idjc 2nd chance final report_2-10-15

Director Sharon Harrigfeld | January 2015 Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections

Developing Productive Citizens Idaho’s Strategic Plan for Juvenile Reentry

Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections

Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission

Developing Productive Citizens | 2015

Contents Page

Message from Director 1

Message from IJJC Chair 2

Message from IJJC Reintegration Committee Chair 3

Acknowledging Our Partners 4

IDJC Mission 5

Introduction 6

Second Chance Act Grant 7

Idaho Juvenile Justice System 7

Data and Trends 10

Positive Youth Outcomes 13

Problem Statement 14

Idaho Strategic Plan 14

Strategic Planning Process 15

Individual Factors 15

Goals/ Objectives/ Timeline 18

Recommendations 25

Evaluation 25

Conclusion 25

Appendix 24

An active partnership with communities

Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections 954 W Jefferson Street P.O. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0285 Phone: (208) 334-5100 Fax: (208) 334-5120

Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) 1 800 377-3529

C.L. “BUTCH” OTTER SHARON HARRIGFELD Governor Director

As we prepare to celebrate 20 years of the Idaho Juvenile Corrections Act, I reflect on the partnerships and collaborations that characterize the Idaho juvenile justice system. Over 95% of juvenile offenders are served in communities through county services. The juveniles committed to state custody are the highest risk, and often highest need, offenders in the system. Helping them return to the community requires effective collaboration at the local and the state level. This report demonstrates the power of our partnerships and reveals the critical nature of the priorities within: collaborative decision-making, cross system learning, targeted outcomes, and youth and family social ecology. Maintaining community safety, holding juvenile offenders accountable, and helping offenders develop competencies to become productive citizens are foundational tenets of the Idaho juvenile justice system. This report builds on those tenets with strategies to restore, victims, communities, and the offenders, from the harm caused by juvenile crime. The Commission, representing statewide geographic areas, has a diverse membership of stakeholders who work together on juvenile reentry. The Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections is pleased to partner with and support the Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission in addressing challenges for juvenile reentry throughout our great state. The Department and the Commission have an extensive history of collaboration that has led to significant system improvements including removal of juveniles from adult jails, creation of training academies, and implementation of evidence based programs. I thank all the individuals and organizations that came together to make this report possible and invite you to join our efforts to develop productive citizens. On behalf of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections, I am pleased to join our partners to share the following report as a testament to the strength, dedication, and collaboration of the extraordinary individuals and organizations who serve young people in this great state. Through the generosity of the Council on State Governments, a Second Chance Planning Grant was awarded to the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections. With the oversight of the Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission as the task force lead, we have coordinated the efforts to increase the success of juvenile offenders returning to their communities following an out-of-home placement. This unified partnership enables the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections and the Juvenile Justice Commission the ability to engage our community stakeholders in program and system enhancement for improved positive youth outcomes. I encourage you to consider the strategies presented in this report and identify how you or your organization may impact or complement our shared goals of helping strengthen Idaho youth and families and developing productive citizens. We invite you to contact the Juvenile Justice District Council in your area to see how you can participate.

1

Carolyn Peterson, Coeur d’ Alene, Chair Denise Blevins, Moscow Hon. Darrell Bolz, Caldwell

Stacy Brown, Bonner’s Ferry Darin Burrell, Rexburg Mo Canfield, Pocatello Kyle Fisher, Jerome Tina Freckleton, Caldwell

Hon. Mark Ingram, Shoshone Dale Kleinert, Boise Nancy Lopez, Idaho Falls Lorin Nielsen, Pocatello Matt Olsen, Pocatello Chris Palmer, Boise Dave Peters, Blackfoot Andy Rodriguez, Nampa Korey Solomon, Kimberly Lisa Taylor, Lewiston Bill Thompson, Moscow Bev Wilder, St Anthony Youth Members: Susan Delyea, Boise Ismael Fernandez, Wilder Fernando Flores, Caldwell Kailamai Hansen, Coeur d’ Alene Jazmin Hill, Idaho Falls Brooke Jones, Boise Ashley Kuber, Meridian Chelsi Nygaard, Potlatch Anna Rodriguez, Nampa

On behalf of the Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission, I am pleased to join our partners to share the following report as a testament to the strength, dedication, and collaboration of the extraordinary individuals and organizations who serve young people in this great state. Participation in a planning grant through the Second Chance Act provided the Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission the opportunity to establish itself as a task force to lead, coordinate, and oversee efforts to increase the success of juvenile offenders returning to their communities following an out-of-home placement. The Commission has a diverse membership representing the various geographic areas of the state as well as the stakeholder groups working together on juvenile reentry. This unified partnership enables the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections and the Juvenile Justice Commission the ability to engage our community stakeholders in program and system enhancement for improved positive youth outcomes. I encourage you to consider the strategies presented in this report and identify how you or your organization may impact or complement our shared goals of helping strengthen Idaho youth and families and developing productive citizens. We invite you to contact the Juvenile Justice District Council in your area to see how you can participate.

Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission Chair

IDAHO

JUVENILE JUSTICE COMMISSION

c/o Department of Juvenile Corrections 954 West Jefferson / PO Box 83720

Boise ID 83720-0285

2

Carolyn Peterson, Coeur d’ Alene, Chair Denise Blevins, Moscow Hon. Darrell Bolz, Caldwell

Stacy Brown, Bonner’s Ferry Darin Burrell, Rexburg Mo Canfield, Pocatello Kyle Fisher, Jerome Tina Freckleton, Caldwell

Hon. Mark Ingram, Shoshone Dale Kleinert, Boise Nancy Lopez, Idaho Falls Lorin Nielsen, Pocatello Matt Olsen, Pocatello Chris Palmer, Boise Dave Peters, Blackfoot Andy Rodriguez, Nampa Korey Solomon, Kimberly Lisa Taylor, Lewiston Bill Thompson, Moscow Bev Wilder, St Anthony Youth Members: Susan Delyea, Boise Ismael Fernandez, Wilder Fernando Flores, Caldwell Kailamai Hansen, Coeur d’ Alene Jazmin Hill, Idaho Falls Brooke Jones, Boise Ashley Kuber, Meridian Chelsi Nygaard, Potlatch Anna Rodriguez, Nampa

This letter is in great appreciation of the continued efforts by the Juvenile Justice Commission as the Re entry Task Force, and specifically the dedicated professionals who came together to serve on a Reentry Strategic Planning Group. Their work on the Second Chance Act Planning Grant was nothing short of phenomenal.

As the Chair of the Reentry Committee I was given the honor to assist in gathering partners through the state to develop the Reentry Strategic Plan group. This process provided me opportunity to talk with professionals across the state and discuss concerns and obstacles in the delivery of services to our youth, families, and communities. These conversations served as the spring board for our Reentry Strategic Planning Meeting. The grant through the Second Chance Act combined with support from the Council of State Governments provided a platform and process to address reentry. The following plan is just the first step in our work to improve reintegration services for youth. Implementation of this plan will require additional funding, coordination of services, and committed partnerships across the state. Without all three needs being met, Idaho will be reduced to fragmented and incomplete services for the youth we serve. I am truly grateful for the assistance that the Second Chance Act has provided our State at the same time apprehensive that the pre-work and a large portion of the planning having been completed to achieve the change we have sought may not be accomplished if funding and collaboration is not at the forefront of the process. I write this letter in support of the State of Idaho's efforts for continued re entry planning and implementation, and also am hopeful for additional funding so that we can complete planning and produce a well thought out and strategic implementation process.

IJJC Reentry Committee Chair

Cc: file

IDAHO

JUVENILE JUSTICE COMMISSION

c/o Department of Juvenile Corrections

954 West Jefferson / PO Box 83720 Boise ID 83720-0285

3


Acknowledgements We would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their contributions of time, energy, and expertise to make this project possible. The partnerships envisioned by the Idaho Juvenile Corrections Act are realized due to the collaboration of dedicated professionals and agencies.

Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission Idaho Juvenile Justice Councils Idaho Supreme Court Idaho Association of County Juvenile Justice Administrators County Probation Departments County Detention Administrators Local School Districts Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Idaho Department of Labor Idaho Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Idaho Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health Idaho CASA Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections Staff

Special Thanks To: Individuals participating in training workshops throughout the state (177) Consultants:

Frank Riley Tom Begich

Elizabeth Seigle, The Council of State Governments Justice Center Ann Van Buren, Intern

4


IDJC Mission

eveloping productive citizens

in partnership with

communities, through

juvenile crime prevention,

education, rehabilitation and

reintegration

D

5


Introduction Partners in the juvenile justice system throughout the state recognize reintegration of juvenile offenders as an area that can be improved. The bifurcation of the juvenile justice system creates an environment that relies on effective coordination and communication.

In the 2014 report on confinement of juvenile offenders, the Office of Performance Evaluations acknowledged and discussed opportunities and challenges regarding systemic improvements to the reintegration process.

Through a planning grant awarded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections launched a strategic planning process to improve opportunities for successful reintegration of juvenile offenders into the community following placement in juvenile corrections facilities. The Council of State Governments provided technical assistance and training to support the state’s efforts.

The Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission established itself as the Juvenile Reentry Task Force to oversee reentry planning and system improvement. A committee was then tasked to convene partners and draft a plan. Over 175 individuals representing dozens of organizations participated in facilitated workshops to develop this plan. The culmination of this planning strategy supports evidence-based approaches with local management and statewide accountability.

A workgroup of the Juvenile Reentry Task Force that led the planning process identified the following four priority areas.

• Collaborative Decision-Making • Cross-System Learning • Targeted Outcomes • Family and Social Ecology

Local Juvenile Justice District and Tribal Councils developed specific strategies within these priority areas based on their unique needs and resources. To avoid any duplication of efforts, Councils were tasked to lead various aspects of the priorities as specialty areas, the results of which will be shared statewide.

The Juvenile Reentry Task Force approved this plan in December 2014 at their quarterly meeting. Formation of workgroups, development of projects, and securing resources are the next phase of action for the state to implement the activities within the plan.

6


Second Chance Act Planning Grant Since the creation of the department in 1995, significant work has been accomplished to address many aspects of the reentry process. Funding from the Second Chance Act Planning Grant, awarded to the department in 2013, provides an important opportunity for the state’s juvenile justice partners to develop renewed focus on evidence-based approaches to improving reentry practice. Specifically, work on the grant over the past year has built upon the strong relationships among juvenile justice practitioners to promote collaboration and a keen desire to create a more comprehensive range of services.

1. Expand knowledge base and create an informed re-integration system of care. Develop a foundation of evidence-based research to guide the re-integration process in Idaho. Look to successful efforts in other states.

2. Leverage current services and enhance integration of programming.

Identify existing services and connect resources to create a comprehensive array of services with engagement of partners which are involved in the reintegration process, including juvenile judges, county probation administrators, Idaho Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) and community employment, housing and education partners.

3. Create a plan for the future. Develop a juvenile re-entry strategic plan to identify evidence-based community programming that will effectively engage families and community supports to promote success of the juvenile upon reentry. The plan will define specific goals to maximize successful re-integration and reduce recidivism of this population and identify performance measures to track outcomes.

Idaho Juvenile Justice System

Overview The Idaho Juvenile Corrections Act is based on the Balanced and Restorative Justice Model. To support the philosophy of this model, both the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections (IDJC) and the Juvenile Justice Commission (IJJC) engage community stakeholders to identify needs, establish priorities, implement effective practices, and measure results.

Idaho is comprised of many communities in which a strong sense of both connection and individuality prevails. Youth don’t grow up in isolation. Their behaviors and beliefs are a reflection of their homes and the influences they experience from their peers, schools and communities. The IDJC and the IJJC strengthen connections by funding programs at the local level that prevent juveniles from entering the system. They support various programs for offenders and families who have been committed to IDJC custody, and aftercare services once released.

7


According to the US Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics, Idaho has approximately 191,157 juveniles between the ages of 10 and 17. In 2013, over 12,000 were taken into custody with law enforcement. Of those in custody, approximately 5,706 are on formal probation at the county level. Nearly 95% of the youth in the juvenile justice system remain at the county level, with many diverted from further criminal activity through programs provided by the county and funded with Juvenile Corrections Act and Tobacco Tax funds, county general funds, state general funds, and federal grant dollars. 1

The remaining five percent of juveniles in the system pose enough of a community risk that the courts commit them to the custody of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections. After they complete their stay with IDJC, they return to the county’s jurisdiction for any needed aftercare services.

A chart, titled General Flow Chart of Idaho’s Juvenile Justice Process can be seen in the appendix. It illustrates the typical flow of the juvenile justice system in Idaho.

Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections (IDJC) The Department officially went into effect July 1, 1995, while the Juvenile Corrections Act of 1995 (JCA) became effective October 1995. The IDJC was based on the philosophy of the Balanced Approach, addressing juvenile offending by focusing on community protection, offender accountability and competency development in the context of the offender, the victim, and the community. The mission is to prevent or reduce juvenile crime in partnership with communities through prevention, rehabilitation, and reintegration.

Under the JCA, a judge may commit a juvenile to the IDJC, but may not specify secure confinement or make any recommendations for placement. If the judge commits the juvenile to IDJC, the juvenile will go through an observation and assessment process to determine his/ her risk level, needs and strengths, and the most appropriate treatment facility.

