Graduated Responses for Youth Under DJS Supervision.

Graduated Responses for Youth Under DJS Supervision

2

Goals for Today

Learn about the agency’s standardized approach to managing youth behavior and how it came about

Identify lessons from research on effective ways of changing behavior

Learn how to use new sanctions grids and apply them to hypothetical cases

Practice how to explain graduated responses to youth, family members, and juvenile justice stakeholders

Address questions or concerns

© Richard Ross

3

Why now?

2013 Legislation requires the Department to report its implementation of graduated responses by December 1, 2014 © Publicdomainpictures.net

4

What did the legislature mean?

“Graduated responses” means an accountability–based series of sanctions, including incentives, treatment, and services, applicable to children within the juvenile justice system, administered to hold children accountable for their actions and to protect communities from the effects of juvenile delinquency by providing appropriate sanctions for every act for which a child is adjudicated delinquent, by encouraging law–abiding behavior, and by preventing subsequent involvement in the juvenile justice system.(Chapter 497, 2013 Session)

5

Data

VOPs are a leading contributor to DJS commitment DJS commitment was ordered in 46.5% of

disposition decisions where the most serious offense alleged or adjudicated was a VOP

In contrast, DJS commitment was ordered in only 19.2% of disposition decisions adjudicated on crimes of violence

Three quarters of disposition decisions placing youth on probation involved low or medium risk kids - we can use options besides out of home commitments

Crimes of violence VOPs0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

407 498

1713

572

Committed Not committed

Youth are committed to DJS for VOPs at more than twice the rate of

commitments for crimes of violence

7

The Approach

From the start, encourage youth to

succeed, not just “comply”

Anticipate challenges and plan strategies

to address them with youth and

families

Provide ongoing reinforcement

for positive behavior and

swift, proportionate responses to

negative behavior

If youth are struggling,

identify effective tools to hold youth accountable and improve

behavior

8

The Philosophy

Save the most serious responses for behaviors that are concerns for public safety

Put tools to handle the other behaviors in the hands of case managers

Leave flexibility to handle special cases by working with regional directors

9

Documented Successes

Successful use of incentives and sanctions, or just incentives on their own, can be found in related programs. Positive Behavior Interventions

and Supports (PBIS) in schools Adult drug courts Smoking cessation Many juvenile probation

departments

© openclipart.org

10

What Does the Research Tell Us?

In 2012, the American Probation and Parole Association, the Pew

Charitable Trusts, and the National Center for State

Courts examined the most up-to-date research on effective

probation and parole practices . . .

11

Their Findings . . .

“The use of incentives is equally important (and often not sufficiently considered) in probation and parole supervision”

“[S]anctions and incentives should be used in conjunction with one another to promote compliance and positive behavior”Effective Response to Offender Behavior: Lessons Learned for Probation and Parole Supervision, AM. PROB. & PAROLE

ASS’N (2012), available at http://www.appa-net.org/eWeb/docs/APPA/pubs/EROBLLPPS-Report.pdf.

12

What Else Do We Know From the Research?

To be most effective, a system of sanctions and incentives must be: Certain Immediate Fair Of the appropriate

intensity Tailored to be effective

for individual youth

© Richard Ross

13

Certainty

What the Research Says:

“…. perceived certainty of sanctions does exert a specific deterrent effect, but perceived severity (given certainty of punishment) does not.”

Adele Harrell & John Roman, Reducing Drug Use and Crime Among Offenders: The Impact of Graduated Sanctions, 31 J. Drug Issues 207, 210 (2001).

What It Means for Our Work:

Consistency of our response changes

behavior, not the severity of the sanction.

Don’t automatically ramp up sanctions if a lower level sanction worked

earlier.

14

Immediacy

What the Research Says:

“…. a swift response to an infraction improves the perception that the sanction is fair and that the immediacy is a vital tool in shaping behavior.”

U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, “Swift and Certain” Sanctions in Probation Are Highly Effective: Evaluation of the Hope Program, available at http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/community/drug-offenders/Pages/hawaii-hope.aspx#note3.

What It Means for Our Work:

Responses must occur soon after a behavior

in order to be effective. That way, youth learn

the connection between the behavior

and the response.

15

Fairness and Appropriate IntensityWhat the Research Says:

“When used excessively or inappropriately, [sanctions] may precipitate a learned helplessness syndrome, which is counterproductive to the goal of improving behavior. Individuals who experience excessive, uncontrollable, and/or unpredictable sanctions often become irritable, despondent, and isolated, and thus less open to positive behavioral change.”

Douglas B. Marlowe & Kimberly C. Kirby, Effective Use of Sanctions in Drug Courts: Lessons from Behavioral Research, National Drug Court Inst. Rev.., Summer 1999, at 11, xv.

What It Means for Our Work:

Applying harsh sanctions for minor misbehavior can undercut our work to

change behavior.

Sanctions must match the seriousness of the behavior to be effective at deterring future negative behavior.

16

Tailored for Individual Youth

What the Research Says:

“When administering reinforcements or punishments, three important factors impact the effectiveness of the contingency: salience, immediacy, and consistency .… salience is the relevance of a given contingency to an individual. A contingency will not be effective if it is not important or relevant to the individual.”

Adria J. Trotman & Faye S. Taxman, Implementation of a Contingency Management-Based Intervention in a Community Supervision Setting: Clinical Issues and Recommendations, 50 J. Offender Rehabil. 235 (2011).

What It Means for Our Work:

The same sanctions and incentives won’t work for all youth. We

have to select sanctions and incentives that will matter based on what

we know about our clients.

Not all staff respond to violations in the same way

Some staff don’t use incentives to the same degree as others

Responses may not be quick enough to change behavior

Staff want the most effective options to respond to behavior

When we refer youth to court for violations, we lose much of our control over the case

We already

do this…

© All-free-download.com

18

What has DJS done so far?

Focus groups around the state with case managers and DJS management about needs, potential barriers, and what was already being done

Site visit of delegation of DJS regional directors, PD, State’s Attorney, judge, law enforcement and service providers to Santa Cruz, CA

Statewide survey with case managers about practices and understanding of graduated responses

Used information to develop grids and infraction guide, identify IT and training issues

19

Graduated Responses Development

“AIM Committee” met for over a year Developed statewide grid of

responses Regional Directors worked with

teams locally to make adjustments to reflect available programs and services

AIM Committee will be expanded to include line staff as coaches and contributors to plans for incentives side of system

20

New Tools: Infraction Determination Guide

Infraction Determination Guide

21

Infraction Determination Guide: Special Situations

Multiple Violations Complete one sheet for the most serious violation

and check the “multiple violations” box Determine seriousness by identifying the violation

that has the strongest relationship to any offense for which the youth is on active supervision, taking into account any direct victim impact

Document all violations in case notes Scoring Ties (2-2-1, 2-1-2, 1-2-2)

Consult with a supervisor and document how you broke the tie on the Infraction Determination Guide, including the factor you weighed most heavily in your decision

22

New Tools: Sanctions Grid

Sanctions Grids (county specific)

If you think that the grid does not offer an appropriate response, consult with your regional director or assistant regional director. They will determine whether an override is warranted and notify Headquarters if an override is granted, including the reason why.

AIM Tip Sheet

23

Implications for Practice

1. Ensure that youth understand expectations from the beginning

2. Explain the system of graduated sanctions if youth do not comply

3. With the youth and family, assess the likelihood of problems complying with particular conditions and plan strategies to prevent violations

4. Expect challenges; respond each time so that it is clear you are watching

5. Use sanctions related to the underlying behavior and likely to create change

24

Responding to a Violation

1. Explore the events that led up to the behavior that got them in trouble

2. Help youth understand why his or her behavior is a problem

3. Explore alternative actions the youth could take in the future

4. Explain why you are imposing a particular sanction

5. Work with the youth to create a plan for making better choices next time

Adapted from Mark Carey, Carey Guides Effective Case Management, Responding to Violations (2010).

25

What Are the Benefits?

Higher successful probation completion rates and lower recidivism rates

Reduced detention admissions for technical violations

Consistency and equity in approach to violations Strengthening of youth’s ability to succeed when

no longer under DJS supervision

We will have more tools in the toolbox to help us achieve our goals

26

What Are the Benefits in Court? Judges will receive more information on the

interventions that we have used in each case We will have easily accessible documentation

to support VOP or case closure The court will see consistency and uniformity

in our approach, which will build confidence in our work

27

Scenarios and Group Discussion

© Richard Ross

28

Talking to Stakeholders about Graduated Responses

Anticipate the interests and concerns of key stakeholders Judges Prosecutors Public Defenders

Frame messages in a way that recognizes and addresses those interests and concerns © Pixabay.com

Judge

LENS: Concerned with public safety, accountability, child’s treatment needs, and fairness in the system

KEY CONCERNS: May feel obligated to be “tough on crime” to protect public safety May favor restrictions if youth present any risk to public safety or risk of

flight Concerned with being embarrassed by decisions that yield bad

outcomes (e.g., released youth alleged to have committed murder) Concerned with limits on their discretion

MESSAGING: The legislature required DJS to report on its implementation of a graduated responses system

Youth who commit violations that aren’t a danger to public safety can be better served in the community at lower costs and with better results (e.g., lower recidivism rate, improved re-entry outcomes, etc.)

Using a system of responses to handle violations of low-level offenders will allow the more intensive resources to be focused on high-risk, violent, and repeat juvenile offenders

The AIM system will promote consistency and fairness AIM will be used to respond quickly to technical violations The court will receive detailed information on the use of responses

Prosecutor

LENS: Responsibility for public safety; represents the voice of the victim

KEY CONCERNS: May be wary of policy changes that could be viewed as risking public safety

May be more supportive of sanctions as the best means of preventing further delinquency in youth

May be concerned that victims would not appreciate offenders receiving rewards for doing what they are ordered to do

MESSAGING: The legislature required DJS to report on its implementation of a graduated responses system

Using a system of responses to handle violations of low-level offenders will allow the more intensive resources to be focused on high-risk, violent, and repeat juvenile offenders

Youth who commit violations that aren’t a danger to public safety can be better served in the community at lower costs and with better results (e.g., lower recidivism rate, improved re-entry outcomes, etc.)

The AIM system will promote consistency and fairness AIM will be used to respond quickly to technical violations

Public Defender

LENS: Advocate for child’s expressed interests; concerned about unnecessary incarceration/placement and due process

KEY CONCERNS: • May oppose the use of responses that are perceived to be outside the authority of the community supervision court order

• Concerned that enhanced requirements that youth participate in services may set youth up for failure

• Concerned about imposition of sanctions without a hearing

MESSAGING: • AIM will help youth complete community supervision successfully, with the ultimate result of the case being closed

• AIM will help intervene in violations early before they rise to being chronic problems

• AIM will assist in getting the “wrong kids” out of residential placement (e.g., low-level offenders and youth with technical violations)

• DJS plans to monitor implementation of the AIM system and make any appropriate modifications

32

Questions and For More Information Contact your supervisor and regional

director with any questions about how to apply the graduated responses system to a particular case