CA Juvenile Justice Law & Policy Update COVERAGE

1. Juvenile JusticeLaw & Policy UpdateUpdates on DJJ realignment, 2011 parole shift, adult court processing, state-local program funding, new legislation, policy trendsPresented by: David SteinhartPJDC RoundtableNovember 6, 2010 – Sacramento

2. CA Juvenile Justice Law & Policy Update COVERAGE • Update state juvenile arrest trend • Realignment Milestones- 1996 - 2010 • Top end realignment: Adult court filing trends • Bottom end realignment: SB 81 update • 2011 realignment: DJJ parole shift • County realignment response– funds, facilities, programs • New legislation • Policy issues on tap for 2011

3. California Juvenile Felony Arrests andJuvenile Felony Arrest Rate Per 100,0001995-2009 Source: California Department of Justice

4. California Arrests for Violent CrimesJuvenile and Adult Arrest Rate Per 100,0001995-2009 Source: California Department of Justice

5. CA Juvenile Justice Realignment Major Milestones 1996 -2010 CYA/DJJ POP 10,000 1,400 • 1996: Sliding scale fees imposed for level V-VII commitments– CYA population drops swiftly • 2000: Proposition 21 opens new doors to adult court • 2000: JJCPA provides counties with JJ program funds • 2004: Consent Decree in Farrell case vs. CYA– generates program costs that are catalysts for SB 81 • 2007: SB 81 bans future commitments of non-707 youth • 2010: DJJ parole is realigned to county probation

6. “Top end” realignment:California Transfers of Juveniles to Adult Criminal Court 2004 - 2009 Source: California Department of Justice

7. Adult Court Dispositions of Juveniles – 2009(N = 722 dispositions) State Prison 361 (59%) Convicted 611 (85%) DJJ Commitment 3 (<1%) Probation 13 (2%) Dismissed, Acquitted or Rt’d to Juv. Ct. 111 (15%) Probation with Jail 207 (34%) Jail 10 (2 %) Fine / Other 17 (3%) Source: California Department of Justice.

8. CA Juvenile Court Fitness Hearings - 2009 • Number of fitness hearings: 488 • On felony charges: 387 • On misdemeanors: 101 • Total found unfit for juvenile: 346 • Total found fit for juvenile: 142 Source: California Department of Justice

9. Adult court transfers– DJF Impact More prison-bound youth in DJF facilitiesJune 30th population of “E” and “M” youth in DJF institutions(Juveniles convicted as adults) - FY04/05 to FY 08/09 Source: CA Dept. of Justice

10. Adult Court Transfers:“Top End” JJ RealignmentImplications of data • More and more juveniles are being tried as adults and sentenced to state prison – twice as many in ’09 as in ’05 • The most serious juv. offenders are being carved out of the rehabilitative system • Category I Juv. Commitments to DJF in 2009 = 17 • DJF commitments from juvenile court are shrinking, DJF population of youth waiting to go to prison is growing

11. Downsizing CA State Youth CorrectionsLegislative Realignment - SB 81 • Effective September 2007 • Banned all future DJF commitments of “non-violent” youth (“non 707(b) offenders”) • Exception: non-707(b) sex offenders (PC 290.008 registration) • Phased all non-707(b) wards out of DJF institutions and off the DJF parole caseload • Established the Youthful Offender Block Grant to pay counties for local juvenile offender custody and care

12. California Division of Juvenile FacilitiesInstitutional Population1996 – 2009 (as of December 31 each year) and 9/30/10 SB 81 Source: Ca. Dept. of Corrections & Rehabilitation

13. CYA-DJF Institution Closures Since 2000

14. DJF First Commitments by Court of Commitment and admissions of state prison (“M”) housing cases Calendar Years 2004 – 2009, FY 2010 Source: CA Division of Juvenile Facilities, Research Branch

15. Reasons for declining juvenile court commitments to DJF • Realignment of non 707s to counties (SB 81) • Continuing declines in arrests for serious/violent crimes • Adult court processing– most serious juv. cases are going to adult court & state prison • Some counties have avoided DJF, developed alt. dispositions for their 707s

