As many as 70% of the youth involved At least 20% of youth in the juvenile 32% of children with learning disabilities Only 35% of students identified Between 1972 and 2000, the percentage of Since 1992, 45 states have passed laws making it African-American students are 2.6 times as likely Examining the Data

* National average from The National Center on Education, Disability and Juvenile Justice.  As many as 70% of the youth involved in the juvenile justice system have disabilities.*

 Learning disabled youth are 200% more likely to be arrested than non-disabled youth for comparable activity, are more likely to be adjudicated, and spend longer periods of time locked up or on probation. * National average from The National Center on Education, Disability and Juvenile Justice.  As many as 70% of the youth involved in the juvenile justice system have disabilities.*

 Only 35% of Students Identified as Emotionally Disturbed, Graduate with a Regular High School Diploma. 35%

 In Louisiana, only 8% of students with ED graduated high school  Montgomery, Alabama and average of 30 students drop out of high school every school day. A 51.2% graduation rate

 Students are more likely to drop out if: They have been suspended repeatedly They have been expelled for any period of time They have been retained in a grade below their age-level peers  The more days a student misses, the more likely they are to drop out of school

 African-American students are 2.6 times more likely to be suspended as white students. In 2000, they represented 17% of the student population, but 34% of those suspended.

 Although juvenile crime dropped during the last half of the 1990’s, the number of cases involving juveniles— mostly non-violent—increased, along with the number of youths held in secure facilities for non-violent offenses.  African-American students are 2.6 times more likely to be suspended as white students. In 2000, they represented 17% of the student population, but 34% of those suspended.

Zero tolerance  The overrepresentation of students with disabilities and minorities who are suspended and expelled suspended and expelled in the juvenile justice system in the juvenile justice system  is exacerbated by the fact that many school districts have adopted a “zero tolerance” policies.

Zero tolerance  Mandates predetermined consequences or punishments for specified offenses.  Subjects students to automatic punishments that do not take into account extenuating or mitigating circumstances.

 Zero tolerance policies began with federal drug policy of the 1980’s.  This tide swept zero tolerance into national policy when the Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 was enacted.

 The Gun-Free Schools Act mandates a one year expulsion for possession of a firearm, referral to the criminal or juvenile justice system, and that state law must authorize each local school district to modify such expulsions on a case-by-case basis.  Originally, covered only firearms, but recently broadened to include any instrument that may be used as a weapon.

In the name of zero tolerance, local school districts have:  Broadened it application beyond the federal mandates of weapons, to drugs and alcohol, threats, or even swearing.  Continued to toughen their disciplinary policies with permanent expulsion from the system for some offenses.  Applied school suspensions, expulsions, or transfers to behaviors that occur outside of school.

All relevant research — including a recent, study by the American Psychological Association — shows that zero tolerance approaches do not result in safer, more orderly classrooms. Zero tolerance does not work

 Represents a lost moment to teach children respect and  A missed chance to inspire trust of authority figures. Zero tolerance

 State Legislation — Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana  Administrative Complaints — Louisiana, Mississippi  Coalition Building Locally — Florida (Legal Aid, P&A, Public Defenders)  Cooperative Agreements — Louisiana (Juvenile Courts, Police School Districts)  Coalition Building Nationally — NJDC, ACLU, Harvard Civil Rights Project, NAACP etc.  Litigation — Beth V. v. Carrol, 87 F.3d 80 (3rd Cir. 1996); Corey H. v. Chicago Board of Educ., 995 F. Supp. 900 (N.D. Ill. 1998) Multi-faceted Strategies

PBIS A core aspect of the strategy is using special education law as the lever to get school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) adopted around the country.

PBIS PBIS is an evidence-based, systems-wide method of improving student behavior.

PBIS School-wide and individualized teaching, School-wide and individualized teaching, Modeling, and Modeling, and Recognizing and rewarding positive student behavior Recognizing and rewarding positive student behavior  PBIS’s premise is that continual

PBIS  PBIS will reduce unnecessary discipline and  promote a climate of greater productivity, productivity, safety, and safety, and learning. learning.

PBIS > It is a viable alternative to zero tolerance PBIS is critical because > It will create a hospitable environment for kids Allowing them to remain in school Giving kids diverted from the juvenile justice system or released from juvenile detention the ability to succeed in school

 Very high suspension rates and overuse of court referrals for behavior that historically has been dealt with by school officials Problematic Education Issues to be addressed

 Very high suspension rates and overuse of court referrals for behavior that historically has been dealt with by school officials  Failure to provide appropriate Related Services Issues

 Very high suspension rates and overuse of court referrals for behavior that historically has been dealt with by school officials  Failure to provide appropriate Related Services  Failure to provide services in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) Issues

 Very high suspension rates and overuse of court referrals for behavior that historically has been dealt with by school officials  Failure to provide appropriate Related Services  Failure to provide services in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)  Failure to properly evaluate students with disabilities Issues

> Very high suspension rates and overuse of court referrals for behavior that historically has been dealt with by school officials > Failure to provide appropriate Related Services > Failure to provide services in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) > Failure to properly evaluate students with disabilities > Failure to have any or appropriate transition plans Issues

 Very high suspension rates and overuse of court referrals for behavior that historically has been dealt with by school officials  Failure to provide appropriate Related Services  Failure to provide services in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)  Failure to properly evaluate students with disabilities  Failure to have any or appropriate transition plans  Failure to provide services to ensure Educational Benefit Issues

In the three states we already have a physical presence. In three additional states where we’re working with groups to whom we’ve provided grants. At the national level. 123

For More Information Contact Ronald K. Lospennato, Director School-to-Prison Reform Project