1. Juvenile Justice Planning and Oversight Coordinating Council:
How did we get here and where do we go now?
A joint presentation by:
Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance
Judicial Branch
Department of Children and Families
September 6, 2007

2. History
CT is currently one of only 3 states that tries ALL 16- & 17-year-olds as adults, regardless of the charges.

3. When youth are tried as adults, there are poor outcomes for youth and community.
When youth are tried as adults they…
receive fewer rehabilitative supports including: education, treatment and vocational training;
are at risk of “school of crime” training, with unhealthy adult mentors.
When they reenter, they…
are subject to increased stigma and labeling;
may have weakened ties to family and other support systems;
will have difficulty finding and keeping a job.

4. Trying Youth as Adults Does NOT Prevent Them from Future Offending
Youth in the adult system are more likely to reoffend than youth in the juvenile system --
They will reoffend more quickly and more often
And for more serious offenses
“The weight of evidence shows that youth who are transferred from the juvenile court system to the adult criminal system are approximately 34% more likely than youth retained in the juvenile court system to be re-arrested for violent or other crime.” (2007). The Task Force on Community Preventive Services supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(see appendix a)

5. Community Support
350 community members filled the Capital Building in Hartford to show their support for RTA

6. Public Support
“Gov. M. Jodi Rell vaulted Connecticut to the forefront of the juvenile justice reform movement when she signed a bill that removes 16- and 17-year-old offenders from the adult courts and puts them back into the juvenile justice system where they clearly belong.”
“One of the highlights of the General Assembly’s recent session was passage of a bill…that raises the age of adult incarceration from 16 to 18, except in those very infrequent cases where 16- and 17-year olds commit violent crimes.”

7. Juvenile Justice System More Appropriate for Youth
The juvenile justice system in Connecticut is grounded in the concepts of restorative justice, emphasizing protection of the community, offender accountability, and rehabilitation. The goals of the system include:
Individualized and a greater amount of supervision, care, and treatment provided pursuant to an individual case management plan that involves the family of the juvenile.
School and community programs promoting prevention and reentry.
A statewide system of community-based services designed to keep the juvenile in the home and community whenever possible.

8. Legislatively Mandated Committee 2006-2007
History
Legislatively Mandated Committee
The Juvenile Jurisdiction Planning and Implementation Committee (JJPIC) was created through legislation.
“Pursuant to Public Act , section 16, the committee shall plan for the implementation of any changes in the juvenile justice system that would be required in order to extend jurisdiction in delinquency matters and proceedings to include sixteen-year-old and seventeen-year-old children within the Superior Court for Juvenile Matters.”

9. Juvenile Jurisdictional Planning and Implementation Committee
Schedule of meetings
Meeting agendas and minutes
Copies of PowerPoint presentations

10. Role of Contracted Vendors
Three highly qualified, national groups provided consultation and co-led three workgroups:
Vera Institute – Project Management
Co-led “Front-End” workgroup
Hornby Zeller Associates – Service Needs / Gap Analysis
Co-led “Services” workgroup
NCSC – Court Process and Staffing
Co-led “Court Issues” workgroup

11. JJPIC Recommendations
Pass legislation in the 2007 session to raise the age of juvenile jurisdiction from 16 to 18.
Improve court diversion and pre-trial detention practices.

12. JJPIC Recommendations
Establish Regional Youth Courts.
(see appendix b)
Phase in an effective system of services and supports for 16- and 17-year-olds.
Establish a Policy and Operations Coordinating Council.

13. Projected Outcomes Lower re-arrest rates
Fewer youth incarcerated, placed or hospitalized
Reduced use of illicit substances
Reduced minority representation
More youth completing school
Increased engagement in pro-social activities
Better family functioning
Improved community safety

14. Two Bills Resulted from JJPIC
S.B. 1196—An Act Concerning Children and Youth in Juvenile Matters
H.B. 6285—An Act Concerning Children and Youth in Juvenile Matters and the Recommendations of the Juvenile Jurisdiction Planning and Implementation Committee
(see appendix c and d)

15. Legislative Process Bipartisan support for both bills Public hearings
Informational sessions
Refer back to the 350 people at the capitol, postcards and s sent

16. 2007 Legislation
What Happened: The language from the two bills was carried over into the special legislative session and became Sections 73 and following of the budget implementer bill, HB 1500.

