m = 'oJ'" :;:;::::: VJ C) 2 p""" CJ C:;, 2 r""'7"1 1A.:l> "-C'-- C=..,. .... ,"""' t? 7iJ r.= t..: Y " (,.Pj ="J id:C;' =1 .;-;; v.,..-J! !?91i =v; r=;J i"'FJ :"? =::.a:::o ""-'- n I77l (.n <1:",,)) :;::;:l < ,-:.::_'" ... "": ... ", / ;.' _'r, N ()(lIAl SE I(]E (]E fiT ENT -, 1 Y7S f NNUAL .. - If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.
53
Embed
SEl j. holle,nbach, iii co()tjt'i judge county commissionei'1s tom helm bob kirchdorfer earl hartlage metropolitan social services depart~ent division of administration 216 s, 5th
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
m
=
'oJ'"
:~~ :;:;::::: ~;..-:.~
VJ ~ C)
2 ~ ~ ~ p"""
<~
CJ ~' C:;, 2 r""'7"1
~;§ !f~
1A.:l> "-C'--
~ C=..,. .... ,"""'
t? 7iJ r.= t..:Y
"
~'} ~ (,.Pj
="J id:C;' =1
~', .;-;; \J~~~ :~~ ~. ~.= ~ v.,..-J!
!?91i ;:~ =v; ~ ~:
~ r=;J i"'FJ :"? =::.a:::o ..-~ ""-'-n ~ I77l
(.n
<1:",,)) jj_?~ :;::;:l ~ ~-
< ~S; ~ ,-:.::_'"
~~~
4'~",
'1;~~;~~'-... ,.~~ ~T' "": ... ",
/ '~.: ;.'
~~t#'1
_'r,
111(J~()ll N
()(lIAl
SE I(]E
(]E fiT ENT
-,
1 Y7S f NNUAL IiE~(lf1T
.. -
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.
L J. HOLLE,NBACH, III CO()tJT'I JUDGE
COUNTY COMMISSIONEI'1S TOM HELM BOB KIRCHDORFER EARL HARTLAGE
METROPOLITAN SOCIAL SERVICES DEPART~ENT
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION
216 S, 5TH STREET LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY 40202
The contents of this publication, including the conclusions represent the views of the staff of the Office of Research and Planning, Metr'opolitan Social Services Department.
This publication should not be considered to have official approval of the Jefferson County Fiscal Court, the Jefferson County Juvenile Court, or the Metropolitan SoC'ial Services
'Department, either expressed or implied until l"ev;ewed and evaluated by those orgqn'izations and subsequently endorsed by the appropriate individuals.
List of Tables. List of fi gUi~es List of Illustrations
INTRODUCTION
Tj~BlE OF CONTENTS
prHU ONE: JUVENILE JUSTI~E SE~\!ICES
Section 1.0: 1.1 : 1.2: 1.3: 1.4: 1.5: 1.6; 1. 7:
Q • • 0. o. . ~.
Section 2.0:
$r:ction 3.0: 3.1: 3.2:
Juverrile Justice System Youth Diversion Project Diagnostic and Detention Ce~!tei'" Alternative to Detention/Homefiildii'!9 Depa~~t!i:~nt Protect'j 'Ie Se~~vi ces Department Children's Sel"'vlces Intake fJeDartment Assessment Depart~ent . Home Detention Psyc:hologica-l $grvlces Department Treatment Services
General Ch~racteristics
Pi emill ng SGl"V1ce CommLii1iti es DGmog~~ap:'lic Lrforrr:ati Oi"l l Scores of Social Pat}iology Pl ann; ng Se?'vice l;Oli!iTIUlyjt-j es PmfH es
PART TWO: ADULT SERVICES
SecUon 1.0: 1.1:
Financial Assistance Annual Date Financial Assistance !'kmthly Data
Section 2.0: Louisville and Jefferson County Nutrit-iufliil PrDgram
t~ 1:[1(-; CQ~t;"t is: a f~omri: of ~:'f:«:h V(i!!::l~j{!t :<J'~lid~-;; ~,'i'}/'.'i!j5f: i;', ~l -;~lJG;r; Jf:iAu". (,: n t~',:~~~ .. :~~\'~"-: .. ~: .~ r-"
~ ·~fi
~: ,
, '
'~1iei~e r€sp;)~~jS i b 1 e -fer Jti1ess ~«:~f €rk~~ ~ s !'",C "~ '(~~~~cn ~ ~1d'~'i·;GBiJ i ~V;):) r{rf8i'" ·~,O 'IJ;.J.·~jen"~"~'E· ~,0}t"~~ a,l~ i!;,:",:41,.":,~~;f!.; :)': l<o";(
times a yeal'"'.
As compar'ed to 1914~ t.hen: ~'jas a fI:agl i9it,h~ sJll:lmge ilfl the total mzmb".;~~ r>f ~"',:;!ferV'C',ls 'hi 1,)!'~. :r?: 21pi,;:E:arS
that there ha 5 been a 1 eve 1 i ng of f of v'sf err'a Is, s i flee the pl"!'N i Oil S 9 h nt1;~~~~er ~"""'-:.'~",, I'D ':liP) -Ll '10'73 ti~t.;:;\·_) '~J~r,.j""" IJIoI _J ..
- 2 -
Table 1. Juvenile Individuals and Referrals by Rac~Sex arud Vea~
E ': ---"l'JHITE : -- :~ ~---~~--BrACl<-' 1 ~- --- -rOiAl r1a!e c hFsmcl.le", p ;)ub T~! I ,~~l~J Fem~eol f su~, •. }"1aie =/ .Femalg~J ,Tota'_o _
__ 1.~_;)_ ~~/q·1!~~~=--~j~~-.-'~ ~~~'~~~r.~_ff:;o'~., .. o~.~~~,L_:~'··"~,~~_·_!J:·~~~~~ __ ''~_~_'~L~~~ __ .-:~~r~~ __ ~~,~~j • llt-OI'j,:',j"l'l.'C:'" ,'<If I " I t I ' , f_' ,,, __ ,n.;'''!) ... ",r,c2·t n ! I ~ " I "-1!D4-':-
I' -~~ 5.6 I ,·]0.2 ; ~;':) ., ;' J ~ :~.1 ! ~ 6.e I C.2 7.7 i 6.;: I
1"75 " ...... .,.. 6 r:. n ....., .~" 'I,r. .-'.,... JI '~-- t- t fI·,.o:;. 'i"'6 ' .... i -a 'V .... ,,"",., .', ~ -'-il,. ,'" .. ,l.' ~ ~,~" ,~",~.-, ~,", ,'-, ,/ I . .1. ... " v I ~'. '.I j . >, ,.' I -, -I."" ' " -', • v ' "- ~I.' L - .. '" -~ .. "' "', ",'
I't='~"'"",H=rJ..."n=E1e·~R~;if"i-t'" I-'--'---,--o-.. ·-----i-----· .. "-'''r----'-- .-.- 0" --- n -' f"'\n " I i- t(~., ! ~ ~ i ? ,0 i ,," .' 1 '":>
1974 1975
.;: .. '" ~ .'... . ; 1. 3 i 1. 4 I L ~ I .t • ,) 10 4-~.~ ! 1.5 1.3 ~ ~.~ . L4 I l.~ 1.4
1.4 I 102 1:3, I i:~ i:~ i ~:4 I t: I ~:~ 1.4 i 1. 4 ! L 2 1. '"} I L;) 1. 2 I L'5 ! 1. 5 ~ .2 1. 4~
lSes pages 11 and 16 for a more co~plete discussion of these departments.
