Issue Brief February 2014 iyi.org
603 East Washington Street, Suite 800 | Indianapolis, IN 46204
Less Crime for Less Money – JDAI in Indiana In 2005, the Indiana Supreme Court found that the number and cost of juvenile delinquency cases were on the rise.1 The number of cases rose from 30,000 in 1999 to 33,587 in 2005, and the cost per day to house a juvenile offender had increased to $175, up 13.5 percent from the previous year.2 Depending upon their offenses, teenage offenders who were committed to the Indiana Department of Correction typically spent between nine and seventeen months in one of Indiana’s juvenile facilities.4 Seventy-four percent of detained youth were detained for nonviolent offenses.5 African American youth were more likely than their Caucasian peers to be arrested, detained, and confined in Indiana juvenile facilities.6 In fact, in 2005, the African American youth were three times more likely than Caucasian youth to be placed in custody in Indiana.7 This trend led to the development of a new juvenile justice strategy that still provides a penalty for the crime but decreases the number of juveniles detained, decreases juvenile crime, saves money, and reduces the racial disparities in the juvenile justice system.
Juvenile offenses fall into two broad categories: 1. status offenses, which would not be considered a crime if committed by an adult, such as running away, habitual truancy, or buying alcohol; and, 2. delinquent offenses, which involve a child who has violated state or federal law or a municipal ordinance.3
100%
Population of Juvenile Offenders vs. Total Population Ages 10-17 by Race/Ethnicity, 2005 81.0%
80% 60%
Popuation of juvenile offenders
58.7%
Total population ages 10 - 17
40%
32.3%
20% 0%
11.8% White
Black
5.5% 5.7%
3.5% 1.5%
Hispanic
All Other
Number of Juvenile Status and Delinquency Cases in Indiana 34,000 33,000 32,000
32,415
31,000 30,000 29,000 28,000
32,693
33,587 32,400
31,890 30,032
1999
30,452
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
A Changing Tide In an effort to ensure justice for juvenile crime while improving outcomes for juveniles in the justice system, a handful of Indiana counties implemented programs to decrease both confinement and Number of Juvenile Commitments to the recidivism among youth. These programs in Allen, Department of Correction, Marion County Bartholomew, Howard, and Porter counties exhibited eight 200 common traits:8 180 150
• An approach that balanced strict compliance with criminal sentencing and opportunities for rehabilitation;
148
161
146
141
135
100
• Partnerships among the local courts, probation departments, prosecutor’s offices, law enforcement agencies, schools, and social service agencies;
106
100
50 0 2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
• Judicial leadership to maintain the inter-agency collaboration; • Utilization of a credible, standardized tool to make placement decisions; • Strong involvement among youth and parents, as well as probation officers and caseworkers; • County-wide awareness that family and situational factors contribute to youth behaviors; and • Utilization of a shared computer database of juvenile offender case history information. In 2006, Marion County joined a similar program called the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI). This initiative followed the eight traits above and adhered to national best practices in detention reform. JDAI is a project of the Annie E. Casey Foundation (AECF) and has been shown to yield positive outcomes for youth and communities in both urban and rural settings by moving low-risk youth from secure detention into community-based alternative programs.9 Nationally, JDAI sites have shown the following outcomes:10 • A 43 percent reduction in average daily detention for juveniles, • A 40 percent decrease in the number of youth committed to state custody, • An average decrease of 36 percent in juvenile crime indicators in communities participating in the JDAI, • Improved conditions in juvenile facilities, and • A decrease in disproportionate minority contact.
