1 / 20

NC Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

North Carolina’s Efforts to Reduce Disproportionate Minority Contact by Jamal Carr Youth and Family Services Administrator. NC Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Inspirational Quote. Difficulties are meant to rouse, not discourage.

kyna
Download Presentation

NC Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. North Carolina’s Efforts to Reduce Disproportionate Minority Contactby Jamal CarrYouth and Family Services Administrator NC Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

  2. Inspirational Quote Difficulties are meant to rouse, not discourage. The human spirit is to grow strong by conflict. William Ellery Channing 1780-1842

  3. PresentationObjectives • Understand what is meant by DMC • Examine DMC data at critical decision points within the juvenile justice system • Highlight known risk factors that contribute to DMC • Review Department efforts towards reducing DMC

  4. Four Core Protections of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act • Deinstitutionalization of status offenders (DSO) • Separation of juveniles from adults in institutions (Separation) • Removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups (Jail Removal) • Reduction of disproportionate minority contact (DMC)

  5. Understanding DMC In 1988, Congress amended the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJPD) Act requiring states to address the overrepresentation of minorities in the juvenile justice system. In 2002, Congress re-established the JJDP Act. What had previously been studied as disproportionate minority confinement was expanded to consider all the decision points of the juvenile justice system (Contact). Source: http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/dmc/

  6. Calculating DMC In North Carolina Using the Relative Rate Index (RRI) we are able to calculate DMC at the following decision points: • Complaints referred to juvenile justice • Complaints petitioned (approved) for court • Detention admissions • Youth development center commitments

  7. Relative Rate Index Cases Referred to DJJDP NC–JOIN Data FY 2008-09 Alleghany 3.02 Ashe 0.59 Gates 2.73 Surry 1.21 Northampton 1.79 Stokes 1.24 Rockingham 1.72 Warren 2.75 Person 3.02 Caswell 1.12 Vance 2.26 Hertford 1.41 Currituck 1.78 Granville 2.09 Camden 0.00 Halifax 2.93 Pasquotank 1.92 Watauga 2.29 Wilkes 1.05 Yadkin 1.21 Orange 2.81 Perquimans 3.94 Forsyth 5.73 Guilford 3.79 Bertie 2.42 Mitchell 0.00 Franklin 1.97 Avery 1.51 Alexander 2.53 Durham 6.50 Chowan 1.78 Nash 4.51 Alamance 1.94 Davie 1.58 Caldwell 2.03 Edgecombe 1.84 Madison 0.46 Yancey 4.35 Washington 2.81 Martin 3.12 Iredell 2.03 Catawba 1.37 Wake 6.28 Dare 0.31 Davidson 2.07 Burke 1.41 Tyrrell 0.44 McDowell 1.21 Wilson 4.69 Chatham 1.77 Randolph 1.74 Pitt 4.36 Rowan 2.10 Buncombe 2.70 Beaufort 2.13 Haywood 0.70 Johnston 2.51 Hyde 1.43 Swain 0.45 Lincoln 1.44 Greene 1.01 Montgomery 2.00 Lee 1.18 Rutherford 1.88 Cabarrus 2.94 Wayne 2.99 Harnett 3.41 Henderson 1.68 Graham 1.76 Jackson 0.47 Gaston 1.82 Polk 1.26 Stanly 3.19 Moore 2.59 Cleveland 2.80 Lenoir 3.49 Craven 2.26 Mecklenburg 4.07 Macon 1.07 Transylvania 3.39 Cherokee 3.45 Pamlico 2.15 Cumberland 2.79 Clay 1.16 Jones 0.76 Richmond 1.82 Hoke 3.39 Sampson 1.38 Union 2.17 Anson 14.74 Duplin 1.48 Onslow 1.94 Carteret 2.67 Scotland 4.18 Legend: Relative Rate Index Value Description Robeson 2.77 Bladen 2.27 Pender 2.43 < 1.00 - Under Representation for Youth of Color Columbus 2.76 = 1.00 - Proportional Representation for Youth of Color New Hanover 4.01 Brunswick 2.00 > 1.00 - Over Representation for Youth of Color > 2.00 - 2x Over Representation for Youth of Color > 3.00 - 3x Over Representation for Youth of Color