IDJC’s current population mirrors national trends regarding juveniles with mental health issues. A recent study showed that 56% of juveniles booked into county detention facilities have mental health issues. This number is substantially higher than the roughly 20% prevalence found in the non-delinquent adolescent population.2 Currently, over 56% of the juveniles in state custody are defined as seriously emotionally disturbed (SED).3 Serious emotional disturbances refers to children (birth through 21) with clinically-defined illnesses that negatively impact a child’s functioning in significant ways and where the impact can be expected to last for a significant period of time. 1 IDJC Legislative Update, 2015, http://www.idjc.idaho.gov/ 2 McDonald, T. W., Begic, S. Howard, E., (2014). A statewide and multimodal assessment of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections’ Clinical Services Program. Boise, ID: Center for Health Policy, Boise State University. 3 Loc. Cit. Legislative Update

8


IDJC has three state juvenile institutions with a total bed capacity of 270. Currently, 32 of those beds are reserved for observation and assessment. The state is at record low census with current number of juveniles in state custody around 280, with the difference provided through contracts with county and private providers.

Idaho Code §20-501 lays the foundation for aftercare as an essential component of the Idaho juvenile justice system. Idaho Code §20-504 further describes the authority and responsibility of the department and assistance to counties.

When a juvenile is found to be delinquent, or within the purview of the JCA, the court will then hold a hearing to determine a disposition/ sentence that will promote accountability, competency development, and community protection. Prior to the entry of an order disposing the case, other than an order of discharge or dismissal, the court may request a report containing the results of an inquiry into the home environment, past history, competency development, prevention or out of home placement services provided, and the social, physical and mental condition of the juvenile.

After presentation and consideration of the report, the court may advance to disposition/ sentence the juvenile with any combination of the following options.

• Formal probation • Detention • Driver’s license suspension • Alcohol/ drug evaluation followed by treatment, if needed • Conditions restricting associations with friends and/ or relatives

Juveniles can be committed to IDJC under Supreme Court, Idaho Juvenile Rule (IJR) 19 or Rule (IJR) 20.

Rule 19 addresses commitment to IDJC. Screening teams must be convened prior to commitment. The factors for the team to consider and report their findings to the court are: the risks to the community if the juvenile offender is not committed; the needs of the juvenile and juvenile’s family using a strengths-based approach; any community-based programs that might be available to address the risks and needs of the juvenile and their family; and the juvenile and their family’s abilities, barriers and commitment to participate in the community-based programs identified. In addition to the screening team report, specific commitment criteria must be met.

Rule 20 addresses juveniles recommitted to IDJC. Under Rule 20, the court may hold a hearing to review the conditions of probation and determine whether the existing conditions should be amended or eliminated, or if additional conditions should be imposed. Written notice of the hearing shall be provided to the juvenile, parent(s), legal guardian or custodian, and any person who has been made party to the proceeding.

At this hearing, the court may also order conditions to be complied with by the juvenile's parent(s), legal guardian or custodian, or any person having been made a

9


party of the proceeding that the court deems to serve the best interest of the juvenile or the community. Alternately, at the hearing, the juvenile, parent(s), or legal guardian are entitled to legal representation.

In the event a juvenile probation officer, as authorized by court order, establishes additional conditions of probation with which the juvenile offender must comply upon the juvenile's release from the custody of IDJC, the probation officer shall notify the juvenile at the time the additional conditions are imposed of the juvenile's right to request a hearing before the court to contest the additional conditions. Upon a subsequent violation of probation, the court may recommit the juvenile to the custody of IDJC. The court may only impose detention previously suspended at the time of commitment to the Department's custody as a sanction.

If the judge commits the juvenile to IDJC, the juvenile will go through an observation and assessment process to determine his/ her risk level, needs and strengths, and the most appropriate treatment facility.

Data and Trends Arrest

Idaho mirrors the rest of the country with steep declines in the rate of juvenile arrest, as illustrated in the chart below.

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

13,000

14,000

15,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Juvenile Arrest Trends

Persons, 1,319

Sexual Offenses,

113

Property, 3,939

Drug & Alcohol,

2,601 Society,

405

Other, 5,248

Traffic, 152

Arrest by Type 2009 - 2013

10


Detention Detention bookings have been trending downward for several years. An individual juvenile could be booked into detention more than one time per year, which would result in multiple bookings. Clinicians work in each detention facility to identify juveniles with substance abuse and/ or mental health issues to refer them to community based services.