Number of Juvenile Delinquency and Status Case Filings, Marion County
7,000 Delinquency
6,000 5,000
5,406
5,893
Status
5,312
5,132
4,000
4,139
4,453
4,301
3,000
882
972
342
292
331
2010
2011
2012
3,693
1,078 277
479
347
0 After adopting JDAI, Marion County also began seeing 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 positive outcomes. For example, the county reduced the detention population by nearly 50 percent, implemented a hard cap of 96 youth detained in the county at any given time, and increased the number of detention alternatives from two to seven. Currently, Marion County’s alternatives to detention include: home confinement (formal and informal), electronic monitoring, supervised release, curfew, evening reporting, day reporting and shelter. Only the first two were available prior to the implementation of JDAI.11
2
3,729
1,670
2,000 1,000
3,845
Communities new to JDAI follow a pattern of organization, education, and immersion. A few additional steps communities take to build stakeholder buy-in and increase knowledge of juvenile justice include:
Counties participating in JDAI
★
Juvenile Detention Centers
★ ★ ★ ★★ ★
★
• Undergoing a Systems Assessment, ★ ★
• Building a Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (DRAI), • Assessing the conditions of confinement in local facilities,
★
• Attending trainings on the fundamentals of JDAI, and
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
★
★
★ ★
• Visiting model JDAI program sites to see how the initiative works at different levels of implementation.
★ ★
Statewide Expansion of JDAI Four lead agencies—Indiana Supreme Court, Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, Indiana Department of Correction, and the Department of Child Services—have come together to support a statewide expansion of JDAI. Indiana seeks to utilize JDAI to improve public safety in the state through the use of evidence-based interventions for youth and families that eliminate the unnecessary detention of youth, reduce disproportionate minority contact, and improve outcomes and welfare of youth.14 In 2013, the Indiana state legislature dedicated more than $5 million over two years to allow new counties to become JDAI sites. The state added its first four expansion counties to the initiative in 2009: Johnson, Lake, Porter, and Tippecanoe. Three new sites were added to JDAI in 2011-2012: Clark, Elkhart, and Howard counties. An additional eleven counties were added
Types of Alternatives to Secure Juvenile Detention13 Home or Community Detention is used to supervise youth who can safely reside in their homes or with relatives. These programs require youth to observe a tight curfew and limit movement outside the home to pre-approved activities, locations, and times such as school and church. Program staff provides frequent, random, unannounced community supervision. Day and Evening reporting programs are non-secure nonprofit and community programs that provide six to twelve hours of daily supervision and structured activities. Residential Alternatives, also called shelter programs, provide non-secure 24-hour supervision and age-appropriate services like education, recreation, tutoring, and life-skills training. Foster Care Contracts are sometimes used for younger children, girls, lower-risk cases, or other youth who are not suitable for placement in congregate care facility. These placements often are used as temporary housing (only a few days) while other arrangements are made.
How JDAI Works The Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative is not a set program for communities to follow but rather a process of building local-level, public-private partnerships in each community around a specific set of strategies. These include:12
1. Collaboration between the major juvenile justice agencies, other governmental entities, and community organizations
5. Improvement in case processing procedures to expedite the flow of cases through the system,
2. Use of accurate data, both to diagnose the system’s problems and to assess the impact of various reforms;
6. Minimization of detention of youth in “special cases” such as youth in custody as a result of probation violations, writs and warrants, as well as those awaiting placement;
3. Implementation of objective admissions criteria to replace subjective decision making at all points where choices to place children in secure custody are made;
7. Reduction in racial disparities to ensure a level playing field for youth of color; and
4. Creation of new or enhanced non-secure alternatives to detention in order to increase the options available for arrested youth;
8. Improvement in conditions of confinement by ensuring that facilities are routinely inspected by knowledgeable individuals applying rigorous protocols and ambitious standards.
3
in 2013. The nineteen counties participating in JDAI by the end of 2013 serve 56 percent of the state’s youth population ages 10-17.15 Since 2010, the partnering state agencies have developed a set of core principles, a memorandum of understanding, and a framework for next steps in the statewide replication of JDAI. Subcommittees of the group are working to draft new detention facility standards and are participating in community discussions about the purpose of detention. Also, experts in juvenile justice data collection and analysis are looking into the state’s data reporting process, the potential development of a statewide juvenile justice data repository, and the integration of the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s newly designed quarterly reporting system (QRS).
