Systems Change for Status Offenders in Connecticut Presented by: Kimberly Sokoloff Selvaggi April 12 & 13, 2011

Presentation Overview Connecticut juvenile population Impetus for Change: legislative background and target population Family Support Center model Implementation process: considerations and challenges Measuring and monitoring outcomes Lessons learned

Connecticut Juvenile Court in FY ,857 distinct juveniles referred to court – –10,910 Delinquency – –1,212 Youth in Crisis (status offenders age 16 & 17) – –3,735 FWSN referrals (status offenders under 16)

Legislative Changes PA : Children of Families with Service Needs; effective October 1, 2007 – –Prohibits holding a child whose family has been adjudicated as a FWSN in juvenile detention, and – –Prohibits adjudicating FWSNs delinquent solely for violating a court's FWSN order PA : Establishes Families With Service Needs Advisory Board

New Court Referral Process New Parent Complaint Notification Form Changed the School Truancy/Defiance of School Rules Complaint Form Considerable changes in requirements for Judicial handling High-need FWSNs diverted directly to services (to FSCs in 4 areas)

Role of Juvenile Probation Supervisors Screen FWSN Referrals; focus is on court diversion – –Refer directly to FSC (high needs indicated) OR – –Assign a probation officer to assess needs and refer to services All Cases Handled Non-judicially – –Exceptions: Continued and escalating problem behavior in conjunction with community based services being exhausted

Family Support Center: Funding Judicial Branch requested state funds for 10 centers to serve 12 juvenile courts Target Highest-Need FWSNs – –Estimated 25% of all referred FY 07/08 state budget funded four (4) of ten, remainder of funding requested for FY 08/09 and again for FY 09/10 Funding included process and outcome evaluation

System Impact of Changes

Statewide FWSN Referrals Down Calendar Year 2006 – –3,638 FWSN Referrals Calendar Year 2007 – –3,263 FWSN Referrals Calendar Year 2008 – –2,187 FWSN Referrals 10% reduction from % reduction from 2006

Decrease in Judicial Handling 10/1/06 to 4/30/07 – –1,222 non-judicial FWSN – –1,309 judicial FWSN 10/1/07 to 4/30/08 – –1,397 non-judicial FWSN – –89 judicial FWSN 10/1/08 to 4/30/09 – –1,341 non-judicial FWSN – –47 judicial FWSN 0 FWSNs or FWSN Violators in Detention

Decreased Violations and Commitments 10/1/06 to 4/30/07 – –30 FWSN Commitments of 181 total commitments (17%) – –263 violations for FWSN & Delinquent 10/1/07 to 4/30/08 – –6 FWSN Commitments of 134 total commitments (4%) – –166 violations for FWSN & Delinquent 10/01/08 to 4/30/09 – –8 FWSN Commitments of 151 total commitments (5%)

Family Support Center Model

Goals To divert FWSNs from further court involvement: – –Offer a “one-stop,” multi-service model of care for children and their families – –Provide an array of services on-site – –Prioritize collaboration with systems, service providers and families

Model Underpinnings Principles of effective practice Strengths-based Gender responsive Trauma sensitive Family focused Individualized

Services Offered Crisis Intervention Family Mediation Case Management/Coordination Educational Consultation/Advocacy Aftercare Services Referrals to home-based programs Flex Funds for Pro-social Activities

Group Offerings Trauma Services/ Intervention Cognitive Behavioral Interventions Female-specific services Parent/ Family Skill building

Key Elements Focus on initial engagement – –Contact families within 3 hours of receiving the referral – –Must continue attempts until all options are exhausted Provide comprehensive screening, assessment and case plan (called collaborative plan) Services needed are services offered; match the child/family to the services indicated through assessment Collaboration with systems and service providers

Who are the Kids? Cases are VERY Complex – –Multiple system involvement: Many services have already been tried Prior out of home placements Home-based services Outpatient substance abuse and mental health services – –Significant mental health needs – –Have witnessed or been victims of abuse/violence – –Parents have untreated and significant needs – –Educational challenges – –Stressed families

Referral Process Probation Supervisors receive and review referrals from complainant If risk/need indicators are moderate/high, referral is sent immediately to FSC and FSC must contact the family within 3 hours If risk/need indicators are mild/moderate, case is assigned to a probation officer for standard processing – –If after meeting the child and/or family, probation officer uncovers more risk/needs indicators, referral to FSC can still be made DCF liaison can/is also be consulted; 3 of 4 courts instituted a triage meeting with DCF

Screening and Assessments Comprehensive screening process – –Juvenile Assessment Generic (JAG) – –Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ) – –Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2) If indicated, assessment is conducted – –Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths with Mental Health Challenges (CANS-MH) – –Traumatic Events Screening Inventory (TESI)

Staffing & Training Staff interview process reflects key underpinnings of the program model Each staff must have an individual development plan Staff are accountable to set standards regarding model adherence Training (plus coaching) begins with – –Motivational interviewing – –Strengths-based practice – –Trauma sensitivity – –Cultural competence – –Gender responsivity Training on practices and interventions – –Process must include quality assurance and feedback to encourage improvement

Measuring Outcomes Utilize Contractor Data Collection System to collect data Justice Research Center conducted process and outcome evaluation Quality assurance by outside vendor CSSD staff ensures contract compliance and model fidelity

Risk Reduction Indicators for FSC Program Completion Number of Referred Clients with an Intake Arrest rate 12 months post FSC Completion FWSN Re-referral Rate 12 months post completion

Percentage of Clients Re-referred as a FWSN

Family Support Center: Other Outcome Measures Client Level – –Educational improvements – –Family functioning improvements – –Overall client functioning improvements Program Level – –Treatment matching – –Model fidelity System Level – –Recidivism by risk level, gender, age, ethnicity

FSC Budget Information Each FSC is independently contracted for services via the RFP process – –Contracts are for 3 to 5 years Average cost per slot is $10,000 – –Slots turn over every 5 to 6 months – –Average cost per family is $ FSC’s opened 10/07; 3 opened in 12/10; 5 program expansions in 12/10

Lessons Learned Implementation requires an active partnership between model developer and the agency implementing the model Process evaluation helps streamline program processes and activities; QA ensures quality is maintained Collaboration with referral source is paramount Must have established ties with other systems/ service providers Collect data that will help determine if outcome objectives are being met Detail processes and inform partners Offer live technical assistance

Connecticut Contact Information Kimberly Sokoloff Selvaggi State of Connecticut, Judicial Branch Court Support Services Division 936 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT