Transcript Community Breakfast Presentation

School-Based Diversion for Youth
With Mental Health Needs
May 29, 2014
Lara Herscovitch
Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance
Cathy Foley Geib, MPA
Connecticut Judicial Branch
Jeffrey J. Vanderploeg, Ph.D.
Connecticut Center for Effective Practice
• Leads a national movement
• State-based juvenile justice
coalitions and organizations (43
members in 33 states)
• Laws, policies and practices that
are fair, equitable and
developmentally appropriate for all
children, youth and families
Photo: Moriza
Action Network
Models for Change Mental Health Juvenile Justice Action
Network
• Created in response to shared concern about youth
mental health among the Models for Change states and
across the country
• Four states selected to be part of the MHJJ Action
Network: CO, CT, OH and TX
• Work occurred primarily between 2008 and 2011
• Coordinated by the National Center for Mental Health
and Juvenile Justice (ncmhjj.com)
• Primary areas of focus: early diversion, family
involvement and workforce development
Innovations: Early Diversion
States developed new models and tools for safely and
appropriately diverting youth with mental health
needs to community-based treatment at early and
critical points of contact:
– Probation-Intake Based Diversion:
• Texas Front End Diversion Initiative (FEDI)
– Law Enforcement Based Diversion:
• Crisis Intervention Teams for Youth- CIT-Y Training
– School-Based Diversion:
• Ohio: School Responder Program
• Connecticut: School-Based Diversion Initiative
MH JJ Collaborative for Change
New training, technical assistance
and education center supported by
Models for Change
– Web-based resource center with access to critical
resources, documents and information on mh and jj
– Phone consultation, via help desk, provided by NCMHJJ
staff or by an expert consultant
– On-site consultation by content experts
– Training delivered by experienced expert trainers
– TA publications and webinars
– Visit at http://cfc.ncmhjj.com
Presenters
Catherine Foley Geib, MPA
Lara Herscovitch
Jeffrey J. Vanderploeg, Ph.D.
Manager
Clinical and Educational Services
Connecticut Judicial Branch
Court Support Services Division
Deputy Director
Connecticut Juvenile
Justice Alliance
Associate Director
Connecticut Center for Effective
Practice
Connecticut’s Comprehensive Approach
to Reducing In-School Arrests:
Changes in Statewide Policy, Systems
Coordination, and School Practices
National Juvenile Justice Network
May 29, 2014
Connecticut in Context
• Statewide juvenile justice system across 2 branches
of government/2 agencies
• 169 towns
• Child population less than 800,000
• 15,000 – 10,000 juvenile court referrals annually
• Increasing and shifting investment in juvenile
justice system
Decreasing Court Referrals
Juvenile Court Intake
FY 2008-2013
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
All
0
FY 2008
FY 2009
Delinquents
FY 2010
Status Offenders
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013
Decreasing Commitments
Decreasing Recidivism
Court Diversion Efforts
• Referral to emergency mobile psychiatric services
• Establishment of Family Support Centers
• Expansion of Juvenile Review Boards
• Police and school training
• Return of Referrals
Why Focus on Referrals?
• Creates or increases juvenile’s court record
• Takes Probation Officer time and attention away
from higher risk offenders
• Creates inconsistent responses to adolescent
behavior
• Court/Probation function is not school discipline
How to Change Practice?
• Implementation of New Intake Policy
• Utilized existing statute: CGS §46b-128(a)
Investigation of delinquency complaint
“Whenever the Superior Court is in receipt of any written
complaint filed by any person, any public or private
agency or any federal, state, city or town department
maintaining that a child’s conduct constitutes delinquency
within the meaning of section 46b-120, it shall make a
preliminary investigation to determine whether the facts, if
true, would be sufficient to be a juvenile matter and
whether the interests of the public or the child
require that further action be taken”.
What Needed to Happen?
• Consultation with Judicial Legal Services
• Approval from Chief Court Administrator, Chief
Administrative Juvenile Court Judge, Chief State’s
Attorney and Chief Juvenile State’s Attorney
• Chief Court Administrator and Juvenile Probation
Supervisors notified police chiefs and school
superintendents
• Policy changes were shared with child welfare agency
and other stakeholders
Implemented Guidelines
• Fights in school, similar age, no injuries, both arrested
• School incidents involving normal adolescent behavior, lack of good judgment or
appreciation of consequences (e.g., hats, swearing, disruptive)
• Skateboarding, bicycles, loitering, trespass
• Tobacco (if over age 15)
• Siblings fighting, no weapons, no injuries
• Child is 8 years old or less
• Data collection
Where Are We Now?
• Supervisors Regularly Return Referrals
• Over 500 referrals returned in first year
• Stronger Probation/Police/School relationships
• Prosecutorial reviews
• 73% overall agreement rate; range 0-100%
Working to stop the
criminalization of
Connecticut’s children and
youth.