Commitment Youth who represent the highest risk to community safety and who often have significant needs for treatment may be committed to state custody. Juveniles spend an average of 18 months in custody.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Detention Booking Trends

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

State Commitment Trends

11


Recidivism In the past five years, IDJC released an average of 217 juveniles annually. Overall, recidivism by juveniles placed in Idaho state custody is trending down. However, recidivism among youth with mental health and/ or substance abuse issues remains higher than the rate for all juveniles. IDJC’s current population mirrors national trends regarding juveniles with mental health issues. Recidivists also have a more detailed criminal background and more family issues. Responsivity issues that affect recidivism include juvenile attitude toward treatment, transportation services, resources, mental health issues for juveniles and/ or family members. These issues influence the outcome. Recidivism is defined as the act of “being adjudicated or convicted of a new felony or misdemeanor that is not a status offense or probation violation within 12 months of release.” These trends are illustrated in the following charts.

Recidivism by juveniles placed in Idaho state custody is trending down. Source: Idaho Juvenile Offender System (IJOS)

Recidivism of youth with mental health and/ or substance abuse issues remains high. Source: Interactive Recidivism Tool, IJOS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

2010 2011 2012 2013

Recidivism Rate Trends

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

All juveniles Juveniles withMH

Juveniles withSA

Juveniles withboth SA/MH

Rate of Recidivism Date of release to 26 months

12


Positive Youth Outcomes IDJC monitors positive youth outcomes as measures of effectiveness. Two critical areas monitored are employment and education. For youth released in 2013, nearly 58% of juveniles age 17 or older were receiving a taxable wage six months after release. Furthermore, 66% of those juveniles earned a high school diploma or graduation equivalency diploma (GED) prior to release. On average, 71% of juveniles who did not have a high school diploma or GED were enrolled in school (K-12) at the time of their release. While in custody, over 90% of juveniles improved in both reading and math.

The following indicators are used by IDJC to monitor positive youth outcomes after juveniles are released from state custody.

13


Problem Statement

For the chronic, serious juvenile offender who is released from secure confinement and may be at high risk for re-offending, the quality of intensive community-based aftercare could determine whether the youth remains crime free or returns to delinquency.

Recognition of youths’ multifaceted needs and problems while in correctional programs is essential for aftercare field staff and community social institutions. It is important they obtain this knowledge and become more directly involved with correctional facility staff.

The key challenge is how to strengthen our partnerships with schools, community organizations, the family, mental health agencies, drug and alcohol treatment centers, employment and training programs, faith communities, business associations, and employers.

Idaho juvenile offenders are under the county’s jurisdiction until the judge transfers legal custody to IDJC for confinement in a secure or community based facility. Upon completion of the program in the facility, a juvenile is transitioned back to the community where the county is responsible to coordinate aftercare.

Idaho Strategic Plan

Role of Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission The Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission (IJJC) is the State Advisory Group designated by the Governor for purposes of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. The IJJC includes representatives of all of the elements of the juvenile justice system and stakeholders from all parts of the state. The IJJC serves as the Juvenile Reentry Task Force and has a standing committee dedicated to improving reentry practice. The Reentry Committee is charged with coordinating and overseeing a statewide juvenile reentry plan.

High risk juveniles transitioning from placement in secure

confinement to the community may not have access to

evidence-based programs and services, a stable home

environment, or motivation to participate in treatment after

release.

14


Role of Juvenile Justice Councils

The Juvenile Reentry Task Force includes representation from seven (7) District Juvenile Justice Councils and one (1) Tribal Juvenile Justice Council. The Councils engage stakeholders to develop plans that focus on local needs. Councils leveraged the work of the Reentry Committee’s plan to inform activities consistent with the four priority areas therein. Councils manage and coordinate activities to meet goals and objectives in the plan.

Strategic Planning Process The Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission approved a facilitated process to develop a comprehensive statewide plan for juvenile justice where local needs could be identified and addressed. The Commission engaged District and Tribal Juvenile Justice Councils to host two-day planning workshops with representation from key stakeholders in their jurisdiction.

The Reintegration Committee of the Commission started the planning process by hosting a workshop with individuals participating from all areas of the state representing stakeholder groups including: families, youth, probation, education, child welfare, children’s mental health, vocational rehabilitation, corrections, detention, and others.

District and Tribal Councils used the priorities the Reintegration Committee identified to guide and inform their localized plans. Each Council plan focused on the areas of highest need within their jurisdiction.

The Commission reviewed the work of the Councils and noted similarities within the local plans. In order to manage a comprehensive plan, the Commission established specialties for each Council. Councils agreed to specialize in one priority area and then provide information for replication to the other districts. This approach will prevent any duplication of efforts and allows the state to work on several priorities simultaneous.

