Title: Interventions for Juvenile Offenders Prevent Crime [from "fightcrime.org"]
Compelling research shows that early, intensive interventions can get young offenders back on track and steer them toward productive futures. Yet despite proven success, the funding to these programs is shrinking. We need to spend more money on our young facing challenges, not less. A priority goal of FIGHT CRIME: INVEST IN KIDS California, an anti-crime organization of over 400 sheriffs, police chiefs, district attorneys and crime survivors, is to ensure juvenile offenders and youth at risk of entering the juvenile justice system have access to proven interventions that will steer them away from crime.
..
Repeat Offenders Threaten Public Safety. Each year, there are over 200,000 arrests of juveniles in California.fn1 While many young people learn their lesson once arrested, too many offend again and again. For example, approximately 70 percent of youth leaving state custody are re-arrested within three years.fn2 These repeat offenders pose a serious threat to public safety.
..
Intensive Family Interventions Cut Crime. Intensive family interventions are proven to prevent juveniles from reoffending. Through the Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) program, carefully chosen and trained foster parents closely supervise juvenile offenders, while their parents receive complementary training. MTFC has been proven to
successfully cut the average number of arrests for seriously delinquent juveniles in half, and six times as many of the boys in MTFC as boys in a group home successfully avoided any new arrest. fn 3
..
Among family therapies, Functional Family Therapy (FFT) cut re-arrests in half in one study and out-of-home placements by three quarters in another.fn 4
..
A study of Multisystemic Therapy (MST) found that youth who had not received MST were 62 percent more likely to have been arrested for any offense, and more than twice as likely to have been arrested for a violent offense. fn5
..
The Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act is an Important Crime-Prevention Tool. Enacted in 2000, the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) provides a dedicated funding stream for local juvenile justice programs designed to curb juvenile crime, including FFT, MST, after-school programs for at-risk teens, gang and truancy prevention, job training and diversion programs. JJCPA currently supports approximately 174 programs in 56 participating counties, and serves over 100,000 at-risk and delinquent youths annually. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Administration credits JJCPA with “curbing juvenile crime” and deterring “countless thousands” of juveniles from ending up in custody. fn6 JJCPA funding is linked to the Citizens’ Option for Public Safety (COPS) program, which funds local law enforcement agencies for front-line public safety services. According to a recent evaluation by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, youth left out of JJCPA-funded programs were 22 percent more likely to be arrested than youth not receiving those services.” fn 7
..
In addition, JJCPA youth in programs reporting further outcomes attended school more frequently, were suspended less often, and had higher GPAs. fn 8 “Effective juvenile crime-prevention and intervention programs aren’t about making excuses for kids who commit crimes. They’re about giving young people the skills they need to actually learn from their mistakes.” Chief William Lansdowne, San Diego Police Department www.fightcrime.org/ca (510) 836-2050 Crime-Prevention Programs Save Money Programs that reduce crime pay off in saved lives, in reduced incarceration costs and other fiscal savings. For example, studies of intensive family interventions show these approaches can save as much as $14 for every $1 invested. Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care saves over $77,000 for every juvenile offender served, while Functional Family Therapy saves over $31,000 and Multisystemic Therapy saves over $18,000. fn 9
California Is Reducing Investments in Juvenile Offender Interventions, Despite Great Need
..
• Established in 2006, the Juvenile Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction (MIOCR) program provided $22 million for a variety of interventions, with 12 of 20 counties using MIOCR to provide the proven intensive family therapies MTFC, FFT or MST. However, this program was eliminated by the 2008 Budget Act.
..
• After a cut of over $30 million in 2008-09, Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act funding was partially restored to $107 million in 2009-10, although it is contingent on vehicle license fees which are lower than projected. This is still well below its original funding level from 2000, while spending for Corrections has nearly doubled. fn 10 As a result, many valuable JJCPA programs have been forced to shut down entirely, cut services, or place troubled youths on waiting lists.
..
• Increased funding through juvenile justice reform legislation (SB 81), which transferred many young offenders from State to county custody, has been undercut by cuts to JJCPA, MIOCR, and other programs.
..
• Overall, intensive family therapies serve just 4 percent of the more than 20,000 eligible juvenile offenders in California. fn 11 This does not even take into account expected cuts to intensive family therapies due to the elimination of MIOCR. Protecting and increasing
investments in proven interventions to get troubled kids back on track will help make California safer.
..
..
References:
fn1 217,158 juveniles were arrested in California in 2005. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2005). Crime in the United States, 2005. Retrieved February 2, 2007 from
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_69.html.
fn2 California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Justice. (2005, Nov. 30). Reforming California’s Juvenile Corrections System, Farrell v.
Hickman, Safety & Welfare Remedial Plan.
fn3 Chamberlain, P. & Mihalic, S.F. (1998). Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care: Blueprints for Violence Prevention: Book Eight (D.S. Elliott, Series Editor).
Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.
fn4 Alexander, J., Pugh, C., Parsons, B. & Sexton, T. (2000). Family Functional Therapy: Blueprints for Violence Prevention: Book Three (D.S. Elliott, Series Editor).
Boulder, CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.
fn5 Schaeffer, C.M. & Borduin, C.M. (2005). “Long-Term Follow-Up to a Randomized Clinical Trial of Multisystemic Therapy with Serious and Violent Juvenile
Offenders.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(3), 445-453.
fn6 California Department of Finance. (2007). Governor’s budget summary 2007-08. Retrieved on April 23, 2007 from
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/FullBudgetSummary.pdf; California Department of Finance. (2007). Corrections and rehabilitation. Retrieved on
April 23, 2007 from http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/GovernorsBudget/5210.pdf.
fn7 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Corrections Standards Authority. (2009). Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act: Annual Report. Retrieved
on January 27, 2009 from http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Divisions_Boards/CSA/CPP/Grants/JJCPA/Docs/JJCPA_2009_leg_report.pdf.
fn 8 Id.
fn 9 Aos, S., Miller, M. & Drake, E. (2006, October). Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime
Rates. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved from http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/.
fn 10 California Department of Finance. (2009). Governor’s budget summary 2009-10. Retrieved July 2009 from http://www.dof.ca.gov/budget/historical/2009-
10/governors/summary/documents/enacted/FullBudgetSummary.pdf.
fn 11 Hennigan, K., Kolnick, K., Poplawski, J., Andrews, A., Ball, N., Cheng, C. & Payne, J. (2007). Juvenile Justice Data Project phase 1: Survey of interventions and
programs: A continuum of graduated responses for juvenile justice in California. County by county appendix. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California,
Center for Research on Crime. Retrieved on April 23, 2007 from http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/ReportsResearch/docs/JJDPSurveyFinalReportCountybyCountyAppendix.pdf;
Personal communication with Todd Sosna. (2007, March 24). Todd Sosna is a Senior Associate at the California Institute for Mental Health; Personal communication
with Keller Strother. (2007, February 27). Keller Strother is President of MST Services.
No comments:
Post a Comment