Promising Approaches to Juvenile Justice - California State …csun.edu/sites/default/files/Denise Herz, Dave Mitchell... · · 2015-05-20Study Implications for Juvenile Justice

Promising Approaches to Juvenile JusticeTwo Examples in Los Angeles County

Study made possible through the support of the W.M. Keck Foundation and the California Wellness Foundation.

The Los Angeles CountyJuvenile Probation Outcomes Study

Denise Herz, Ph.D. CSULADavid Mitchell, District 1 Bureau Chief, ProbationMelissa Nalani, Advancement Project

The Probation Outcomes Study Project Team

Data AccessibilityCollaboration & Partnership with Key

Agencies : Probation, DCFS, DMH, and LACOE

Research & Analysis

Project Accountability & Outside-System Perspective

Advocacy Community Representation (AP & Children’s Defense Fund)

Researchers with Expertise & System Trust (CSULA, USC and Research

Roundtable Partners)

Study Background

2010/2011Advancement Project (AP) Meets with

Researchers and Probation

to Discuss Possible Study

2011AP Applies for Keck Funding

2012AP Receives Keck Funding

& Data Permissions

Sought

2013Data Collection

Begins and Continues

through 2014

What was the study time framefor case file data collection?

OVERVIEW OF STUDY STRUCTURE & DATA SOURCES

The Los Angeles County Juvenile Probation Outcomes Study

YOUTH CHARACTERISTICS (N=100)

GENDER & RACE/ETHNICITY

FAMILY HISTORY

PROBATION CHARACTERISTICS

YOUTH CHARACTERISTICS (N=100)

60% Males

40% Females

NOTE: Females were oversampled. Original distribution was 10% in Camp and 20% in Suitable Placement.


STUDY TIME FRAME FOR CASE FILE DATA COLLECTION (N=100)

One Year After Exit or Jurisdiction Terminated -Whichever Came First

Exit from Study Placement

Study Placement inSuitable Placement or Camp

Preceding Arrest/Petition That Led to Study Placement

Original Arrest(Note: Not always youth’s first time or first contact with Probation)

The “Original Arrest” and the “Preceding Arrest” can be the same if the disposition for the “Original Arrest” resulted in the study placement. What are the

characteristicsof these youth?


Public Assistance

56% 60%CAMPSUITABLE

PLACEMENT

Substance Abuse

38% 30%CAMPSUITABLE

PLACEMENT

Arrest/Incarceration

68% 60%CAMPSUITABLE

PLACEMENT

Gang Involvement

22% 20%CAMPSUITABLE

PLACEMENT

Family (Mother, Father, and/or Siblings) Had a History of Any of theFollowing Based on Self-Report to the Probation Officer:


Average Ageat the “Original Arrest”

1415

% Placed “Home on Probation” within1 Year Prior to Study Placement

% Under Probation Supervision atTime of Study Placement

% of Study Placements Resultingfrom a Probation Violation

Average Age at Time of Placement

Average Length inStudy Placement

72% 76%CAMP

1516

90% 92%

76%62%

SUITABLE PLACEMENT

CAMP

SUITABLE PLACEMENT

CAMP

SUITABLE PLACEMENT

CAMP

SUITABLE PLACEMENT CAMP

SUITABLE PLACEMENT

What was their involvementin other systems?


MULTISYSTEM INVOLVEMENTDCFS CONTACT

LACOE/EDUCATION

DMH SERVICES

DCFS Contact


Based on 500 cohort youth, 18 cases not included (N=482)

DMH Services

What behavioral health treatment servicesdid youth receive across the study time frame?


Based on 100 case file youth, 2 cases not included (N=98)

LACOE/Education


Based on 100 case file youth, 4 cases not included (N=96)

RECIDIVISM FOR ALL COHORT CASES (N=500)

NEW JUVENILE ARRESTS AND SUSTAINED PETITIONS AFTER STUDY PLACEMENT EXIT

Note: Data does not include adult arrests.