Indiana’s Juvenile Justice Data Are Improving Since reaching a peak in 2006, the number of juvenile status and delinquency cases in Indiana has decreased from 35,283 to 23,995 in 2011. The number of youth being committed to the Department of Correction (incarcerated) also has declined, from a peak of 1,101 in 2007 to a low of 932 in 2012.
“County after county is having experiences where fewer petitions alleging delinquency are actually being filed; it’s resulted in more collaboration between law enforcement, defense, and child advocates to really change the juvenile justice system.”
Though the number of juvenile cases and commitments has decreased over the – Indiana Supreme Court Justice Steven David last few years and the percentage of youth detained for less serious or minor offenses has decreased from 68 percent in 2007 to just 36 percent in 2012,16 the recidivism rate remains constant at 34 percent.17 Both black and white youth Number of Juvenile Status and Delinquency Cases in Indiana 40,000 were more than 40 percent less likely to be detained in 2012 than in 2005. However, 35,283 33,587 30,000 the share of black youth detained in Indiana 30,797 29,246 is still much larger than their share in the 25,995 25,171 23,995 23,069 20,000 population. At the same time, the cost per day to house a juvenile offender in Indiana has increased from $175 in 2005 to $239 in 2012.18
10,000
0
2005 2006 These data reveal how JDAI is impacting youth, communities, and the juvenile justice system. Youth who commit less serious offenses are being provided with alternatives to detention that provide an appropriate level of discipline, supervision, and intervention, without unnecessarily removing youth who are not dangerous from their communities. Therefore, fewer children are being confined without an increase in recidivism rate. Counties participating in the program are spending more money per detained child, but less money overall, and are seeing less juvenile crime in their communities with improved outcomes for youth.
2007
100%
60%
2009
2010
2011
2012
Population of Detained Youth vs. Total Population Ages 10-17 by Race/Ethnicity, 2012 77.3%
80%
Popuation of detained youth Total population ages 10 - 17
51.1% 36.1%
40% 20% 0%
4
2008
12.3% White
Black
6.4% 8.4% Hispanic
6.4%
2.0%
All Other
Lake Porter
Snapshot of JDAI–Involved Counties19
Elkhart
Howard Tippecanoe
Each JDAI site is currently working through a different phase of the process. The county-level snapshots below provide a brief overview of each county’s progress towards adopting JDAI, as well as a glimpse of the county’s trend data since 2005.
Johnson
Clark
Lake and Porter Counties – 2009 Lake and Porter counties in Northwest Indiana have been working with the W. Haywood Burns Institute to conduct Readiness Assessment Consultations (RACs). RACs are designed to assist jurisdictions in identifying ways to reduce and ultimately eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in the juvenile justice system, when they exist. For both counties, the next step is to convene a group of local stakeholders to develop a work plan.
law enforcement officers about the center’s guidelines and admissions criteria and provided them access to the Quest Management Data System allowing them to view information such as: active warrants, formal supervised probation lists, house arrest statuses, and juvenile photos. Porter County’s goals are to develop a Probation Sanctions Grid to help individuals in the county make decisions about placement by clearly showing the available options at each risk level and to start a new Day Reporting Program as an alternative to secure confinement.
Additionally, both counties are working to create new non-secure alternatives to detention. For example, Porter County opened a new Juvenile Services Reception Center in 2012. Prior to opening, center staff trained the county’s Lake County, Indiana Commitments to the Department of Correction Delinquency Case Filings
Lake County’s goal is to complete, validate, and implement a Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (DRAI).
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
83
83
104
79
72
79
77
95
2168
2722
2358
2110
2226
1734
1701
1769
Status Case Filings
627
611
641
370
384
205
222
263
Porter County, Indiana
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2
7
8
8
11
9
5
4
Delinquency Case Filings
Commitments to the Department of Correction
458
508
433
420
482
497
481
490
Status Case Filings
60
38
40
49
29
145
116
141
Source: Kids Count Data Center datacenter.kidscount.org
Tippecanoe County - 2009 the reasons for problem behavior in youth, improving referral services, and targeting interventions to specific populations. Tippecanoe’s goal is to focus on decreasing disproportionate minority contact in the county.
