Disproportionate Minority Contact for        African American and Hispanic Youth:             The Story Behind the Numbers...
2Today’s Presentation• Why conduct an analysis in Fairfax?• What is an Institutional Analysis?• What did we learn from thi...
3Terminology and Background• Disproportionality refers to the over- or under-  representation of a given population group,...
4Regional & State Context• Disproportionality and disparities exist in neighboring  localities and at the State level• Asi...
5Why an Analysis in Fairfax?• Fairfax County’s has always made efforts to eliminate disparities in outcomes  for youth and...
6Why an Analysis in Fairfax?• About 3% of youth ages 10 – 17 in Fairfax County are  referred to Juvenile Court (4,106 of 1...
7Why an Analysis in Fairfax?• Disproportionality has been increasing for both African American and  Hispanic youth at almo...
8 What is an Institutional Analysis?• A diagnostic process used by a trained team to reveal  the gap between what a youth ...
9What the IA is NOT• Not quantitative analysis• Not an assessment of individual judges, police or  probation officers• Not...
10 What is an Institutional Analysis?Core Assumptions• Institutions are designed to ensure consistency  among staff and li...
11Institutional Analysis Framework                                         JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM                        ...
12IA Data Collection•   ‘Big Picture’ Interviews with Leadership (37)•   Case based analysis (8 youth – included 71 interv...
13IA Data Collection       N= 179 interviews and focus groups
14    Phases of the Fairfax IA Process• Initial Planning and Preparation    ▫ Identify and Train Internal Investigative Te...
15What We Learned from the IAShared by African American and Hispanic Youth and Families• Theme 1: Publicly available preve...
16What We Learned from the IAShared by African American and Hispanic Youth and Families• Theme 4: Approaches to working wi...
17        What We Learned from the IA              Specific to Hispanic Youth and Families• Theme 6: The mixed documentati...
18  Opportunities for Improvement• Findings illustrate the complexity of  addressing DMC and that DMC is not solely  cause...
19Opportunities for Improvement • Improve cross-systems data capabilities • Change the way County institutions are organiz...
20Next Steps Discussion
21Additional Data and Information• The IA serves as beginning point of analysis, not an  exhaustive investigation• Other C...
22Change Framework    Strategic Action Levels                        Change Mechanisms Influence Policy & Legislation     ...
23Organizing for Improvements              Influencing Policy and Legislation• Successful Children and Youth Policy Team (...
24Organizing for ImprovementsChange Organizational Practices - Foster Coalitions & Networks- Educate Providers  • Dispropo...
25Organizing for ImprovementsChange Organizational Practice – Promote Community Education• Regional Change Team(s)   ▫ Mem...
26Organizing for ImprovementsChange Organizational Practices – Promote Community Education• Individual Agencies   ▫ Examin...
27Communication Plan: IA Findings• CSSP & Fairfax County Joint Report• Internal Communications  ▫ Board of Supervisors & S...
28Disproportionate Minority Contact forAfrican American and Hispanic Youth:The Story Behind the Numbers and the Path to Ac...
29Questions and Dialogue
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Disproportionality Presentation to BOS and FCPS

2,462
-1

Published on

On Tuesday, Sept. 18, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and the Fairfax County School Board were presented with findings from an institutional analysis looking at disproportinate minority contact in the county's juvenile justice system. The study, completed by the Center for the Study of Social Policy under contract by Fairfax County, found that while both county government and public schools have already made great efforts to address the issue of disproportionality, there are still gaps that should continue to be addressed.

Published in: News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,462
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Specifically, under the Formula Grants Program, each State must address efforts to reduce the proportion of youth detained or confined in secure detention facilities, secure correctional facilities, jails, and lockups who are members of minority groups if it exceeds the proportion of such groups in the general population. For purposes of this requirement, OJJDP has defined minority populations as African Americans, American Indians, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Hispanics.
  • In FY 2005, Montgomery County, MD utilized grant funds to examine how their youth became involved with law enforcement and juvenile justice systems and the decisions made that led to youth being place in secure detention.
  • This is a national issue and concernTWA’s mission included: Addressing the disproportionality of African American and Hispanic youth in the juvenile justice and child welfare systems – eliminating the achievement gap – and eliminating health disparities. Seizing a grant opportunity of Dept of Criminal Justice Services – we focused in on the front door of the juvenile justice system and moved forward to conduct an institutional analysis
  • Together, African American and Hispanic youth comprise 74% of the youth population detained and 54% of the referrals to juvenile court In the County populations, these subgroups comprise 27% of youth ages 10 - 17
  • The IA is grounded in a form of sociology known as institutional ethnography. Institutional ethnography produces “accounts of institutional practices that can explain how workers are organized and coordinated to talk about and act on cases.
  • Quantitative analysis is used to determine the focus of inquiry – in Fairfax, this emerged as the front door of juvenile justice
  • standardization
  • Small sliver unlabeled is “other” and includes 5 interviews with community non-profit (2), local pastor (1), Public Defender office(1) and Commonwealth Attorney’s office (1) Appendix A in the report details all of the data collection activities
  • Fairfax Investigative Team members came from: Health Department Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Neighborhood and Community Services Office for Women and Domestic and Sexual Violence Services Police Department Family Services Office of the County Executive
  • The findings illustrate the complexity of addressing DMC and that it is not solely caused by – nor solved by the juvenile justice system alone. Rather, changes and actions are required within communities and other public systems. Some findings are generally applicable to youth in Fairfax County, stressing the importance of overall access to preventive services to support families and promote positive youth development. Other findings are more specific to the experiences of African American and Hispanic youth encountered in this study, and very well may apply to other populations.
  • Change Framework helps us to organize and align multiple strategic levels When multiple levels are worked simultaneously – creates a synergy that produces better results to effect positive, sustainable change
  • Disproportionality Presentation to BOS and FCPS

    1. 1. Disproportionate Minority Contact for African American and Hispanic Youth: The Story Behind the Numbers and the Path to ActionPresentation to Fairfax Board of Supervisors &Fairfax County School BoardSeptember 18, 2012
    2. 2. 2Today’s Presentation• Why conduct an analysis in Fairfax?• What is an Institutional Analysis?• What did we learn from this Institutional Analysis?• What’s next?
    3. 3. 3Terminology and Background• Disproportionality refers to the over- or under- representation of a given population group, often defined by racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic status• In the juvenile justice system, disproportionality is measured as disproportionate minority contact (DMC) at all decision points in their system (i.e. cases referred, diverted, probation, detention, etc.)• In the 1988 Amendments to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974, Congress required that States address DMC in their State plans
    4. 4. 4Regional & State Context• Disproportionality and disparities exist in neighboring localities and at the State level• Aside from Arlington County, Fairfax County has the highest rate for African American referrals to juvenile court. ▫ For every one white youth referred, there are 3.78 African American youth referred in Fairfax County ▫ In Prince William, the rate is 2.41 to 1 ▫ In Montgomery County, the rate is 4.38 to 1• Except for Loudoun County, Fairfax has the lowest diversion rates for both African American and Hispanic youth ▫ For every one white youth diverted from juvenile court in Fairfax, .64 and .60 (African American and Hispanic) are diverted ▫ In Arlington County, the rates are .75 and 1.76 respectively ▫ In Montgomery County, the rate is .87 and .82 respectively
    5. 5. 5Why an Analysis in Fairfax?• Fairfax County’s has always made efforts to eliminate disparities in outcomes for youth and recognize the complexities across institutions and community. Continual improvement examples of practices working well include: ▫ JDRDC “Youth Assessment Screening Instrument” ▫ Opportunity Neighborhood: Mount Vernon pilot ▫ Systems of Care reform ▫ Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) school based teams• A community collaborative Together We’re the Answer engaged stakeholders across communities, faith, private and public sectors to further the local journey in 2004 ▫ To reduce disproportionality of African American and Hispanic children and youth in Child Welfare & Juvenile Justice systems ▫ To eliminate the achievement gap and health disparities• Despite efforts and rhetorically “race-neutral” policies, disproportionate minority contact (DMC) within juvenile justice remains a relevant and growing problem
