10. juvenile justice reform in ca 09

  • 1,738 views
Uploaded on

CJCJ's Executive Director Daniel Macallair, is a practitioner-in-residence at San Francisco State University (SFSU)'s Department of Criminal Justice Studies. These slides are from his Intervention …

CJCJ's Executive Director Daniel Macallair, is a practitioner-in-residence at San Francisco State University (SFSU)'s Department of Criminal Justice Studies. These slides are from his Intervention Policies in Juvenile Justice course materials.

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,738
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Juvenile Justice Reform in California 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 2. California’s Juvenile Justice System Moving Past the Reform School System 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 3. Timeline to reform A Troubled System Exposed 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 4. Prison Law Office files a lawsuit against State of California (2003) Lawsuit alleges state’s treatment of youthful offenders was illegal and inhumane 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 5. Lawsuit cites constitutional violations in six program areas • • • • • • Overall safety and welfare Education Mental health treatment Medical treatment Sex offender treatment Access for wards with disabilities 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 6. State’s initial response California attorney general hires independent experts to investigate claims 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 7. What the experts found • • • • • Unprecedented levels of violence Substantial use of force by correctional staff Lack of adequate educational programs Substandard or non existent mental health services Wards locked in decrepit isolation cells for 23 hours a day for months 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 8. CYA isolation cell block 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 9. CYA isolation cells became major issue 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 10. Response to the expert reports California acknowledges unconstitutional conditions and enters into a consent decree in November 2004 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 11. Determining what to do Addressing the Farrell Lawsuit: 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 12. Conditions of consent decree • State agreed to oversight by court-appointed special master • State promises to engage in a series of actions to overhaul entire youth corrections system 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 13. First steps • Governor restructures California’s corrections system’s administrative structure. • California Youth Authority is eliminated as an independent agency. • Youth corrections institutions merged with adult corrections system as Division of Juvenile Facilities 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 14. Next Steps Assign independent experts to determine the extent of the problem and recommend remedial steps 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 15. Expert findings: State’s independent experts issue report detailing “a system that is broken almost everywhere you look”, citing: Safety and Welfare Plan: Implementing Reform in California March 31, 2006 Christopher Murray Chris Baird Ned Loughran Fred Mills John Platt  High levels of violence and fear in the institutions  Unsafe conditions for wards and staff  Antiquated facilities unsuited for any mission  An adult corrections mentality with adult juvenile mix 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 16. Expert findings continued:  Management by crisis with little time to make changes  Frequent lockdowns to manage violence with subsequent program reductions  Time adds for infractions adding over 8 months to average lengths of stay  Lengths of stay almost triple the average for nation  Hours on end when youths have nothing to do 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 17. Experts finding continued • Vocational classrooms that are idle or running at half speed • Capitulation to gang culture with youths housed by gang affiliation • Low levels of staffing and huge living units • Abysmal achievement despite enormous outlays for education • Information management systems incapable of supporting management 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 18. Typical Dormitory Living Unit 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 19. Expert findings continued: • Little partnership with counties and a fragmented system • Poor re-entry planning and too few services on parole • Enormous costs with little to show for it (California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice Safety and Welfare Plan March 2006) 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 20. State’s response to expert’s report Safety and Welfare Remedial Plan: Implementing Reform in California (July 10, 2006) 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 21. California’s route to promised reform  Create capacity for change  Reduce fear and violence  Identify a rehabilitative treatment model  Lay the foundation for treatment reform  Convert facilities to rehabilitative model 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 22. State fails to make progress on Farrell reforms Series of reports by independent court appointed monitors finds little progress despite declining institutional population and increased expenditures 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 23. California Division of Juvenile Justice (CYA to 2005) Institutional Cost Per Ward Per Year 1996 – 2007 $218,000 $200,000 $178,000 $150,000 $115,000 $100,000 $92,545 $83,223 $50,000 $40,528 $43,565 $49,111 $63,961 Sources: CA state budgets, CA Dept.Boardman PlaceCDCR-Div. of Juvenile Facilities 40 of Finance, CA San Francisco, CA 94103 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 $0 $36,118 $39,425 $56,247 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 24. Governor’s response to lack of progress on reform Senate Bill 81 (August 2007) 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 25. SB 81: juvenile justice reform through realignment  DJF Population will be “downsized” to about one half its current level  Non-violent juvenile offenders will stay in county programs and facilities– No DJF  State will pay counties for new juvenile disposition and aftercare programs  DJF will continue to accept serious- violent offenders committed by county courts
  • 26. Little Hoover commission issues bipartisan report Calls for eliminating state role in administering youth correctional institutions by 2011 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 27. Commission’s Recommendations  Create an independent office of juvenile justice to plan, develop, fund, and oversee a comprehensive continuum of services at the county level  Consolidate all state juvenile justice funding into one dedicated funding stream  Elimination of the state’s role in administering juvenile correctional institutions and shifting responsibilities to the counties 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 28. Governor Brown and the Future of Juvenile Justice in California • Elimination of the DJJ • Transfer of all Juvenile Justice functions to the counties • Provide resources to the counties to augment capacity 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 29. Emerging System of Juvenile Justice in California • County Juvenile Halls, Ranches and Camps become long term confinement options • Community-Based Interventions are expanded • New Federal funding streams are utilized to enhance programing for high risk youths • State maintains an oversight sight role but no direct services 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
  • 30. References JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM: REALIGNING RESPONSIBILITIES Little Hoover Commission Closing California’s Division of Juvenile Facilities: An Analysis of County Institutional Capacity by Daniel Macallair, MPA Executive Director, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice Mike Males, PhD Senior Research Fellow, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice Catherine McCracken, M.S. Program Director, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 40 Boardman Place San Francisco, CA 94103 www.cjcj.org © Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013