|
Quarterly Meeting Summary
July 18,
2003
Office of Justice Programs
Washington, D.C.
Abstract
This meeting of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention provided members and the public
with information on the importance of responding to children
with mental health issues, with particular focus on a discussion
of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration
for Children and Families testimony on voluntary relinquishment
of custody issues to the U.S. Congress; the U.S. Department
of Education's After School program, the 21st Century
Community Learning Centers; and the U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's Juvenile
Justice Gang Initiative.
Participants
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(OJJDP), Office of Justice Programs (OJP)
J. Robert Flores, Administrator, OJJDP, Vice Chair, Coordinating
Council
Susan Abrams, Legal Intern, OJJDP
Karen Boston, Administrative Coordinator, Juvenile Justice Resource Center
(JJRC)
Tonya Cropper, Intern, OJJDP
Catherine Doyle, Technical Information Specialist, OJJDP
Ebony Edwards, Project Coordinator, JJRC
Kathi Grasso, Senior Juvenile Justice Policy/Legal Advisor, OJJDP
Donni LeBoeuf, Special Assistant to the Administrator, OJJDP
Carrie Madison, Intern, OJJDP
Donna Ray, Associate Administrator, OJJDP
Marilyn Roberts, Special Advisor to the Administrator, OJJDP
Jackie Siegel, Editor, JJRC
Jeff Slowikowski, Supervisory Social Science Specialist, OJJDP
Kevin Whitman, Intern, OJJDP
William Woodruff, Deputy Administrator, OJJDP
Phelan Wyrick, Gang Program Coordinator, OJJDP
American Indian and Alaska Native Affairs
Norena Henry, Director
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Herb Drake, Chief, GREAT Branch
Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys
Chris Chaney, Attorney Advisor
Executive Office for Weed and Seed, OJP
Robert Samuels, Acting Director
U.S. Department of Education (ED)
Joe Conaty, Program Director
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Isadora Hare, Public Health Analyst
Children's Bureau, Administration for Children and Families
Susan Orr, Associate Commissioner
Family Services Bureau
Harry Wilson, Associate Commissioner
U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)
Richard Morris, Youth Specialist
U. S. Department of Transportation
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Cheryl Neverman, Safety Specialist
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP)
Darlind Davis, Chief, Prevention Branch
Practitioner Members
Larry Brendtro, President, Circle of Courage
Vernadette Broyles, Public Policy Legal Counsel, We Care America
Larry Echohawk, Law Professor, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University
Michael Mahoney, Vice Chair, Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission
The Honorable Gordon Martin, Associate Justice, Massachusetts Trial Court,
District Court
Other Participants
Louise Anderson, Economic Development Associate, International
Economic Development Council
Erika Fitzpatrick, Executive Editor, Criminal Justice Funding Report
Meng He, Public Policy Intern, National Association of State Alcohol and
Drug Abuse Directors
William Howard, Assistant Administrator, Maryland State Judiciary
Patricia Johnston, Director, Members Services, National Association for Children's
Behavioral Health
Randi Levine, Policy Assistant, Fight Crime: Invest in Kids
Terri Odom, Chair, District of Columbia State Advisory Group
David Osher, Managing Research Scientist, American Institutes for Research
Jeffrey Washington, Deputy Executive Director, American Correctional Association
Welcome and Introductions
J. Robert Flores, Vice Chair, Coordinating
Council, Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP), U.S. Department of Justice
Robert Flores, Vice Chair, Coordinating Council, Administrator,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP),
welcomed participants to the Quarterly Meeting of the Coordinating
Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Mr.
Flores announced that Lee Kessler, Program Director, National
Endowment for the Arts, is recovering from major surgery and
that the Coordinating Council will send its wishes for her
speedy recovery.
On July 17, 2003, Mr. Flores and Dr. Susan Orr, Associate
Commissioner, Children's Bureau, Administration for Children
and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
testified before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs
about the issue of voluntary relinquishment of custody. Voluntary
relinquishment of custody has occurred for thousands of parents
who are unable to pay for needed mental health services for
their children. Mr. Flores suggested that the Coordinating
Council further explore and focus on the significant risk mental
health issues pose for juveniles. OJJDP has a number of efforts
that focus on drugs, alcohol, and mental health issues and
would like to coordinate these efforts with other ongoing Federal
efforts to weave a safety net for young people.
Presentation: Mental Health Issues for Children
Dr. Susan Orr, Associate Commissioner,
Children's Bureau, Administration for Children and Families,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
A recent General Accounting Office (GAO) report on the relinquishment
issue identified a nationwide problem of misinformation for
parents without resources and who do not know where to go with
a troubled child. In most States, there are situations when
parents believe they must relinquish custody of their children
to get the necessary mental health treatment for their children.
Children are either surrendered to child welfare or juvenile
justice and, unfortunately, there is a perception on the part
of these parents that there are significant Federal restrictions
that require that outcome. These restrictions do not exist,
but there continues to be a large disconnect between the perception
and reality. Usually in voluntary relinquishment, a parent/agency
agreement is developed; if the State discovers abuse or neglect,
the placement goes from voluntary to involuntary placement.
Title 4E of the Social Security Act, a possible source of
funding for services for these children, is the most restrictive
categorical funding stream possible. Dollars may only be tapped
at the State level if a child is removed from the home. The
Bush Administration is working on legislation that will allow
States to choose an option to make that categorical funding
stream flexible.
There are half a million children in foster care, a percentage
of whom are voluntarily relinquished children--who rarely get
the mental health services they need. HHS is now looking at
performance-based measures in addition to process measures
to safeguard their needs. HHS has developed safety, permanency,
and well-being measures for foster children. HHS's Administration
on Children and Families (ACF) has funded continuum of care
demonstrations for States so they can supplement services identified
by ACF.
Discussion
Vernadette Broyles, Public Policy Legal Counsel, We Care America,
asked how parents can enter the Federal system for help. Dr.
Orr responded that there is not a Federal system, but rather
the Federal government supports the State programs. States
have several options, including accessing Medicaid through
waivers.
Michael Mahoney, Vice Chair, Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission,
congratulated HHS, particularly the work of the Substance Abuse
and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA), and OJJDP
on their work that focuses on mental health issues for children
in institutions. Work in that regard in Chicago has led to
State-funded community-based services at detention centers.
It would make sense to provide 4E services before youth go
into training programs. Dr. Orr said that would require legislative
change.
Mr. Flores noted that it does not make sense to put children
who are severely depressed or acting out in detention centers.
The economic cost is very high as well. He asked that the Coordinating
Council refer the issue to the Family Health Subcommittee to
develop specific recommendations to motivate State governments
to elevate the importance of mental health issues and administer
associated grant funds. A motion to that effect was made, seconded,
and passed.
The Honorable Gordon Martin, Associate Justice, Massachusetts
Trial Court, District Court, asked that the Coordinating Council
membership receive copies of the GAO report on relinquishment
of custody.
Presentation: After School Programs
Joe Conaty, Program Director for Academic
Improvement and Teacher Quality, Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education, U.S. Department of Education
In 1997, the U.S. Department of Education (ED), working in
partnership with the C.S. Mott Foundation, established the
21st Center Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC), with a
goal to develop high quality afterschool enrichment opportunities
and make them available to inner-city and rural students and
communities. The impetus for the program came from a Congressman
from a rural district who worked to make the schools function
as community resources in areas with limited resources. The
program grew exponentially from $1 million to $1 billion, receiving
many more requests from eligible applicants than could be funded.
By 2002, 21st CCLC programs were serving 1.2 million children
and 400,000 adults in 6,800 schools in nearly 1,600 communities.
Services were varied--in some sites, children did homework,
others focused on sports or academics, and some included tutoring
by volunteers--but all provided a safe, secure place for children
after school. When the No Child Left Behind legislation passed,
the program underwent some fundamental changes to focus on
academics.
The reauthorized 21st CCLC programs focused on academic enrichment
activities for students in high-poverty and low-performing
schools to help students meet State and local standards, an
array of additional services to complement academic programs,
and literacy and related educational development services to
the families of children who are in the program. This program
also became a State program under which States receive Federal
dollars on a formula basis. As of this writing, all States
have run competitions under the new 21st CCLC program, and
all have made their first awards--just under 1,000 grants that
average $325,000, compared to $525,000 in the previous program.
Grantees are primarily school districts, but some grants have
been awarded to community- or faith-based organizations.
Mr. Conaty also reported on a rigorous evaluation study conducted
by Mathematica, " When Schools Stay Open Late: The National
Evaluation of the 21st-Century Community Learning
Centers Programs" that found that the 21st CCLC programs
may not be serving children most effectively. Academic services
were found to be haphazard and of low quality. Children, particularly
older youth, did not regularly attend the programs. As a result
of the study, ED and its other partners will provide extensive
training and support to improve the quality of afterschool
programs and to ensure that they are effective. This study
determined that effective afterschool programs need to offer
activities that are exciting and engaging and reinforce academic
learning. Content matter and activities need to feel and look
different from schoolwork. Trained staff who know how to challenge
and encourage children are important to the success of these
programs.
Over the next few months, ED will offer technical assistance
and training--a followup to ED's After School Summit, hosted
by Arnold Schwarznegger--that will focus on research-based,
promising and exemplary activities and help program directors
and staff to understand what the most important aspects of
after school programs should be and how to evaluate them.
Discussion
Larry Brendtro, President, Circles of Courage, asked what
impact after school programs had on the high levels of delinquency
during after school hours. In some cases, an increase in misbehavior
was indicated by the self reporting of drug abuse (a finding
that may cause disagreement because it was based on an assessment
of immature programs). Mr. Conaty said that this was one of
the most controversial findings of the study.
Richard Morris, Youth Specialist, Department of Labor (DOL),
asked to what extent the lack of adult engagement influenced
the youth who self selected to leave the program. DOL's Workforce
Investment requires the involvement of caring adults. He also
noted that youth leadership is critical and must be integral
to the program. Mr. Conaty agreed, saying that the most effective
programs were designed by young people who subsequently recruited
other young people to serve as mentors.
Ms. Broyles suggested that afterschool programs used to occur
in the home with parents and asked if there was any effort
to provide outreach to the public about the consequences of
not being available to children after school. Mr. Conaty said
that ED does a great deal of outreach on the issue of latchkey
kids and the consequences of children coming home to an empty
house.
In response to a question about where 21st CCLC grants are
awarded, Mr. Conaty said that the States have made some awards
to faith-based organizations (FBOs), but a high percentage
go to school districts. FBOs have been very active in afterschool
programs and continue to be partners with the program.
Mr. Flores suggested that representatives from ED meet with
the Education Subcommittee to discuss what programs could work
in tandem. For example, Weed and Seed and the Anti-Gang Initiative
could work with the 21st CCLC--6,800 21st CCLC sites represent
6,800 distribution channels for OJJDP materials for youth.
He also noted another potential partner could be the President's
Council on Physical Fitness to meet youth needs for exercise
and physical activity. Harry Wilson, Associate Commissioner
Family Services Bureau, HHS, noted that an epidemic of childhood
obesity is apparent and suggested that ED should include health
components in its approach to afterschool programs.
Judge Martin noted that at the Coordinating Council's March
retreat the issue of zero tolerance in school had been discussed.
While zero tolerance sounds good, the reality is that abandoning
children to the streets is harmful. He suggested the Coordinating
Council look at legislative avenues to address this issue--perhaps
mirroring the Federal highway funding approach that is dependent
on a State's compliance with Federally-mandated speed limits.
Mr. Brendtro added that a measure of a school's excellence
could be its holding power or its ability to hold onto
its students.
Herb Drake, Chief, GREAT Branch, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms, said the GREAT program uses police officers as
caring adults in many afterschool environments and has recently
developed a family component with FBOs and community mental
health services. GREAT has 1,600 agencies with officers involved
in the program, and 2,500 school resource officers who interface
with youth. As curriculum was developed, GREAT utilized ED's
State Standards of Learning and incorporated decisionmaking,
life skills, and conflict resolution into the curriculum.
Presentation: OJJDP Gang Initiative and Mapping
Jeff Slowikowski, Supervisory Social Science
Specialist; Phelan Wyrick, Gang Program Coordinator, Demonstration
Programs Division, OJJDP
The goal of the Gang Initiative is to reduce youth gang crime
and violence in communities through the integrated application
of proven practices in prevention, intervention, and suppression.
A key observation and driving program concept is the knowledge
that criminal street gangs are the most visible cause and the
most visible result of extreme social and economic distress
in the most disadvantaged communities. This initiative takes
a broad-brush approach that includes prenatal care, truancy
prevention, and job programs because prevention is core to
the effort.
This program is a comprehensive slate of prevention, intervention,
and suppression programs that integrates related programs across
risk domains and age groups and is coordinated through a single
point of coordination (POC). The Gang Initiative identifies
the best research-based programs and applies them across all
appropriate age ranges and risk domains and across traditional
agency boundaries. In the process, this program identifies
overlapping or underutilized services and service gaps and
asks communities to identify plans to fill gaps and identify
and leverage resources. A single POC in each State is responsible
for integrating and coordinating services. Pilot sites must
demonstrate citizen involvement, existing local resources,
and government investment. OJJDP wants to ensure significant
local buy-in and sustainability from communities that want
to solve their own problems.
