getting out of the “kitchen sink”
TRANSCRIPT
GETTING OUT OF THE “KITCHEN SINK”:
EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS FOR LOW RISK YOUTH
ALICIA HENDERSON, LANCASTER COUNTY ATTORNEY
AMY HOFFMAN, DIRECTOR OF JUVENILE DIVERSION PROGRAMS
AMOREENA BRADY, OFFICE OF PROBATION ADMINISTRATION, JUVENILE JUSTICE
SPECIALIST OF CASE MANAGEMENT
SESSION OBJECTIVES
• HIGHLIGHT OF DIVERSION PROGRAMS IN NEBRASKA
• RISK, NEED, RESPONSIVITY AND DOSAGE PRINCIPLES
• TARGETING INTERVENTIONS FOR LOW RISK YOUTH
• LANCASTER COUNTY SCREENING PROCESS OF CANDIDATES FOR
DIVERSION
3
Diversion
LANCASTER COUNTY EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
Referrals
Police
Assessment Specialist
interviews youth and parent(s).
Completes NYS Assessment
Makes intervention
recommendations
Children under 12 assessed at Child
Guidance
County Attorney
reviews police reports AND assessment information.
Makes intervention
decision
Child Guidance
File
No File
WHY?
• TO ASSESS RISKS/ASSETS OF REFERRED YOUTH TO
DETERMINE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF INTERVENTION (USING
NEBRASKA YOUTH SCREEN ASSESSMENT TOOL)
• PARENTS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR CHILD AND FAMILY
SITUATION TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IN A TIMELY
MANNER
OUTCOMES
Evaluation of Lancaster County Early Assessment Process (Hobbs, 2010, 2012)
FINDINGS
•REDUCED court filings.
•INCREASED “No Files.”
•DECREASED referrals to Diversion.
•CHANGED County Attorney decision for 136 youth.
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
• WHILE JUVENILE CRIME IN LANCASTER COUNTY
DECREASED 30%, JUVENILE FILINGS HAVE DECREASED
BY 40%.
• YOUTH WHO PARTICIPATE IN EARLY ASSESSMENT ARE
LESS LIKELY TO RECIDIVATE LONG-TERM (LONGER
THAN 24 MONTHS AFTER COMPLETING PROGRAM)
WHEN COMPARED TO YOUTH WHO PARTICIPATE IN
DIVERSION PROGRAMMING.
Evaluation of Lancaster County Early Assessment Process (Hobbs, 2010, 2012)
TYPES OF DIVERSION IN LANCASTER
• EARLY ASSESSMENT
• PROJECT SUCCESS
• TRUANCY DIVERSION
• DIVERSION
• INTENSIVE DIVERSION
DIVERSION IN NEBRASKA
• AUGUST 2013:
• 50 COUNTIES REPORTED HAVING A JUVENILE DIVERSION PROGRAM
• 25 COUNTIES REPORTED DATA INTO JDCMS
• JANUARY 2014:
• 57 COUNTIES REPORTED HAVING A JUVENILE DIVERSION PROGRAM
• 43 COUNTIES REPORTED DATA INTO JDCMS**
• JANUARY 2015:
• 62 COUNTIES REPORTED HAVING A JUVENILE DIVERSION PROGRAM
• 52 COUNTIES REPORTED DATA INTO JDCMS**
• JANUARY 2016:
• 69 COUNTIES REPORTED HAVING A JUVENILE DIVERSION PROGRAM
• 59 COUNTIES REPORTED DATA INTO JDCMS**
• WINNEBAGO WELLNESS COURT DIVERSION PROGRAM AND SANTEE SIOUX TEEN COURT PROGRAM NOT
INCLUDED IN DATA.
**Some counties with zero referrals; some counties not complying with reporting
requirement.
Winnebago Tribe
Santee Sioux
DIVERSION IN NEBRASKA
• WE CONTINUE TO SEE AN INCREASE IN DIVERSION BEING OFFERED
STATEWIDE.