Lara Herscovitch
Deputy Director
[email protected]
www.ctjja.org
• Public policy advocacy to reform juvenile
justice and other systems that affect
Connecticut’s at-risk children and youth.
• Goals: fewer children will enter the justice
system, and each child in the system will be
treated safely, fairly and effectively.
• Small staff, large coalition
Statewide, System Advocacy
and Coordination
• With “Raise the Age” in place,
looking for major feeders.
• Building on (decade-in-the-making)
culture of diversion and prevention
• Consistent DMC lens
• Suspect areas:
– Student arrests
– Unaddressed behavioral and mental
health needs
Looking for JJ System Feeders:
Found School-Based Arrests
• Too many children referred to JJ system from schools
(latest SY 13% of total, down from est. 20% prior SY)
• Most for minor, misdemeanor offenses
–School Policy Violations escalate into delinquency charge or probation
violation (swearing, “insubordination,” dress code)
–Delinquency Charges:
• Disorderly conduct, breach of peace (fighting, talking back, running
in halls, loud music)
• Trespass (skateboarding, bicycles)
• Smoking
• Children of color referred at disproportionately higher
rates
Reasons for School-Based Arrest
by General Category, SY2010-11
Source: SDE data analyzed by Connecticut Voices for Children
CTJJA’s Response:
Advocacy, Education, Capacity Building
• Challenge of statewide reform though very local issue /
infrastructure
CTJJA’s Response:
Advocacy, Education, Capacity Building
• Educational forums:
– moderated panels on jj/ed connections
– CPTV’s Education vs. Incarceration & The
Color of Justice
CTJJA’s Response:
Advocacy, Education, Capacity Building
• Close partnership with SAG (JJAC) and its student arrest
work
• Pilot replication of the Judge Teske model to demonstrate
local success
Replication is Possible
The process:
• CT model MOA with graduated response model designed by SAG
(JJAC)
• Alliance adaptation of Judge Teske / GA model in 3 cities
• Judge-Chief-Superintendent collaborative to review and improve arrest
(discipline) policy and practice (earlier, diversion, add missing supports)
• Demonstrated success:
• Windham (-87% and decreased ISS, but increased expulsion and OSS)
• Manchester (-59%, also reduced OSS and expulsion, increased ISS)
• Statewide, 20% of total juvenile referrals to 13% to __? (10% in Feb ‘14)
• Warning (promise ! ): ongoing effort required
• To review data, address trends & gaps, add & subtract initiatives,
(re)train / orient new leaders and personnel
CTJJA paper: Adult Decisions – Connecticut Rethinks Student Arrests (Jan 2013)
Work Centered on JJAC Model MOA
Principles:
•
Most student misconduct best addressed through
classroom & in-school strategies (not jj system)
•
Response to school disruptions should be reasonable,
consistent and fair
•
Hold students accountable through graduated
response and continuum of services
•
Appropriate redirection and support from in-school
and community resources prior to exclusion/arrest
•
Clarifying the responsibilities of school and police
personnel promotes best interests of students, district,
law enforcement and community
Traditional Discipline
Interventions
•
•
•
•
•
Detention
In-school suspension
Out-of-school suspension
Arrest
Expulsion
Examples of Manchester
Discipline Interventions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Redirection
Mediation
Detention
1 to 1 counseling
Mentoring program
Play by the Rules Referral
Behavior Intervention or Reflection
Room
In-school suspension
Referral to Substance Intervention
Program
Parent/Administration conference
and other parties (guidance
counselor, social worker, etc.)
Referral to Restitution/Community
Service Program
Out-of-school suspension
Arrest
Referral for consideration for
expulsion
And…
Legislative
• Proposed legislation to require MOAs and data
(SB54/HB5355)
SAG (JJAC) DMC Subcommittee
• Model MOA and incentive grants
• Training and network: patrol officers & school personnel
(RightResponseCT.org)
• Right Response Network now has 16 community
collaboratives using MOAs
A word (some words) about
culture and climate…
Justice system
• Student arrest reduction work builds on decadelong culture shift from punitive to restorative /
preventive.
• Diversion – juvenile review boards, mediation
• Prevention - VCO loophole closed, FWSN (status
offenders) Boards, Student Attendance Review Boards,
Family Support Centers, EBPs
Education reform
• At the center, school-based arrest reduction =
positive school climate/ culture reform NOT
discipline / jj-related reform.
Working to stop the
criminalization of
Connecticut’s children and
youth.
Lara Herscovitch
Deputy Director
[email protected]
www.ctjja.org
The Connecticut School-Based
Diversion Initiative
Jeffrey J. Vanderploeg, Ph.D.
