Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council September 13, 2016 3:00 pm - - PDF document

Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council

September 13, 2016 3:00 pm – 5:00 pm Meeting held at the San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department 375 Woodside Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127 3rd Floor Cafeteria Minutes Member and Supporter Attendees (Italics designate voting members): Adult Probation Department: Ernest Mendieta

• Dept. of Children, Youth & Their Families:

Laura Moyé Jasmine Dawson Emily Fox Department of Human Services: Barry Johnson

• Dept. of Public Health:

Alison Lustbader District Attorney’s Office: Katherine Miller Juvenile Advisory Council: Jesus Martinez Juvenile Justice Commission: Absent Juvenile Probation Commission: Joseph Arellano, President Juvenile Justice Providers Association: Ron Stueckle, Sunset Youth Services Kimo Uila, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ) Juvenile Probation Department: Allen A. Nance, Chief Probation Officer/Mtg. Co-Chair Paula Hernandez, Assistant Chief Probation Officer Sheryl E. Cowan, Secretary Mayor’s Office of Violence Prevention Services: Cate McCracken Mayor’s Office on Housing: Julia Sabory Public Defender’s Office: Patricia Lee Recreation and Parks Department: Bob Palacio San Francisco Unified School District: Alysse Castro San Francisco Police Department: Captain Carl Fabbri Sheriff’s Department: Absent Superior Court : Lisa Lightman Transitional Age Youth San Francisco: Absent Youth Commission: Cecilia Galeano Adele Failes-Carpenter Others present: Huckleberry Youth Programs: Doug Styles Denise Coleman AIIM Higher Rita Perez Item 1: Welcome and Roll Call Chief Allen Nance, San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department calls the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. and asks everyone to introduce themselves. Item 2: Public Comment Chief Nance calls for public comment and reads the following statement: Members of the public may address the Council for up to two minutes on any matter within the Council’s jurisdiction that does not appear on the agenda. Speakers shall address their remarks to the Council as a whole and not to individual Council members or Department personnel. The lack of a response by Council members or Department personnel does not necessarily constitute agreement with, or support of, statements made during public comment.

P a g e 2 | 6

No public comment. Item 3: Review and approval of minutes from April 13, 2016 JJCC meeting. (Action Item) Chief Nance asks all to review minutes before voting. Motion made; Laura Moyé seconds. Vote: Approved unanimously; motion carried. Item 4: Presentation by One Circle Foundation (OCF) by Executive Director Giovanna Taormina (Discussion Item) One Circle Foundation offers two research based models utilized across the nation - Girls Circle and The Council for Boys and Young Men. Girls Circle is the first program in the nation proven to reduce delinquency for girls (OJJDP Study 2015.) Both models have additionally been proven to increase school engagement and are steeped in best practices that are gender responsive, trauma informed, strengths based, and culturally responsive across all sectors of care to include juvenile justice, education, behavioral health, and child welfare.

• Ms. Taormina reads One Circle Mission Statement: OCF promotes resiliency and healthy relationships in

children, youth, adults, and communities with evidenced based, gender responsive, restorative circle program

• models. We provide training, curricula, and consultation to all sectors of youth serving organizations in the

United States and internationally.

• Ms. Taormina states that these are gender responsive programs; all rooted in evidenced-based practices.

She states that rigid unhealthy norms are causing a lot of public health risks in society today. She states that kids today face an incredible amount of trauma. She states that many cultures use rituals, and in the center of rituals, youth can develop relationships. She states that the quality of these relationships matters; when youth can communicate, they can learn.

• Ms. Taormina introduces Ms. Kiku Johnson, who will also present.

They hold groups during which they discuss how hard it is in public placement; they talk about drug use; tells story of youth who feared he would die but ultimately sought treatment due to contact with the group; she mentions that it was very gratifying that participation in the group helped the young man. Many One Circle Foundation practices are based on relational theory, evidenced-based theory. She addresses why kids are separated by gender. States that OCF believes that how each gender identifies is different; example: beliefs exist that boys must be tough, be strong, however, she states these common beliefs can create unhealthy masculine behaviors. Gender specific risks for boys and girls are uniquely different; the OCF programs recognize gender

• differences. They invite examination within these female and male identities. The groups they hold are

listening environments; adults listen to kids. Tells a teacher story from the New Mexico Department of

• Health. Mentions great success with girls’ counsel, which helped 400 youth, had been introduced into local

high school with 3 sessions a week ultimately became a 5-days a week elective class. She states that youth need safe spaces in order to build trust, to be themselves, and realize they are not alone. She continues to state that OCF works in middle and high schools in New York and Illinois; states that research was conducted in Cook County, IL with girls on probation for 3 years; states that outcomes showed a significant reduction in recidivism. In Oregon; they started by working with adjudicated youth, but now have moved into schools. For the 4th year, they have shown reduction in juvenile offenders; very successful program. Shows handouts from presentation with statements made by boys about what they learned in “Council” (OCF ppt Page 12, attached) and what girls say they learned in “Circle” (OCF ppt Page 13, attached).

P a g e 3 | 6

Flyers with dates for their upcoming trainings is distributed. Reads quote about how the group works better together; shocking that rival gang members were in the same classroom talking to each other when weeks before they were “at each other’s throats.” Mentions that One Circle Foundation travels nationally, but they want to work with San Francisco agencies; they just received $10,000 in matching funds for rolling out programs into San Francisco communities. OCF thanks the JJCC for the opportunity to present. Chief Nance comments that One Circle Foundation trained the SFJPD Log Cabin Ranch (LCR) counselors who have subsequently been using the curriculum to convene a Boys’ Council group; feedback so far has been very good. One Circle Foundation Presentation attached.

Item 5: Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families (DCYF) update on Local Action Plan (LAP) process:

• a. Interview findings, and
• b. Discussion of findings and implications for LAP (Discussion Item)

Laura Moyé, DCYF, introduces Emily Fox, DCYF, who will present the results of the LAP interviews to date.

• Ms. Fox states that she will present an update on the LAP process; how information was gathered and the

framework used during interviews. Everyone is reminded about the alignment of the Local Action Plan with the DCYF Community Needs Assessment (CAN).

• Ms. Fox reviews the timeline for interviews and asks for show of hands of those at JJCC meeting who have

been interviewed; she thanks them for their time. They held 22 interview sessions with 32 people from 18 JJCC agencies which she states is impressive. She also mentions that focus groups were/will be conducted at JPD with youth in Juvenile hall both boys (done) and girls (this Saturday). After reading all their notes, areas of overlap were found especially in the categories of what was identified as “barriers and challenges” for juvenile justice system-involved youth and how we can improve the juvenile justice system in San Francisco. She states that all the results being discussed today were discussed in over half the interviews. Re: Barriers: She gives examples: lack of coordination, consistency, accountability, transparency and

• communication. Lack of trust, bias (implicit and explicit) and lack of stability including meeting very basic

needs for youths and their families (such as affordable housing and access for healthy food) was mentioned in interviews. They found there is need for leadership development for youth; she states kids cannot advocate for

• themselves. New educational opportunities in school settings are needed for these young people.

She mentions the need for gendered-based services especially for girls. Interview findings: Everyone interviewed had suggestions on improvements; 9 major categories:

• 1. Examine Policy/Be Flexible (mentions being flexible with time especially having meeting times

beyond the regular work day and reviewing older policies to see if they are outdated).

• 2. Trained & Supported Workforce
• 3. Collaboration & Communication – Ms. Fox states that this improvement area was mentioned by

everyone; improvement with collaborations and communications across agencies; she states that we want to take this opportunity to challenge ourselves on just how to accomplish this improvement.

P a g e 4 | 6

• 4. Alternatives to Formal Involvement & Incarceration - Other comments included that DCYF

should support technical assistance and be more accountable with service delivery. Also, there should be more clarity with JPD. There should be alternatives to formal involvement and incarceration to be built on existing alternative programs. (See pages 17 & 18 of attached ppt presentation.)

• 5. Academic & Alternative Education Opportunity - We need to be more creative and provide

more vocational training opportunities, including a better reentry process for those youths going back into a school setting.

