Reforming Georgia Juvenile Justice Getting Results in Juvenile Justice: Improving Outcomes and Containing Costs Using Evidenced Based Programs

Workgroup Findings Total Population (2011)

% Non-felony (Misdemeanor or Status)

% NonViolent Offense Types

% Low-Risk

Recidivism Rate (Released in 2007)

Cost

64%

N/A

Out-of-Home Population 24% 1,917 YDC Population Designated Felons

40%

619

1%

39%

39%

65%

$91,126 per bed

607

0%

38%

39%

N/A

N/A

Non-Secure Residential Population

53% 600

RYDC Population

58%

698

20%

54% 70%

49%

65%

34%

N/A

$28,955 per juvenile $88,155 per bed

• Large numbers of low‐risk kids consume expensive juvenile justice resources and recidivism rates remain high. • YDC: 39% low-risk, 65% recidivism rate, $91,126 per bed • Non-Secure Residential: 53% non-felony, 49% low-risk, 54% recidivism rate, $28,955 per juvenile 2

Race/Ethnicity of Youth in System Out-of-Home

Community Other 11%

Other 9%

White 22%

White 31%

Afr Amer 58%

Afr Amer 69%

n = 1,917

n = 13,790 3

Juvenile System Changes • Status Offenders are now described as Children in Need of Services (CHINS); CHINS should not be detained except under limited circumstances and for a limited time (DSO) • Fewer lower risk youth confined in DJJ facilities, but we will still house high and medium risk including violent youthful offenders • Services for lower risk youth will be provided in the community • Funding has been offered to counties through grants for community based services for delinquent youth 10/31/2016

4

GA Assessment Instruments New Assessments/Tools: The development of a continuum of new validated assessments and tools for our juvenile system, to include:

– – – –

10/31/2016

Detention Assessment Instrument (DAI) Pre-Disposition Risk Assessment (PDRA) Structured Dispositional Matrix (SDM) Juvenile Needs Assessment (JNA)

5

Georgia’s Juvenile Incentive Grants With the new Children’s Code passage (HB 242), state and federal funds have been focused on Evidence-Based Interventions shown to be effective with a juvenile population. Research has shown the programs listed below to be effective interventions with this population– Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST) – Functional Family Therapy (FFT) – Thinking For A Change (T4C) – Aggression Replacement Training (ART) – Seven Challenges (7C)

10/31/2016

6

How are we doing so far? • Implemented and validated risk assessment tools with assistance of judiciary and enforcement community – Pre-Disposition Risk Assessment-PDRA & Structured Dispositional Matrix – Detention Assessment Instrument-DAI – Juvenile Needs Assessment –

• Incentive grant program now serving 60 counties (SFY 2014 - $6M; SFY 2017 - $8.8M)

• With population shift to community, we have been able to take two juvenile detention centers and one YDC off-line • As of December 1, 2014, every juvenile circuit in the state has access to at least one evidence-based program (DJJ $1.6M) • Eventual cost shift of services from facilities to community (Sustain Reforms) 10/31/2016

7

Two Years of Juvenile Incentive Grant Results

Implementation Period Number of Grantee Courts Number of Counties Served

10/31/2016

FY 2014

FY 2015

9 months 29 courts 49 counties

12 months 29 courts 51 counties

8

Re-Investment Funding for Clayton County Series 1 $800,000.00 $700,000.00 $600,000.00 $500,000.00 $400,000.00 $300,000.00 $200,000.00

$100,000.00 $0.00 FY14

FY15

FY16

FY17

Series 1

10/31/2016

9

Is the Offense a Focus Act?

NO Youth Arrested for Delinquent Act

YES

Released on O.R. or Alternative Monitor Program

NO Youth assessed for risk using predictive algorithmic tool: Is Youth High Risk?

YES

Detention

Dismissed with Admonish & Counsel

NO

Does Youth Require Court Ordered Supervision?

Recidivist Reduction Algorithm for Juvenile Justice Systems • • • • • •

Community Supervision: Using EBP

Probation down 83% Detention admissions down 66% LOS83% down 44% in # decline ADPofdown 80% probationers School Arrests down 91% Annual cost savings of $4 million

YES Formal Adjudication Process: Is Youth Eligible for Commitment?

NO Multi-Disciplinary Assessment: Does Youth Require Other Pathway?

YES Youth Referred to other Agency: Mental Health, Social Services

NO • Commitments down 73% • Annual cost savings of $2.5 million

Commitment to State

YES

NO Is Youth Eligible for Deep-End Intensive CBS?

