Reforming Juvenile Justice A Developmental Approach (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
10 The Federal Role
10 The Federal Role
Pages 281-320
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 281... ...
THE HISTORY OF OJJDP OJJDP is the only federal agency specifically directed to develop and disseminate knowledge to the juvenile justice field and to assist states in improving their systems. Established in 1974, the office has authority for federal programs under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA)
|
From page 282... ...
Although formula funds could be applied to a wide variety of delinquency prevention and intervention programs, receipt of this funding was tied to compliance with core requirements. The original JJDPA included two core protection requirements.
|
From page 283... ...
• Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) : States are required to show that they are implementing juvenile delinquency preven tion programs designed to reduce -- without establishing or requiring numerical standards or quotas -- the disproportionate number of minorities confined in their juvenile justice systems.
|
From page 284... ...
In the 1992 reauthorization of JJDPA, reducing DMC2 was elevated to a fourth core requirement tied to formula and block funds. This reauthorization also established the Community Prevention Grants program, also referred to as the Incentive Grants for Local Delinquency Prevention, under Title V to encourage prevention efforts at the local level.
|
From page 285... ...
and embarked on intensive TTA initiatives to pilot and push forward the adoption of the Comprehensive Strategy by local and statewide jurisdictions. The office also embarked on efforts to involve other child-serving systems that have critical roles in delinquency prevention.
|
From page 286... ...
, training for law enforcement and court personnel, juvenile gun courts, juvenile drug courts, juvenile records systems, information sharing, accountability, risk/need assessment, school safety, restorative justice, juvenile courts and probation, corrections/detention personnel, and reentry (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2009c)
|
From page 287... ...
NOTES: Funding for Juvenile Accountability Block Grants, although it disappears in the graph after FY2004, has remained at about $50 million. JABG = Juvenile Ac countability Block Grant, JJDPA = Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, MCAA = Missing Children's Assistance Act, OJJDP = Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, VOCA = Victims of Child Abuse Act.
|
From page 288... ...
Its responsibilities include collecting and documenting data on juveniles in the system, guiding and assisting efforts to prevent delinquency or improve state justice systems, ensuring states' compliance with the goals of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) of 1974, and sponsoring relevant research.
|
From page 289... ...
NOTE: In order to not distort the graph, JABG funding for fiscal years 1999-2002 is shown at one-third value. EUDL = Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws, JABG = Juvenile Accountability Block Figure 10-2= Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Pre Grant, JJDPA vention Act of 1974, OJJDP = Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
|
From page 290... ...
, and the state or county with jurisdiction (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2001b)
|
From page 291... ...
It sponsored pilot sites to test the program and provided incentives for participating facilities with funds for improvements identified by the program (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2001b)
|
From page 292... ...
Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders, Jail Removal, and Separation OJJDP's greatest impact on the juvenile justice field has probably been its role in ensuring compliance with the core requirements (Howell, 1997)
|
From page 293... ...
DSO = deinstitutionalization of status offenders, JJDPA = Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974. Figure 10-3 SOURCES: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1995a)
|
From page 294... ...
as presented in Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1995b)
|
From page 295... ...
; Memorandum to the states from OJJDP acting administrator, Jeff Slowikowski, regarding Status Offenders and the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act, Follow-up on Data Reporting for Annual Core Requirements Determination (March 17, 2011)
|
From page 296... ...
allow states to continue to serve youth tried in adult court in juvenile facilities without jeopardizing federal funding. Groups like the National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Coalition (n.d.)
|
From page 297... ...
. These five activities -- identification, assessment, program implementation, evaluation, and monitoring -- comprise OJJDP's DMC reduction model (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2010)
|
From page 298... ...
By its own standards (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2009a) , the DMC initiative has had only limited success and, in fact, OJJDP has conceded that "states and localities, except for a few jurisdictions, have not reduced DMC" (Coleman, 2011, p.
|
From page 299... ...
found that three states and seven local jurisdictions showed improved and/or stable and low RRI values at three of the five juvenile justice decision points (referral, diversion, detention, confinement, and transfer)
|
From page 300... ...
Casey Foundation, 2009; Federal Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice, 2009; Krisberg and Vuong, 2009; Soler, Shoenberg, and Schindler, 2009; National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Coalition, 2010)
|
From page 301... ...
From the beginning, OJJDP's research portfolio has focused on issues of interest to practitioners in the juvenile justice field. In the 1970s, OJJDP supported work to better understand youth gangs in America as well as violent and chronic juvenile offending.
|
From page 302... ...
. The following findings from the Causes and Correlates program, in conjunction with statistical trends in juvenile crime and other research knowledge available at the time, guided the development of OJJDP's Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders:
|
From page 303... ...
• Most chronic juvenile offenders start their criminal careers prior to age 12. • Early-onset offenders tend to come from poorer, inner-city disad vantaged neighborhoods.
|
From page 304... ...
Comprehensive Strategy A signature program of OJJDP that evolved more than a decade ago, the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent and Chronic Juvenile Offenders, illustrates OJJDP's research-to-practice continuum. The comprehensive strategy started as a theory of reform (Wilson and Howell, 1993)
|
From page 305... ...
. The first review focused on research findings from prevention and intervention programs for juvenile offenders and youth at risk of offending and was incorporated in a guide for the comprehensive strategy (Howell, 1995a)
|
From page 306... ...
The comprehensive strategy was well received at both the national 25 Note that intervention research has been heavily dominated by studies of male samples. Although the few studies with girls show similar variability as that among boys, there is not yet sufficient evidence to draw confident conclusions.
|
From page 307... ...
It encouraged people to think about risk and protective factors and to tailor programs to specific youth. Participants in the comprehensive strategy planning reported improved communication and coordination among agencies and increased awareness of the prevention services and sanction options available for juveniles (Coolbaugh and Hansel, 2000)
|
From page 308... ...
Budget The following sections examine how recent appropriations, which have included numerous carve-outs and earmarks, have diminished the capacity of OJJDP's authorized programs -- particularly its state formula/block grant programs, mandate to coordinate federal efforts, nonearmarked research and data collection, and technical assistance -- to carry out the core requirements of the JJDPA. Funds for State Grant Programs Earlier Figures 10-1 and 10-2 indicated that OJJDP funding authorized through JJDPA has been relatively stable over the last decade but that funding available to support juvenile justice improvements by state and local 26 For more information on the Juvenile Justice System Improvement Project, see http://cjjr.
|
From page 309... ...
The reason for this decline is the dramatic decline in funding available through JABG since 2003 as well as the increase in appropriated carve-outs under Title II and Title V (e.g., Enforcing Underage Drinking, Tribal Youth Program, mentoring) and earmarked programs (see
|
From page 310... ...
Funds for Federal Coordination The original JJDPA established an independent organization in the executive branch known as the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention as a vehicle through which OJJDP was intended to exert its leadership to coordinate the federal government's juvenile delinquency programs. JJDPA, as amended, has changed the composition of the coordinating council28 over the years but continues to address the need for coordination at the federal level.
|
From page 311... ...
It needs a strong mechanism to coordinate funding and activities among other federal agencies in pursuit of improving prospects for all youth. Funds for Research, Evaluation, and Data Collection The original JJDPA of 1974 established the National Institute for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (NIJJDP)
|
From page 312... ...
As funding for the state grant programs continues to decline, the set-aside limit for TTA is increasingly inadequate to support the needs of the field. Juvenile justice practitioners have identified the need for more thorough guidance on complying with the core requirements, particularly the DMC requirement, citing the inadequacy of the guidance currently provided under the JJDPA and by OJJDP (Coalition for Juvenile Justice, 2009)
|
From page 313... ...
. Because funds to support OJJDP's hallmark state formula and block grants are declining, OJJDP is constrained from helping states and localities with other interventions that may better fit their local needs for preventing delinquency.
|
From page 314... ...
Known as the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2009 (S.
|
From page 315... ...
but have failed to move forward.36 In the absence of regulations, OJJDP relies on OGC for guidance, and the 34 Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, Audit Report 09-24, "Procedures Used by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention to Award Discretionary Grants in FY 2007" (April 2009)
|
From page 316... ...
This interpretation had perverse effects as applied to youth in states with so-called blended jurisdiction because youth under the age of majority who are tried in criminal court can be sent to a juvenile facility until they reach the maximum age of a state's juvenile court jurisdiction; the youth then finishes the sentence in an adult correctional facility. However, because the juveniles were adult inmates under the DOJ interpretation, states found themselves facing sanctions if they failed to remove these youth from juvenile facilities.
|
From page 317... ...
, which has been leading the reauthorization effort for the past three years.40 The Federal Advisory Committee for Juvenile Justice, the Coalition for Juvenile Justice, and the National Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Coalition have issued statements urging Congress to reauthorize OJJDP and the president to appoint the OJJDP administrator (Coalition for Juvenile Justice, 2008; Federal Advisory Committee on Juvenile Justice, 2010; National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Coalition, 2011a, 2011b) .41 In addi 39 Similarly to OJJDP, NIJ and BJS have also experienced budget reductions and increasingly less funding discretion.
|
From page 318... ...
. The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 reflects several basic understandings that have set the nation on the path toward developmentally appropriate juvenile justice policies and practices.
|
From page 319... ...
SOURCE: National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Coalition (n.d., p.
|
From page 320... ...
But to do so will require that Congress remove the budgetary and political roadblocks that prevent OJJDP from making use of its legislative authority. As we have noted earlier, advocacy and juvenile justice practitioners continue to support OJJDP's mandate because they believe in the importance of a federal role in assisting state, local, and tribal jurisdictions to prevent crime and improve their handling of juvenile offenders.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.