The Gang Initiative seeks coordination and integration in
two directions: vertically--Federal, State, and local; and
horizontally--across communities and program types. This initiative
contains five elements--primary and secondary prevention, gang
intervention and suppression, and reentry.
- The key component to primary prevention is making
services accessible and visible to the entire population
in high-crime, high-risk areas. Programs will include prenatal
and infancy support, afterschool programs, and truancy and
dropout prevention.
- Secondary prevention includes identifying youth
from 7 to 14 years at high risk and providing services to
prevent delinquency and gang involvement. Younger brothers
and sisters of gang members will be a part of this group
and will be served by schools and community and faith-based
organizations.
- Gang intervention efforts target active gang members,
close associates, and gang members returning from confinement
to provide outreach, support, and assistance for positive
choices. At the same time, the message of negative repercussions
for those who do not make positive choices will be clear.
- Gang suppression targets gang leaders for aggressive
suppression and removal and includes involving Federal, State,
and local law enforcement; programs such as those from the
U.S. Attorneys Offices, Weed and Seed, and Project Safe Neighborhood
will be partners. A system of graduated sanctions will be
developed for less serious offenders.
- Reentry targets serious offenders who are reentering
their communities, provides appropriate services and criminal/juvenile
justice monitoring, and addresses the displaced gang members
who challenge those who have assumed their previous gang
roles while they were incarcerated.
Mr. Slowikowski discussed the role of mapping, a technology
tool that enhances the ability to meet the goals of the gang
reduction program by mapping community resources and needs.
Using software that overlays geographic information with many
other types of data, mapping provides a visual depiction of
where juveniles live and go to school and how they correlate
with programs from OJJDP, Drug Free Communities, Safe Schools
Healthy Students, YMCAs and Boys and Girls Clubs, faith- and
community-based organizations, and schools. The goal is to
identify the location of resources, needs, and where to add
to and connect them.
Demonstration sites will be geographically small, comprising
a few square miles or a single ZIP Code, in Los Angeles, California;
Richmond, Virginia; Miami, Florida; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Mr. Slowikowski asked the Coordinating Council to assist in
this comprehensive resource analysis by identifying the agency
resources that exist at the pilot sites.
Discussion
Mr. Morris asked why there were no rural areas included in
the initiative. Mr. Flores responded that very little money
to fund additional sites was available and that Indian Country
and Puerto Rico had not been included. A significant amount
of funding will be devoted to data collection and evaluation.
Mr. Morris offered access to the many evaluations performed
by DOL and said that DOL evaluators visit many similar sites
and could simply add questions relating to juvenile justice.
Ms. Broyles asked if and how a private sector group could
work with the Gang Initiative, suggesting that there are many
small, private groups who may not be known to local officials.
To many of these small groups, government is a black box--where
is the entry point for them? Mr. Wyrick said faith- and community-based
groups could be approached through local leadership as the
initiative unfolds and that OJJDP will ensure that news of
the program is widely disseminated.
Cheryl Neverman, Safety Specialist, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S. Department of Transportation,
suggested that it would be helpful to broaden the definition
of the initiative so other agencies can legitimately participate
within the parameters of their own missions. For example, gang
activity is not a high priority for NHTSA, but if it was identified
as a risk or needs assessment, it would better fit the agency's
core mission.
Judge Martin, noted that the Department of Agriculture (AG)
is an underused resource in this regard. AG representatives
prepared a detailed map of resources in Roxbury, Massachusetts,
for the court's use. Mr. Wilson offered OJJDP a tour and access
to HHS's mapping software and mapmaking abilities at its Bioterrorism
Control Center.
Building on earlier remarks on the importance of keeping kids
in school, Mr. Brendtro urged the Coordinating Council to encourage
schools to become truly responsible for leaving no child behind.
He said that the best gang prevention program we have is school.
Judge Martin suggested that the council develop language on
this issue through the Education Subcommittee. He also asked
that a superintendent of schools from the Washington, D.C.,
area be invited to participate in a meeting of the Education
Subcommittee.
Mr. Flores asked that council members act as POCs to provide
information for the Gang Initiative mapping effort and that
they give special consideration to awarding those sites.
Closing Remarks
J. Robert Flores
Mr. Flores asked the Coordinating Council to authorize a letter
that recommends funding for the Bureau of Justice Statistics
to pay for the cost of transitioning the National Crime Victimization
Survey from a pencil and paper format to an electronic format.
A motion to do so was made, seconded, and passed. The Coordinating
Council will meet on November 13 and 14, 2003. Mr. Flores thanked
the Council members and guests for their participation and
comments and adjourned the meeting.
Back to Meeting Archives
|