New Juvenile Arrest 1 YearAfter Study Placement Exit

How do youth with more positive outcomes compare to those with more challenging outcomes?


RISK & RESILIENCY FACTORS IDENTIFIED BY DEPUTY PROBATION OFFICERS IN CASE NARRATIVES (N=8)

CASES WITH MORE POSITIVE OUTCOMES

CASES WITH MORE CHALLENGING OUTCOMES

Suitable Placement


Camp


Study Implications for Probation

▪ This study has illuminated the fact for Probation that good data and research should drive practice. Probation must improve our data tracking and research.

▪ Probation’s success with these youth is dependent upon every agency that serves them, including but not limited to Education, DMH and DHS.

▪ Probation has implemented best practices in Placement, Placement aftercare and RTSB and CCTP, subsequent to this study, including but not limited to; MDTS, Intensive aftercare services. These practices should improve our outcomes for youth coming out of Camp or Placement. A follow up study is being conducted to determine if our outcomes have improved.

Study Implications for Juvenile Justice Reform in Los Angeles County

AP Urban Peace Focus: Improving Outcomes in High-Violence Communities

Community-Level Transformation

Data-Driven Policy & Practice

System-Level Transformation

Accountability Transparency


Consensus: First Step Toward

Improve Youth Outcomes

Credible & Accessible Data

Data Sharing Across Systems


Establish an ongoing forum with agency representatives as well as other key stakeholder groups, including youth and family.

Develop policies to support the

implementation of these practices across

agencies.

Report findings as starting point for discussion

Connect data and findings to practices that

address the risks and needs of these youth


Establish a Cross-Departmental Juvenile Justice Data Systems Task Force

Develop framework for data-sharing

across departments

Assess data system capacity

Survey best practices and effort

alignment

Develop set of shared outcomes

Develop joint plan to achieve

an integrated

data system

that can:

• Produce data on system decisions and operations

• Produce data on individual level

• Track youth positive development

• Produce program data for evaluation

• Interface with other data systems Provide user-friendly functionality

• Ensure data elements are quantifiable

The City of Los Angeles Gang Reduction and Youth Development/Probation Reentry Program Partnership

Anne Tremblay, GRYD DirectorMarybeth Walker, Director of the Camp

Community Transition Program (CCTP), ProbationDavid Mitchell, District 1 Bureau Chief, ProbationJorja Leap, Ph.D., UCLA, Department of Social Welfare

Project Background

▪ Second Chance Act Juvenile Reentry 2013 Award Recipient, supporting the implementation of a GRYD Juvenile reentry program in four GRYD Zones

▪ The Juvenile reentry strategy focus: engaging youth, ages 14-21 on probation, returning from Juvenile Hall, or Juvenile Probation Camp & gang involved or classified as been gang involved by law enforcement, and reside within proposed GRYD zones

▪ Partner Agencies: Homeboy Industries (Cypress Park/Northeast) and Soledad Enrichment Action- SEA (Florence/Graham 77th, 77th (II), & Watts Regional Strategy)

Overview of GRYD Reentry Family Case Management (FCM)▪ Referrals must meet the following

eligibility criteria:

Age 14-21

Reside in the GRYD Reentry Eligible Zone, attend a school that is considered an in-zone school, or have a significant presence in the zone, including youth residing outside City of LA boundary (County)

Member or affiliate of a gang or crew (as determined by the contractor)

Overview of Probation’s Camp Community Transition Program (CCTP)▪ The purpose of CCTP is to work with minors transitioning from camp to community, and to promote

successful rehabilitation through:

▪ Family Engagement

▪ Assessment

▪ Case Planning

▪ Involvement of Community Partners.

▪ Recognizing Multiple Risk Factors such as:▪ Gang Involvement▪ Substance Abuse Problems▪ Educational Issues

▪ Aftercare (CCTP) begins servicing the youth once they are ordered camp and continues until the youth is released from camp. The CCTP Deputy acts as an “Agent of Change” empowering minors and their families. Our role is to instill trust and hope, motivate, and engage the family.

