The Annie E. Casey Foundation

Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative

JDAICouncil of State Governments

May 17, 2009

Rand Young, WA State JDAI Coordinator rand_young@msn.com 509-624-4924

Rapid Growth of JDAI Nationally100 jurisdictions - 25 states & District of Columbia

County site State site

●

JDAI Goals

• Reduce Detention for low-risk youth

• Develop community-based alternatives to detention

• Improve the effectiveness of the juvenile justice system

• Reduce racial disparities for youth in Detention

• Maintain or improve public safety

High - Risk Youth

• Murder

• Rape/Sex Offenses

• Robbery

• Burglary

• Weapons charges

• Assault

• Physical injury crimes

• Bomb Threats

Low – Risk Youth

• Minor theft

• Alcohol violations

• Minor drug charges

• Disorderly Conduct

• Truancy

• Runaways

• Probation Violations

• Many Warrants

Reducing Detention is Good Public Policy

• Maintains or improves public safety

• Cost-effective for taxpayers

• Produces better outcomes

What we have learned about detaining youth

• Reducing detention for low-risk youth has not increased crime

• Detention is the most expensive crime reduction strategy

• Detention is not particularly effective in reducing crime

• Low-risk youth can be negatively influenced by high-risk youth

• Detention interrupts school – youth fall further behind and dropout

• Detention can pull youth deeper into the criminal justice system

• Detained youth are more likely to reoffend than youth not detained

Less Detention – No increase in Crime

JDAI Site Reduction in Detention ADP

Washington State5 Cities

-- 34%

State of Virginia8 Cities

-- 22 %

Chicago, IL -- 35 %

Santa Cruz, CA -- 52 %

Albuquerque, N.M -- 31%

State of New Jersey5 Cities

-- 43 %

Detention is the most expensive crime reduction strategy

$0$20$40$60$80

$100$120$140$160$180$200

Detention AlternativePrograms

$200

$35

Cost Per Day

Cost Savings/Avoidance - Reduced Liability

Seattle, Washington• Reduced detention population from 180 – 90• Avoided new construction costs• Saved $3.9 - $5.4 million per year over a 20 year period

Tacoma, Washington• Reduced detention population from 158 to 65• Reduced liability by closing an unsafe detention unit• Shifted savings & staff to community-based alternatives

Spokane, Washington• Reduced detention population from 65 – 40• Reduced Liability - eliminated unsafe “double-bunking” • Transferred detention staff to alternative programs

Detention is not particularly effective in reducing crime

$0.00

$2.00

$4.00

$6.00

$8.00

$10.00

$12.00

$14.00

Boot Camps Detention FunctionalFamily Therapy

Mentoring AggressionReplacement

Training

Multi-SystemicTherapy

$1.00 invested = $ ____ Crime Reduction Benefit

$1.01

$1.98

$6.81$7.68

$10.82

$13.36

WA State Institute of Public Policy: Recommendations to Improve Cost-Effectiveness in the Juvenile Justice

Most Detained Youth are not risks to public safety

MisdemeanorShopliftingDrug PossessionAlcohol ViolationsDisorderly Conduct

38.6% 32.3%

29.1%

Felony Assault

Robbery Arson Weapons

Status Offenses Probation Violations

Warrants

7%

5%

40%

14%

15%

19%

Probation Violations

Warrants

Truancy, RunawayAbuse & Neglect

Court OrderedDetention

New Felony New Misdemeanor

JDAI Strategies

2) Reliance on Data

3) Objective Admissions Screening

4) Alternatives to Secure Detention

5) Expedited Case Processing

6) Warrant & Probation Violation Options

7) Reduce Racial Disparities

8) Regular Detention Facility Inspections

1) System-wide Collaboration

System-wide Collaboration

• Leaders work together to improve juvenile justice

• Implement the Eight JDAI strategies

County Council Prosecutors Schools

State Government Defense Attorneys Social Services

Law Enforcement Probation Churches

Judges Detention Community

Reliance on DataData drives decisions & policy

Measure current outcomes & costs• Number low-risk youth detained• Juvenile arrest rates• Cost of Detention

Develop plan based on data• Reduce low-risk youth detained• Develop alternative programs• Monitor arrest rates• Reduce costs – redirect to alternatives

Objective Admission Criteria

Risk Assessment Tool to Detain the Right Youth

• Identify & detain high-risk youth

• Reduce detaining low-risk youth

• Standardize decisions

– fairness – consistency

Alternatives to Secure Detention • Community Service Work Projects

• House Arrest & Electronic Monitoring

• Weekend Programs

• Day & Evening Reporting Centers

• Foster & Shelter Care Programs

Expedited Case Processing

• Youth learn best with a swift consequence

• Improve coordination: Prosecutor, Defense & Probation

• Reduce court case continuances

• Identify stalled cases & problem solve

Probation Violation Options

• Consistent sanctions for all youth

• Match sanction with the seriousness of violation

• Develop immediate informal sanctions

• Use Alternative Programs

• Make Detention the last resort

Warrant Options – Minimize FTAs

• Expedite court process

• Court Hearing Reminder Calls

• In-Person Reminder Contacts

• Verify notice of hearing was received

Reduce Racial Disparities

• Prioritize reducing racial disparities

• Measure rates of racial disparities at decision points• Detention• Sentencing• Sanctioning• Transfers to Adult System

• Adopt “standardized” methods of decision making• Detention Risk Assessment Tool• Standardize Probation Violation Sanctions

Regular Detention Facility Inspections

• Annual Self-Inspections

• Measure compliance with JDAI Standards

• Update policies and make improvements

JDAI Technical Assistance

• Small grants for travel & coordination

• Technical Assistance Providers

• Tools, Guides, Publications

• jdaihelpdesk.org

• Model Site Visits

• JDAI National Conferences

“The daily detention population in our facility has greatly reduced but without a resultant compromise in community safety.

In fact, just the opposite: we have the lowest rates of reoffense that we’ve ever had.”

Amy Holmes Hehn

Multnomah County District Attorney