A Fiscal Perspective: The National Trend Towards Free Market - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

A Fiscal Perspective: The National Trend Towards Free Market Principles in Juvenile Justice Je a ne tte Moll, E sq. Polic y Ana lyst, T e xa s Public Polic y F ounda tion Pre se nta tion to the Ke ntuc ky Unifie d Juve nile Code T a sk F orc e , Oc tobe r 25, 2012

Introduction to the Foundation T he T e xa s Public Polic y F ounda tion is a sta te - ba se d think • ta nk c ove ring a broa d ra ng e of issue s, from he a lth c a re to e duc a tion, with a mission to promote individua l re sponsibility, fre e e nte rprise , limite d g ove rnme nt, a nd priva te prope rty rig hts. In 2005, the Ce nte r for E ffe c tive Justic e wa s founde d • within the F ounda tion, foc using on c rimina l justic e re forms within T e xa s. Our work in T e xa s e ve ntua lly spre a d to juve nile justic e , • a nd suc c e ssful polic y imple me nta tion in T e xa s le d to the e xpa nsion of our work to othe r sta te s.

Ten Guiding Principles

First: Some Confinement is Necessary Juve nile justic e syste ms simply must pr ovide at le ast some • style of se c ur e c onfine me nt for the small minor ity of se r ious or viole nt juve nile offe nde r s. Public safe ty c onc e r ns de mand this le ve l of se c ur ity to pr e ve nt • fur the r c r ime s while the youth unde r goe s r e habilitation. Howe ve r , those fac ilitie s must be suffic ie ntly safe to allow for • e ffe c tive r e habilitation for juve nile offe nde r s. Ge ne r ally, smalle r fac ilitie s and those c lose r to home ar e • be tte r . o T he Missour i Mode l; $120 pe r day and le ss than 9 pe r c e nt r e c idivism in adult or juve nile syste m.

Second: Community- Based Programming Countle ss studie s have highlighte d the ge ne r al • e ffe c tive ne ss of c ommunity- base d pr ogr amming ove r institutional state “tr aining sc hools,” whic h usually ar e loc ate d hundr e ds of mile s away fr om a youth’s home . T his e ffe c tive ne ss ge ne r ally spr ings out of positive • c onne c tions made and maintaine d in the c ommunity; howe ve r , the lowe r c osts of c ommunity- base d plac e me nts c an dr amatic ally e ffe c t state budge ts.

Third: Because of the effectiveness of community-based programming… Confine me nt should not be the de fault r e sponse for • most youth. Car e ful distinc tions ar e ne e de d to diffe r e ntiate • be twe e n the major ity of youth, who ar e low- r isk and would like ly be c ome wor se off due to c onfine me nt, fr om the small minor ity of high- r isk youth, who would be ne fit fr om se c ur e c onfine me nt. In T e xas, a br oad bar r ie r was se t for state le ve l • se c ur e c onfine me nt (misde me anant youth). Othe r state s limit c onfine me nt on a c ase - by- c ase • basis.

Fourth: Risk and Needs Assessments are Necessary A prove n a nd re lia ble risk a nd ne e ds a sse ssme nt c a n, • on its own, g re a tly inc re a se suc c e ssful outc ome s in juve nile justic e syste ms. Sta tic a nd dyna mic fa c tors; risks a nd ne e ds. • Provide s inva lua ble informa tion on tre a tme nt pla ns a nd • pla c e me nt options. Most use ful whe n a va ila ble a nd use d by e a c h de c ision- • ma ke r a t e a c h junc ture of the justic e syste m.

Fifth: School Discipline Heavily Impacts Juvenile Justice T he adve nt of ze r o- tole r anc e polic ie s be gan a • tr e nd away fr om tr aditional in- sc hool disc ipline , towar ds gr e ate r r e lianc e on juve nile justic e inte r ve ntions into c ommon sc hool misbe havior . T his use of the juve nile justic e syste m to disc ipline • stude nts c an c ome at a high c ost and ove r bur de n the c our ts, dive r ting valuable justic e syste m r e sour c e s away fr om ge nuine public safe ty c onc e r ns. Re se ar c h shows that a balanc e d appr oac h to • sc hool be havior issue s c an r e duc e ove r r e lianc e on the justic e syste m while c r e ating be tte r outc ome s for stude nts.

Sixth: Juvenile Probation is Often the Best Alternative Juve nile justic e syste ms a re unde r pre ssure to a void • se c ure c onfine me nt for most juve nile offe nde rs. Proba tion c a n provide a wide - ra ng e of supe rvisory a lte rna tive s to c onfine me nt. Costs for proba tion a re me re fra c tions of c osts of • c onfine me nt, a nd proba tion c a n be e a sily ta ilore d to e a c h juve nile offe nde rs ne e ds a nd risks. o Ave ra g e c ost for ba sic proba tion pe r da y pe r youth in T e xa s is $17.25, whic h e qua te s to $6,296 pe r ye a r. F e w g e og ra phic limita tions (in te rms of se rvic e • provide rs).

