Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Committee on a Prioritized Plan to Implement a Developmental Approach in Juvenile Justice Reform Committee on Law and Justice Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS  500 Fifth Street, NW  Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. 2013-JF-FX-K004 from the U.S. Department of Justice/Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Contract No. 213.0506 from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, and Contract No. 13-105086-000- USP from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-3: 978-0-309-30347-7 International Standard Book Number-0: 0-309-30347-8 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2014 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Suggested citation: National Research Council. (2014). Implementing Juvenile Justice Reform: The Federal Role. Committee on a Prioritized Plan to Implement a Developmental Approach in Juvenile Justice Reform, Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in sci- entific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad com- munity of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the govern- ment, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.nationalacademies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON A PRIORITIZED PLAN TO IMPLEMENT A DEVELOPMENTAL APPROACH IN JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM RICHARD J. BONNIE (Chair), Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy, University of Virginia SAM J. ABED, Maryland Department of Juvenile Services GRACE BAUER, Justice for Families KEVIN J. BETHEL, Patrol Operations, Philadelphia Police Department SANDRA A. GRAHAM, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles MAXWELL GRIFFIN, JR., Child Protection Division, Cook County Juvenile Court PATRICIA LEE, Juvenile Unit, San Francisco Office of the Public Defender EDWARD P. MULVEY, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh ALEX R. PIQUERO, Program in Criminology, School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas VINCENT SCHIRALDI, New York City Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice CHERIE TOWNSEND, Consultant, Idabel, Oklahoma JOHN A. TUELL, Robert F. Kennedy National Resource Center for Juvenile Justice, Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps ARLENE F. LEE, Director DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Study Director JULIE ANNE SCHUCK, Senior Program Associate EMILY BACKES, Research Associate LETICIA GARCILAZO GREEN, Program Assistant (as of July 2014) v

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE JEREMY TRAVIS (Chair), John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York RUTH D. PETERSON (Vice Chair), Department of Sociology, Ohio State University CARL C. BELL, Department of Psychiatry in the School of Medicine and the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois at Chicago, St. Bernard Hospital’s Inpatient Psychiatric Unit, and Jackson Park Hospital’s Family Practice Clinic, Chicago, Illinois JOHN J. DONOHUE, III, Stanford Law School, Stanford University MINDY FULLILOVE, New York State Psychiatric Institute and Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University MARK A.R. KLEIMAN, Department of Public Policy, University of California, Los Angeles GARY LAFREE, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland, College Park JANET L. LAURITSEN, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Missouri GLENN LOURY, Department of Economics, Brown University JAMES P. LYNCH, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland, College Park CHARLES F. MANSKI, Department of Economics, Northwestern University DANIEL S. NAGIN, Heinz College, Carnegie Mellon University ANNE MORRISON PIEHL, Department of Economics and Program in Criminal Justice, Rutgers University DANIEL B. PRIETO, Cybersecurity and Technology, U.S. Department of Defense SUSAN B. SORENSON, School of Social Policy & Practice, University of Pennsylvania DAVID WEISBURD, Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, George Mason University CATHY SPATZ WIDOM, Psychology Department, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York PAUL K. WORMELI, Integrated Justice Information Systems, Ashburn, Virginia ARLENE LEE, Director TINA M. LATIMER, Program Coordinator vi

