Joint Ad-hoc Tennessee Blue Ribbon Task Force on Juvenile Justice June 28, 2017

1. Joint Ad-hoc Tennessee Blue Ribbon Task Force on Juvenile Justice June 28, 2017

2. Meeting Agenda • Introductions • Our Charge • The Work Ahead • National Juvenile Justice Landscape • Discussion • Next Steps

3. Our Charge The Joint Ad-hoc Tennessee Blue Ribbon Task Force on Juvenile Justice is hereby authorized and directed to study, evaluate, analyze, and undertake a comprehensive review of the state’s juvenile justice system, using a data-driven approach, and to develop evidence-based policy recommendations for legislative, administrative, and budgetary considerations that will: • protect public safety; • effectively hold juvenile offenders accountable; • contain costs; and • improve outcomes for youth, families, and communities in Tennessee.

4. The Work Ahead: Process and Timeline Stakeholder Engagement

5. The Work Ahead: Stakeholder Engagement Who else should we be hearing from? Youth and Families Law Enforcement Judges Faith Leaders Prosecutors Defense Attorneys Service Providers Educators Probation Officers (County and DCS) Youth Service Officers Youth Advocates Victims and Survivors Business Leaders Local government Task Force Input Stakeholder Roundtables will be held in July and August

6. National Juvenile Justice Landscape Joint Ad-hoc Tennessee Blue Ribbon Task Force on Juvenile Justice Nashville, TN June 28, 2017

7. Public Safety Performance Project The Pew Charitable Trusts is a nonprofit organization that applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public, and stimulate civic life. Pew’s public safety performance project works with states to advance data-driven, fiscally sound policies and practices in the criminal and juvenile justice systems.

8. Public Safety Performance Project • Tennessee’s Technical • Assistance Team • LaShunda Hill • Lydie Loth • Pamela Lachman • Jasmine Jackson • Lisa Margulies • Ruth Rosenthal

9. Less crime, less commitment

10. States facing high annual costs per youth Out-of-home placement costs

11. States experiencing poor or unknown outcomes

12. Residential placement generally ineffective National Academies of Science Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach Two Key Findings: “In general, multifaceted community-based interventions show greater reductions in rearrests than institutional programs.” “There is no convincing evidence … that confinement of juvenile offenders beyond the minimum amount needed for [providing sufficiently intense services], either in adult prisons or juvenile correctional institutions, appreciably reduces the likelihood of subsequent offending.”

13. Residential placement performs worse than community-based programs for all but the very highest risk youth Source: Pew Charitable Trusts, State-Local Partnership in Ohio Cuts Juvenile Recidivism, Costs

14. Longer lengths of stay out of home does not lower recidivism

15. Systems out of step with national research 56% of these youth were assessed as low risk

16. Systems out of step with national research

17. Systems out of step with national research

18. State policy solutions are tailored and reinforcing

19. Large projected impact on out-of-home populations • Projected decreases in out-of-home placements free up $$ for reinvestment

20. Jumpstart investments in effective community options with upfront investment

21. Transformative Voices “We need to do a better job determining which youth offenders really need to enter an expensive Youth Detention Center and which ones can be effectively supervised in the community.” Danny Porter, District Attorney, Gwinnett County Scott Berry, Sheriff, Oconee County, Georgia Op-ed, Gwinnett Daily Post, February 13, 2013

22. Transformative Voices “When I was appointed to the work group, I was not supportive of reform, given my law enforcement background and the murder of my daughter, Kelsey Smith. But as I poured over our state’s data and compared it with research about how to reduce reoffending and improve outcomes, my thinking changed.” Senator Greg Smith, Chairman, Kansas Senate Corrections and Juvenile Justice Committee Op-ed, Wichita Eagle, February 23, 2016

23. National Juvenile Justice Public Opinion: Voters care about preventing crime Voters care less about whether or how long juvenile offenders are incarcerated than about preventing crime “It does not matter whether a juvenile offender is sent to a juvenile corrections facility or supervised in the community. What really matters is that the system does a better job of making sure that he or she is less likely to commit another crime.” 85% of Voters Agreed Source: Pew Charitable Trusts, Public Opinion on Juvenile Justice in America

24. Strong Legislative Support Success

25. Observable Results: Georgia’s Juvenile Justice Reforms • More investment into community programs • and fewer youth out of home: • Invested $37 million in grant programs since FY 2014 Decrease in state commitments Decrease in population in state secure facilities 36% 46% From FY2014-FY 2017

26. Observable Results: Georgia’s Juvenile Justice Reforms • Evidence-based community alternatives now available to judges in every judicial district  • More than 7,200 youth served in fiscal incentive program as of December 2016 

27. Observable Results: Kentucky’s Juvenile Justice Reforms • Fewer court referrals and more diversion: • 3,000 cases referred to Family Accountability Intervention and Response Teams Reduction in court referrals Increase in diversions 31%* 38%*

28. Observable Results: Kentucky’s Juvenile Justice Reforms • In FY 2017, 3 facility closures, total reduction of 82 beds From 2013-2016

29. Questions

30. Joint Ad-hoc Tennessee Blue Ribbon Task Force on Juvenile Justice June 28, 2017

31. Discussion What is already working particularly well? Where do we have room for improvement? What areas would you like to learn more about as we examine our juvenile justice system statewide?

32. Next Steps:Understanding the System • Data Analysis • System Assessment • Document Review • System Mapping • Statutory Review • Individual Stakeholder Outreach • Stakeholder Roundtables • Stakeholder Questionnaires • Meeting notes and summary

33. Next Steps:Upcoming Meetings Task Force Meeting Dates: • Meeting 2: July 26, 9:30 am – 3:30 pm central • Meeting 3: August 31, 9:30 am – 3:30 pm central • Meeting 4: September 12, 9:30 am – 3:30 pm central • Meeting 5: October 30, 9:30 am – 3:30 pm central • Meeting 6: November 15, 9:30 am – 3:30 pm central

34. Contact Information Speaker Beth Harwell Email: speaker.beth.harwell@capitol.tn.gov Phone: (615) 741-0709 Senate Majority Leader Mark Norris Email: sen.mark.norris@capitol.tn.gov Phone: (615) 741-1967 LaShunda Hill Senior Associate Public Safety Performance Project, The Pew Charitable Trusts Email: lhill@pewtrusts.org Phone: (202) 510-3915