• 6. Whole Family Engagement is needed.
• 7. Basic Needs/Access to Service & Transportation – Some basic needs should be better met

especially housing for youth. Transportation also needed; the need for safe borders unrestricted by gangs or limited by money

• 8. Service Connection & Coordination Services - Services that are received through Juvenile

Probation Department should be continued outside probation and it was mentioned that families often get lost outside the system.

• 9. Quality Programming – It was mentioned that there should be standardized reporting systems

for all agencies in this process. Reporting should be determined by kids’ needs and not by funding strains. Types of programming mentioned; music and conflict resolution training. Leadership training programs should be accessible. Internships need to be developed. Create engagement opportunities which foster youth sense of empowerment.

• Ms. Fox tells how excited and invigorating this process has been. Next steps: Flush out strategies which

will then be brought back in December, 2016 at next meeting. (DCYF PowerPoint presentation attached.) Chief Nance states that he is so incredibly proud of the insight which has been offered by this internal process; these ideas exist in our own community and not from a consultant. Chief Nance mentions this great work being done by DCYF staff distilling the ideas from interviews into something digestible that will allow JJCC to create a Local Action Plan which is relevant for our San Francisco community. Chief Nance applauds DCYF; he states that while we cannot do it all, we need to make sure that we have a plan to move forward to realize these strategies and ideals. Discussion is invited. Ron Stueckle, Sunset Youth Services: Mr. Stueckle asks when the groups are starting and if there was still time to be included. A question arises if there are going to be any more targeted interviews with CBOs. Laura Moyé states that as far as the day-to-day CBO’s, there are 41 groups representing a huge number of

• staff. Meetings to date have included DCYF, Department of Health and JPD staff; she states they probably

will bring in more people to the meetings going forward. Kate Miller (DA office): Ms. Miller states that some improvements could be done just by additional funding; mentions the Joint Funders Group which meets already. Laura Moyé mentions that for funding to work, something also needs to shift around policy. Chief Nance states that there will need to be a “placeholder” in the process for these conversations around policies to be held. He states that part of the function of the JJCC is to develop policy and strategy to deliver

• services. We may need a subcommittee comprised of members of JJCC, to make recommendations to the

policy makers. Example: re: Barriers: some benefits may not be available to youth who are too young; mentions 12-year old. This may be not only a local, but state and federal, policy. Mentions some of the Mayor’s offices are already working on these local conversations. States that a subcommittee of this body focused on looking at the programming and resource policy would be helpful.

P a g e 5 | 6

Jesus Martinez, JAC: Asks about who has access to a Shared-Youth Database (SYDB). Chief Nance states that the SYDB conversation have been taking place for the last 11-years. Now in the broader framework, especially for youth involved in juvenile justice and child welfare systems, DPH, JPD and DCYF are going to share data in limited fashion to be pro-active and have higher level of coordination thereby avoiding fragmenting the capacity to serve and to coordinate the services given. There is a memorandum of understanding which includes strict protocols regarding who will have access to this information. Denise Coleman, Huckleberry Youth Services: Ms. Coleman states she is concerned about the barriers which arise every time this process is started. Talks about the need for transparency across CBO’s. Chief Nance states that they have been making progress over the past decade, but he agrees 100%. He states that he has proposed to the Delinquency Administration Team that there needs to be training for our JPD staff. He continues that this is one sliver of the challenges which have been identified. He mentions developing a working group to have meaningful movement regarding addressing these barriers and then to move forward. He mentions that today there were 27 kids in juvenile hall; this is far cry from where the system was a decade ago. When we look at the kids on probation, this number is reduced too. We should celebrate that San Francisco has done some amazing work to impact youth in the city. Fewer are in custody; fewer in the system. Chief Nance continues that no one agency can take credit, but absolutely we need to celebrate this joint effort including the young people and their families who have stepped up and taken what was offered. Patricia Lee, Public Defenders Office: She agrees we should celebrate accomplishments made over the past decade; suggests that we meet to look at what made us successful. There has been a residual effect with

• ther issues with partners; particularly she states there has been a big culture shift and we need to look at

this as we move forward with the LAP. Mentions reentry court. Mentions increased transparency especially when CBOs are talking about rigid and outdated policies; we should work together moving