Individual Factors and System Principles Individual juvenile characteristics (factors) that represent a youth’s level of functioning in key areas are significant considerations in working to improve reentry practice. Research of the available national literature completed early in the grant process established that the following factors are important considerations in working to improve juvenile reentry.

• Family factors • Negative peers/ lack of pro-social supports • Antisocial attitudes and beliefs • Substance abuse • Lack of educational/ vocational attainment

15


These elements of a juvenile’s functioning have been well-established in national research as key criminogenic risk targets. Improving a juvenile’s functioning in any of these areas helps to reduce the risk of recidivism. These same factors are often included in validated risk and need assessments used within the juvenile justice system.

In addition to the individual factors identified above, certain principles of practice related to reentry have been identified as important.

An early step in the planning grant process was completing a comprehensive Planning and Implementation Guide (the guide). This was developed by the Council of State Governments as a part of their role in overseeing the Second Chance Act Grant process. The Planning and Implementation Guide required a comprehensive review of juvenile justice practice in the state. The department used the information along with a review of work in other states to develop a target list of reentry principles most relevant to Idaho’s system.

The following six principles provided a starting point and broad structure for the statewide reentry meeting conducted in July 2014 and also for the subsequent district and tribal reentry planning meetings that followed.

1. Collaborative Decision Making 2. Validated Assessments 3. Evidence-Based Programs 4. Targeted Outcomes 5. Youth/ Family Social Ecology Approach 6. Cross-System Learning

These principles are not unique to improving reentry practice but rather apply to improving juvenile justice and behavioral health practice in general. Familiar to juvenile justice practitioners, these principles have been at the foundation of much of the system development work done in Idaho the past several years. A further discussion of each of the six principles is presented below.

Collaborative Decision Making Practicing collaborative decision making helps administrators of county and state juvenile justice systems determine that they have the right people and organizations involved to develop and implement a reentry initiative. A reentry initiative should address key structures leading to the successful return of juvenile to the community.

Validated Assessments

Using validated assessment tools with integrity has proven the most effective way to help jurisdictions maximize the Risk, Needs, Responsivity framework for providing juvenile justice services. Using validated assessments provides a common framework to identify needs and services. It also benefits case planning across behavioral health systems.

16


Evidence Based Programs

Promoting and assuring the quality of evidence-based programs fosters the adoption of treatment approaches that emphasize a therapeutic orientation. Preferred programs also focus on behavior change and a social ecology approach. Research has shown that such programs have demonstrated the ability to produce significant, long-term reductions in recidivism and improved youth outcomes. The use of evidence-based programs helps to assure that the investment made by individuals and by systems of care target those individual factors that can produce the intended behavioral outcomes and improve community safety.

Targeted Outcomes Many youth in the juvenile justice system are also involved with other systems of care. It is necessary to consider and specify outcomes of primary concern with all other systems involved. Intermediary case outcomes, such as case contacts, duration and intensity of service, and successful completion rates are critical for assessing the effectiveness of reentry programs and making adjustments.

Targeting outcomes encourages cross-system collaboration by providing diverse systems of care the critical information needed to effectively support interventions. Interventions improve the individual factors which reduce risk and recidivism.

Youth/ Family Social Ecology Approach

Families, peers, schools, and communities – these are the social ecology in which youth develop. They heavily influence a youth’s cognition and actions. Thus, many of the most successful programs focus not only on facilitating youth behavioral change, but also seek to strengthen parenting skills and youth-family interactions. Additionally, programs focus on connecting youth to other positive adults, peers, and positive activities and supports. Adopting reentry practices that consider the broad social context in which the juvenile must function upon return to the community provides the best opportunity to support individual changes that the juvenile may have made while in care.

Cross-System Learning Effective collaboration must include strategies that identify common case and system goals that define roles and communication structures while being clear about legal requirements and limits of authority.

Cross-System Learning promotes an integrated approach to the assessment of youth and family needs, development of treatment plans, and coordination of service delivery. It also provides for ongoing training of staff and providers within all of the collaborating organizations.

17


Goals / Objectives / Timeline Prioritizing

The Reentry Committee considered the principles and identified four (4) to target for a strategic plan. The principles established as priorities are listed below.

• Collaborative Decision-Making • Cross-System Learning • Youth and Family Social Ecology

• Targeted Outcomes

Summary Tables

The following tables and timeline describe in broad terms the state’s goals and objectives to improve reentry services for juvenile offenders. Specific action steps, timelines, and performance measures are maintained in each Council plan. An overview of the Council plans can be found on the Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission website at www.ijjc.idaho.gov.

Due to the similarity of goals within Council plans, the areas of Collaborative Decision-Making and Cross-System Learning are combined in the summary tables.

