A Spotlight on Multi-tiered Interventions and Supports through an Advocacy and Policy Lens in Juvenile Facilities Simon G. Gonsoulin, Principal Researcher,

A Spotlight on Multi-tiered Interventions and Supports through an Advocacy and Policy Lens in Juvenile Facilities

Simon G. Gonsoulin, Principal Researcher, Project Director NDTAC

Matthew Cregor, Staff Attorney, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Economics Justice

PBIS: Building Capacity & Partnerships to Enhance Educational Reform/2014 PBIS Leadership Forum/Rosemont, Illinois

Part I. Background

The U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention regularly reports data on conditions and youth in juvenile facilities.

The Southern Education Foundation analyzed the OJJDP’s data and surveys to produce Just Learning, an invaluable report on the state of education in juvenile facilities in the U.S. and the South.

The charts below are from the Southern Education Foundation’s report: http://southerneducation.org/

How Many Youth Are in Juvenile Facilities?

“The combination of a dismal economy, falling crime rates, lawsuits, and tireless advocacy led multiple communities to close entire facilities.” National Juvenile Justice Network

Chart from Southern Education Foundation, Just Learning p. 10 (2014)

Why Are Youth Being Sent to Juvenile Facilities?

37% confined for an offense against a person

24% confined for a property offense

7% confined for a drug offense

32% were confined for public order offenses (disorderly conduct), technical violations (of juvenile probation order), and status offenses (e.g., curfew, truancy).

Almost two-thirds of youth were confined for offenses that did not involve directly harming another person.

Chart from Southern Education Foundation, Just Learning p. 9 (2014)

Who Are the Youth in the Juvenile Facilities?

40.6% African American

32.5% White

22.3% Hispanic

1.7% Native American

1.0% Asian

1.8% Other

30% of youth had diagnosed learning disabilities (yet only 22% were receiving special education)

Chart from Southern Education Foundation, Just Learning p. 7 (2014)

What Weight Do They Carry?

Chart from Southern Education Foundation, Just Learning p. 14 (2014)

What is the Quality of Education They Receive?

Barriers:

Attendance prohibited as punishment

“Inadequate security staffing”

Lack of special educational services

Failure to diagnose special educational needs

Hodge-podge of service providers

Chart from Southern Education Foundation, Just Learning p. 14 (2014)

Federal Lens

June 9 Jointly Issued Memo USDOE & DOJ

From: Attorney General Eric. H. Holder and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan

To: Chief State School Officers and State attorney’s General

June 9 Memo

Overarching points for youth who come into contact with our juvenile justice systems: Youth obtain skills/competencies necessary for transition

home/community

Academic and career supports and services

Disabled students must have access to high-quality educational services

Youth must make meaningful educational progress while confined

June 9 Memo

Overarching points for youth who come into contact with our juvenile justice systems: (cont.) Individuals with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 obligate public agencies to provide educational services to eligible youth in confinement.

ED and DOJ Working Together to Influence State and Local Policy and Practices

Joint release of School Discipline Guidance Package

Released 2011-2012 Civil Rights Data Collection included school discipline data from long term secure facilities

Partnered with philanthropic community in release of the School Discipline Consensus Project

ED and DOJ Working Together to Influence State and Local Policy and Practices

Sponsored the 2013 National Academy of Sciences Report—Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach

Funded three model demonstration projects to improve reentry of youth with disabilities from JJ facilities

Overarching Characteristics for Providing High Quality Educational Services for Youth in Long -Term Secure Care Facilities

One: A safe, healthy facility-wide climate that prioritizes education, provides the conditions for learning, and encourages the necessary behavioral and social supports services that address the individual needs of all youth, including youth with disabilities and English learners.

Overarching Characteristics for Providing High Quality Educational Services for Youth in Long -Term Secure Care Facilities

Two: Necessary funding to support educational opportunities for all youth within long-term secure care facilities, including youth with disabilities and English learners, comparable to opportunities for peers who are not system-involved.

Overarching Characteristics for Providing High Quality Educational Services for Youth in Long -Term Secure Care Facilities

Three: Recruitment, employment, and retention of qualified educational staff with skills relevant to juvenile justice settings who can positively impact long-term student outcomes through demonstrated abilities to create and sustain effective teaching and learning environments.

Overarching Characteristics for Providing High Quality Educational Services for Youth in Long -Term Secure Care Facilities

Four: Rigorous and relevant curricula aligned with State academic and career/technical standards that utilize instructional methods, tools, materials and practices that promote college and career readiness.

Overarching Characteristics for Providing High Quality Educational Services for Youth in Long -Term Secure Care Facilities

Five: Formal processes and procedures—through statute, memoranda of understanding, and practice—that ensure successful, navigable transitions across multiple child-serving systems, and smooth reentry into communities.

Q & A

Contact Information Simon G. Gonsoulin, Project Director – NDTAC

[email protected]

Matthew Cregor, Staff Attorney - Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Economics Justice

[email protected]