• forward. Hopes in the future that we can share the information between agencies to move forward and

develop an action agenda. Laura Moyé, DCYF, says this will happen as we move forward with a qualitative

• analysis. Chief Nance states that now people are stepping outside their traditional roles to listen a bit more

and this has had a positive effect. Lisa Lightman, Superior Court: Asks about the process. Laura Moyé states there will be need for some subcommittees in the coming months. Alysse Castro, SFUSD: States that this is an extraordinary release of information; she states that she is trying to process how to bring some of this information back into actionable things; there is movement in school system to look at new alternatives for youth. She states that having the parents feedback from youth might help move the process forward.

• Ms. Castro asks how she can help. Chief states that the school district should certainly be at the table to tell

us what is doable and what isn’t based on the feedback from the stakeholders. Cecilia Galeano, Youth Commissioner: Questions that youth won’t share their ideas fully with certain adults and has concern how the information being given will be used. Chief Nance states that the information we hold is sacred and we have obligation to only provide information on a need to know basis. Laura Moyé states that they hope over time, the data will be used for research. Ernest Mendieta, Adult Probation Department: Talks about the “need to know” and "right to know" requirements from DOJ regarding the sharing of criminal history information and have the proper release

• f information in place. We need to very respectful of how information is used; he continues and stated that

this is necessary to build trust and establish a report. He asks what can be done now to facilitate these conversations.

P a g e 6 | 6

Julia Sabory, Mayor’s Office on Housing: Thinks it would be valuable to bring together other city staff to talk about communication and to explain their initiatives. She talks about setting up a space to explore

• communication. Chief Nance mentions working with DCYF on a smaller scale, mentions our JPD resource

fairs and mentions that the JPD staff often exit these fairs with new contacts and other agency brochures; he states that more can be done.

• Ms. Sabory mentions that their office has a lot of brochures; she thinks we should discuss how best to

communicate the information. Chief Nance talks about subcommittees and suggests making a motion to develop subcommittee to look at barriers and policies. Patti Lee makes Motion: JJCC to develop subcommittee to look at barriers and policies. Second made by Kate McCracken. Unanimous vote – Motion passes. Denise Coleman asks how are people going to volunteer. Kate Miller states that there would be more than

• ne subcommittee. It is suggested that they categorize and sort these policy recommendations into

“buckets” so once these are clarified, then they can reach out to specific folks. Someone mentions people can volunteer to be on subcommittee and afterward, they can figure out other committees and who is on which committee. Initial subcommittee will “unpack” the recommendations into subcommittees; this information can then be brought back to the entire group so they can commit to moving forward with actions. Item 6: Announcements and Requests for Future Agenda Items (Discussion and Possible Action Item)  Proposed strategies for the Local Action Plan will be presented again at the next JJCC meeting.  Denise Coleman, Huckleberry Youth Services is starting a Spanish version of parents group at September 28th in the Excelsior. Please call Huckleberry at 415 621-2929 to sign up. Item 7: Call for public comment. No public comment. Item 8: Adjournment Meeting Adjourned. 4:45pm

With you today

• Giovanna Taormina

Executive Director and Co-Founder, provides national training, materials, consultation, and technical assistance related to gender responsive services to non-profit agencies, government, state supported programs, institutions, and systems that work with youth. Started Girls Circles with her own daughters in the early 90’s.

• Kiku Johnson

Customer Relations & Office Administrator

Mission Statement

OCF promotes resiliency and healthy relationships in children, youth, adults, and communities with evidenced based, gender responsive, restorative circle program models. We provide training, curricula, and consultation to all sectors of youth serving organizations in the United States and internationally.

The Girls Circle and Council for Boys & Young Men are researched based, structured support groups for youth 9-18 years.

