Juvenile Justice Reform in California

1
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• Presented by
• Elizabeth Siggins
• Chief, Juvenile Justice Policy
• California Department of Corrections and
  Rehabilitation

2
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• The System In Context (2004)
• Juvenile Arrests 206,201
• Probation Department Dispositions 169,681
• Closed at Intake 60,942 (36)
• Informal Probation 5,444 (3)
• Diversion 7,881 (5)
• Transferred 8,848 (5)
• Petitions Filed 86,283 (51)
• Source CA Department of Justice. Juvenile
  Justice in California, 2004

3
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• Petitions Filed in Juvenile Court 86,283
• Dismissed 17,411 (20)
• Diversion/DEJ/Transferred 5,396 (6)
• Informal Probation 4,842 (6)
• Non Ward Probation 3,255 (4)
• Remanded to Adult Court 252 (lt1)
• Wardship 55,129 (64)
• Source CA Department of Justice. Juvenile
  Justice in CA, 2004

4
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• Wardship Dispositions 55,129
• Own or Relatives Home 34,613 (63)
• Secure County Facility 13,223 (24)
• Non-Secure County Facility 1,966 (4)
• Other Public/Private Agency 4,668 (8)
• Division of Juvenile Justice (CYA) 659 (1.2)
• Source CA Department of Justice. Juvenile
  Justice in CA, 2004

5
The Juvenile Justice System in California 2004
Most Youthful Offenders Are Kept Locally

Juvenile Arrests 206,201
Probation Department Dispositions 169,681
Probation Department Dispositions
51 of Dispositions 86,283
Petitions Filed in Juvenile Court
32 of Disposition 55,129
Youth Adjudicated with Formal Wardship
0.4 of Dispositions 659
Youth Committed to the States Division of
Juvenile Justice
6
Juvenile Justice Reform in California The
Historical Context

• Legislative Efforts to Keep Youth Locally
• Sliding Scale Fee Legislation (1995)
• Legislative Efforts to Enhance Local Services
• Challenge Grants I II (1996-98), JJCPA (2000)
• VOI/TIS (beginning 1997/98)
• Despite these efforts, ongoing tensions between
  state and 58 counties
• Increasing Frustrations with CYA/DJJ
• SB 1793(attempted to eliminate YOPB)
• SB 459 (limited YOPBs role)

7
Juvenile Justice Reform in California The
Historical Context

• Very early in the Schwarzenegger Administration,
  problems at DJJ (then CYA) became high profile.
• Expert reports in Farrell v. Hickman revealed
  significant deficiencies throughout the
  department (Jan 2004)
• DJJs failure to ensure safety from violence
• Due process violations
• Improper and illegal conditions of confinement
• Inadequate medical and mental health care

8
Juvenile Justice Reform in California The
Historical Context

• Problems at State Facilities Highlighted (contd)
• Inadequate access to education, substance abuse
  treatment, and sex offender programs
• Denial of religious rights
• Disability discrimination
• Extensive legislative and media attention
  throughout winter and spring 2004
• Inspector Generals Report Jan. 2005

9
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• High Profile Commitment to Juvenile Justice
  Reform
• Governor Schwarzenegger at N.A. Chaderjian in
  November 2004.
• Stipulated Agreement in January 2005.

10
Juvenile Justice Reform in CaliforniaIncarceratio
n Rates
Note Total at-risk population 10-69 years of
age Adult at-risk 18-69 years of age Juvenile
at-risk 10-17 years of age. Source
CA Department of Justice, Crime in California,
2003
11
Juvenile Justice Reform in California DJJ
Commitment Compared to the Arrest Rate
Source Office of Research, Juvenile Justice
Branch, Information Systems Unit
12
Juvenile Justice Reform in California
DJJ Institutions and Parole Populations 1974-2004
Source Office of Research, Juvenile Justice
Branch, Information Systems Unit
13
What does Juvenile Justice Reform mean?
14
CA COMPARED TO OTHER STATES

• Unusual Features of the California Juvenile
  Justice System
• Longer extended age for juvenile court
  jurisdiction (age 24) than most states.
• One of 6 states where length of stay is based on
  an indeterminate commitment with a maximum.
• One of 11 states which have the juvenile
  authority within an adult corrections agency.
• One of 7 states with a juvenile parole board.

15
Juvenile Justice Reform Working Group 2004

• There was no consensus in significant areas
• Separate Juvenile Justice agency?
• Reduce age of jurisdiction?
• Make local courts responsible for release
  authority?
• Replace sliding scale with an incentive system
  (realignment)?
• Even transferring aftercare to counties was later
  abandoned.
• Note Everyone agreed the State needed to take a
  stronger leadership role.

16
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• Pressure in Farrell lawsuit continued to
  increase
• State failed to implement early commitments.
• Separate high and low risk offenders.
• Open programming.
• Reduce violence.
• State committed to transforming the state system
  to a rehabilitative model.
• Lots of pressure to eliminate the state juvenile
  justice system all together.

17
What does Juvenile Justice Reform mean?

• Reform what happens in state system?
• Reform who goes to state system?
• Do we need a state system?

18
DJJs Population Trends Primary Offense on
First Commitment

• The percentage of youth committed for a violent
  offense has increased significantly since the
  1960s, from less than 15 to over 60 today.