- 4 -
Table 2. Juvenile Referrals by Reason Refe~red~ Se~ and Race
REASON REFERRED
Paternity Narriage Request Arson Assault Aggravated Assault Attempted Suicide Auto Tampe\"-jng Auto Theft Unauthorized Use of Auto Banding to Commit Felony Ois~rderly Conduct
. Destruction of Property I Dependency ~ 13r'unkermess
I D\"Jell inghouse Break.ing Forcible Rape
I Grand La rceny loitering Murder 8; Mafls:aughter Outhouse B,eakir.g Petit Larceny Poss./Drinking Liquor Robbery: Purse Snatching Robbery Runaway: In County Runaway: Out of County Runaway: Out of State Runaway: At~OL
2Q 0.5 I 6 0.3 ~6 0.4 1 0.1 0 - I 1 3.1 I!) 0.3 ~ 3 0.2 18 0.3 0 0 - ~ 0 77 L 7 i 7 0.4 i 3.'1 L 4- I 2 0.1 1 0.2 l 3 G.1
3 0.1 i' 1 0.1 I 4 0.1 ~ 5 0.3 0 - l 5 0.2 392 8.8' 104 5.9 I 496 8.0! 100 6.7 32 5.6 I 132 6.4 114 2.6, 43 2.5 i 157 2.5 I 1 0.1 10 1.7 I 11 0.5 I 282 6.4 I 1l~ 6.~ I 398 6.4 i 298 19.9 i 108 18.8 i 4?~ 19.6! 180 ~.1 i '" 0 .... , 185 3.0 r, 17 1.1 ~ 0 I 11 O.BI
45 100 i 44 2.5 i 89 1.4 0 -! 0 I 0 ~ ~ 16 0.4 ~ 5 0.3 I 21 0.3 0 0 I 0 -!
182 4.1 ~ 77 4~4 I 259 4.2 3 0.2 3 0.5 R 5 0.3 14 0.3 I 28 1.6 I 42 0.7! 4 0.3 8 1.4 i 12 0.5 I 2 '* I ~ 0.2 I 6 0,1 J 9 - (J - n ~ ~ i o - I U - I 0 - I {} - I 0 - i t> -!
112 2.5 ~ 56 3.2 i 168 2.7 i 42 2.8, 14 2.4 I 56 2.7 277 5.3 I 8 0.5 i 285 4.6 I 53 3.5 I 3 0.5 i 56 ~.7
9 0.2 i 35 2.0 I 44 0.1 1 0.1' 4 0.7! 5 D.2 67 !.5 I 72 4.1 139 2.31 1 0_; J ~~ 1.~ I. 111 0.5 59 1.3 22 1.3 81 1.3 154 lO.J I ~J 5.~ 184 8.9 13 0.3 0 13 0.2 21 1.4 I 4- 0.7 25 1.2 64 1.4 3 0.2 67 1.1 I 66 4.4 I 4 0.7 70 3.4 76 1.7 35 2.0 111 1.B 58 3.9. 24 4.2 I 82 4.0
TOT A L No.
2 17 59
126 255
5 27 IS 87
r) ., 62·3 15(~
8\14 2n? 89 ?1 . '.
~ .~,..
lb!) 54 5 f}
224 341
flO .J
150 265
38 137 193
% ... I
-~ ! o <) ~
0:7 I 105 I :Ll I 0, 1 ~ 0.3 l 0.2 i 1.1 , '1 'I ' <.i ~ t 7,5 : ~. n ~
e:. U i 9.7 i ~ .~ I .-<~ ~ "i 1 ' ~, - 1 G.3 t '1 ? I' _0_ ;}.7 I tI.l I -I
2.7 .. 4.1 0.6 ' loB 3.2 0.5 1.7 2.3
__ ~._ I _l _~ ___ _
- 5 -
I I
r I
--~-:..:::.-,----"~~~.':..:.",,,
Table 2. Juvenile Referrals by Reason Referred, Sex and Race (Contt.)
i'4ALE FEf.'!AL~ TOT A L t'Jbite I B lack--T- ~ Sub 1. ~- -- ~IhHe Black f - Sub-l"--:--, REASON REFERRED
No. % No .% No. % No. % No: % No. % I No. % I School House Breaking 3 0.1 - 3 0.2 t 6 0.1 ~- 0 ~! 0 - 0 = 6 0.1 Sex Offenses 27 0.6 12 0.7 39 0.6 12 0.8 15 2.6 27 1.3( 66 0.8 I
-o-rAL 4 431 lOC) 0 , "':? 1110 1 ~ (;. 1 ~3 00 0 i . 40 4 "1 y .. '1 I !)/d :;:T:2 DuB 1-')0 " R 8 2;::'1 -'() 9 1 I . , __ ~~. __ =~/_~~:~:~_L O'~':~._d_:~l_l~~ ~ .J v.U I ~_' ~.-:J I ~,! ~.I,j.u I ~ ._.1. Y.~ •.
ll'Less than 0.1 psr'Cent.
~ 6 -
For 1975, the most frequent reasons for referral were Burglary, Shoplifting, and Dependency. Together 2
these charges account for nearly 33 per cent of all the referrals.
As previously seen in 1974, white f~~ales wp.re referred mainly for Dependency (19.9%), Shoplifting (16.3%)~
and Runaway: In County (lO.3%), to/hne black females were referred for Shoplifting (24.6%), Dependency (18.8%)$
and Ungovernable Behavior" (lO.5%).
For ma les, th~ main reasons for 'referral changed p."1iilari ly a:J ~ result of the classification pr'obl em.
White males were l"sfer\"ed for Burglary (14.7%), Disorderly Conduc-e (8~8%L arid Dependency {6.4%} v':-:'1':e black
males \'Jere i"eferred for Burglary (20.no ~ Shoplifting (12.4%), and Dependency {6.6%).
As a result of the new crim'lnal ccde~ the best way to compm"e the i"~as,!)ilS for referral in 1975 to previ~"-;s
years is thi"ough tile use of thE: FBI Cr'hTle Classifico:t-ion which comi:rl:1eS simi'li}i' Gffenses. T~lis grou;ring resldt"
in lan;eny/Theft" BUY'glary ~ Dependency ~ Drug tal'} Violations" and fh.ln8t-iays ~s tk-.; fiv'l..:>: main i~ed::)ons fOi~ i"'.?fer~t'd L 3
Drug Law Violations for the first t'jme emei'ged as one of the main rea5~:m') -for 'f'l:::~~rTtd.
Ma'rriage Requests and Dependevicy t~?en(als {~onthlu;;;J tiJ decr'e.use as an 'i;'uiicaticn of -;:he inteiventirm by
the Protective Services Department.
2.Concern has already been expressed about the number- of ti~uandes in 1975. It has been en'r.meollsiy stilted that the number of truancies should have 'increased because Gf the boycott of the court desegregat~ion order"'~ however!? a child must be truant a certain number of days before legal act-ion can be takEn. TherefQre the petitions for truancy were not taken out until the late months of 1975, and most of them in 1975. A first··count semiannual for January to June of 1976 shows already 565 truancy referrals.
3 For a more complete analysis of the Drug Referrals~ see MSSD/Juvenile fpur! Int~r]mE~po~!lAn Examinatipn
of Drug Referrals in Jefferson Countl~' lSl.; Office of Research--anct~; SprHig~ 1m.
Major vs. Person 0 0 -,' 7 1.6 I 2 .9 1 .5 I 0 10.n ' Major vs. Property 2 .4 0 10 2.4 I 5 2.3 11 5.3 I 4 1.6 32 1.9 I Minor 255 54.6 63 53.8! 270 63.5! 135 63.1 88 42.7 I 143 5G.l 954 56.7 I
Social 71 15.2 22 18.8 I 110 25.9 II 54 25.2 70 34.0 I 76 29.8 403 23.9 i Dependency 4 09 0 I 10 2.4 2 .9, 2 1.0 I 0 -I 18 1.1 i Job Needed 7 1. 5! 0 - I 1 .2 I 3 ~.4 1 ' .5 i 18 7.1, 30 1. J I Other (Non-Del.) 128 27.4 I 32 27.4 j! 17 4.0 13 6.1 33 16.0 I 14 5.5 I 237 14.1!
