Beyond the Bench 2006 Corene Kendrick Staff Attorney Youth Law Center

1. Youth with Developmental Disabilities in the Juvenile Justice System Survey of Probation Departments Beyond the Bench 2006 Corene Kendrick Staff Attorney Youth Law Center

2. Survey Overview • Telephone Interviews with County Probation Staff designated by Probation Chief • Fall 2006 – as of 12/13/06, 30 counties surveyed – urban, suburban and rural • Designed to better understand the practices in serving youth with developmental disabilities and/or major mental health needs, and who are incompetent or potentially incompetent to stand trial

3. Overall Themes from Probation • Juvenile Hall is not the place for these youth • Halls are ill-equipped to deal with their needs • By virtue of their problems, these youth are in danger of being harmed, taken advantage of, or pushed into other criminal involvement while in the Hall • Lack of appropriate alternative placements and programs means these youth end up spending the most time in the Hall • Halls are used as dumping grounds for these youth • “They’re like hot potatoes, no one wants them.”

4. Judicial Competency Proceedings • Judicial process of determining competency occurs rarely. Divergent reasons why: • Youth diverted early due to collaboration w/ DAs, PDs, CMH and Regional Center • Some counties thought no one in the system understands option enough to raise it • Some counties thought there aren’t many kids who are incompetent but instead are high-needs and need an alternative placement.

5. Judicial Proceedings, Cont’d • Handful of counties had higher rates of competency proceedings in past year • Sacramento: 64 evaluations, 10 determinations • Los Angeles: approximately 35-50 determinations • Kern: 30 determinations • Frequency of proceedings up in counties • Meth, “huffing” solvents – severe brain damage • Increased awareness of process by players

6. Commonly Cited Problems

7. Lack of Placements • Every person interviewed mentioned this • Not enough placements for high needs / potentially incompetent / incompetent youth • Level 14 group homes – counties admit this is not the ideal solution, but best option currently available to them • Long wait lists, homes refuse the highest needs youth, staff inadequately trained to deal with these youth, youth may assault staff or children • Community Treatment Facilities – same problems as Level 14 • Result of failure in these placements – counties end up sending youth to DJJ or out of state

8. Lack of Placements, Cont’d • Families are preferred placement, but families may be unable or unwilling to accept child’s return • Limited wrap-around services • Relatives are explored as an option – even out of state • Few, if any, DD parents’ support groups are actively partnered with Probation

9. Lack of Placements, Cont’d • Few state hospitals willing to work with juvenile incompetent population, only a handful of beds statewide for kids • No juvenile competency restoration programs (Humboldt has contract to begin) • Emergency hospitalizations time-limited • Increasing out-of-state placements using AB 2726 “educational placements”

10. Lack of Placements, Cont’d • Out of county placements • Rural and small counties have no placements nearby and also problems in having other counties’ facilities to take their youth • Result: youth spend months at a time in juvenile hall awaiting placement out-of-county

11. Lack of Interagency Collaboration • Cooperation and collaboration among agencies varied wildly from county to county • Some RCs work together with Probation from time of youth’s admission to Hall, with expedited assessment timelines, in-Hall assessments • Some RCs would only evaluate youth post-JJ involvement (both post-Hall and post-probation) • Some RCs ignored referrals and requests and had to be joined by courts

12. Working With Regional Centers • All counties said the narrow eligibility requirements under the Lanterman Act were a barrier to getting RC resources and services for low-functioning youth • Long timeline for RC assessments means youth wait in juvenile hall • Some RCs and counties have agreed to shorter timelines for evaluations of kids in custody

13. County MH and School Districts • Widely divergent levels of cooperation and collaboration with CMH and School Districts • Some work closely with Probation from the start • Some School Districts are ordered by court to work with Probation and ignore orders • Youth falling in the cracks between Regional Centers and County Mental Health

14. Impact of the Lack of Collaboration When Probation, the Regional Center, County Mental Health, and School District do not collaborate together from the very onset, this forces further penetration into the criminal justice system because all non-Probation services are court-ordered.

15. County Probation’s Ideas of Promising Practices

16. Interagency Collaboration • Regular (as frequently as twice a month) collaborative strategy meetings of leaders of all agencies to discuss an individual case • Process has been quite successful in small counties

17. Clear Court Process for Competency Determinations • Los Angeles – Mental health court • San Diego – protocol • Kern – close working relationship among Public Defender, RC, Probation and court. Shorter timeline for RC assessment • Caveat: some counties express concern that developing a uniform court process could have unintended consequences: lack of flexibility and individualized response, net-widening

18. Alternative Placement Options • Counties expressed their interest in creating a local (or nearby) secure facility, fully-staffed, and based on a therapeutic model for • Short term competency restoration or • For youth with serious delinquencies, long term services based on youth’s needs • Increased family involvement for successful stabilization and re-entry to community • Orange County: separate wing of juvenile hall – therapeutic model, no leather restraints used in 4 years

19. Increased Education & Training • Many county probation offices said that judges, Public Defenders, and District Attorneys may not have sufficient training or knowledge about this population of youth or of the services that would best address the youth’s individual needs • Probation Department staff may not know what developmental disabilities are • Lack of understanding by many players in the process about what Regional Centers can and cannot offer for these youth

20. Model Staffing Practices • Counties with the most collaboration and success in serving the youth also displayed model staffing: • Long term staff who have worked with incompetent youth • Staff teams who adopt a unified therapeutic approach • Experienced and knowledgeable PDs, Judges, DAs with years of working with these youth • Higher staff-to-youth ratios in the alternative placements with staff who are highly-trained in working with this population of youth

21. For more information Corene Kendrick Youth Law Center 200 Pine St., Ste. 300 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 543-3379 ext. 3909 ckendrick@ylc.org www.ylc.org