Overview of the Camp Process

DPO sends referral to GRYD Reentry at 90 days prior to release.

Note: Youth’s Primary DPO is located in camp.

Process and Outcome Evaluation

▪ Number of clients and demographics of clients

▪ What happened with clients while in they were in the program

▪ Impact of services on clients over time

▪ Feedback from service providers staff and GRYD staff

▪ Feedback from clients and families

GRYD Reentry: Progress So Far….

96% Males

4% Females

TOTAL REFERRALS ASSESSED

(N=32)

Referrals to GRYD (N=55)

REFERRALS WHO BEACME

CLIENTS(N=25, 78%)

GRYD CLIENT CHARACTERISTICS (N=25)

LATINO (60%)

AFRICAN-AMERICAN (36%)

OTHER (4%)

Client Age at Referral

40%17

years old

Admits to being a gang

memberIdentified as

gang member:

Cal-gangs or LAPS gang unit

Has gang tattoos

Has been arrested for gang activity

Hangs out with

identified gang

members

On probation for crime

consistent with gang

activity

Active “tag-banger”

Family has multi-

generational gang

involvement

8% 8%24%

32% 36%

4%16%

32%

REFERRALS PENDING

FOLLOW-UP(N=23)

Feedback from clients and families UCLA Evaluation Team plans to interview 25 men/women and their families.

Pre interviews will be conducted at roughly 3/4-months after release Post interviews will be conducted at roughly 7-months after release

Participation is voluntary and participant/families will receive a gift card for completing the interview.

Evaluation Team will record (with permission) all interviews and code them using an open coding process. Themes discussed by at least 1/3 of the sample will be presented in the final report.

Methodology for Client & Family Interviews The qualitative component of this evaluation draws upon a case study approach.

Case studies are used to understand: Broad questions given complex circumstance Current rather than historical issues Research that includes qualitative and quantitative data

Qualitative data will be collected through in-depth semi-structured interview.

In-depth interviews allow researchers to rely on the exact language of those who experienced the program – they are considered the experts.

Interviews will provide individual anecdotes, key themes, and cultural context unaccounted for by the quantitative aspects of the study.

An Overview of Interview Content Protocol will guide semi-structured interview through the following areas:

▪ Life Trajectory: key moments, successes, and challenges

▪ Camp Experience: benefits, challenges, and lessons learned▪ DPO and multi-disciplinary team ▪ Family involvement▪ Aftercare

▪ Community Reentry: transitioning back into the home/community - what's different?

An Overview of Interview Content—Continued Protocol will guide semi-structured interview through the following areas: ▪ Support System: diagramming/drawing how they envision their support network.▪ Youth Needs: problems they are facing and areas in which they need help.▪ GRYD: like most/like least and relationship with case manager.▪ Additional Programs: is family participating and other recommendations.▪ Probation/Other Systems: support from Probation, DMH, DCFS, School, etc.▪ Goals/Desires: life in 5 years, dreams for the future, and support system needs.

Significance of Partnership for GRYD

▪ City/County Collaboration, Evaluation and Community-Based Partnerships

▪ Juvenile Reentry within the GRYD Comprehensive Strategy– community and law enforcement/probation engagement

▪ Youth desistance/differentiation from gang and delinquent activity

▪ Increase in school enrollment and reduction in recidivism

▪ Addressing juvenile detention and impediments to successful Reentry

Significance for Probation/CCTP

▪ Youth and families are both connected to services while the youth is in camp.

▪ GRYD Reentry starts with the family early on. This is invaluable.

▪ Collecting data provides an opportunity for Deputy Probation Officers to see how youth and families are doing in the program. Data is connecting the research and practice together.

▪ Bigger Picture: The success of the program would led to county-wide operations through a continuation of care after release. This is the future of how we serve our clients.

Questions?

Documents

Promising Approaches to Juvenile Justice - California State …csun.edu/sites/default/files/Denise Herz, Dave Mitchell... · · 2015-05-20Study Implications for Juvenile Justice