19
The Juvenile Justice System in California 2004
Most Youthful Offenders Are Kept Locally

Juvenile Arrests 206,201
Probation Department Dispositions 169,681
Probation Department Dispositions
51 of Dispositions 86,283
Petitions Filed in Juvenile Court
32 of Disposition 55,129
Youth Adjudicated with Formal Wardship
0.4 of Dispositions 659
Youth Committed to the States Division of
Juvenile Justice
20
California Compared to Other States

• California houses a lower percentage of committed
  youth in its state facilities than the national
  average and other comparison states.
• Source Census of Juveniles in Residential
  Placement Databook, 2005 (Chris Murray analysis
  of data)

21
State Incarceration Rate

• The state incarceration rate for youth in
  California is lower than other comparison states.
• Source Census of Juveniles in Residential
  Placement Databook, 2005 (Chris Murray analysis
  of data)

22
DJJs Population TrendsLength of Stay

• The increase in violent offenses has been
  accompanied by an increase in the
• average length of stay for initial commitments
  from 18.8 months in 1986 to 36.3
• months in 2005.
• Source Census of Juveniles in Residential
  Placement Databook, 2005 (Chris Murray analysis
  of data)

23
What does Juvenile Justice Reform mean?

• Do we need a state system?
• Reform who goes to state system?
• Need Risk/Needs Assessment
• Reform what happens in state system?

24
Implementing an Effective Rehabilitative Model
within State Juvenile Justice System

• Challenges
• Applying research to an operational model that
  can be supported financially and politically.
• Staff
• Training
• Quality Assurance
• Evaluation

25
Cost of DJJs System
DJJs COST PER YOUTH (Estimated) DJJ
institutions cost more than 120,000 per youth in
FY 05-06 2005-06 Expenditures Juvenile
operations 178,589,000 Juvenile education
programs 138,523,000 Juvenile parole
40,468,000 Juvenile healthcare
56,135,000 Total 413,715,000 Less
parole 40,468,000 Total for
institutions 373,247,000 Average
daily population for 2005 3,100
Cost per bed per year
120,402
Source Governors Budget, Budget Year 2006/07
(Prepared by Chris Murray)
26
Cost of DJJs System
Other States Cost Far Less The five comparison
states that were visited generally cost less than
half of DJJ costs. Missouri 57,170 Washingt
on 68,564 Florida 57,998 Texas 56,58
2 Colorado (waiting for data) Washington
costs do not include education
Source Census of Juveniles in Residential
Placement Databook, 2005 (Chris Murray analysis
of data)
27
Cost of DJJs SystemWhy is DJJ so much more
expensive?

• The analysis is not complete but preliminary
  findings (subject to refinement) show that
• In Washington State, the average salary for the
  position equivalent to a Youth Correctional
  Officer (YCO) is 55 of that earned by a typical
  YCO in California.
• The average for the position equivalent to a
  Youth Correctional Counselor (YCC) is 67 of a
  YCC in California.
• Adjusting for wage differences, the Washington
  program in California would cost about 113,000
  per youth per year a figure which does not
  include educational costs.

Source Census of Juveniles in Residential
Placement Databook, 2005 (Chris Murray analysis
of data)
28
Cost of DJJs System(contd)

• In Missouri, the average salary for the
  position equivalent to a Youth
• Correctional Counselor is 41 of that earned
  by a typical YCC in
• California (Missouri does not employ Youth
  Correctional Officers).
• Adjusting for wage differences, the Missouri
  program in
• California would cost about 141,000 per
  youth per year.
• (This calculation also subject to
  refinement.)

Source Census of Juveniles in Residential
Placement Databook, 2005 (Chris Murray analysis
of data)
29
Juvenile Justice Reform Plan

• All six remedial plans have been filed in court.
• Safety Welfare (the most comprehensive)
• Eliminates general population
• Risk/Needs Assessment
• Plans based on principles of effective
  intervention
• Need
• Responsibility
• Dosage
• Treatment
• Reduces living unit size
• Enhances staffing

• Source (Gendreau, 1997 Andrews Bonta, 1998
  Guerra 1995 Palmer, 1995 Miller Rolnick, 1991,
  2001 etc.)

30
Juvenile Justice Reform Plan

• Some Controversial elements of DJJs Plan
• Explores the possibility of placing female
  offenders in contract placements
• New staff classifications
• Requires significant resources
• Ultimately seeks new facilities
• Unfortunately, energy is not concentrated on
  effective implementation or quality assurance,
  but on trying to get support for the reform
  plan.

31
Juvenile Justice Reform Plan

• Why is it so difficult?
• What does reform mean?
• What would success mean?
• Field is reactive in nature.
• Stakeholders not educated about evidence
• (e.g., importance of risk/needs assessment,
  etc.).

32
How could we do (or should we have done) this
differently?
33
Juvenile Justice Reform in California

• On a positive note
• In many circles, evidence-based language is
  becoming the norm.
• State and counties are working together.
• California Juvenile Justice Accountability
  Project.
• Survey of Current Practices
• Common Indicators /Outcome Measures
• Moving toward a stronger continuum?
• Change takes time.