17. 2007 Legislation Implementer signed June 30, 2007
Public Act 7-4 “…for purposes of delinquency matters and proceedings, ‘child’ means any person (A) under eighteen years of age, or (B) eighteen years of age or older who, prior to attaining eighteen years of age, has committed a delinquent act …”
Goes into effect January 1, 2010
(see appendix e)

18. Not ALL 16- and 17-year-olds will return to juvenile system
16 and 17 year olds legally considered juveniles in all delinquency proceedings, with the following exceptions
Motor vehicle infractions and violations
Class A and B felonies
Prosecutorial discretion in all felony cases

19. Transfer to Adult Court
Juveniles age 14 or 15 charged with a Class A or B felony are automatically transferred to the adult criminal court.
Additionally, juveniles age 14 or 15 charged with a Class C or D felony or with an unclassified felony may be transferred to the adult criminal court upon a motion by the juvenile prosecutor and order of a Juvenile Matters Judge (discretionary transfers).
Juveniles charged with a Class B felony and the “discretionary transfers” can be returned to the Superior Court for Juvenile Matters upon order of a judge in the adult court.

20. Juvenile Justice Policy and Operation Coordinating Committee
Sec. 88. (Effective from passage) (a) There is established a Juvenile Jurisdiction Policy and Operations Coordinating Council. The council shall monitor the implementation of the central components of the implementation plan developed by the Juvenile Jurisdiction Planning and Implementation Committee, as set forth in subsection (f) of this section, and resolve issues identified by the committee, as set forth in subsection (g) of this section, concerning changes required in the juvenile justice system to expand jurisdiction to include persons sixteen and seventeen years of age.

21. Recent Successes
The Connecticut Juvenile Justice System has undertaken significant reform efforts and achieved important gains in recent years, resulting in better outcomes for children and the community.

22. Success in Recent years
Significant reduction in delinquency commitments

23. Success in Recent years
Joint work between DCF and Judicial:
Joint Juvenile Justice Strategic Plan
Emily J. Settlement Agreement
Joint Case Planning and Service Provision
FWSN Reform
Joint Investment in Evidence-Based and Promising Practices

24. Successes Two examples of these joint programs:
Flex Funding for Court-Involved Children
Work/Learn

25. Flex funding for court-involved children
Flex Funding is used to purchase a variety of services or goods, not otherwise contracted, but important for children’s and families’ success
DCF contracts for Flex funding, through a fiduciary agency, for:
Detention-involved children at risk for residential treatment
Court-involved children supervised in the community (through a joint project with CSSD)

26. Flex funding for court-involved children
Services purchased with flex funding include:
Mentoring and Therapeutic Mentoring
Social and recreational programming
Educational Consultation, Advocacy & Tutoring
Assistance with food, clothing and furnishings
Transportation
Individual, family, and specialized therapies

27. Work/Learn Programming
Skills and Interests Inventories
Academic Assessments
Tutoring
Post-secondary Educational Planning
In-House Youth Business and Training
Employment Assistance
Life Skills and Financial Literacy Training
Community Engagement

28. Current Reforms Underway
Who are the 16- and 17-year-olds in the system?
What reforms are already happening to ease their transition into the juvenile justice system?