Director, School-Based Diversion Initiative
Associate Director, Center for Effective Practice at the
Child Health and Development Institute
CT Background and Statistics
•
Lower frequency of juvenile arrests, rising proportion of school-based arrests
– Schools accounted for 1668, or 18.6%, of all juvenile court referrals in 2011-12
– Reduction to 14% of all court referrals in 2012-2013
– 65% for BOP, Assault-3rd, Disorderly Conduct, Threatening
•
Higher rates of unmet mental health needs and academic failure
– Approx. 20% of all children meet criteria for MH diagnosis; most don’t receive
treatment
– Rate of diagnosable mental health condition is 65-70% among youth in juvenile
detention 1
– 80-90% of youth in detention have a history of trauma exposure 2
– Students arrested are 2x as likely not to graduate as their non-arrested peers;
those processed in court are 4x as likely not to graduate3
•
Impact of Newtown tragedy on school security and juvenile justice reform
efforts
– Increased security (technology, SROs, security officers)
Goals of the School
Based Diversion Initiative
• Reduce the number of discretionary arrests in school;
reduce expulsions and out-of school suspensions
• Build knowledge and skills among teachers, school staff,
and school resource officers to recognize and manage
behavioral health crises in the school, and access needed
community resources
• Link youth who are at-risk of arrest to appropriate
school and community-based services and supports
SBDI Key Activities
•
•
•
School Selection
Needs Assessment
Three Core Components:
– Linkage to Network of Community-Based Services and Supports
– Customized Professional Development in MH and JJ
– School Disciplinary Policy Consultation
•
Other Activities:
–
–
–
–
Data Collection and Evaluation
SBDI Manual
Post-Initiative Technical Assistance and Follow-Up
School Arrest Toolkit
Community Coalition Building and Linkage
to Community-Based Resources
• Goal: Enhance student access to mental health and
other services and supports
• Diversion at the point of possible arrest requires
rapid support and crisis stabilization
• Linking schools to community-based services and
supports can reduce burden to address mental
health concerns
 Emergency Mobile Psychiatric Services (EMPS); Care Coordination, Juvenile
Probation, Youth Service Bureaus, etc.
Linking to Community-Based
Resources
• Emergency Mobile Psychiatric Services (EMPS)
– A component of Connecticut’s behavioral health system
– Funded and managed by DCF
– Available FREE to all CT children
• Access: Dial 2-1-1
– Phone support 24/7, 365
– Mobile hours M-F 8am-10pm;
Weekends/holidays 1pm-10pm
• Rapid response to behavioral crises
 90%+ mobility rate
 On site in 45 min. or less (28 min. median response time)
• Services include: Crisis stabilization, assessment, treatment
(up to 45 days), linkage to ongoing care
Professional Development
• Goal: enhance knowledge, attitudes, and skills to support
arrest diversion principles and practices
• Includes Administrators, School Resource Officers (SROs), teachers,
school psychologists, social workers, guidance counselors, others
• Semi-customized to each school
• Trainers drawn from the local community whenever possible
• Modules include:
– Effective Classroom Behavior Management; Distinguishing Normal Adolescent
Development and Mental Health Symptoms; Effective Collaboration with EMPS and
Care Coordination; Multicultural Competence in the Schools; Overview of Juvenile
Justice System; etc.
Revise School Discipline
Practices
•
Goal: Examine and revise disciplinary policies and policies where
needed to support diversion efforts
•
Convene a workgroup, ideally building off an existing in-school team
•
Develop a Graduated Response Model for school discipline
1. Classroom level interventions
2. School Administrative Interventions
3. Assessment and Service Provision
4. Law Enforcement Intervention
•
Include restorative justice practices in disciplinary approach and in linkages
to community-based organizations
School-Based Court Referrals
EMPS Referrals
Community Level Data:
Lower Re-Arrest Rates
% of youth with no court referral
Time to subsequent court referral in SBDI and non-SBDI
Comparing communities with
and without SBDI:
Subsequent arrest rates were
significantly lower for SBDI
communities (31%) than nonSBDI communities (43%) even
after controlling for:
Days until subsequent court referral
•
•
•
•
Previous court involvement
Race
Age
Gender
Model Expansion:
The SBDI Toolkit
•
Despite expansion of the model,
we recognized a need to reach
more schools, more quickly…
•
This toolkit was designed for a
school to self-implement
some of the core principles
and activities of SBDI
•
Available for free download at
chdi.org
Summary: Connecticut’s Approach
and Why it Works
• Addresses the issue of school-based arrest from multiple
perspectives and systems
• Engages variety of stakeholders, building on buy-in of
key leaders
• Timing is everything!
• “Raise the Age” success paved way for next steps
• Community-level data and feedback provided sense
of urgency to promote policy change
• All efforts together decreased court referrals for school
arrests from 19% to 14%
Contact Information
Cathy Foley Geib
[email protected]
Lara Herscovitch
[email protected]
Jeff Vanderploeg
[email protected]
Questions?
Download the SBDI toolkit at
chdi.org or http://bit.ly/1mzk76k
To learn more about the mental
health diversion initiatives in other
states, visit the Mental Health and
Juvenile Justice Collaborative for
Change at http://cfc.nchmhjj.com
www.njjn.org