-L... I I .
~ - . TOTAL r; ~;.o I ~~~.Or2~~~0.~ i. 21~-~9.9 I 2;;100.0 ! 255 100.1 1'68~~_~~;1 F, DIVERSION 'I' 332' 71."~'"4- 8~-;;~6-~il-~O;-~ 95"81119~---92.;117;-~q~, .5\-223 a7.~-(~I.~~~~7-<--;t:,~,l
PREVEIIITION l~h 28 9 ~., ,,-, 11, '," !.1 2 1'- ", h I 3'1 1f" - 3? "'<I""! .,~-" <i:; -, • l n 1,)0. • ;}t:: 1..' ..... l ",0 ' 0 _,0 f • i.J. "'t 0<;:- I '- .!.i.. 'J i ::.7:JJ ! ... ;' i
. I L---------1------I--~ I -----+-.-~---.~-.---.-,.---- _J 1 ! 1 I ! I I '
'., ~, " T ~f', tf"'I J 1 6 )''' .. ~... i""" 1 '1 ~ t) rei. i"j '1 c r.: ! ( ~ «: 0 ~ 0. .... i
5In 1974, the data collection was not complete so that the information is unknown. 6Total detention are those who were not paroled before arraignment. 7The rate of individual detention is derived by determining the ratio of total detentions to total Juve-
nile Court referrals.
- 14 -
SECTION 1. 3: ALTERNATIVE TO DETENTION/Hm1EFINDING DEPARn1ENT
In September $ 1972" MSSD initiated the Alternative to Detention Progrzm (A1'D). Under this program"
private individuals in the cmTflnunity accept into their home children who IJ.ave committed a de1inC[ ... ~nt act and
are in need of care and supervision 'but do not need S(~cu:..·e dGte.rtiClii. T.he lell~t;l vi sta.y l~ 'Of a sli.vrt dUl'a-
tion.
The specific go~ls of the pTOg?8m aTe:
.; to sepak'ate the younger ~ social of:f~:n'ide2's fro;n the mc:;,''9 sopl-3.sticated dzlix!quent;
.; to reduce the fliJ1Jlber' of ehild'r.en ,!(;t:Z;3il::?:tl ht the D(;i:ildo~i C<2:.ntG:i:', mii
Children are received into ATD through the admi::;:;icl:S 'l'lO:.d.crs at tte D~t~nticn Center or through the
Juvenile Court ,JudGe. The criteria for acc('J:ting a ..::11] 10. intv the p..t·or::-c;~u L~ tl.~t th~ \._,ffemH' be l1'tino1' or
social. At least seventy-fiv~ p~l' celit of the I;;,fE'J'1~a15 \'lex'e of t:hi.s tnJ00
There was a forty ;,Je:r cellt h:.creL'J0 in -~he n';li1lt€r :;:: ":i1it G ·)f'!', .-.;3 ~'r:; t·.<.,~d 1 ~j hr tL::· : .... :1: r r ~ J::,~(n l'Ur:1:l,~
1975 as corr'Fared to 197L HC"i';J'J0::' for hlack r~fS'iTFlls" \';i:t'~ ~1 ,_'.:',:.n,;;:;'l.SC of t~iJ::'LtY~I.~1_2.te i.e .. : :".i:t.
Srne Protect-lYe Services Departmeflt keep~ 5GparatG f"(·cm'1s fer t;1G c~s~s they haw:nf~d \i';~kh is where this information orighlated. The Juvenile Cnurt 5tatistk5~ hClJJevel('~ COLm'!; onlY t:v)se dp!lenctGiiCi~s \1,;10 actu.i-.111y had Court involvement.
- 16 -
forty per cent lived with their mother only. C~i,,11~1 1 "" .<.1-..-"7 ~l"'~'''' 8 01"_<.0 __ ""Y e"s I-l_~, .• l ",1;.;,,,,, • Uving AiTMlqeme.=mt of Indiv-1ctuals -.--~"'"-'-----~
1t.~~~IN5 ~;M~GBfjENT TuN~-.----); I !-- - • ---i- J
I '. I i r'1cther/Stepfather I 58 6.5 i ~~othet Dilly I 339 38.3 I
Rf.:l ative I 156 17,6 I
twenty per cent liv·:ed -vdth both parents.
Juvenile individuals in Protective Services (}.verag~d 1.93
siblings.
Over haH (50.8%; of tl).e headc; of households of jUtfen ..... '? - ~ '!- ." I "7 ~ f' I .:d15 I, nUL: ,CAl i~' J.1 80th Pa'rellts Ffi :;'>;.2 F.1'.r~:ra~rISteprr!(ltr\:lf·' ;:6!!. ~ Fath~r Only 45 s"~
in-12.1!idL:als in PY'cft··:;lctl,,'e S3-;:,dces ~'l~~rr;- tmempIoycd 3.t ~·.he ti:'ae
of ref€:u·fl!.J. Sligh~ly oV<:>i' a tLi.i.\l 0'':: d~B £anliUes ~'JOI'(; rc;.::;}~x- foster Home 19 ::! .• ,~ I:1dependant 12 L~~
ing Public Assi~tance. Th:: ;;'l,;;an :J..n(cme ~~<lS $7 .. L(';S 1)":£' y<::.ar. Uiiknm":iI 1,+ 1.':',
9Presently the audges are uS-iVig a. d'/$po:,Hlim 'mnl;1\1 as "irrfm'tr.frl adjustment. 1i The~;e c.ases .iH'€ ones 1.vtiHe the problells of the refernil are corrert(i:'Ci so that most probably the case did not n€:!€'d formal ~tte!ltiDn. Iii 197 5 ~ there it/ere 561 of these such cases Of' 6.8% 01 a 1"! the referrals.
- 18 ..
In 1975~ a greater percentage of white males were handled formally. But, as in previous years, blacks
were handled formally more often than whites.
Less than half of the first offenders \~'ere ha,'ldled informally. The probability of a case beLJg handled
informally decreases as the nuraber of prior referrals increases.
100 ~
75
50 Infol"ma 1
~ 25 Formal
D 1 2-5 '6-10 11-20+
Manner of Handling by Total Referrals'
Fig. 2.
- 19 -
100%~
I 75
50 T 25 t
M . F vlhite
r4 F Black
Manner of Handling by Race and Sex
Fig. 3.
Informal
~ Formal
D
SECTION 1.6: ASSESSMENT DEPARTMENT
The Assessment Department receives the formal cases and completes an investigation in order to make a
recommendation to the Judge as to the disposition of the case. The recommendation takes into accoUl~t the
behavior patterns and background of the juvenile to arrive at a social work evaluation which may not neces-
sarily be derived from legal interpretation.
The assessment worker interviews the family and child, SUl!IDlORS the l1itnesses, informs the family of any
changes in court dates> and p2"esents the case to the Court. The ,,'orker handles the case through the al'l-aign-
ment s pre-trial, and dispositional hearing.
Fo:rmal cases appear befoY'e the c.:mrt first at the arraignment. At this stage, seve:caJ Op-;;10l15 are open
to the Trial Ccmmissioner h2.ndling the case. The C3..r.;e can be dismissed, reiIlanded,. filed away ~ referred for
infoHnal adjustment or passed to a hearing date. If the case is finaled (not p&.ssed to a later date). the
juvenile basically leaves tI.e SystE'ffi. tut tI1C c:;!.se can be reopened and the juven.ile returned to Court.
When the cas€' is passed .. the child may be s~nt to th0 Detention Center, an Alterna.t.ive to Detenticm HO':l>e,
the Shelter House, the Home Detention PrGgram, or released to the parents or anQther responsible person.