    6. 6. 6Why an Analysis in Fairfax?• About 3% of youth ages 10 – 17 in Fairfax County are referred to Juvenile Court (4,106 of 119,287 – FY 2011)• African American youth comprise 10% of the County’s youth population, yet: ▫ 27% of JDRC referrals (1,108 youth) ▫ 37% of detention center placements (173 youth)• Hispanic youth comprise 17% of the County’s youth population, yet: ▫ 27% of JDRC referrals (1,108 youth) ▫ 36% of detention center placements (167 youth)
    7. 7. 7Why an Analysis in Fairfax?• Disproportionality has been increasing for both African American and Hispanic youth at almost every decision making point in the juvenile court system • In FY 2004, the rate of referral for African American and Hispanic youth was 2.45 and 1.17 and in FY 2011, these rates were 3.78 and 2.22 • In FY 2004, the rate of diversion for African American and Hispanic youth was .80 and .76 and in FY 2011, these rates were .64 and .60• DMC is most marked at the initial stage of referral to JDRDC and is most dramatic for African American youth• An African American youth has nearly a four times greater chance than his/her white peer to be referred to juvenile court – a Hispanic youth more than twice• African American and Hispanic youth have less than half the chance to be diverted – and are more than twice as likely to be detained
    8. 8. 8 What is an Institutional Analysis?• A diagnostic process used by a trained team to reveal the gap between what a youth and their family needs to be safe, stable and successful and what institutions are actually set up to do• Grounded in sociology, institutional ethnography• Ethnographic methods uncover the experience of individuals as they encounter institutions and provide an understanding of how the organization of institutions and the standardized methods of processing people as “cases” contributes to problematic outcomes
    9. 9. 9What the IA is NOT• Not quantitative analysis• Not an assessment of individual judges, police or probation officers• Not a comparative study• Not intended to uncover all sources of DMC
    10. 10. 10 What is an Institutional Analysis?Core Assumptions• Institutions are designed to ensure consistency among staff and limit the influence of idiosyncratic worker behavior• Institutional view of clients is rarely neutral• Institutional changes can improve outcomes for youth and families• Population specific studies produce valid insights
    11. 11. 11Institutional Analysis Framework JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM & PARTNERS Mission, African Purpose, Concepts American/Hispanic Function and YOUTH & FAMILIES Other Theories Education OUTCOMES: • Strengths/Resources and • No recidivism • Challenges Training • Youth connected to school • Risk Taking Behavior Accountability • Knowledge of Client(s) • Effective Intervention • Youth connected to positive • Capacity to Intervene/Act adults Resources • Youth engaged positively with community Administrative Practices COMMUNITY: • Formal and Informal Linkages Rules and Supports / Resources Regulations • Constraints
    12. 12. 12IA Data Collection• ‘Big Picture’ Interviews with Leadership (37)• Case based analysis (8 youth – included 71 interviews)• Work Practice Interviews (71)• Observations (23)• Youth and Parent interviews / focus groups (11)• Practitioner Focus Groups (4)• Text Analysis (70 case records)• Policy Analysis
    13. 13. 13IA Data Collection N= 179 interviews and focus groups
    14. 14. 14 Phases of the Fairfax IA Process• Initial Planning and Preparation ▫ Identify and Train Internal Investigative Team• Map Key Decision Points of Institutional Intervention• Data Collection Phase I – African American Lived Experience Phase II – Latino Lived Experience• Analyze Information• Identify Opportunities for Improvement• Communicate Findings• Identify Mechanisms to Support Local Action Plan• Implement Action Plan
    15. 15. 15What We Learned from the IAShared by African American and Hispanic Youth and Families• Theme 1: Publicly available preventive services do not consistently meet the broad range of needs of African American and Hispanic youth and families.• Theme 2: Youth who become involved with the courts frequently have mental health, substance abuse and special education needs, and earlier interventions to address these needs have either not occurred or not been sufficient.• Theme 3: A common, cross-system vision promoting the well-being of youth and families and emphasizing collaborative work with families has not been fully developed and implemented. As a result, families experience uncoordinated teams, assessments and case plans.
    16. 16. 16What We Learned from the IAShared by African American and Hispanic Youth and Families• Theme 4: Approaches to working with families are often based on operational requirements of the system—that is, the system privileges its need for efficiency over the individual needs of families.• Theme 5: Most youth involved with juvenile court are also struggling in school. System interventions do not consistently support youth in remaining connected to and completing school.
