Age 16- 2,050 Age 16- 1,573

Age 16- 477

Age 16- 821

Age 16- 4,205Age 16- 2,396

Age 16- 1,625

Age 16- 4,921

Age 16- 2,661

Age 16– 4,444

Dismissal

19,767 (65%)

Age 16– 8,895

Closure

6,157 (20%)

Dismissal

9,876 (32%)

Age 16- 2,771

Transfers to Adult Jurisdiction

40 (< 1%)

Deferred Prosecution

**555 (2%)

Court Services Needs for Court Services Needs for 16 and 17 Year Olds 16 and 17 Year Olds

Additional Court Services Staff Additional Court Services Staff (Approximately 500)(Approximately 500)

Risk Management Risk Management Training on new target populationTraining on new target population Additional appropriate community-based Additional appropriate community-based

programs programs Office space provided by counties Office space provided by counties Equipment – computers, cars, and other Equipment – computers, cars, and other Review of complaint drafting/complaint Review of complaint drafting/complaint

receipt processes to possibly include receipt processes to possibly include magistratesmagistrates

Questions Questions

community programs and court services overview and strategic direction

Documents

juvenile crimescy

juvenile crimes account

court services overview

decreasejuvenile crime

community levels

community initiatives

court servicescurrent

effective services