• IN 2015:
• MORE THAN 4,000 YOUTH WERE REFERRED TO DIVERSION
• 78% OF YOUTH REFERRED TO A JUVENILE DIVERSION PROGRAM IN CY2105
ENROLLED AFTER REFERRAL (3,505 YOUTH).
• 82% (2,365 YOUTH) OF THE CLOSED DIVERSION CASES SUCCESSFULLY
COMPLETE THE DIVERSION PROGRAM, AND 17% (500 YOUTH) OF THE
CLOSED CASES DID NOT SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THE DIVERSION
PROGRAM.
• NOT CAPTURED ARE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF YOUTH THAT WERE SCREENED OUT
OF BEING REFERRED TO DIVERSION WITH LITTLE TO NO SERVICES. IS THIS OKAY??
DIVERSION IN NEBRASKA
DIVERSION IN NEBRASKA
• MUST USE SCREENING TOOLS FOR USE IN CREATING A DIVERSION
PLAN UTILIZING APPROPRIATE SERVICES FOR THE JUVENILE
• MUST BE DESIGNED TO FURTHER THE GOALS OF:
• PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO ADJUDICATION
• REDUCING RECIDIVISM
• REDUCING COSTS AND BURDENS ON JUSTICE SYSTEM
• COLLECTING RESTITUTION TO THE VICTIM.
Neb. Rev. Stat. 43-260.04
DIVERSION IN NEBRASKA
• SO…DIVERSION PROGRAMS SHOULD PROVIDE SCREENING TOOLS
TO CREATE A DIVERSION PLAN, WITH THE GOAL OF REDUCING
RECIDIVISM!
• TO REDUCE RECIDIVISM AND IMPROVE OUTCOMES, YOUR PROGRAM
MUST:
• OBJECTIVELY ASSESS RISK AND NEED
• TARGET THE RIGHT YOUTH!
MUST!!
• ASSESS FOR RISK AND NEED
• TARGET HIGH RISK YOUTH
• ADDRESS GREATEST CRIMINOGENIC NEEDS
• UTILIZE EFFECTIVE SERVICES
• COORDINATE SERVICES ACROSS SYSTEMS
• ENGAGE FAMILIES AND YOUTH
• SUPERVISE YOUTH IN A DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE MANNER
• PRIORITIZE IMPLEMENTATION QUALITY AND EVALUATION
HOW CAN WE BEST SERVE YOUTH ASSESSED AS LOW RISK TO
REOFFEND?
WHAT DOES TARGETED INTERVENTIONS MEANS?
• RISK PRINCIPLE FOCUSES SUPERVISION AND SERVICES ON YOUTH MOST LIKELY
TO REOFFEND. PRIORITIZE SYSTEM INTERVENTIONS FOR YOUTH AT HIGH RISK TO
REOFFEND CAN LEAD TO SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN RECIDIVISM.
• CONVERSELY, INTERVENING WITH YOUTH WHO ARE LOW RISK TO REOFFEND HAS A
LIMITED IMPACT AND CAN EVEN LEAD TO ADVERSE OUTCOMES
• NEED PRINCIPLE ADDRESSES THE YOUTH’S GREATEST CRIMINOGENIC NEED.
• SYSTEMS CAN HAVE THE GREATEST IMPACT ON RECIDIVISM WHEN THEY ATTEND TO
SPECIFIC, INDIVIDUALIZED NEEDS THAT ARE THE PRIMARY CAUSES OF YOUTH’S
DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR
*RISK, NEED, AND RESPONSIVITY ARTICLE, AMERICAN PAROLE AND PROBATION ASSOCIATION, AUGUST 2013
COUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENT, WHITE PAPER ON CORE PRINCIPLES FOR REDUCING RECIDIVISM AND IMPROVING OTHER OUTCOMES FOR YOUTH IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE
SYSTEM, 2014
WHAT DOES TARGETED INTERVENTIONS MEANS?
