1. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. DMCRC

2. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. Multnomah County Detention Reform Reported by William Feyerherm Portland State University (FeyerhermW@pdx.edu)

3. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. History - Multnomah County OJJDP Funded Pilot State - 1990 Concerns about over-representation at County Board and Chair level Efforts by Juvenile Department –Staffing –population control and intensive probation History of concerns about “Cultural Competence” The Casey Foundation Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative – the PDMT

4. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission.

7. Philosophy & Goals Detain the “right kids” Definition of Over-Representation issue as processing odds rather than proportion of population. Avoid actions or decision bases that inadvertently disadvantage minority youth. Develop objective verifiable bases for detention decisions

8. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. Implementation - the RAI Working Team included culturally diverse representatives of most stakeholders Examination of models in other communities Examination of items to prevent inadvertently disadvantaging minority youth Consensus among decision makers

9. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. Implementation - the Development of Alternatives Geographic location Community based provider agencies Alternatives to assist youth in establishing & maintaining community ties

10. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission.

13. The decrease in the rates of FTA and re-offense are also two positive results of the detention alternative. In 1997, less than one in ten juveniles failed to appear for Court hearings after their release. This rate was further decreased in 1998. The rate of juveniles who re-offended (between intake and disposition) also decreased over time. The decrease in these two rates over time are two very important indicators that the RAI instrument does not compromise the safety of the community by assessing the risk of juveniles to FTA or re-offend. - Scott Keir and Thach Nguyen “ Risk Assessment Instrument (RAI) Report “, 1999

14. Reproduction of these materials only by author's explicit permission. Conclusions Change is possible Sustained involvement of all parties is critical Thoughtful analysis of the system and willingness to rethink processes and criteria are critical Change takes time and is hard work