SECTION 1.7: HOME DETENTION
TIle Home Detention Program began in March of 1975. Youths are assigned to the program either at the
arraigrrrnent or at the detention hearing. Through this program, the child is released to hi$ home while inten-
sive supervision is provided by the home detention worker.
- 20
The specific goals of the pro~ram are:
I to reduce the average daily population of the Detention Center;
I to provide care at a cost comparable to or less expensive than the detention experience;
I to make sure the child is available for scheduled court heari-:1gs; and
I to assist the youth in remaining trouble free during the period of his/her adjudicatioll.
From April 1 to December 31; 1975, approxirr~tely 140 juveniles were referred ~~d handled through the Hom~ 10
Detention Program.
The Judge will usually pass a case so that the l·litnesses can be sUTI'Jlioned, a lawyer can be obt.ained" an
investigation can take place~ a casework study can be done$ and testing can be done by the Psychological
Services Department.
SECTION 1.8: PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
The Psychological Services Department has been a part of the Juvenile Coart furlction5 since April of 1956.
Cases referred by the Court receive top priority in ·testing" but other divisions of MSSD may also refer juve
niles to this department. Each child tested is evaluated to determine the most app1"opriate treatment recOTIII'leruiz.
tion. During 1975 ~ this department handled &.n average of 55 cases per month.
10 f,jSSD Home Detention: A Preliminary Evaluation; Office of Research and Planning; March~ 1976.
- 21 -
The Gault decision of 1967 was a ruling by the United States Supreme Court which gave juveniles the right
to representation by counsel in Juvenile Court hearings. Even if the family of the child cannot afford legal
counsel, the child is nevertheless entitled to quality representation.
For 1975, more referrals had their own counsel than in previous years. The percentage of those with no
counsel decreased since 1974.
Table 11. Juvenile Referrals by legal Counsel, Sex and Race
rlHITE BLACK LEGAL COUNSEL i~ale Female Sub 1. ~lale remale Sub T. TOT A l
TOTAL 2~713 100. a . 795 100.1 3~508 99.9 1,288 99.9 348 100.0 1,636 99.9 5,144 100.1 : __________________ L ------- -- -'-----------~----------
A case may be passed numerous times before it finally reaches the dispositional hearing. During this
hearing, the Judge reviews the case and Dlakes note of the recommendations of the case worker and comes to a
conclusion as to what treatment, if any~ would be in the best interest of the child. The most common grouped
dispositions are Filed Away (58.3%), Delinquent Institutions (9.9%), Probation (8.6%), and Restitution (5.0%).
In 1975, the average juvenile referral was more likely to be filed away than in previous years.
Delinquent Institution
Pr
fileci Away (58.3%)
- 22 -
ther
egal Misc. (3.1%)
oster Care (4.2%)
Temporary Custody (4.8%) estitution (5.0%)
SECTION 1.9: TREATf~ENT SERVICES
Adjudicatory·Dispositions
Fig. 4.
Referrals for Homicide, Runalflays~ Behavior Problems and Vagrancy were placed in delinquent institutions
more often than the other offenders.
There are a number of resources and programs available to the Judge for placement of the juvenile. In
1975~ 310 adjudicated delinquents were placed on probation to f4SSD by the Juvenile Court Judge.
The MsSD Probation Department serves the delinquent in both his social and family environment. Intensive
counseling is provided on an individual and/or group basis. In the past five years, the majority of the refer
rals to the Probation Department t'fere for major property offenses. The total number of referrals to probation
continued to increase until 1975 when a 31.4 per cent decrease occurred.
- 23 -
I
. ~.'------'
Table 12. Juveniie Referrals by Reason Referred and Adjudicatory Disposition
GRAND DELINQUENT COf<iMUNITY TOT A l REASON REFERRED FAWl JURY INSTITUTION RESTITUTION PROBATION RESOURCE OTHER No. ~- J'{o. P Np. %- No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Table 13. _CGmmitme!1£Ll~.Lfrobati~fl bX TYp'9 of OffeflZ.:~d Yfi~r
~OF OFFENSE % h j':ilt. jPF ox 1971. J'.-o 1974 ~r 1975 J . No . ~ I~O. % ~ i~o • % D No • %
Major vs. Person 28 806 Major vs. Property 166 50.8 Minor 54 16.5 Social 78 23.9 Dependency ~ 1 .3
39 11.4-40.5 24.5 21.6
139 84 74
7 2.0 ~
TOTAL Po 327 IDD.l 343 100.0
~ .~ -~-.
y.
49 10.9 i 74 16.4 61 225 50.1 '. 233 51.5 159
97 21.6 I 70 15.5 48
19.7 5103 15.5 13.5 77 17.1 I 72 15.9 42
1 .2 3 .7 I 0
449 99,9 I 452 100.0 I 310 100.0 i
--...--~~ -... ... - . ~
Besides the proff;;ssional IJl"ol-:bti un ~xpf'r lence offer0d by the MSS-O Pr0hztioil Depart"lle::-i.t ~ a J '.x'Jell.iJ <? GE' !1E'
placed on probation by the J'.nt~nile Court Jt'.oge to a private citizen l;ihG voluutee7s tc SU?c'K~~Tize .. he cU 10 ..
In 1975 JI there w~re 76 Court :r,~f0L~'als to the Volunteer Prob;;;.tion DEparl::I:!ent.
These voluutsers are recJ".d;;,d ani tl'ained iJy the MSSD Volunteer S0£~vices DepCi.ytment. The traFt:!.!:g
consists of the history and ph.ilosophy of the Juvenile Cour1;~ the org2'.1lization and function of r'~::[;D J thecT:L~5
and methods of counseling, and the at';;::dbutes necessar;r for an effective volunteer ~'lorkcr.
Juvenile refe:crals are :receive.::l 1.::L1.:0 the 'Pro;p.~a;1!. from the COUTt, Youth Services Project, Schools, Prvtec-
tive Services, OrlllSby Village Treaunent Center~ and other sources. A juvenile is matched to a volunteer "/ho
is responsible for the case~lOrkJl monthly reports and court appearances of the juvenile.
It is required that each volunteer handle only one case at a time" but at -;;he completion of the probation-
a:ry period, the volunteer can continue in the program by taking anotIwr case. The probation continues until
- 25 -
I
------~.--
the juvenile achieves a sat,isfactory adjustment, commits a new offense, fails to respond favorably to this
type of probation or reaches the age of eighteen. II
Delinquent institutions received approxima.tely ten per cent of the adjudicated juveniles. The main
delin~aent institution managed by MSSD is the Ormsby Village Treatment Centtir.
The Ormsby Village Treatment Center provides short··term (four to six months) residential treatment for
Jefferson County adjudicated delirtque:nts ag:;>d 13 to 17. Residents receive plr,1sical examinations arill. psycholog-
ical testing prior to being adwitted. The juveniles are grouped in cottages according to their Interpersvnal
Maturity Level Classification (I-Level) so t.hat ther~ i~ less chance that the mOI'e sophisticated delL~rruents - . rule the less sophisticated. The Jefferson County Board of Educa.tion provides schooling for the residents on
the campus. On-th.e-j ob training is also provided tIrrough a progT@1\ of indivi dual ('!Ol'k assignments.
Table 14. ~!1~l?f(~~-!p __ 9!~e£Le.J/l ~~,~~s2!L.R&e~~~~e!i.i~t,2gp~£!)~ ant y~~.,
r·lajor VS. Persoll I B 5.8 14 6.9 17 8.0 20 1.0.3 11 10.5 Major vs. Proper'ty 52 37.7 67 33.2 66 31.0 62 31.8 36 34.3 Minor • 61 28.6 36 18.5 22 21.0 i
Social 50 36.2 63 31.2 69 32,4· 77 39.5 I 36 34.3 i 28 20.3 I 58 28.7
I 213 'on n TOTAL 138 100.0 1_2O~~~_OO._O 195 100.1 1105 100.1 I J.VVo"
IIFor further information see: Volunteer Probation Officers Proaram: An Evaluation; Office of Research and Planning; January, 1975. --
- 26 -
Youths charged lrith having committed a major offense accounted fo1.' over £01:1:y per cent of the commitments
to Ormsby Village while one-third were social or status offerses. In 1975~ there was a decrease of 46.2 per
cent in the number of ym..rths being committed to Ormsby Village so that only t",;."O per cent of the total formal
referrals were sent to Ormsby Village.