Strategic Area: Targeted Outcomes

Area Goals Objectives

Stat

ewid

e • The State of Idaho’s youth reintegration plan

participants are involved as soon as possible to complete reintegration intakes and provide immediate services for smooth transition

• A youth’s reintegration plan includes

positive youth outcomes in education, work, social connections, and health and well-being

• Treatment teams include internal team, external

team and community team throughout a youth’s placement

• Revise reintegration forms and processes

Dist

ricts

• Each District has a comprehensive

understanding of statewide reintegration practices

• Each District will gather information regarding

successful and unsuccessful reintegration efforts, including treatment successes and those that incorporate positive youth outcomes, to send to key stakeholders

18

http://www.ijjc.idaho.gov/


Strategic Area: Youth and Family Social Ecology


Stat

ewid

e • The State of Idaho establishes principles of effective family engagement (PFE)

• Communities/ youth are invested in positive youth development

• Establish workgroup to define and develop PFE • Educate stakeholders on PFE • Strengthen community involvement in

reintegration planning

Trib

es Youth have a voice in Tribal, state, national levels

• Develop Unity Council at each Tribe • Have representation on IJJC Youth Committee

Dist

rict 1

Youth use knowledge of challenges, behaviors, and mental health needs as effective preventive practices

Identify, propose, and provide training to stakeholders regarding youth challenges, behaviors, and mental health needs, including trauma

Dist

rict 2

Stakeholders receive training to support needs of at-risk youth

• District JJC provides training on Dual Diagnosis • District JJC provides training on Traumatic Brain

Injury

Dist

rict 3

All parents/ guardians are engaged in child’s life

• Develop effective evidence-based family peer-to-peer program

• Research/ promote resiliency and interaction between parent and child

Dist

rict 4

Have successful reintegration: services available and timely (in place before juvenile leaves facility. It will be effective (tailored to the needs of the youth, family, and community)

• Develop/ improve family assessment to assist in building family capacity

• Improve family engagement in reintegration • Ensure reintegration resources are available and

effective

Dist

rict 5

Families are involved in reentry and reintegration prior, during, and after commitment process and will be connected to community services during that time

• Support the development of local family support groups

• Research a variety of mentoring practices and recommend appropriate mentoring methods to juvenile justice system stakeholders

Dist

rict 6

Families are provided the necessary services to strengthen family engagement and skills so they may to access evidence-based community resources

• Educate stakeholders in family group decision-making

• Educate stakeholders in evidence-based FEP • Research/ develop evidence-based resources to

enhance family skills

Dist

rict 7

• All families receive strength-based assessments • Propose a SBA be implemented by Probation. • All families involved with the juvenile justice

system are provided support

• District 7 Probation implements strength-based assessments

• Distribute to families an updated resource guide with information on access to services

19


Strategic Area: Collaborative Decision-Making/Cross-System Learning


Stat

ewid

e • The State of Idaho juvenile justice system has strong partnerships with all involved stakeholders

• Each District has a comprehensive understanding of statewide agencies roles and limitations

• Each District has a comprehensive understanding of statewide reintegration practices

• Demonstrate partnership through investment, engagement and participation among stakeholders

• Identify limitations to effective partnerships and develop meaningful solutions to address these limitations

• Identify roles and limitations of stakeholders • Effectively disseminate reintegration

information statewide

Trib

es Idaho Tribal Juvenile Probation programs are aware

of, and using, all resources cooperatively • Expand ITJJC meeting schedule and expand

stakeholders participating in ITJJC meetings • Identify State and/Federal resources and how

to use them creatively • Identify Tribal resources and how to use them

creatively

Dist

rict 1

• District One has a non-judicial response, resource, and support for early intervention for behavioral issues

• District One stakeholders will be meaningfully

communicating and collaborating through a District-wide forum on a regular basis.

• Research effective Restorative Justice and behavioral approaches that will divert juveniles from the juvenile justice system

• Ensure effective and a coordinated collaboration of community-based stakeholders through the current District-wide meeting process; this includes potentially expanding the stakeholders invited

Dist

rict 2

District 2 provides evidence-based support services to at-risk families

• Research and identify evidence-based interventions for at-risk families

Dist

rict 3

District 3 has shared responsibility among stakeholders for adolescents at risk or involved with the juvenile justice system

• Research and identify current stakeholders and their practices

• Research and identify effective, evidence-based approaches for implementing a wrap- around model

20


Strategic Area: Collaborative Decision-Making/ Cross-System Learning


T

Dist

rict 4

• There is open sharing of information among youth-serving system agencies regarding program and policy efforts and activities for youth and families in District 4