    17. 17. 17 What We Learned from the IA Specific to Hispanic Youth and Families• Theme 6: The mixed documentation status of many Hispanic households creates unique needs for this population and often compromises a family’s ability to access prevention services.• Theme 7: School truancy is often a warning sign of significant needs of the youth and family. Interventions around school truancy issues of Hispanic youth do not necessarily account for and meet the underlying needs of youth and are therefore unsuccessful resulting in youth becoming more involved in the juvenile court system.• Theme 8: Interventions do not take into account the language barriers and cultural barriers experienced by some Hispanic families who were newer to the United States.
    18. 18. 18 Opportunities for Improvement• Findings illustrate the complexity of addressing DMC and that DMC is not solely caused by - nor solved by - the juvenile justice system• Changes and actions are required within communities and other public systems
    19. 19. 19Opportunities for Improvement • Improve cross-systems data capabilities • Change the way County institutions are organized ▫ Align partner missions and functions into overarching County goals ▫ Revise administrative procedures and protocols ▫ Expand and tailor resources • Strengthen systems of accountability • Expand knowledge and skills • Enhance partnerships and linkages • Conduct additional analyses
    20. 20. 20Next Steps Discussion
    21. 21. 21Additional Data and Information• The IA serves as beginning point of analysis, not an exhaustive investigation• Other County and School data will inform our actions ▫ Youth Survey ▫ Graduation Task Force Report ▫ Community School Linked Services unified assessments• Promise Scorecard will begin to collect data across the systems in Opportunity Neighborhood
    22. 22. 22Change Framework Strategic Action Levels Change Mechanisms Influence Policy & Legislation Successful Children & Youth Policy Team Regional Change Team(s)Change Organizational Practices Dialogue with Directors Series Individual Agency Actions Foster Coalitions & Networks DDPET Opportunity Neighborhood: Mt Vernon Educate Providers DDPET & Ambassador ProgramPromote Community Education DDPET, Community & All Stakeholders Strengthen Individual Community & All Stakeholders Knowledge & Skills Change Framework Source : Prevention Institute’s Spectrum of Prevention
    23. 23. 23Organizing for Improvements Influencing Policy and Legislation• Successful Children and Youth Policy Team (SCYPT) ▫ Provides the leadership, vision, and strategy needed to enhance the well-being and resilience of children and youth  Shared vision for positive youth outcomes  Capacity to address shared policy issues  Shared accountability  Balanced Membership comprised of Human Services, Police, Schools, Community, Youth and Parents
    24. 24. 24Organizing for ImprovementsChange Organizational Practices - Foster Coalitions & Networks- Educate Providers • Disproportionality and Disparity Prevention and Elimination Team (DDPET) ▫ Facilitate Dialogue with Directors ▫ Link and support Regional Change Teams ▫ Track and connect agency specific and system wide initiatives ▫ Provide workforce development actions on disproportionality and disparity
    25. 25. 25Organizing for ImprovementsChange Organizational Practice – Promote Community Education• Regional Change Team(s) ▫ Membership comprised of community based organizations, faith groups, county and schools providers ▫ Neighborhood based change teams  Start-up in Opportunity Neighborhood ▫ Apply a deliberate change model to pilot and measure impact of incremental changes ▫ Identify policy issues for the SCYPT
    26. 26. 26Organizing for ImprovementsChange Organizational Practices – Promote Community Education• Individual Agencies ▫ Examine the implications of the IA findings for your agency’s policies and practices ▫ Examine how your agency’s policy and practices potentially influenced the IA findings ▫ Identify and monitor agency specific disproportionality and disparity initiatives ▫ Participate in cross-system initiatives
    27. 27. 27Communication Plan: IA Findings• CSSP & Fairfax County Joint Report• Internal Communications ▫ Board of Supervisors & School Board ▫ Human Services, Police and School Leadership ▫ Human Services, Police and School Staff• Community ▫ Target groups include  Annandale Round Table  Minority Student Achievement Oversight Committee  Opportunity Neighborhood Governance Team  Partnership for Youth  Together We’re the Answer  United Prevention Coalition
    28. 28. 28Disproportionate Minority Contact forAfrican American and Hispanic Youth:The Story Behind the Numbers and the Path to Action Report contains: • Additional data • Discussion regarding how each theme emerged through the analysis • Opportunities for Improvement strategies • Appendix C contains a growing inventory of initiatives targeting supports for African American and Hispanic Populations
    29. 29. 29Questions and Dialogue

    ×