In 2013, the Tippecanoe County JDAI collaborative visited a model program site in Santa Cruz, CA. The group returned to Indiana with a list of new ideas and strategies to implement including a focus on understanding Tippecanoe County, Indiana
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
28
29
28
21
25
23
16
30
Delinquency Case Filings
1023
877
579
466
460
370
323
303
Status Case Filings
869
574
271
262
109
383
270
225
Commitments to the Department of Correction
Source: Kids Count Data Center datacenter.kidscount.org
5
Snapshot of JDAI–Involved Counties Clark County - 2010 Clark County has been building buy-in from local stakeholders by educating them about the population of juveniles in secure detention in the county. This information also is being used to help identify potential programs Clark County, Indiana
to serve as alternatives to detention in the county. The county’s goal is to develop and implement a Detention Risk Assessment Instrument (DRAI).
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
3
3
1
2
2
9
7
3
Delinquency Case Filings
728
1334
508
585
694
701
647
475
Status Case Filings
218
495
146
74
88
181
240
136
Commitments to the Department of Correction
Source: Kids Count Data Center datacenter.kidscount.org
Elkhart County – 2010 Elkhart County has implemented a new policy that now allows for appropriate juvenile justice system-involved youth who fail placement in a residential facility to go directly to a new residential facility instead of automatically being placed in secure detention. The county also is utilizing partnerships between agencies to provide Elkhart County, Indiana
emergency shelter care in the event that parents are not available to pick up their child when the decision is made not to detain the youth. Elkhart County’s goals are to build consensus about the purpose of detention in the county and to design a DRAI.
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Commitments to the Department of Correction
73
80
82
68
103
80
64
63
Delinquency Case Filings
916
1271
798
932
745
654
576
496
Status Case Filings
52
85
51
38
74
64
58
56
Source: Kids Count Data Center datacenter.kidscount.org
Howard County - 2010 Howard County is working to increase participation from local stake holders in its JDAI collaborative as the group discusses the purpose of detention in the county. Howard County, Indiana
The county’s goal is to develop a DRAI that will assist in making objective decisions regarding youth who enter into the Detention Intake Unit. 2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Commitments to the Department of Correction
17
15
13
16
20
18
12
11
Delinquency Case Filings
512
540
444
357
479
348
362
251
Status Case Filings
85
92
116
85
71
49
36
60
Source: Kids Count Data Center datacenter.kidscount.org
Johnson County - 2010 After completing a Conditions of Confinement SelfAssessment in 2012, Johnson County’s collaborative classified its next steps into three groups: immediately possible, possible with some planning, and not possible without substantial additional resources or not advisable for other reasons. The detention facility implemented those items which were immediately possible such as increasing visitation time, painting the dining area, starting a positive Johnson County, Indiana Commitments to the Department of Correction
incentive program, and increasing the number of reception calls. The collaborative plans to move forward with the items deemed possible with some planning through the work of three subcommittees: Positive Incentive Program for Juveniles, Training Curriculum and Positive Incentive Program for Staff Members, and Structured Recreation Program.
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
11
23
13
9
14
13
10
10
Delinquency Case Filings
585
633
710
518
673
487
405
313
Status Case Filings
143
129
213
152
164
145
138
103
Source: Kids Count Data Center datacenter.kidscount.org
6
Sources 1
Supreme Court of Indiana, Division of State Court Administration.
2
Finance and Performance Division, Indiana Department of Correction (2004) Juvenile Facilities, Fiscal Year 2003-2004. http://www.in.gov/indcorrection/pdf/ factsFY0304JuvenileFinancial.pdf.