Provided weekly for 1-2 hours segments

Theoretical Foundation

The programs offer healthy, safe ways to develop - as individuals and a community

RELATIONSHIPS Developing Male/Female Brain Gender Transformative Resiliency Trauma Responsive Rites

• f Passage

Foundational Practices of Programs

• Gender-responsive, gender transformative
• Relational, Resiliency & Assets
• Trauma-informed
• Culturally responsive
• Restorative
• Strengths-Based
• Motivational Interviewing
• Cognitive-Behavioral
• Social-Emotional Learning
• Experiential - Relevant topics Designed for adolescent

developmental and learning styles

Why Gender Specific Groups?

Violence and trauma are the primary pathways into the school-to-prison pipeline

• Gendered risks for girls and boys are uniquely

different

• Rigid gender norms are harmful; LGBT youth are

at greatest risk

• Youth experience behaviors such as bullying,

violence, harassment that impacts school engagement

• Our circle programs recognize gendered

differences

• Youth need safe spaces in order to build trust, be

themselves, let their guard down, realize they are NOT ALONE, and build relationships with each

• ther and adults

Our Programs Are Utilized in All Areas of Prevention and Intervention Nationwide and in Canada

SECTORS:

Education Juvenile Justice Behavioral Health Child Welfare Community Based Orgs Police Departments & P.A.L.

• Schools: Elementary, Middle Schools, High Schools, Alternative
• Gang Prevention
• After School Programs, Clubs
• Group Homes/Foster Care
• Residential Treatment
• Workforce Development
• Service Learning and Leadership
• Camps, Outdoor & Adventure Programs
• Pregnancy Prevention

Girls Circle Research

Girls Circle is the first gender responsive program in the country proven to reduce delinquency for girls!

2016 OJJDP FUNDED STUDY:

Research was conducted in Cook County, Illinois for 3 years with girls on probation Outcomes resulted in significantly greater reductions in recidivism.

Additional Outcomes:

• Significant increases in use of condoms
• Increases in educational expectations and educational

aspirations of self

Girls Circle Research

(cont.)

Initial Studies showed significant increases in:

• Self-Efficacy
• Body Image
• Social Connection (JJ girls had greater gains in this area)

Additional Studies had same findings and significant increases in:

• School bonding
• Communicating Needs to Adults
• Positive peer interactions and peer selection

And significant decreases in:

• Alcohol Use
• Self-Harming Behaviors

The Council Research

Results from two studies conducted by Portland State University:

• First Study:

– Significant increases in boys’ school engagement in middle schools, community programs, and probation

• Second Study:

– Significantly impacted harmful masculinity beliefs for young men in a secure juvenile facility. More sessions = greater resistance to unhealthy masculinity beliefs – High Satisfaction rates amongst boys

*Mary Elisabeth Gray, PhD Dissertation, Successful defended, PSU, Oregon May, 2012

What boys say they learned in Council

• “How to solve problems without violence.”
• “To respect others even if I don’t know them.”
• “I learned that I can share my thoughts with

my classmates and I learned more about my

• classmates. Also I noticed that I do some

things that might hurt people even without knowing.”

• “I could say mostly what I was thinking about,

and wouldn’t get judged or anything.”

What Girls Say About Girls Circle

• ”To stop being so self centered and be more

considerate of others and open minded.”

• “That I’m more respectful than I was.”
• “That I can sit back and listen to girls and hear

what their saying instead of judging them.”

• “I noticed that I can work on myself and get

positive comments.”

• “I learned that everyone goes through

something during their lifetime.”

What Facilitators Say About Council

“The boys are very engaged. They have developed relationships with each other and it’s been a huge

• success. We’re going to begin an

additional Boys Council at our family respite center.”

~ Daniel Bland, Trainer, Facilitator, New Haven, CT

“The boys are communicating honestly and openly within the group, and working together in team activities. We’ve been talking about father figures, and role models, and they are expressing things they never did before.”