• There is open sharing of resources among youth-serving system agencies when serving youth and families in District 4

• Expand the District 4 Council meeting to include open sharing of information and to ensure appropriate agency representatives are included

• District 4 establishes a viable cross-agency juvenile collaboration model that is strength-based, family-driven, and developmentally appropriate

Dist

rict 5

• District 5 is improving collaboration between Juvenile Justice, Child Protective Services, schools, law enforcement, behavioral health and other community partners to develop evidence based system of care for youth and families

• District 5 is improving collaboration between

Juvenile Justice, Child Protective Services, schools, law enforcement, behavioral health, and other community partners to develop evidence based system of care for youth and families

• Develop an ongoing forum in District 5 to collaboratively problem solve cross system challenges to include service gaps and recommend development of services and reductions in duplicative services. This forum could also look at ways to cost share and combine resources

• Identify the services each of the community partners currently provide and the limitations of each of the collaborating partners; including a process to assess if best practices are being used by partners

• Analyze, using case studies, the characteristics of those children and families who have high needs but do not currently fit neatly into the juvenile justice, child welfare or behavioral health systems and develop common protocols for providing effective services for those children and families

Dist

rict 6

District 6 stakeholders are better informed about the behavioral health needs of high-risk juveniles (Substance Use, Mental Health, and Trauma)

• District 6 shall educate stakeholders (such as school system, medical providers, people in the trenches who have direct contact with youth in identifying high-risk youth

• District 6 shall provide stakeholders and interested community members with training in recognizing and addressing trauma

• District 6 shall provide stakeholders with training on substance use and co-occurring disorders

Dist

rict 7

District 7 will have consistent communication and collaboration among all community stakeholders and systems affiliated with youth

• Identify in local communities all stakeholders affiliated with youth

• Assess resource networks and enhance these networks, while clearly communicating across systems to prevent the “silo effect”

21


Timeline

The timeframe Idaho intends to follow for the sequential phases of this strategic plan is highlighted in the following chart. Timelines for individual objectives and activities are identified within individual Council plans.

Year 1 Establish workgroups

Research effective models Develop training curriculum Develop evaluation protocols Support JJ Councils Review statutes and rules

Year 2 Implement Training Initiate pilot programs Convene workgroups Conduct Council meetings Make recommendations on statutes and rules

Year 3 Evaluate and adapt training Develop sustainability plan for training Continue pilot programs Evaluate data and convene IJJC for plan adjustments Monitor statutory or rule changes

Year 4 Pilot sustainability plan for training Evaluate pilot programs Update reentry plan as needed

Year 5 Institutionalize training Expand pilot programs to new communities Evaluate Reentry plan

High risk juveniles transitioning from placement in secure confinement to the community have access to evidence-based

programs and services, a stable home environment, or motivation to participate in treatment after release.

22


Recommendations Planning groups developed recommendations instead of goals and objectives for those areas or topics where the participants perceived they did not have the ability to directly influence the outcome. The Juvenile Reentry Task Force will review the following recommendations during the first year of the implementation phase to guide appropriate action.

1. IDJC and county probation should develop stronger youth offender investment/ connection to communities through pro-social activities.

2. There should be vocational education programs in IDJC facilities.

3. The Department of Juvenile Corrections and Probation Shall implement a plan ensuring all families receive a family strength-based assessment.

4. The State of Idaho Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Welfare, Department of Education along with other involved State Department entities will formulate a knowledgeable task force to identify IDAPA rules that hamper a function-able transitional re-entry plan for an incarcerated child from state custody back into his or her community.

5. All agencies involved at the time of commitment of a juvenile offender shall stay involved.

6. IDJC should develop a reintegration website.

Evaluation The Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections is dedicated to evaluating the quality of services, fidelity to best practices, and treatment outcomes. The department has a long-standing partnership with Boise State University to evaluate programs. If this reentry plan can be resourced, the following elements would be monitored as indicators of success.

• Outcomes of activities in Council plans • Positive youth outcomes (enrollment in education, employment, treatment) • Recidivism and Recommitment • PBS Reintegration Performance Measures • Cooperative Agreements and Collaborative Projects

Conclusion

The Idaho Juvenile Corrections Act set the stage for collaborative approaches to the treatment of youth throughout the continuum of care. This plan leverages partnerships and creates opportunity for increased collaboration. The Idaho Juvenile Justice Commission has been at the forefront of system improvements for decades and is able to implement and oversee this plan as the Juvenile Reentry Task Force provided sufficient resources can be secured.

23

idjc 2nd chance final report_2-10-15

Documents