29. Profile of 16- & 17-year-old Offenders
FY 2006 Data on Court-Involved 16- and 17-year-olds
12,633 total criminal cases1
(10,075 unique youth)
2,256 youth sentenced to probation2
1,725 youth currently on probation2
(as of 9/14/2006)
1 Source: Judicial Branch Court Operations
2 Source: Court Support Services Division

30. 16- & 17-year-olds Sentenced to Probation

32. Judicial Branch’s Tenets for Program and System Development
Community Safety
Developmentally Appropriate
Strength Based
Family Inclusive
Trauma Sensitive
Community Based
Culturally Competent & Gender Responsive
Based on Juvenile Need/Risk Level

33. Judicial Branch’s Four-Point Plan
Modify Probation Workforce (1/08)
Adapt Juvenile Service Delivery System (1/08)
Create New Programs for Youth (1/09)
Establish Infrastructure to Ensure Positive Outcomes (On-Going)
85 new positions, 16 reallocated positions
16 supervisors
Expand exisitng contracts, develop new services
Hire new administrative staff

34. Continuum of Services for New Haven Pilot Program
Clinical Evaluations
Psychiatric
Psychological
Substance Abuse
Sex Offender
Mental Health Services
Intensive In-Home Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Services (IICAPS)
8 slots available at any given time

35. Continuum of Services for New Haven Pilot Program
In-patient Substance Abuse Treatment
4 dedicated slots for New Haven youth to add to the statewide capacity
Educational / Vocational Services
Work / Learn Model
20 slots available at any given time

36. Continuum of Services for New Haven Pilot Program
Youth Risk Reduction Center
Aggression Replacement Therapy
MET/CBT/FSN
VOICES and Girls Circle
(Gun) Violence Prevention
TARGET
Family Violence Education Program
Brief Strategic Family Therapy

37. Continuum of Services for New Haven Pilot Program
Outcomes Research
Central CT State University won competitive bidding process to evaluate NH YPI.
CCSU will be reporting quarterly on the progress of the New Haven Pilot Program, with a final outcome report expected in Spring 2009.

38. DCF Development Plan Internal inter-bureau group to analyze:
potential caseload and service needs
Nationally recognized best and promising practices
Impact of PA07-4 on other DCF bureaus
Child Welfare
Behavioral Health
Adolescent Services

39. DCF Development Plan Review of current DCF risk/needs data
Strategies for behavioral health services
Strategies to address impact on DCF area offices
Study of 16 and 17 year olds at DoC
Program and service needs
Housing needs
Community Safety

40. Role of JJPOCC
Public Act 7-4 section 16 (g) lists some questions for the JJPOCC to consider:

41. What’s Left? Disproportionate Minority Contact
How does DMC affect who is in the juvenile justice system?
How do we build a system that will eliminate DMC?

42. What’s Left? DCF/CSSD: Placement & Treatment
What is the need for out-of-home care?
Placement Capacity
Short term/long term
Specialization/Type of facility/care
Current/projected

43. What’s Left? Development of Diversion Programs What already exists?
What needs to be created?
Whose responsibility?

44. What’s Left?
CSSD/Judicial: Court Diversion and Pre-trial Detention Practices
Serious Juvenile Offenses
Should list of SJOs be reconsidered?
Are there youth who enter detention now that might not have to? Are there related policies/procedures that should be reviewed?

45. What’s Left? Impact of 16 & 17 yr olds on state agencies such as:
Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services
State Department of Education
Public Defenders
Prosecutors
Department of Labor
Department of Social Services
DCF (Child Protective Services, Adolescent Behavioral Health System)
Judicial Branch (CSSD, Court Operations)
Impact on Local/Municipal agencies such as police departments

46. What’s Left?
Now that 16 & 17 year olds are being treated as juveniles in the justice system, what other laws need to be reconsidered?
Mandatory school attendance (signing out of school at 16 years)
Custodial interrogation

47. What’s Left? DCF/CSSD: Assessment Tool
What are the pros/cons of current assessment tools at different decision-making points in the system?

48. What’s Left? Judicial: Regional Youth Courts
What will be the needs of the Judicial Branch regarding the following issues?
Staffing
Facilities
Equipment
Automation
Operational
Legal

49. What’s Left?
Judicial/Legislative: Adult court elements imported to JJ system
Does Connecticut want to incorporate certain aspects of the adult court system (i.e. bond, jury trial, fines, expungement, probationary sentences, etc.) to the juvenile justice system?