16. DJJ Average Institutional Length of Stay Juvenile Court Commitments(ALOS in months, 1996 – 2009) Source: CA Division of Juvenile Facilities, Research Branch

17. 2010 DJF Parole Realignment:Key elements (AB 1628) • New paroleesas of Jan. 2011 shift to county supervision • Committing court to hold “re-entry dispo hearing”prior to discharge from DJJ • DJJ transports ward to the local court • DJJ jurisdiction terminateson discharge to local court • Local court sets conditions of release supervision– • JPB release recommendations to be “incorporated” • Conditions must be “consistent with Evidence Based Practices” • State funds: $15,000 per parolee ($115K for custody) • Funds must be spent on “evidence based” interventions • Caseload size? • FY 09/10: 911 wards were released on parole, 445 were returned to DJF

18. 2010 DJF Parole Realignment:Violations & New Sanctions (AB 1628) • Violations/revocations-- determined by local court (for wards released after 1/19/11) • “Modification hearing” within 15 days of detention • Counsel and other due process rights apply • Standard of proof? Likely, preponderance of evidence • New sanctions for “serious” or “repeat” violations • Commitment to juvenile facility if age appropriate (WIC 208.5) • Up to 90 days county jail if over 18 • Return to DJJ institution: min 90 days, max 1 year • Interim rule– violations by youth paroled before 1/19/11 • Youth already on parole remain subject to JPB revocation process and “LH” protections (707 b & sex offenders only) • On 9/30/10 there were 1,593 wards on the total DJF parole caseload

19. SB 81 realignment: County responses & program development • Picture remains fragmented due to… • Lack of statewide data: SB 81 did not require counties to submit plans or report how they spent YOBG funds. • This changed in 2009– legislation now requires annual county YOBG plans and spending reports to go to CSA • Where is the shifted (non 707b) caseload going? • Juvenile hall commitments are increasing, with longer stays • Dedicated camp programs -- e.g. Challenger camp in L.A. • Older parolees may be banked on adult probation • Based on May 2010 plans filed @ CSA, a wide range of assessments and services are being deployed to SB 81 youth

20. Youthful Offender Block GrantCounty Allocations 10 largest for FY 09/10 (in $ millions)

21. SB 81: County FY 10/11 Plans Submitted to CSA All Proposed YOBG Expenditures By Major Category(Direct Service, Placements, Capacity Building) PLACEMENTS- 19% (Juvenile Hall, Camps, Group care, etc.) 19% 62% 20% DIRECT SERVICE- 62 % (Assessments, Supervision, Counseling, Aftercare, etc) CAPACITY BUILDING 20 % (Administration, salaries, Equipment, training, etc.) Source: Corrections Standards Authority

22. DJF & realignment policy changes on the front burner for 2011 • DJJ “time adds”– Almost gone in 2010, issue wont go away • DJJ/JPB plan to revise PCDs (sentences assigned at intake) and DJJ release criteria • YASI scores will determine assigned PCD, release decision • Full shut down of DJJ? Not likely anytime soon • State-local JJ funds (JJCPA, JPCF, YOBG) up for grabs in 2011 • Legislature must re-fund next year: VLF tax extension? • Evidence based program requirements? • The New Governor and the Politics of Appointment

23. What can we expect? • As candidate- tough-on-crime talk • But calls for downsizing state prisons, more services and success on parole • As AG generally tough-on-gangs & crime • As Oakland Mayor opened charter school – military bootcamp for kids • As Gov. (1978)– no big supporter of juvenile justice reform– praised the Singapore “spanking” model of youth discipline • Death penalty- doesn’t favor it, vows to enforce it Bottom line: No leftie on crime, but likely to support cost-reduction proposals for prison downsizing, parole reform

24. New 2010 Legislation of interest See Commonweal Handout for expanded review of 2010 bills Signed into law AB 12 (Beall)- Foster & kinship care benefits extended to age 21 for “nonminor dependents” AB 2212 (Fuentes)- New procedures for incompetent minors in delinquency court Vetoed by the Governor SB 1091 (Hancock)- Medi-Cal benefits for incarcerated juveniles