~Juan Gomez, Trainer, Facilitator, Salinas, CA

Upcoming Trainings in California

• San Francisco Girls Circle Training: Nov. 2-3, 2016
• San Francisco Boys Council Training: Nov 9-10, 2016
• San Diego Boys Council Training: Nov 9-10, 2016

Hosted by San Diego Office of Education

Q & A

Thank you

• Giovanna Taormina

Giovanna@onecirclefoundation.org 415-847-9194

• Kiku Johnson

Kiku@onecirclefoundation.org 415-419-5119

Department of Children, Youth and Their Families

Maria Su, Psy.D.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Edwin M. Lee

MAYOR

JJCC Local Action Plan Interview Findings Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council September 13, 2016

1 Department of Children, Youth and Their Families 1390 Market Street Suite 900 * San Francisco, CA 94102 * 415-554-8990 * www.dcyf.org

Agenda

1. Update on Local Action Plan (LAP) Timeline 2. Methodology 3. Framework of Analysis 4. Interview Findings: Barriers 5. Interview Findings: Suggested Improvements 6. Discussion 7. Appendix A: Alignment of Local Action Plan with DCYF’s Community Needs Assessment & Services Allocation Plan 8. Appendix B: Juvenile Justice System-Involved Youth – Data Overview

2

• 1. Update on LAP Timeline

3

Update on Timeline

4

Date Item Completed Summer 2016 Finalize DCYF CNA  Summer 2016 Assess need for additional data collection or stakeholder input  Summer 2016 Conduct interviews with JJCC members  Fall/ Winter 2016 VPI Joint Funders Group to develop proposed strategies December 2016 Present proposed strategies to JJCC December 2016 Finalize proposed strategies for inclusion in LAP April 2017 Submit request for substantive change to JJCPA Program Categories Summer-Fall 2017 Incorporate new funding strategies into DCYF RFP

• 2. Methodology

5

Methodology: JJCC Member Interviews

• Adult Probation Department
• Community Assessment and Referral

Center (CARC)

• Center on Juvenile and Criminal

Justice (CJCJ)

• Department of Children Youth and

Their Families

• District Attorney’s Office
• Department of Public Health
• Human Services Agency
• Juvenile Advisory Committee
• Juvenile Probation Department
• Mayor’s Office of Violence Prevention

Services

• Mayors Office of Housing and

Community Development

• Recreation and Park Department
• Police Department
• Public Defender’s Office
• San Francisco Unified School District
• Sheriff’s Department
• Superior Court
• Youth Commission

6

Conducted 22 interview sessions, interviewed 30 people, representing 18 different JJCC agencies/organizations:

Methodology: Other Information Gathering

• VPI/YWD-JSI Grantee Input Sessions (2)
• JJC Focus Groups (2)
• Unit 7 – 16 & 17 year old boys
• Girls Unit (September 23)
• Focus Groups/Interviews with young people who have successfully

transitioned out of the juvenile justice system

• Other Data Analysis

7

• 3. Framework for Analysis

8

Framework for Analysis

9

1) What was identified as the barriers and challenges for juvenile justice system-involved youth? 2) How can we improve the juvenile justice system in San Francisco?

• 4. Interview Findings: Barriers

10

Interview Findings: Barriers

• Lack of coordination, consistency, accountability, transparency, and

communication

• Lack of trust
• Between system partners
• Between system partners and CBOs
• Between system partners and youth/families
• Bias
• Implicit and explicit
• Of systems and people working in systems
• Lack of stability (basic needs not met for youth and families)

11

Interview Findings: Barriers

• Insufficient whole family support throughout system-involvement
• Need for increased youth leadership, development, and

empowerment opportunities

• Need for access to mental health and substance abuse services
• Need for academic and alternative education opportunities
• Insufficient targeted services for specific groups of youth

12

• 5. Interview Findings:

Suggested Improvements

13

Interview Findings: Suggested Improvements

14

• Examine Policy/Be Flexible
• Trained & Supported Workforce
• Collaboration & Communication
• Alternatives to Formal Involvement & Incarceration
• Academic & Alternative Education Opportunity
• Whole Family Engagement
• Basic Needs/Access to Service & Transportation
• Service Connection & Coordination
• Quality Programming

Suggested Improvement: Examine Policy/Be Flexible

• All system partners support and implement LAP recommendations

and strategies

• Provide services beyond the 9-5 work day
• Change rigid or outdated policies
• Use data to assess juvenile justice system and drive policy

15

Suggested Improvement: Trained & Supported Workforce

• All professionals (e.g. teachers, probation officers, police officers,

administrative staff, etc.) believe in a child’s potential to change if given real opportunities