• RESPONSIVITY PRINCIPLE IDENTIFIES A YOUTH’S BARRIERS TO LEARNING AND
IMPROVING HIS OR HER BEHAVIOR AND TAILOR SERVICES TO HELP OVERCOME
THEM.
• THE RESPONSIVITY PRINCIPLE CAN ENHANCE THE IMPACT OF SERVICES BY ADDRESSING
NEEDS OR CONDITIONS, SUCH AS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DIAGNOSIS, THAT INTERFERE
WITH SERVICE ENGAGEMENT
• THE DOSAGE PRINCIPLE REFERS TO HOW TO STRATEGICALLY STRUCTURE A
YOUTH’S TIME AND PROVIDE THEM WITH APPROPRIATE QUANTITIES OF SERVICES
*RISK, NEED, AND RESPONSIVITY ARTICLE, AMERICAN PAROLE AND PROBATION ASSOCIATION, AUGUST 2013
COUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENT, WHITE PAPER ON CORE PRINCIPLES FOR REDUCING RECIDIVISM AND IMPROVING OTHER OUTCOMES FOR YOUTH IN THE
JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 2014
MATCHING RISK OF REOFFENDING WITH SUPERVISION DECISIONS
Low Risk
Removal from System
Diversion
Probation
Medium Risk
Probation
High Risk
Probation
Residential Treatment
Confinement
Council of State Government, White Paper on CORE PRINCIPLES FOR REDUCING RECIDIVISM AND IMPROVING OTHER OUTCOMES FOR YOUTH IN THE
JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 2014
MATCHING RISK OF REOFFENDING WITH SUPERVISION DECISIONS
• FOR THOSE YOUTH WHOSE OFFENSES ARE MINOR AND WHO SHOW LIMITED
RISK FOR FUTURE OFFENDING• THE JUVENILE COURT SHOULD AVOID ANY ACTION BEYOND A WARNING
• FOUND THAT DIVERSION FROM COURT IS MORE EFFECTIVE IN REDUCING
RECIDIVISM THAN THE TRADITIONAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
• DIVERSION WAS SUPERIOR TO COURT PROCESSING• WHETHER DIVERTED YOUTH RECEIVED ONLY A CAUTION
• OR WERE REFERRED TO A COUNSELING
• OR AN INTERVENTION PROGRAM
• IN FACT, LOW-RISK YOUTH RECEIVING ONLY A CAUTION FARED BETTER THAN
THOSE REFERRED TO A DIVERSION INTERVENTION
*ARTICLE: THE EFFECT OF YOUTH DIVERSION PROGRAMS ON RECIDIVISM, A META-ANALYTIC REVIEW BY HOLLY A.
WILSON OF RYERSON UNIVERSITY AND ROBERT D. HOGE OF CARLETON UNIVERSITY, SEPTEMBER 2013
PROGRAMMING OPTIONS FOR LOW RISK YOUTH
• RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
• VICTIM OFFENDER MEDIATION
• COMMUNITY SERVICE
• EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMMING FOCUSED ON SKILL BUILDING
• DECISION MAKING CLASS
• VICTIM EMPATHY CLASS
• ON LINE EDUCATION COURSES
• MINIMIZE TIME ON DIVERSION TO INCLUDE:
• MINIMAL CONTACT WITH YOUTH
• FOCUSED CONDITIONS OF DIVERSION THAT RELATE TO THE HIGHEST CRIMINOGENIC
AREAS.
IN CLOSING
• DIVERSION IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
• PLANS FOR YOUTH SHOULD MATCH THEIR RISK LEVEL AND INCLUDE
TARGET INTERVENTIONS THAT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION:
• RISK, NEED, RESPONSIVITY AND DOSAGE PRINCIPLES
• LOW RISK YOUTH CAN BENEFIT FROM SCREENINGS TO DETERMINE IF
AN INTERVENTION FROM A JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS EVEN
NEEDED.
QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING!