1. San Francisco district attorney’s office
Make It Right Presentation
Juvenile Probation Commission
March 13, 2019
San Francisco district attorney’s office

2. What questions do we ask about wrongdoing?
What law was broken?
Who broke it?
How should they be punished?

3. Restorative justice asks:
Who has been harmed?
What are their needs?
Whose obligation is it to meet those needs?

4. Origins of restorative community conferencing
New Zealand’s Family Group Conferencing (FGC)
Howard Zehr and Allan MacRae’s Little Book of Family Group Conferences: New Zealand Style
Grew from Maori desire to decrease DMC
Pilot went nationwide via NZ’s Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act of 1989
Juvenile incarceration nearly obsolete through diversion and FGC
Adapted in Alameda County after extensive collaborative planning process; currently being replicated in 10 jurisdictions nationwide

5. Restorative community conferencing
Case is referred to RCC in lieu of traditional prosecution
Prosecutor identifies eligible cases at point of charging
Specified eligibility criteria
Participation by young person and victim is voluntary
“Reverse Miranda”
Victim can choose to participate in variety of ways
Model includes three key components:
Facilitated face-to-face session including victim, young person, their supporters
Session results in a consensus-based agreement to repair the harm
Discrete goals & timeline
4 dimensions for restoration: victim, self, family, community
Young person fulfills agreement with support of an “Agreement Monitor”
If the young person completes the process, the case is not charged

6. Make it Right: Developing San Francisco’s RCC
Zellerbach funded sujatha baliga to help us implement
Focus groups and 1-on-1 interviews in
Nonprofit partners selected via competitive process
Community Works & Huckleberry’s unique partnership
Developed eligibility criteria based on data analysis:
Legal eligibility (burglary, theft, robbery, threats)
Individual eligibility (age, residency, history)
Co-defendants
Developed evaluation design
DA, Probation and Public Defender developed referral protocol & confidentiality agreements
DA’s Office began reviewing cases for referral in late 2013
Impact Justice and California Policy Lab are evaluating program as part of a multi-site evaluation

7. Make It Right: Preliminary Results
Data from inception through March 2018 shows a difference in recidivism among treatment and control:
The Goldman School of Public Policy found in 2017 that Make it Right has an 88% likelihood of having a positive effect on the youth it serves – regardless of whether they complete the program.
At capacity, MIR costs $5,000 per youth.
Category
Total Number
% Recidivated
Comparison Youth 35
37%
All Treatment Youth 73
29%
Program Graduates 32
16%

8. NEXT STEPS FOR MAKE IT RIGHT
Complete evaluation; end randomization of cases
Expand to additional offense categories
Overcome residency limitations
Begin piloting young adult cases

9. Chief of Programs & Initiatives
For more information
Katy Weinstein Miller
Chief of Programs & Initiatives
(415)