Call to Order and Roll Call
The 8th meeting of the Task Force on the Unified Juvenile Code was held on Wednesday, November 6, 2013, at 1:00 PM, in Room 327 of the Capitol. Senator Whitney Westerfield, Chair, called the meeting to order, and the secretary called the roll.
Present were:
Members: Senator Whitney Westerfield, Co-Chair; Harry L. Berry, Hasan Davis, Glenda Edwards, Steven Gold, Teresa James, Lisa P. Jones, Bo Matthews, Mary C. Noble, Pamela Priddy, and John Sivley.
Guests: Sonja Hallum, Senior Associate, State Policy, Public Safety Performance Project; Pamela Lachman, Senior Associate, Research, Public Safety Performance Project. Co-Chairman Representative John Tilley joined the meeting remotely from Washington, D.C.
LRC Staff: Matt Trebelhorn, Jonathan Scott, Jon Grate, Jessica Causey, Mike Clark, and Kathy Miller.
Approval of Minutes
A motion was made by Mr. Steve Gold to approve the minutes from the 7th meeting of the Unified Juvenile Code Task Force. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bo Matthews and carried by voice vote.
Roundtable Discussion
Sonja Hallum, Senior Associate, State Policy, Public Safety Performance Project and Pamela Lachman, Senior Associate, Research, Public Safety Performance Project moderated a discussion of Kentucky juvenile justice issue areas.
Public Offenders
Research and data was summarized on the topic of juvenile admissions and dispositions in Kentucky. Data showed that a quarter of public offense referrals are from schools and that the majority of court petitions are low level offenses. There are different interpretations of the statute on prosecutors’ authority to not file a charge, and a pre-disposition investigation is not done in every case. Data also showed that the Youth Level of Services (YLS) assessment has not been validated by the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) on Kentucky recidivism outcomes and there are limited disposition alternatives to DJJ.
Research found that validated risk and needs assessment tools should be used in disposition and placement decisions to provide objective guidance.
Data findings on the topic of placements showed that the majority of youth placed out of home are lower level juvenile offenders with little prior adjudication history and that probation violations are the leading offense prior to out of home placement.
Research found that out of home placement does not lower the likelihood of juvenile reoffending for most juvenile offenders and may increase offending in lower risk youth.
Kentucky data finds that out of home length of stay has increased over the past decade. The difference in out of home length of stay for misdemeanants, violators and felons is less than one month.
Research has shown that a longer length of stay in out of home placement does not increase public safety and that the severity and intensity of responses should be proportionate to the seriousness of the offense and the risk the juvenile offender poses to public safety.
On the topic of supervision, Kentucky data found that the average length of DJJ supervision is more than 15 months. Commitment to DJJ is for an indefinite period and can continue until a youth turns 18 and ages out of the system. There are limited aftercare services for youth released from out of home placement and for community supervision.
Research on supervision shows that therapeutic programs are more effective at preventing reoffending than those focused on monitoring alone. Interventions are most effective when focused on specific characteristics of offenders that contribute to delinquent and criminal behavior, such as low self-control and antisocial attitudes.
In Kentucky, there are limited treatment services in the community for youth, particularly substance abuse outpatient services. Data showed there is not consistent use of program fidelity or outcome measures.
Research has found that a number of evidence-based, cost-effective community-based programs reduce recidivism more than out of home placement.
Status Offenders
Data findings in Kentucky show that status offenses account for more than half of referrals to court, but the majority are screened out in the pre-complaint process. The majority of status complaints are from schools and alternatives to filing a complaint are limited. Truancy Diversion Programs are only available in half of the counties in Kentucky.
Research findings show that early and limited intervention is more effective for low risk, low level juvenile offenders.
In Kentucky, status offenders are being held in detention. A significant number of status offenders are also committed to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services and placed out of the home for more than 8 months on average. Research shows that out of home placement does not lower the likelihood of juvenile reoffending for most juvenile offenders and may increase offending in lower risk youth.
Sonja Hallum led a discussion of Kentucky juvenile justice policy options.
Public Offenders
Proposed policy options for dealing with referrals of public offenders from schools were to develop recommendations to increase clarity on school responses, enhance tracking of school referrals, and increase the number of diversions allowed for lower level offenses. The task force showed interest in pursuing the school response options and had no objection to enhanced tracking.
Discussion of policy options for admissions and dispositions of court petitions for low level offenders included clarifying prosecutor authority to not file charges where appropriate, creating disposition alternatives, and increasing the use of validated risk and needs assessments prior to disposition. The task force was in agreement with all the policy options.
A significant number of lower level offenders are committed to DJJ and placed out of home. Policy options for placement of misdemeanants were: prohibiting commitment for all misdemeanants, reducing the number of misdemeanor offenders committed, or prohibiting placement out of the home. The task force agreed that prohibiting commitment was not a good option, and that a reduction in the number of juvenile offenders committed should be the focus.
Policy options for class D felonies were to create a new class for less serious class D offenses, to create a new type of disposition for some class D felonies based on criteria or to prohibit DJJ from placing some class D felons out of the home. Consensus among task force members was to pursue creating a new type of disposition for some class D felonies.
The task force was in favor of developing graduated sanctions in regard to probation and supervision violations, not a prohibition of placement out of the home.
task force members agreed that the problem of lower level offenders spending similar amounts of time out of home as felony offenders should be addressed. Focus of the attention on the length of stay issue will be on reducing time violators are placed out of home.
During discussion of supervision policy options, the task force agreed that rather than an indefinite period, statutory supervision length for commitment and probation should be established. Improvement of community supervision of juveniles with requirements for parental involvement should be explored. Enhanced DJJ aftercare options for transition were recommended.
It was agreed by the task force that the issue of lack of services in the community should be addressed. A decision was made by the task force to discuss a reinvestment program at the next meeting.
The task force agreed to the concept of the increased use of evidence-based practices with proven outcomes.
As a policy option, Sonja Hallum recommended that an ongoing oversight committee be established to implement recommendations and review additional issues. The task force was in agreement with this recommendation.
Status Offenders
Policy options in three areas relating to status offenders were discussed: system, referrals, and placement. Status offenses account for more than half of referrals to court. One option for policy change systemically would be to create an alternative system for handling status offenders outside of the court. The second policy option would be to determine whether status offenses should remain in Family Court jurisdiction or be moved to District Court.
Justice Noble handed out two flowcharts detailing an expanded “super CDW” program for both status and public offenders. It was decided that these models would be discussed in detail at the next meeting.
The majority of referrals are made from schools. A recommendation was made to enhance the requirements schools must follow prior to filing a truancy complaint, to expand diversion programs and increase assessment training. The focus will be to reduce the number of referrals to court.
The task force agreed to discuss options to prohibit CHFS from placing status offenders outside the home and restrict detention and/or commitment.
Other Issues
Members of the task force raised a few issues that had not been discussed. Ms. Edwards asked about children under 11 years of age. Justice Noble asked for a discussion of the fiscal impact and funding of new programs. Mr. Berry asked that the impact on local government be considered.
In conclusion, Rep. Tilley agreed that a transition plan for implementation of new policy will take everyone’s needs in mind. New policy should best serve the children and protect public safety.
Adjournment
The 8th meeting of the Unified Juvenile Code Task Force was adjourned at 4:00 P.M.