Another institution operated by ~ffiSD is the SrnIthfields Residential Group Center.
In September $ 1961 ~ Sou,thfields Residential Group Center Vias established using the principles of the
Highfield t S experiment. Adjudicated male delinquents from 1~ to 18 yeaI"s of age are placed on prcbation by
the Juvenile Court F1."ovided that they attend Su'Uthfi"lds; they aIe not "committed fl to the progrmll.
l\feeI<days axe ~entered aroui"1d helping the youth develop consistent i1fork J:abits since i!10st oft'ht::!1~ hr:!.ve
rejected the school setting. Guided Group Int,el'actioIl. and peer pl.'csst.'T(,;; are utilized to intel'nalizG in the
youth~ socially acceptable noXillS of behavior.
Table 15. AooTlssir.;lls to Southfields by Reasovi fm~ Refel'''ral (Grouped) iJ.nd Year
F ,F 1972 1973 1974 REA ... Dr'l RLERRfD I No. ~~ . No. % No. %
Major vs •. Person I 9 14.5 II 14 21.5 11 32.4 Major vs~ Propef~Y I 30 48.4 22 33.8 I 9 26.5 Minor 14 22.6 14 21.5 5 14.7 Social 9 14.5 I 15 23.1 9 26.5
TOTAL I 62 100.0 I 65 99.9 I 34 100.1
1975 f'~o 0 %
9 23.7 27 71.1 1 2.6 1 2.6
38 100.0
- 27 -
L
From t~ovemb'TI'. 1974 1:0 Ys.arch" 1975" SO' .. :rth::lelds t-,'a.5 clos::-d fo:r a :re-€valuation to see 1£ it <'las 8-chieving
its goals. In 1975, the TIlilllber of ::rGfeTI'91 s sta.yed relativzly close to the 1974 total which is e.''(plainoo by
the temporary closing ard the policy 'that 'the maximum pOI.ulation of Southfields CCillTIot exceed twenty individuals
v.-;ho stay an average of foUl' to dx m.olith5. In. 1975~ at least 94 per cent cf the referrals t'Jer~ for- Ililljor
offenses.
For dependency or neglect Ca5eG~ a fLeqt"!.61:<"tly used disposition is Fas'cm- Care which accouv.t.erl fol' at
least fou..r per cent of all adjlia.icat.~o jiJieniles in 1£-75. Until July 1" 1~75, MSSD operated its C'l'In Foster
Care Department: ~ but s:Lnce thlCTi tr·e f(t!::TI'!-u,.;;':y f;{::-p'1:W~tli'ellt £m" HWii!.Hl Re5uh:U;("3 (DHR) has provided t:r.i3 s0]:llic€.
The main plrl.--p'3Se of the foster CP.T€· el~I~?T}Ent;'S is to I~unite (~~·ih'!~en ar.d ~'rleiJ: fC'1'!iliIC'5 II.rhe!I~1J'i:J }>(lsbjiJle.
The Homefindulg Depa:rtllie:l~ of r15SD :::-c(;7uh5 .. St'.1::1i~5 arid o.ppl'OVES home:5 to "tie used in the ATfJ l'I'c ·2X"1!'l
and Emergency Shelter a'c r4SSJ) , T::!.(;: df':.iI<u:t.r.6nt aiEc. .~orks t-iith the Home of the Innuc.:.ents for te:npora.ry phcc-
ment: of children.
Nearly t~10 per cent of tee a:JIj'; ... :·:l?_cate:i jnrenile3 ere pIac£c in Grc'Up Homes 4 Th0 COYillIftmity R~~,icif'rrdal
'freatlilent Program administered hy !·i5SlJ acc,:,pts jU'veril(;s for placement in a.. group hOEe if the COllY.:: dIrectly
refers the youth or after a child i's :t,'elp,.ased from a delinqucl1't institution.
The C01I!IilUIlity Residential Treaxm0Jrit PTogra.1U ((T(fP) has been in ope:['ation since e.al"ly 1972. TIle stated
goals of the program are:
Ito reduce recidivi~;
I to shorten the length of institutional treatment;
- 28 -
I to decrease the institutional population; and
I to increase the success rate in the treatment of social offenderso
The program consists of nlO phases. During Phase Is the child lives in one of the five group homes
scattered throughout Jeff3Tson County. Each home operates in a family-liIce atmosphere with a housepaxent and
a social worker aide under the superuision of the house social worker.
When Phase I is completed; the child FetU.I'ns to his mm home uhenewer possible. Phase II then o€-gins viith
the social fllorker continuing to 'tioo."k '!lith the clli.ld and his parents "to supervise the youth $ s <'4i.!justment in the
commtmity. The averc.ge time in tld.s phase is four mcmtp..!:" after 'iii'hi.ch the juvenile is released f:l'om !"iSSD S'.1P(;;:O-
visiono 12
f2
Table 16. CW1!lili.mity Kc:o;idtfltial Treatrnen! P~'u::lfiam R.::fe~~a1s by l·_:.me o..f Offense and Yea~
1972 1973 1974 1915 TYPE OF OFFENSE
j No. .. 5& 1\\0. % I No. el I No. ,,~.
I:; ,:;
Major vs. Person 11 7.0 10 5.9 6 4.9 4 3.9 Major vs. Property 47 29.9 46 27.1 25 20.5 21 20.6 Minor 27 17.2 56 32.9 28 23.,0 13 12.7 Soc-ial 68 43o~ 56 32.9 I 60 49.2 60 58.8 Dependency 4 2.5 2 1.2 3 2.5 4 3.9
.
TOTAL 157 99.9 I 170 100.0 122 100.1 102 99.91 -- ... ! !
~-.--.-.-~~-~
For further information see: MSSD Aftercare/Pre-Probation: A Review; Office of Research and Planning; ~linter~ 1975. -- -
11 67 11.5 516 88.5 f 533 ImLO I 2 18.2 ' 5} 81.81 11 100.0 69 11.6 12 5'6 10.1 49]' 89.9 553 lOiJ.O I 21.2 26 78~B
.... ~ 100.0 63 ~n p 1 .)j .".'..,1.., 0 I 13 69 UtI I &15 89.9 I -££4 Hl[LO I 29 21.3 107 7B.7 J J.36 100J} 9B 12.0 f 14 18 4.9 349 95al i 367 100.0 I 2 2090 B S(U) 10 lO0.V r'n .5.3 £'.J
15 24 9.3) 233 90.71 257 1W.0 _ 2 15.4 11 84,0 13 100.0 26 () 6 Out of 3{t2 ~ 3D fig.S
- - I 28 ~i,8 I 382 93.2' 410 100.0 I 13 1J.7 10CtO 41 9.1 ~ County r,j
I I f f
... - I 3803 1929 rl 7 L ~n"" TOTAL £11 llLI 3!)119 85~9 4~330 IOO.O! b13 U 0 .. i J..sm .. L 100.0 ,1~224 20.6!
. f i. ~ 1 ; ---"
Total j Noo_:J:J
214- 72.3f 296 100.0 l 2Ll.8 "3 3 392 100#0 D. f
61 56.51 103 100.0 165 54.6 3frl 10{LO 169 53.0 i 319 1[,0.0 I 226 68.51 33[! 1"'0.0 i v' • ' !
54 49.1 . 110 If.;}.O I 123 66.5, "'-lr 100.0 I H:i~~
oore sf ten tt-an ju-'l!enH.es ir.! the othEr cor:mR::1Sities.
T~b~e 29. J~w.mne Rf'fe~l'ai5 by Plam'd~~e.rYice Dr1IJ¥i1!fflity ~m;i Tj:p? of Cisposi-dfii1J
~ j 7; I ~ "trlki~f .Drnmr.wnty Grand Tlnstitutional I J p- Hfifoma\ I "fUll !1? 101 !~EnE" Jur"l,' ~reatmen~ 1 ~ 13 T A t,v ~ f'i.SAt.4 i ~lD. ,<U !~p. P-'_1- tw. h I No:_ % t f~iJ~ % ~ fI:{\~ ,~. ' i-I ~ . , 1 '. 132 32.4 152 37.3 l 85 20.8 0 - 39 9.6'~ 408 10n.1 ' I ~! 135 lC.~· 313 ~7,~ I i~9 !9.5 1 .2 S? 12.~ I 662 ~{);'.~ i i j g 74 43~o 63 j7411 d 12A I ~6! 11 6<:; I 110 Hk:!. . .Itt I .;;. .?,. - r. ~ Ii i: ~ n ~ nt'. ' ~
i . ~ 123 _~,,3 Jj7 42.6 10!< t:1.6 3 .6 ..,S 9~9 f 486 J..'Uu.D 1
Both Parents Parent & Step-parent Single Par'ent Other
BOUNDAR! ES - fJJut by Ei.&:tee."Lth StJc.ee;tp NOJlXh by lhoadway, Sou;th by Afgonqu.-i.n POJc.kv.xJ.y~ Ea/.);[; by L Ii N RaliJc.oa.d Tlfac(u,. ~mNNER Of HANDLING
Formal Infonnal
80.0 20.0
19.1 3.6
64.5 12.7
FIVE MAIN REASONS REFERRED (Grouped) PRESaff SCHOOL STATUS
1. Larceny/Theft 41 t'Jhite Black 2. Burglary/Breaking & Entering 30 --3. Dependency 23 Attending 69.4 79.7 4. Other Assault 16 vii thdra\'Jn 19.4 14.9 5. Runaways 15 Other 11.1 5.'~
- 55 -
~Jh~te Bt{lck --- -'--~ .. -~-~-
YES 38.9 !.J6.8 NO 61.1 43.2
MEAN EOUCATION CLAIi\iFD
r4ale Female
f4ale
80.0 14.1 5.9
Female ---64.0 24.0 12.0
7.6 6.5
,
PLANNING SERVICE COiwJMUNITY B ..
01.1) I.,OUISVILLE
". 15
~U
n
BOUNOAR1ES - We6Z by L & N Ro/~~aad Tnacl~~ NawJi by BMar.1uJay, South by to.l..:tfl/1.Ji. PaJr..0.iJ[lgj) feW:. by 1-65.
FIVE MAIN REASONS REFERRED (Grou.ped)
1. Drug Law Violation 52 2. Burglary/B~eaking & Ente~ing 42 3. Larceny/Theft 33 4. Dependency 33 5. Runaways 26
PJJANNING SERV!.CE cm·~I[Ui~:rTY 90
SHIVELY-LOWER IIDl\lT~RS TP .... i.\CE
~~ .............
13
·"\.N ) l\ \' /"
'/ ~--.--,...-..-
BOUNDARIES - Weo:t by OhJ~ ~~~ N~tth by Cltij ~ p Sou:th by GfLeeJWJood 'RaMI' Ea.6:t by Seventh S:tlr.ed Road and Ma.nolic.k Road.
FIVE MAIN REl\SONS REFERRED (Grouped)
1. Burglary/Breaking & Entering 2. Larceny/Theft 3. Drug Law Violation 4. Breach of Peace 5. Dependency
69 52 52 41 36
GEHEP!:L, INFORMATION
1974-Juvenile Referrals 1975-Juvenile Refer~als 1975-Juvenil e Individual s 1st Offender Percentage Total Co. Ref. Percentage
Total
286 294 185
28.9 3.6
White ---248 245 155
Black Male Female
38 200 86 49 211 83 30 127 58
PERCENTAGE OF CHANGE JUVENILE INDIVIDUALS REFERRED
1972-73 1973-74 1974-15
+ 08 Mean Number of Referrals 1.6 -22.9 + 2.8
Mean Number of Siblings 3<3 Mean Age at R€!fer:fal - Male - l?L8
LIVING ARRAI~f8¥jENr OF JUVENILE " .
Both Parents Parent & Step=parent S-ing 1 e Painent Other
25.9 9.7
49.7 14-.6
jr,ltANNER Of HANDLING -~--- -Formal Informal
70.7 29.3
PRESENT SCHOOL STATUS
~Jhite
Attending 60.6 Hithdr'f2wn 29.7 Other 9.7
~ 56 -
CENER1\L mFOm1:WWN
1974-Juvenile ~Bferrals 1975-Juvenil e Referral s 1975-Juvenile Individuals 1st Offender Percentage Total Co. Ref. Percentage
Black
53.3 23.3 23.3
Total
419 469 347
52.7 5.7
Female - 12.4
RECEl VING pueuc ASSISTi\NC£
VES NO
. .
l:!h ite 131 ad<
32.3 40.1') 67.7 GO.O
["lEAr·1 EDUCATION CLAmED
f,1ale Female
r4ale
58.3 30.7 11.0
Hhite
381 4il-4 327
Female --62.1 24.1 13.8
Black
38 25 20
7.8 6.4
Male Female
312 107 381 88 271 76
PERCENTl\GE OF CHA~JGE JUVENILE INDIVIDUALS REH.RRED
1972-73 19T3~74 1974-75
+29.1 - 5.6 +1Ll
iJlean NWi~ber of Referrals 1.E. f,'ean Number of Siblings 2.9 Mean Age at Referral - ~·la1e - 1408
LIVING ARHANGEI'·1ENT OF JU'JENIlE
Both Parents 55.0 Pa~ent & Step-parefit 11~5 Single Parent 22.8 Other 10.7
~mNNER OF HANDLING
formal Informal
59.7 40.3
PRESENT SCHOOL STATUS
Attending ~Ji thd\1tit!n Other
- 57 -
t{hite
78.3 13.8 8.0
Black
80.0 10.0 ID.O
F8.,aie - 12.7
RECEIVING PUBLIC f,\'sSfST13,NCE ---_. Hhite Black ----
BOUNDARIES - flJe..M; by Seve.t1/th. S;D'l.e.ei: Road (i!%.a Ma.n6.t1cli Road; ~J{jlLth by Ai.gonq{J.iHt' ColJ;;,"l.aao and tM:tWl. PaJt.Iw.uy; South by Pa1a;t.f-dl. KOC.::i; Ea6;t bq CJLit;teJ'lfirm VlUve.
~~ea!1 Number of Refen~a 1 s ?~an Number of Siblings Mean Age at Referral - ~le
Female ~
1.4 2 .. 9
llL -; ~"<i C '::"_iI;>i;
LIVING AFF.ANGE}lENT Of Ji,WGalE RECEIVING PUBtIC hSSlSTJV~CE
Beth P(~\"'ef!ts Par'ent 8: Step-piU'Emt Single Pa\~ent Other'
4405 10.7 30.5 YES ILL 3 NO
Write BJaci{ ---10~1 2L3 8!L9 7'8.7
BOUNDARIES _. WeU. by f...€.J.7.fu!!b..y TUJl.np'[kt2., NofLth by iya:t.:teMon Expfteuway,. South .. by Cow'l4q Unef' ~t by B~towll Road. fflA~JNER Of HAHDLI NG
Table 3. R~ason for Care b'y Year (Jlssi st~nce C?ses t
11 1974/ 1975/ Percentot:li Chl REASor .. FOR CARE 1975 1976 Inc. -"--~c_
._'-.. ~ !
Fired/Quit Employment 801 1'3118 39.6 laid Off 2,046 1,511 26.: Illness 2~221 1,778 I 19.' Non-Support 178 176 I 1 .. Sep. /Death/Di v .fDes. 3% 361 I 8.! Homeless I 13f!· 133 ". Inadequate Income 973 %9, .' Awaiting Income 115564 1,698! 8.6 Lost/Stolen Check 616 707 I 14.8
PP is r. I ~::J,.,. l.i.'l." I ";',,,;:.1/' ,I )~"V" .!. ro[. I -L • I Applied 55I 168 l,C; 4HJ'1;:lLbl <L9! -32.5 I Receiving AfDe 15m (; ';1; W}"D:::Z,09 (;,.1 ' +22.4 I
• R ,. ." -51 - ,.. r. .~,., I 1 ~ ,:'\ 1 5'"' ,. r. ',)i0 7 I e""e~vHlg :;;. ,lQJ L:J ~ J.,':'..I<{'. (. Lt.1 1-.10.
Receiving Food Stcmp<; O·;ly ,1,494 D.3 I i5}')5£;,1),1)3 16,:~ +6 /1 .0 'I "10th A f! t' . t I Ii'} 'I') r· ,- r: !" ,)-" ,-,,, t (I 3 , 1') 8 '~o et' g:~=_.~C W:_~ .. _j>.~~~'~_~'~~.~, __ ~/:"_~ ~!~ .. __ ~~ ~~_'~. ' .. ~~=-_~.~~:~: ~ _ ,_.~~~~~: ---J
TO-Al I n r~r' 9(" 9 I "97'" ,_,'r 1'" I f 'l"l 00 I' " 8 I '--____ ! __ ~__ _ __ I n~:~~ ___ : .. ___ ~~~~::",o __ ._v'~ .. ~ _____ -It. ~
- 69 -
TablE: 6. Reason for Closing (Assista.nce !lI..~~~ervke .C1;;e~)
~ ASSISTANCE CASES 1_ No. . %
Private Employment I 640 7.4 Veterans Benefits
I 121 1.4
Resources Found 111 1.3 Made Own Plans 159 1.8 Workmen's Compo 25 .3 AFOC 2 9 572 29.7 55I 230 2.7 Insurance Benefits I 61 .7 Sod a 1 Securi ty 389 4,5 Unemp. Compo I 1:1 076 12.4 Ref. to Other Agcy. I 35 .4 Admitte.d to Inst. I 15 .2 Ret'd. to Legai Res. I 38 .4· Se~vice Completed 47 .5 Death ! 2.8 .3 Loss of Contact 285 3 ~j .)
Planning Service Community by Total , Asslstance Cases
Illustration 1.
.~, 15 ' ')
---j
~ 600-899
I:.:::;J 300-599
·74 /
c===J less than 300
Tha"'\":: was considerable variance among
the Pl f..;"!i1ing Service Communi ties in the
ratio of single cases to household cases.
This is illustt"ated in Table 8. In general ~
the inner-city communities had higher rates
~f single cases than those from the outer-
county cO;TIl11lmiti es. For both PSC-4 and PSt-8,
rilore than sixty per cent of the cases ~"er~e
single cases. By way of contrast, onlY 12.5
per cent of the cases in PSC-ll were single
cases.
Table 9 l"ists the Planning $!ervice Comi":1urrfties by reason for care for assistance cases. As can be seen~
the percentage of cases in each of the categoV'iE:S dHfers scm&~-Ihat from cOIiUlunity to community. Illness was
the greatest reason for care in PSC' s 2~ 4~ 7, 8 and 12 t'Jliile IIAtvaiting Income ll \'.}as the p}~edGminant reason in
PSC's 1, 3~ 5, 6, 10, 11 and 13. "Laid Off" was the primat"y reason for care in PSC's 9, 14 and 15. Tltio-thirds
of the out of county cases were I'i'rJme 1 ess cases.
- 72 -
------·1
iable 9. Planning $er~ice Community bl Reason for Care (Assistance CasesJL r Non- Jjep./Deathl Inadequate I AWiJ.l¥ ... ", I Support Oi" .IDesert Heme less LlI\ .. UI';'" I -
Firedl .1
I Quit laid Off Illness
'Frnn-y-~l5toren
! TOT A L 'I".-- ........... ,~ I Income I c~ Other P.S.C.
TOTAL VOUCHERS 14~O13 99.9 16,454 99.9 30A67 100.0 $ 35.30 I -
*Utilities includes coals heat and electricity and Water. *f'Transportation includes cab and bus fare ***Other includes clothing, medicine and miscellaneous.
- 75 -. ------~--~.~
t,1ean Amount Per Voucher
$ 25.48 53.16 51.37
101.93 23.59 5.30 4.37
19.20
$ 33.76
Tuble 11 prQssnts the actual dollar figures for each month for each category of voucher items. The
greatest expenditures were faiR rent fol1olt;ed by food, utilities~ and room and board respectiv:'ly. Figure 2
illustrates the percentage breakd~Jn of the various items for the entire fiscal year. More than half of the
amount spent duri og fi sca 1 year'" 75/76 !!lent for rent and ?7. 5 per cent went for food. Thi s represents a change
fr'om fiscal year 74/75 \'lhen only 45.6 per cent of the total exper.dHures \'Ient t01tlard rent and 37.5 per cent
wa.s expended 011 food.
Food - {27.5%}
(1. 9% ) __ .,_ ~ -==~.,d. Other
Nsg. Care (.8%)
I Rent - (54.6%)
\
I'
TOTAL EXPENDITURES BY f·~AJCR HBfjS {l975/761.
Fig. 2.
- 76 -
I
,
Table 11. FiQancial B;;~2a;~do'.'sn Bas:"d Upon Vow:ri~jI' Item by Total Expe~v:1i!uiqes and Nontll P.I.!l~_, 1975-June~ 1976t
I TOTAL ~2.622 ·~.a56 __ 4·~~~r~~"5 35.3 1--:;-' 446-}=--:=~ 5,0", 3,425 la.512 100.0
*Pcrcentages are figured across.
- 80 -
1
~.
I I
In fiscal year 1975/76, tn2fC t~ere consioelr'e.ble changes from the pt'evious fiscal year in these categories a
particul(ii~ly the IlUmtGi of recur-rent cases. From fiscal yeat .. 1974/75 to fiscal year" 1975/76, there vJas a
16 per cent dj~cp in nE:t! cases~ a 12 per cent. decline in old cases, but a 47 per cent increase in recurrent
cases. The difference was partiCUlarly noticeable over the last four months of fiscal year 1975/76. In March
April~ May and June of 1976$ the nunlber of recurrent cases opened was 117 per cent above the number of recur
rent cases opened during the same pe~"iod of 1975. Overall ~ slightly mOI"e than half of the cases opened during
fiscal yea}~ 1975/76 li~ere nell! cases.
The total number of cases opened each month continued to follow the pattern of previous years. This is
demonstrated in Figure 3. Each year the month with the greatest number of cases opened was January.
- 81 -
l~lOO 1\ , \
1:1 000
900
BOO.
700
600
'l,.
, ... " "
'" , AI ....
~ .... ./
'~
.... .. -
'- I .... 0
o·
I I
I /
I
I
I I
'" I
I
I J
I
I
, I
j/ Ji -~
I
I \
\
\
\
\
\
\ . ,
"'.
"-
" , " ,
... 'Q .... .... ..... ..... .... ....
\ , \ \
\
\
.....
{ I ~ i I -_. I 1
I
---1975/76
- - - - --1974/75
........ ··1973/74
Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Nay June
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE CASES OPENED BY t-10NTI1 (July, 1973-.)une, 1976)
Fig. 3.
·~
j :( r, ~ ~
SECTION 2.0: LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSON COUNTY NUTRITIONAL PROGRilJ~ FOR THE AGING
In January, 1974, a grant from the Administration on Aging (Title VII) enabled MSSD to initiate the
Louisville and Jefferson County Nutritional Program for the Aging.
The purpose of this program is to provide one hot meal per day, five days per week either in a congregate
setting or in an individual's ovm home. However, emphasis must be placed on the congregate meal setting aspect
of the program in order to encourage socialization and to alleviate the feelings of loneliness and rejection
that are so prevalent among older citizens.
The Nutrition Program sites were chosen according to their proximity to concentrations of older (over 60)~
poor and minor'ity populations. Transportation from central pid-up points within designated areas to sites
and back again is provided.
The following supportive social services are provided to the program's participants: Outreach~ Escort~
Transportation~ Information and Referra1 9 Health and Welfare Counseling» Recreation, Nutrition Education and
Shopping Assistance. The older citizens themselves are involved in the project through employment~ VOlunteer
activity and daily participation in meal programs and site activities.
The sites and their iocation are:
Jefferson Street Baptist Church 733 East Jefferson Street Louisville, KY 40203
First Christian Church 850 South Fourth Street Louisville, KY 40203
Fairdale South-Park 9001 National Turnpike Fairdale, KY 40118
Miles Community Center* 1468 Bland Louisvil1e~ KY 40217
Fourth Avenue Methodist Church 318 West St. Catherine Louisville, KY 40203
Highland Day Care 2006 Douglas Boulevard LouiSVille, KY 40205
Louisville General Hospital* Outpatient Clinic 323 East Chestnut Street Louisville~ KY 40202
23rd & Broadway Baptist Church 2315 West Broadway Louisville, KY 40211
- 83 -
West Side Baptist Church 2013 St. Xavier Louisville, KY 40212
~----.-------------
St. Paul's C?.tholic Church 1022 South Jackson Stre3t Louisvil1eJ KY 40203
Highland Park Recreation Center 4505 Crittenden Drive LouiSVille, KY 40209
.J elvish Community Center* 3600 Dutchman's Lane Louisville, KY 40205
Senior Citizens East J. B. Tinsley Building F loydsbtu'g Road Pee Wee Valley. KY 40056
DuM~yer Recreation Center* Squires D:d ve Louisville" IT 40215
Quinn Chapel A.M.E. Church 912 West Chestnut Street Louisville, KY 40203
St. Mattliet'ls Nutrition Center 311 Brmms Lane Louisville7 k1r 40207
Senior House West* 2308 Portland Avenue Louisville~ KY 40212
Park Hill Recreation Center 1703 South 13th Street LOUisville, KY 40210
Jeffersontown Center 10409 Taylorsville Road LouiSVille, KY 40299
Southwick Recreation Center* 3621 Southern Avenue LouiSVille, KY 40211
In 1975~ the Nutrition Program served over 191~OOO meals. Nearly 25 per cent of these meals were served
to individuals in their Own homes by the Visiting Nurses Association.
gate setting, 23rd & Broadway Baptist Church served almost ten per meals per day_
*Site opened during 1976.
- 84 -
Of the sites serving meals in a congre
cent of these meals or an average of 71
1~
0-r;
The progi"am's goal in 1975 tf!as v.n aveiC:ge of r~:Q r .. 2i::<ls served per (lay. The a1Jei~age number served dudl1g
the year io'.fas 763 meals or 95 per cent of t;~2 g0<11. tkr:;G'!sr, it should be stressed that in the last quartei"
of 1975, this goal had been surpa$~ed.
- 85 -
Tab 1 e 15. Numb0r of fi!2fl.l s S~:~vcd by Site
f- .__ 1 :1;~.., _______ == J---toTa-l '--Mean~r\furTlDerOf Jan.-r!:~r. A'Jr.-Ju!1e I July-Sept. LOct.-Oec.1 1';0. % Nea1e; eer Day
Jefferson Str'eet Baptist Church 3,188 3,,447 II 3~510 I 3,288 13,433 - 7.0 /' 53.5 West Side Baptist Church 3,212 3,561 3~339 I 3,448 13~550 7.1 54.0 23:d & Broadway Baptist Churcj1 6~706 3,6?9 3~341 ! ~,003 17 ,7lj,? ~.~ I 70.7
1----· SIT E S
QUlnn Chapel A.M.E. Church 2.959 2~988 2,255 I 2,880 11~082 ~.u 44.2 Park-Hill Recreation Centei" 1,576 2,081 2~224 I 2~833 8,714 4.5 I 34.7 St. Matthews Nutrition Center 2.204 2~342 29 526 I 2,464 9,536 5.0 38.0 Fourth Avenue Methodist Church 3s 073 3~538 4,063 I 4~401 15,075 7.9 60.1 First Christian Church 3,221 3,571 3$262 3 s 110 13~164 6.9 52.4 St. Paul IS Catholic Church 1,747 1~942 1,605 I 1~827 7~321 3.8 29.2 Fairdale South-Park Center 2,343 2,422 2,413 I 1,97Y 9,157 4.8 36.5 Highland Park Recreation Center 1,975 2,158 2~202 I 2,479 8 1 314 4.6 35,1 Senior Citizens East (Pee Wee Valley) 2~776 2~799 2~591 I 3,078 I 11?344 5.9 45.2 I Jeffet"sontOtrm Senior Citizen Center 1,001 871 S'03 \' 1,014 3~789 2.0 I 15.1 I Highland Day Care* - U l15 380 I 495 0,3· 6.0 I Special Groups - 1 ~327 - I 1 ~:127 0.7 -I Visiting Nurses Association 10,769 ! l1A38 1l~41l4 I 13,289 I 46,910 24.5 lZ6.9 I
Number of days project provided meals per quarter
Mean number of meals per day
1- 46-?El57 ~'7';9;;---- 50'473-t~---~!--·---------~!---:===-." ·-~-·t !: I . I !
I r- --r I I SUPPORTIVE SERVICfS TEAM M.S. S. D. I ,----- PERSONNEL ----~I
! I '\( I t:"HUI.NI'l: ~ £:>. RJ:"'>:~'1prl-' i--~-------·"-l '& "... 1> <1-~~""'J'
Organizational Ch2iit ;-:]6
I ~ ALrHN. t,!.,Jj,~,q'O NG I SERVICES "'1 ,), V-
I r "---~---'!
r--------,.-~kL------__ -__, I
I ADMINISTRATOR I i I ,-~-.--. DIVISION OF JUVENILE L, ____ --_ - ,__ _.i~ _______________ -___ .. __ ,, ________ ...,
I JUSTICE SERVICES ! r--AiJMiNi~~oR '--1 ! : I c_ ---.., -~---r-· ,-' _ ~ . I DIVISION OF r'v'iE!;GENCi I I ASST. ;'W~IHL i' I ·,55 f. [ ,'Q I' I ASSISTl'NCE A:lJ SOCIP.t
TRAINING ,
I -_, __ .. ___ ~-...J
J COURT r~ ;:ESlDHi'i:;(;,L ~fr{llICFS _., .
S~RVlr.r;.~ I =_ St~~_LCL~ ___ ~ " I ,---. ___ ... __ _ '~~1JOLUNTEER -I H PROBATION I HURi"lSBY VILLAGE) ::f;SHIORtr. i,' ____ +' ---l' SER'fH'", TO l L..jj~ I 1..- ---1 '"------~-~.---.! SF ;';':'-:5 £lOti l ! 'f
,--------, ,- . -----.--, .. _,:.:.......--1 I -.----~
.NON-SEC. DETENT. SERVICES ---
PSYCHOLOGICAL fSERVICES
YOUTH
ASSESSMENT
PROCESS SERVICE COURT SECURITY
'''L3~_~-,y~m:s J I J sou~;~ [lDS IJ, LI ADC UN IT i [VALLEY • . I ~_~V~I~LL~A~~~t_, ____ ~ U HEAL~-;--l