YES

Second Chance Program Using EBP

Program cost savings between $19 to 32.2 million

Total Cost Savings = $25.5 to 38.7 milion

Diversion: Using Restorative Justice Programs

Youth Commits Delinquent Act at School

The Big Picture of Clayton’s Journey: 2003 to Present 6000

JDAI Begins FAST Panel

School Protocol Begins

5000

System of Care: Collective Impact

4000 Quad C-ST

71% decline in juvenile arrests

3000 2000 1000 0 99

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12 13 14 15

Complaints Petitions

Annual Admissions Decline by 66% Detention Admissions 1200 1014

44.4% Decline Year DAI Introduced

1000

Another 21.8% decline by adding alternative programs and other

800 604 600 585

580

400

497

492

481

471

357 345

334

342

322

332

2014

2015

200

0 2002 (Baseline)

2010

2011 Annual Admissions Overall

2012

2013

Annual Admissions for Youth of Color

What the Numbers Show: Public Safety and Detention Alternatives Detention Alternatives - FTA and Rearrest Rates 6.00%

5.00%

5.00% 5.00%

4.00%

3.00% 2.00% 2.00% 1.00% 1.00% 0.40% 0.30% 0.00% 2002 (Baseline)

2010

0.00% 2011

0.00% 2012 FTA Rates

Re-arrest Rates

0.00% 0.00% 2013

0.00% 0.00% 2014

0.00% 0.00% 2015

Outcomes: Average Length of Stay Reduced by 44%

ALOS 25 21.96 20

14.36

15 11.65

14.36

12.46

10

12.5

12

12.5

12

2012

2013

11.6 13.5

12.33 13.5

9.03 5

0

2002 (Baseline)

2010

2011 ALOS (in Days) Overall

ALOS (in Days) for Youth of Color

2014

2015

Outcomes: Average Daily Population Reduced by 80% ADP 70 61 60

65.6% decline 50 48

Additional 14.4% Decline

40

30

21

21.13 18.05

20 20.46

20.54

12

11.8

12.36

12

11.6

12.12

2013

2014

2015

17.41 10

0 2002 Baseline

2010

2011

2012 ADP Overall

ADP of Youth of Color

Comparative Analysis of Total probationers, Total Violations, and Total Warrants 700

• 83% decline in number of probationers; • 78% decline in total violations filed; and • 93% decline in VOP warrants

JDAI Begins

600 500 400 300 200 100

0 2

3

4

5

6 Total Probationers

7

8

9

Total Probation Violations

10

11 Total Warrants

12

13

14

15

Failure to Appear Locators Total Bench Warrants 140 120

100

83% decline in Bench Warrants

JDAI Begins

80 60 40 20

0 2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Total Bench Warrants

10

11

12

13

14

15

Total School Arrests Pre & Post School-Justice Collaborative Agreement School/Justice MOU Signed 1229

990 921

898

SRO’s removed from middle schools due to budget cuts

688

SRO Program Begins

577

573 485

SRO’s returned to middle schools

508 443

372 310 203

1

6 3

50 10

93

94

95

67 5

96

101 6

97

47

68

59

98

99

0

106

83

1

2

123

116

3

194

4

Misdemeanors

5

142

6 Felonies

80

67

74

88

125 73

7

8

9

10

11

164 77

157 97

12

13

94 67

73 51

14

15

School Based Filings by Race Compared to Demographics of County 1400

80.00%

70.00%

1200

60.00% 1000 50.00% 800 40.00% 600 30.00% 400 20.00% 200

10.00%

0

0.00% 94

95

96

97

98

99

0

1

Black Population

2

3

4

5

White Population

6

7

8

White Filings

9

10

11

Black Filings

12

13

14

15

Comparative Analysis of Non-School and School Filings and Graduation Rates 3500

90.00%

School-Justice JDAI Partnership Created Began

80.00%

3000 The computation of graduation rates changes from “over-all” to “on-time” reducing the rates in almost every system

2500

70.00% 60.00%

2000

50.00%

1500

40.00% 30.00%

1000 20.00% 500

10.00%

0

0.00% 2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Non School Filings

9

10

School Filings

11

12

Graduation Rates

13

14

15

Commitments Commitments to DJJ 140 122 120

100 98 80

74

60

70

69

69 52

58

58 34

40

33

33

33

31

2013

2014

2015

20

73% decline in commitments

0 2002 (Baseline)

2010

2011

Commitments Overall

2012

Commitments for Youth of Color

Juvenile Crime Indicator: We Need to Reframe What It Means to “Get Tough” Delinquency Petitions Filed 3000 2604 2500

2000

1500 1189 966

852

1000

733

638

730

500

0 2002 (Baseline)

2010

2011

2012 Delinquency Petitions Filed

2013

2014

2015

Expanding the Algorithm to Include Prevention Using a School-Justice Partnership Model Creating an Independent Backbone Agency to Broker Services for Chronically Disruptive Students (at risk of delinquency)

Collaborative Governance Body: The Clayton County Juvenile Justice Fund • 501 (c) (3) • Board of Directors; • Board of Advisors; • Executive Director; • Division of System of Care; • Division of JDAI; and • Meet quarterly

Board of Directors Board of Advisors

Executive Director

System of Care

JDAI

Look at the Child from Epidemiological Basics Diseases do not occur by chance: there are always determinants for the disease to occur. Diseases are not distributed at random: distribution is related to risks factors that need to be studied for the population in order to identify solutions.

Disruptive behaviors do not occur by chance: there are always determinants for the disruptive behavior to occur. Disruptive behaviors are not distributed at random: distribution is related to risks factors that need to be studied and for the population in order to identify solutions.

Behavior Improvement Discipline Referrals

7%

7%

Decrease Increase No Change

86%

10/31/2016

26

Impact on Attendance Absences

After

Before

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Absences

10/31/2016

27

Impact on Grades Chart Title 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Math

Science

Pre Test

10/31/2016

Language Arts

Post Test

28