Seventh: Focus on the Evidence E vide nc e - base d pr ogr amming is the “buzz- wor d” in • juve nile justic e syste ms. Simply, an e vide nc e - base d pr ogr am is one that has • be e n pr ove n to r e duc e the r isk of c r iminal be havior . F unding is inc r e asingly tie d to the e xc lusive use of • suc h pr ogr amming. Multiple database s tr ac k and c ompile r e se ar c h and • e vide nc e . While it is impor tant to use pr ove n pr ogr ams, it is • also impor tant to avoid ignor ing c r e ative solutions and innovation.

Eighth: Juveniles in Adult Facilities Are at a Unique Disadvantage E ve n se r ious juve nile • offe nde r s fac e r isks and disadvantage s in adult loc kups. T he r isks inc lude an • inc r e ase d like lihood of physic al and se xual assault as we ll as suic ide r isks. Disadvantage s inc lude a • lac k of e duc ation and age - appr opr iate pr ogr amming.

Ninth: The Performance Incentive Funding Revolution T e xas imple me nte d pe r for manc e inc e ntive funding • in 2009. Unde r the Commitme nt Re duc tion Pr ogr am, c ountie s ar e pr ovide d with funding to r e tain jur isdic tion ove r youths who would othe r wise be c ommitte d to state fac ilitie s. Othe r state s— Ohio and Illinois— have imple me nte d • the ir own ve r sion of pe r for manc e inc e ntive funding. While e ac h syste m is unique , the c ommon thr e ad is • financ ial assistanc e following a r e duc tion in state c ommitme nts. T his c r e ate s a fisc al inc e ntive towar d tr e atme nt c lose r to home .

Tenth: Juvenile Justice Reform is Spreading Unlike ly state s, ac tor s, and polic ymake r s ar e taking • up juve nile justic e r e for ms for fisc al and mor al r e asons. A c ommon r e fr ain: “If T e xas c an do it . . .” • L ouisiana, Mississippi, Vir ginia, Ge or gia, F lor ida, • T e xas, Califor nia, Color ado, Ne br aska: almost e ve r y state is looking for be tte r outc ome s and inc r e ase d c ost- e ffe c tive ne ss for juve nile s.

National Trends and Research

Texas Reform Origins In 2006, a c r isis str uc k juve nile justic e in T e xas. • Cr iminal pr ose c utions we r e not e nough: • o Judg e s be g a n a voiding se nding youth to sta te fa c ilitie s. o T he L e g isla ture swiftly a c te d to ba r a ny furthe r misde me a na nts in sta te se c ure fa c ilitie s. o L e g isla tion wa s pa sse d to inc re a se se c urity, insta ll vide o c a me ra s, a nd provide for a n Ombudsma n.

Damage Done L e gislator s had lost faith in the state fac ilitie s and • be gan se e king out be tte r ways to handle juve nile justic e . State fac ility populations c ontinue d to de c line , and • thus state savings due to lowe r r ate s of inc ar c e r ation c ould be passe d on to the c ountie s. T he Commitme nt Re duc tion Pr ogr am was e nac te d • in 2009. o Community-base d. o L e ss than $140 pe r day. o E vide nc e - base d. o Claw-bac k provision.

Justice Reinvestment Results An initia l $45 million funding of the Prog ra m g a ve • c ountie s g ra nt mone y to pla c e youths in c ommunity- ba se d se tting s. Re duc e d popula tions in sta te fa c ilitie s pe rmitte d the • c losure of thre e fa c ilitie s a nd a c ost sa ving s of $100 million. Initia l re sults show tha t out of 4,000 youths first pla c e d • throug h the Prog ra m, only 58— or 1.4 pe rc e nt— e ve ntua lly re quire d pla c e me nt in a sta te fa c ility. De linque nc y ra te s c ontinue to fa ll. Sta te wide re fe rra ls • a re down 18 pe rc e nt, outpa c ing the na tiona l drop of 13 pe rc e nt.

The Texas Model for Other States T e xa s’ suc c e ss wa s la rg e ly pre dic a te d on unlike ly • polic yma ke rs a g g re ssive ly turning the ir a tte ntion towa rd this issue a nd ma king the bold c hoic e s onc e thoug ht unlike ly from a sta te like T e xa s. As the sta te re a pe d the be ne fits— both in lowe r c osts a nd • in lowe r de linque nc y ra te s— othe r sta te s soug ht to le a rn from our suc c e ss. T he F ounda tion be g a n to e xport the T e xa s Mode l to • othe r sta te s, by re a c hing out to c onse rva tive s to sha re our re se a rc h a nd le ssons le a rne d. T he T e xa s Mode l is not limite d to pe rforma nc e inc e ntive • funding — but more ove r, the re c og nition tha t c onfine me nt is not a lwa ys the a nswe r.