OCR for page R1
Preface In 2013, Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Development Approach was published by the National Research Council (NRC). In that report, a committee charged with assessing recent initiatives in juvenile justice strongly endorsed a framework of reform based on a scientific understanding of adolescent development. The report was well received within the juvenile justice community and by policy makers in states, localities, and tribal jurisdic- tions, as well as within the Department of Justice. Many of us who participated on the committee that produced Reforming Juvenile Justice detected a sense of urgency about moving forward after the report was published: “This moment should not be lost,” we were advised. In this context, we were pleased that the newly appointed administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) initiated a dialogue with the NRC about the possibility of a follow-up study to develop an implementation plan for OJJDP. With the help of the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the project was funded in late 2013 and an expedited study began soon thereafter. This report, the product of that study, is designed to provide specific guidance to OJJDP regarding the steps that it should take, both internally and externally, to facilitate juvenile justice reform grounded in knowledge about adolescent development. As this report explains, the plan is ambitious and OJJDP will need to overcome many impediments in order to achieve it. However, the committee is confident that this plan can be carried out successfully by building on past efforts of OJJDP and current reforms under way in many states—especially if the agency has the political and material support it will need from Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice. It is important for leaders in the Department of Justice and on relevant congressional committees to understand that juvenile justice reform should be seen as a priority for improving the nation’s justice system as well as a key element of the nation’s youth policy. The committee notes that this report offers, as requested by the OJJDP administrator, an itemized plan of action over the next 3 years, and we applaud the agency’s sense of urgency. We have proposed a 3-year plan because the committee shares the view that we are at a critical moment in juvenile justice reform. Responsibility for propelling juvenile justice reform forward and for sustaining it in the coming decades is the right and appropriate role for the federal government through OJJDP. This must not be seen as a transient priority. It must be seen by Congress and future attorneys general as the preeminent mission for the agency under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. vii

OCR for page R1
viii PREFACE I wish to express my deep appreciation to the members of the committee for their diligent and dedicated con- tributions to this study and to the preparation of this report within an expedited time frame. The diverse expertise and experience offered by each member of the committee were indispensable to the formulation of the “prioritized plan” incorporated in this report for implementing a developmental approach in juvenile justice reform. Richard J. Bonnie, Chair Committee on a Prioritized Plan to Implement a Developmental Approach in Juvenile Justice Reform

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgments This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the follow- ing individuals for their review of this report: Eugene Bardach, Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California; Shay Bilchik, Juvenile Justice Reform, McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University; Karen S. Cook, Department of Sociology, Stanford University; Hermann Habermann, independent consultant, Arlington, VA; Ned Loughran, Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators, Braintree, MA; George D. Mosee, Jr., Juvenile Division, Philadelphia, PA; Daniel S. Nagin, H.J. Heinz School of Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University; Julie J. Ryan, Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, George Washington University; Marc A. Schindler, Executive Director’s Office, Justice Policy Institute, Washington, DC; Lawrence D. Steinberg, Department of ­ sychology, Temple University; Juliana Stratton, Executive Director’s Office, Cook County Justice P Advisory ­ ouncil, Chicago, IL; and Joshua Weber, Juvenile Justice, Council of State Governments Justice Center, C Bethesda, MD. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by the monitor, Charles F. Manski (National Academy of Sciences), board of trustees ­ rofessor of economics, Department of Economics, Northwestern University, and coordinator p John E. Rolph, professor emeritus of statistics, University of Southern California. Appointed by the NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. The committee is grateful to the staff of OJJDP as well as the representatives of the Annie E. Casey Founda- tion and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation for their active participation throughout the study. The committee also recognizes Cheryl Hayes for providing an assessment of the current federal budget to identify funding streams that may be used to support activities for youths involved in the juvenile justice system, and John Wilson, who served as a consultant to the committee, for bringing his wisdom and expertise from 30 years of ix

OCR for page R1
x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS experience at OJJDP to bear on the study. The committee applauds the NRC staff members—Arlene Lee, Daniel Talmage, Julie Schuck, and Emily Backes—for their dedication to the study and to the preparation of this report. We would also like to thank Mary Ghitelman for her administrative support throughout the study process. And finally we thank the executive office reports staff of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Educa- tion, especially Robert Katt (consultant editor), who provided valuable help with editing the report, and Kirsten Sampson Snyder, who managed the report review process. Without the NRC’s guidance and wise counsel, the committee’s job would have been even more difficult if not impossible.