• All professionals trained on/operate from a framework that recognizes:
• Implicit/explicit bias
• Equity and trauma
• Mental and behavioral health
• Evidence-based practices
• Adolescent brain and youth development
• Effective partnership and communication

16

Suggested Improvement: Collaboration and Communication

17

All

• Demonstrate commitment to work in collaboration
• Ensure all partners have full knowledge of juvenile justice system processes
• Implement Shared Youth Database

DCYF

• Ensure access to multiple TA and Capacity Building opportunities
• Increase CBO accountability (e.g. performance based contracting)

JPD

• Offer trainings that encourage caseworker models
• Ensure clarity and consistency of POs roles throughout the juvenile justice process
• Create joint training and service coordination opportunities for CBOs and POs

SFPD

• Seek early intervention opportunities and encourage closer partnerships between city

departments serving justice system-involved youth and SFPD

• Ensure SROs are supported to engage meaningfully with school staff and students

SFUSD

• Improve partnerships between schools and CBOs operating in schools or with students
• Build greater partnership opportunities between SFUSD and JPD

CBO

• Allow CBOs to broker trust between community and system partners
• Utilize CBOs as a central partner of Juvenile Justice System

18

Suggested Improvement: Collaboration and Communication

Department of Children, Youth and Their Families 1390 Market Street Suite 900 * San Francisco, CA 94102 * 415-554-8990 * www.dcyf.org

Suggested Improvement: Collaboration & Communication

19

DPH

• Offer behavioral and mental health training to teachers

HSA

• Create closer partnership with HSA/Child Protective Services and other system

partners

Other

• Work with the business and technology community to bridge the youth workforce

development gap

• Encourage engagement of tech partners as opportunity for community building

Suggested Improvement: Alternatives to Formal Involvement & Incarceration

20

• Build upon existing alternative to detention programs to

ensure multiple opportunities to leave secure custody

• Ensure appropriate placements and referrals to more

appropriate services when applicable

Suggested Improvement: Educational Opportunity

• Deliver culturally relevant curriculum to in-custody youth
• Support SROs to build relationships with students and

teachers

• Create more vocational training opportunities
• Ensure restorative reentry programs at high schools

21

Suggested Improvement: Whole Family Engagement

• Redefine the term “family” so that it is more inclusive and

accessible

• Facilitate support groups for parents/family members
• Hold families accountable to the court-mandated supports
• Engage and offer additional supportive services to youth with a

system-involved parent

22

Suggested Improvement: Basic Needs/Access to Service & Transportation

• Ensure support for meeting basic needs
• Provide safe and stable housing
• Create more connections to employment services
• Safe corridor (unrestricted by turf, money, where public transit

travels, etc.) to and from schools, programs, etc.

• Meet youth and families where they are

23

Suggested Improvement: Service Connection & Coordination

• Ensure services are intentional, continuous, and coordinated

in and out of custody throughout the juvenile justice process

• Provide ongoing services for youth in custody that includes

warm handoffs

• Provide assistance to families that includes consultation and

system and process navigation

24

Suggested Improvement: Quality Programming

• Fund fewer CBOs that have a proven track record, are trusted by

the community, offer diverse services, and deliver high quality services

• Create standardized reporting system for all agencies
• Hold agencies accountable, monitor outcomes and be flexible to

system changes

• Ensure that services are driven by the child’s needs
• Ensure cultural and linguistic competence and appropriateness

for all providers and services

25

Suggested Improvement: Quality Programming

• Provide programming that offers enrichment (arts and music), life

skills, anger management, conflict resolution, and education about the dangers of social media

• Offer more leadership and youth development opportunities
• Provide long-term mentorship opportunities
• Create youth empowerment/engagement opportunities
• Create genuine and meaningful space for system-involved youth to

talk with adult decision-makers

26

Next Steps

27

Date Item Next Step Summer 2016 Finalize DCYF CNA Summer 2016 Assess need for additional data collection or stakeholder input Summer 2016 Conduct interviews with JJCC members Fall/ Winter 2016 VPI Joint Funders Group to develop proposed strategies  December 2016 Present proposed strategies to JJCC December 2016 Finalize proposed strategies for inclusion in LAP April 2017 Submit request for substantive change to JJCPA Program Categories Summer-Fall 2017 Incorporate new funding strategies into DCYF RFP

