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 Juvenile Justice course materials.

1. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Juvenile Justice Reform
Eliminating Congregate Institutions

2. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Case Study: The Closing of the Massachusetts Training Schools
and the Lessons Learned

3. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
The cycle of institutional and reform: the historical pattern
 Exposure of harsh and abusive institutional
conditions leads to public outcry
 Public outcry leads to calls for reform
 Political system responds to public pressure
by calling for an official investigation
 Citizens commission (Executive Branch) is
appointed or a civil grand jury (Judicial
Branch) is empowered to conduct the
investigation
 Many months later, commission or grand jury
issues report with findings and
recommendations
 Legislature appropriates funding for more
staffing, new programs or building renovation
that leaves institutional structure intact
 Public outcry and outside scrutiny fades and
system returns to prior practices

4. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Prelude to Reform in Massachusetts: Triggering Events
• 1966-67 Reports by HEW Children’s Bureau,
Massachusetts Committee on Children and
Youth, and State Senate release critical
reports on abuses in the Massachusetts
Training Schools.
• Juvenile Justice reform become issues in
gubernatorial election of 1968
• New governor establishes a new Department
of Youth Services (August 1969)
• Jerome Miller appointed Commissioner
(October 1969) of new Department

5. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
First Actions: Miller Attempts Conventional
Approach to Institutional Reform
• Fix the institutions
• Lobby for more institutional resources
• Expand institution-based resources
• Maintain existing structure

6. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Next Actions: Miller Abandons Conventional
Reform Strategies
• Rejects congregate institutional care
• Establishes a new vision for juvenile
justice services that emphasizes
community-based services
• Forges alliances with child advocacy
groups
• Invites outside scrutiny of institutional
realities
• Lobbies policy makers for systemic
change
• Sets own timetable and initiates change
process

7. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Obstacles to reducing institutionalization
• Limited Resources
• Nonflexible budget
• External Political climate
• Union contracts and civil service
restrictions
• Lack of community alternatives
• Resistance and sabotage from vested
interests

8. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Strategies for closing congregate institutions
• Reduce institutional populations
by transferring youth to
alternative programs
• Create decentralized
management through
regionalization
• Purchase services from
nonprofit agencies
• Create network of community-
based programs
• Close the institutions
• Transfer institutional funds to
community-based services

9. www.cjcj.org
© Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 2013
40 Boardman Place
San Francisco, CA 94103
Significance of the closing of the Massachusetts reforms schools to
national juvenile justice policy
• Demonstrated that large congregate
training schools were obsolete and
could be closed
• Demonstrated that an alternative
system of primarily non-institutional
interventions could be substituted
for institutional confinement
• Demonstrated the political
challenges of closing training
schools