Detention conditions and Juridical overview on detention ...
Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI) The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
-
Upload
rebecca-dowd -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
3
Transcript of Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI) The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI)
The Annie E. Casey Foundation
Our Vision:
Youth involved in the juvenile justice system will have opportunities to develop
into healthy, productive adults . . .
Why Detention Reform?
Entry Point for System Reform
Gateway to Incarceration
Crowding Crisis
“Hidden Closet of System”
AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION OF JUVENILESIN DETENTION CENTERS, 1985-1999
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999Source: Detention data adapted from Sickmund, M. (forthcoming). Juveniles in Corrections. Washington, DC OJJDP, 1985-99
Detention Populations Doubled Between ’85-’99
PERCENTAGE OF JUVENILES IN OVERCROWDED U.S. PUBLIC DETENTION CENTERS, 1985-1995
20%
32%
42%47%
51%
62%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995Source: Census of Public and Private Detention, Correctional and Shelter Facilities, 1985-95
Most Detained Kids are in Overcrowded Facilities
Overrepresentation of Minority Youth in Public Detention Centers: 1985 – 1999
56.6%
43.4% 56.4%43.6%
White Youth
Minority Youth
1985 1995
Minority Youth
Source: Census of Public and Private Juvenile Detention, Correctional and Shelter Facilities, 1985-1999 .
62.0%38.0%
1999
White Youth
Minority Youth
White Youth
2/3 of Detainees are Kids of Color
One-Day Counts in Detention Facilities, 2001
By Offense Category
Property, Drugs, PublicOrder and “Other”
(38.6%)(32.3%)
(29.1%)
ViolentOffenses
Status Offenses andTechnical Violations
Detention Increased Despite Decreases in Juvenile Crime
Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative
Purpose:To demonstrate that jurisdictions can establish more effective and efficient systems to accomplish the purposes of juvenile detention.
Objectives:1) Eliminate inappropriate or unnecessary use of secure detention2) Minimize failures to appear and incidence of delinquent behavior3) Redirect public finances to successful reform strategies4) Improve conditions in secure detention facilities.
Core JDAI Strategies
Reliance on Data
Objective Admissions Screening
Alternatives to Secure Detention
Expedited Case Processing
Strategies for “Special” Detention Cases
Strategies to Reduce Racial Disparities
Rigorous Facility Inspections
Collaboration
Cook County Outcomes
37% 54%
AverageDaily
Population(1996-2002)
YouthViolentArrests
(1993-2000)
Results-Impact
Multnomah County Outcomes
66% 45%
AverageDaily
Population(1993-2002)
JuvenileFelonyArrests
(1994-2000)
Results-Impact
Santa Cruz Outcomes
52% 38%
AverageDaily
Population(1996-2000)
JuvenileFelonyArrests
(1996-2000)
Results-Impact
Multnomah CountyResource Redeployment
012
34
56
78
910
1998 2000 2002 Cumulative
Millions
Results-Leverage
Santa CruzResource Redeployment
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1998 2001 Cumulative
Millions
Results-Leverage
Cook County Probation Department Average Monthly Residential Placements
1996 - 2005
262
76108
426358
121
0
100
200
300
400
500
1996 2001 2002 2003 2004 Aug-05Residential Placements
19 m
15m
13m
7.5m
Cook County IDOC Commitments
1997 - 2003
450
902 896862
694
555 556498
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,000
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
DOC Commitments
JDAI is present in 95 jurisdictions in 25 states and the District of Columbia, working in systems that hold 65% of all youth detained in this country,
almost 17,000 youth.
County site State siteModel site
What JDAI Participation Provides
Small cash grant (for travel & coordination)Technical AssistanceJDAI Tools, Guides & PublicationsJDAI Model SitesJDAI Training SeminarsJDAI National ConferencesJDAI Network & Peers
What JDAI Participation Requires
Implementation of JDAI core strategies
Fidelity to the model
Determined leadership
Communication and Transparency with Foundation