• 6. Discussion

28

• 7. Appendix A:

Alignment of Local Action Plan with DCYF Community Needs Assessment & Services Allocation Plan

29

Goals & Purposes of LAP

30

Multiagency Local Action Plan (LAP) that identifies resources and strategies for providing a continuum of responses for the prevention, intervention, supervision, treatment, and incarceration of juvenile

• ffenders.

Each year the LAP can either be:

• Updated by 18 JJCC voting members and submitted to BSCC for approval
• r
• The county can reapply for a continuation of funding for the same programs

as the year prior

Required components of the LAP

31

• Assessment of existing resources for at-risk youth and their families
• Identification/prioritization of communities that face public safety risk

from juvenile crime

• Plan for allocation of resources to effectively reduce juvenile crime
• Development of information/intelligence-sharing systems for effective

coordination and data collection

• Identify outcome measures including but not limited to:
• Rate of juvenile arrests
• Rate of successful completions of probation
• Rate of successful completion of restitution and community service

Alignment of LAP with CNA and SAP

32

JJCC voted on 9/15/15 to align LAP with DCYF’s CNA and SAP

• 8. Appendix B:

Juvenile Justice System-Involved Youth – Data Overview

33

JJSI Youth: Data Overview

34

Con Contact with ith th the e Ju Juven enile le Ju Justic tice System

Year

2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 2011 2011-2015 % % Cha Change Al All Referrals ls 2,196 1,871 1,594 1,392 1,204

• 45%

Al All Juv Juvenil ile Hal Hall l Bo Bookin

• kings

1,146 937 856 746 704

• 38%

Average Le Leng ngth of

• f St

Stay (da (days) 27 24 27 31 26

• 4%

Average Da Dail ily Pop

• pula

latio ion in n Ju Juvenile Hal all 89 74 74 70 56

• 37%

% % of

• f Referrals De

Detain ined 52% 50% 54% 54% 59%

Source: 2015 JPD Annual Report

JJSI Youth: Data Overview

35

Br Brea eakdown of

• f Referrals

2015 Referrals ls # % Ju Juvenile Hal all Bo Book

• kings

704 58% Ci Citatio ions 381 32% Oth Other 119 10% Tot

• tal

1,204 100% 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015 Al All Referrals ls 2,196 1,871 1,594 1,392 1,204 Petit itio ions Fi Filed* 1,009 823 757 622 490* % % Petit itio ions Fi Filed 46% 44% 48% 45% 41%

*Number of petitions filed may not equal number of petitions dismissed or sustained b/c petitions are not always resolved in same calendar year Source: 2015 JPD Annual Report

Petition Outcomes

Petiti tition Outcomes es

Petitions Dismissed 127 Petitions Sustained 369 Log Cabin Ranch 30 Department of Juvenile Justice 1 Out of Home Placement 74 Ward Probation 148 Non-ward Probation 11 Informal Probation 33 Remand to Adult Court Transfer Out of County 80

36

Source: 2015 JPD Annual Report

JJSI Youth: Data Overview

Gen ender

# % Female 204 26% Male 575 74% Tot

• tal Und

ndupli licated Referrals 779 779 100% 100%

37

Race/ ce/Ethnicity

# % African American 412 53% Hispanic 215 28% White 70 9% Samoan 23 3% Filipino 17 2% Chinese 12 2% Other Asian 8 1% Pacific Islander 3 0.4% Vietnamese 3 0.4% Asian Indian 1 0.1% Other Asian 15 2% Tot

• tal

779 779 100% 100%

Age e ( ( as of

• f 1/1

/1/2 /2016)

# % 10 & Under 0.0% 11 7 0.9% 12 8 1% 13 25 3% 14 55 7% 15 98 13% 16 151 19% 17 222 29% 18 173 22% Over 18 40 5% Tot

• tal

779 779 100.0%

Source: 2015 JPD Annual Report