3
National Center for State Courts. (n.d.). Juvenile Justice and Delinquency FAQS. Available at: www.ncsc.org/topics/children-families-and-elders/juvenile-justiceand-delinquency/faq.aspx#What%20are%20status%20offenses
4
Indiana Department of Correction (2005) Juvenile Fact Card. Available at: http:// www.in.gov/indcorrection/pdf/facts/jan05.pdf
5
A Roadmap for Juvenile Justice Reform. Annie E. Casey Foundation. Available at: http://www.aecf.org/~/media/PublicationFiles/AEC180essay_booklet_MECH.pdf
6
Skiba, R.J.; Rausch, K.; Abbott, D.; Simmons, A. (2007) Disproportionate Minority Contact in Indiana: Quantitative Analyses Final Report.
7
Indiana Department of Correction (2005) Year End Review. Available at: http:// www.in.gov/idoc/files/2005DOCAnnualReport-Stats.pdf
8
Indiana Youth Institute. (2005) Juvenile Justice: What Works in Indiana. A Case Study Report. Unpublished report.
9
Indiana’s JDAI core Principles. Available at: http://www.youthlawteam.org/files/ Indiana’s%20JDAI%20Core%20Principles.pdf Annie E. Casey Foundation (2009) Two Decades of JDAI: From Demonstration Project to National Standard. Available at: http://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/~/ media/Pubs/Initiatives/Juvenile%20Detention%20Alternatives%20Initiative/ TwoDecadesofJDAIFromDemonstrationProjecttoNat/JDAI_National_ final_10_07_09.pdf
10
JDAI 2011 Annual Report. Available at: http://www.jdaihelpdesk.org/ datamanagereports/2011%20Annual%20Report.pdf
11
Annie E. Casey Foundation (2009) Two Decades of JDAI: From Demonstration Project to National Standard.
12
Annie E. Casey Foundation (n.d.) Pathways to Juvenile Detention Reform. Consider the Alternatives. Available at: http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/ consider%20the%20alternatives.pdf
13
JDAI Core Principles document. http://www.youthlawteam.org/files/Indiana’s%20 JDAI%20Core%20Principles.pdf
14
15
Indiana Department of Correction. http://www.in.gov/idoc/dys/2407.htm
16
Ibid.
17
Indiana Department of Correction. http://www.in.gov/idoc/2376.htm
18
Ibid.
JDAI Newsletter (2013) http://www.youthlawteam.org/files/February%20 2013-%20JDAI%20Newsletter.pdf
19
7
Issue Briefs are short, easy-to-read reports on critical youth trends. Go to http://iyi.org/reports/issue-alerts to see past issues.
Issue Brief February 2014 iyi.org
603 East Washington Street, Suite 800 | Indianapolis, IN 46204
Less Crime for Less Money – JDAI in Indiana
Indiana Youth Institute 603 East Washington Street, Suite 800 Indianapolis, IN 46204-2692
IYI Resources The latest data is at your fingertips with IYI’s Data Center. Search statistics and gather data to improve your program planning and grant writing. Or, request customized data. Go to www.iyi.org/data. Get the most comprehensive overview of children’s well-being in Indiana. Download the Kids Count in Indiana Data Book at www.iyi.org/databook. Want in-depth information on youth? Check out the free resources at IYI’s Virginia Beall Ball Library. We will mail you the library materials and include a postage paid return envelope. Go to www.iyi.org/library for details. Have a quick question or want to bounce an idea around? Contact Ask IYI for free resources and tips: call 1-855-2ask-IYI or visit www.iyi.org/ask. Looking for training on youth issues? IYI provides regional trainings and free webinars on youth development and nonprofit management. Go to www.iyi.org/trainings for details. Need one-on-one assistance with planning, evaluating, or expanding your organization? Benefit from IYI’s Consulting Services and receive professional help at affordable hourly rates – discounted far below market value. Go to www.iyi.org/ consulting-services for details.
603 East Washington Street, Suite 800 Indianapolis, IN 46204 317.396.2700 or 800.343.7060 iyi.org