2. 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

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

4.  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. www.edjj.org.  As many as 70% of the youth involved in the juvenile justice system have disabilities.*

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

6.  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

7.  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

8.  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.

9.  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.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12.  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.

13.  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.

14. 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.

15. 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

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

17.  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

18. 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.

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

20. 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

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

22. 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

23.  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

24.  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

25.  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

26.  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

27. > 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

28.  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

29. 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

32. For More Information Contact Ronald K. Lospennato, Director School-to-Prison Reform Project Ron.lospennato@splcenter.org www.splcenter.org