OCR for page R1
Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS xvii SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 9 The Changing Landscape of Juvenile Justice, 10 Charge to the Committee, 11 Terminology, 13 Juveniles, 13 Delinquency Prevention, 13 System-Involved Families, 14 Study Methods, 15 Organization of the Report, 15 2 FOUNDATION FOR CHANGE 17 Background, 17 Hallmarks of the Developmental Approach, 18 Accountability Without Criminalization, 19 Alternatives to Justice System Involvement, 19 Individualized Response Based on Assessment of Needs and Risks, 19 Confinement Only When Necessary for Public Safety, 21 A Genuine Commitment to Fairness, 22 Sensitivity to Disparate Treatment, 22 Family Engagement, 22 The Mission of OJJDP, 23 Guiding Reform in States, Localities, and Tribes, 24 Conclusion, 25 xi

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS 3 REFOCUSING THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION 26 Reauthorizing and Strengthening OJJDP, 27 Trends in OJJDP’s Funding, 28 Enhancing Internal Capacity, 34 A Common Vision, 34 Staff Training and Curriculum, 35 Making System Reform a Priority, 36 Rethinking Training and Technical Assistance, 36 General Grant Making, 38 Demonstration Grants, 39 Improving Data and Promoting Useful Research, 40 Improving Administrative Data Collection and Management, 40 Supporting Collaborative, Applied Research with a Developmental Focus, 41 Disseminating Information, 44 4 FACILITATING CHANGE WITHIN THE JURISDICTIONS 45 Federal Leadership, 45 Nurturing State Leadership, 45 Training and Technical Assistance, 47 The Challenge of Reducing Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System, 50 Schools/Pre-arrest, 52 Detention, 52 A New Approach to Addressing Racial and Ethnic Disparities, 53 Demonstration Grants, 55 Realignment and Reinvestment Strategies, 55 5 PARTNERSHIPS 57 U.S. Department of Justice, 59 Federal Partnerships, 60 Role of the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 61 Federal Budget Opportunities, 63 National Organization Partnerships, 66 The Federal Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice and the Coalition for Juvenile Justice, 66 Law Enforcement Organizations, 66 Standards for Juvenile Justice, 67 OJJDP’s Role, 68 Family and Youth Partnerships, 68 Foundation Partnerships, 68 6 THE PATH FORWARD 70 Recommendations and Action Steps, 70 Improving Internal Capacity, 71 Assisting External Entities to Promote Reform, 73 Conclusion, 78 REFERENCES 80

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS xiii APPENDIXES A Speakers and Interviews 89 B The 2013 NRC Report in Brief 93 C Committee Biographies 100

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Figures, Tables, and Boxes FIGURES 3-1 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention appropriations in 2014 constant dollars, 29 3-2 Trends in Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention continuing funding streams in 2014 constant dollars, 1997-2014, 31 TABLES 3-1 OJJDP Funding by Fiscal Year (FY) (thousands of dollars [actual]), 30 4-1 Capacity Building Through a Training and Technical Assistance Framework, 48 5-1 Federal Funding for Youths with, or at Risk of, Juvenile Justice Involvement (ages 10-24 years), 65 BOXES 2-1 Participants in the Juvenile Justice Process, 20 3-1 The JJDPA’s Four Core Protections, 27 3-2 2013 NRC Report Recommendations for the Reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, 29 3-3 Hallmarks of the Developmental Approach to Juvenile Justice, 36 3-4 Training Curriculum Decision Point Examples, 37 4-1 Case Study of a Federal and Locality Partnership, 49 5-1 OJJDP Participation in Federal Interagency Initiatives, 58 xv

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Acronyms and Abbreviations ABA American Bar Association BJA Bureau of Justice Assistance CIT Crisis Intervention Team CJJ Coalition for Juvenile Justice COPS Community Oriented Policing Services DOJ U.S. Department of Justice FACJJ Federal Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office IACP International Association of Chiefs of Police IJA Institute of Judicial Administration JABG Juvenile Accountability Block Grant JJDPA Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 NIC National Institute of Corrections NRC National Research Council NYCDOP New York City Department of Probation OJJDP Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention OJP Office of Justice Programs xvii

OCR for page R1
xviii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS SAG State Advisory Group SAMHSA Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration TTA training and technical assistance