  8. Relative Rate Index Cases Approved for Court NC–JOIN Data FY 2008-09 Alleghany1.09 Ashe 0.94 Surry 1.43 Gates 0.64 Northampton 0.69 Person 1.15 Stokes 0.87 Vance 1.00 Caswell 1.00 Warren 1.07 Rockingham 1.05 Currituck 0.99 Camden 0.00 Hertford 1.28 Granville 1.98 Pasquotank 0.87 Halifax 1.28 Watauga 1.16 Wilkes 0.93 Yadkin 0.63 Perquimans 1.58 Chowan 0.76 Forsyth 1.95 Orange 1.39 Mitchell 0.00 Guilford 1.10 Franklin 1.02 Avery 0.47 Bertie 5.43 Alamance 0.91 Durham 1.11 Caldwell 0.86 Nash 1.63 Yancey 0.82 Alexander 1.45 Davie 0.81 Edgecombe 1.27 Madison 0.00 Tyrrell 0.53 Martin 1.02 Washington 0.88 Iredell 1.09 Davidson 1.00 Dare 0.26 Wake 1.21 Burke 1.02 Catawba 0.84 Wilson 0.83 Randolph 1.31 Chatham 1.30 McDowell 0.97 Catawba 0.99 Rowan 1.24 Buncombe 1.10 Pitt 1.30 Beaufort 1.24 Johnston 1.16 Haywood 0.71 Lincoln 0.77 Hyde 2.00 Lee 0.85 Swain 0.95 Greene (47) Rutherford 0.97 Cabarrus 1.04 Henderson 1.00 Harnett 1.46 Montgomery 1.24 Graham 1.41 Wayne 1.13 Jackson 1.36 Stanly 0.68 Gaston 0.97 Moore 1.00 Polk 1.78 Cleveland 0.80 Lenoir 1.39 Craven 1.07 Transylvania 1.03 Mecklenburg 1.33 Pamlico 2.27 Macon 0.91 Cherokee 0.89 Richmond 1.01 Cumberland 1.25 Clay 0.00 Sampson 1.00 Jones 1.13 Hoke 0.96 Union 1.21 Anson 1.02 Duplin 0.93 Onslow 1.15 Scotland 1.65 Legend: Index Values Bladen 2.88 Carteret 1.30 Robeson 1.13 Pender 0.72 < 1.00 – Under Representation for Youth of Color Columbus 1.74 = 1.00 – Proportional Representation for Youth of Color New Hanover 1.04 Brunswick 0.83 > 1.00 – Over Representation for Youth of Color > 2.00 – 2x Over Representation for Youth of Color > 3.00 – 3x Over Representation for Youth of Color

  9. Relative Rate Index Detention Admissions NC–JOIN Data FY 2008-09 Alleghany2.39 Gates 0.95 Ashe 11.40 Northampton 7.26 Rockingham 1.34 Stokes 2.70 Surry 0.81 Warren 0.35 Person 1.48 Caswell 1.43 Vance 0.84 Currituck 0.26 Camden 0.00 Hertford 1.30 Granville 2.02 Halifax 0.48 Watauga 1.24 Pasquotank 1.08 Wilkes 1.16 Perquimans 1.17 Orange 2.07 Yadkin 0.75 Chowan 3.17 Forsyth 0.95 Guilford 1.38 Mitchell 0.00 Avery 0.00 Franklin 0.87 Bertie (37) Alamance 0.77 Durham 1.54 Nash 1.84 Caldwell 0.77 Davie 1.10 Alexander 1.61 Yancey 6.65 Edgecombe 1.53 Madison 0.00 Iredell 1.85 Martin 1.47 Washington 5.36 Wake 1.40 Tyrrell (5) Davidson 1.04 Dare 0.00 Burke 1.24 Chatham 4.44 Catawba 0.84 Randolph 2.10 Wilson 1.32 Catawba 1.21 McDowell 0.37 Rowan 1.09 Buncombe 1.23 Pitt 2.50 Beaufort 1.00 Haywood 0.00 Johnston 1.09 Hyde 0.54 Lincoln 0.72 Lee 1.66 Swain 0.84 Greene (11) Rutherford 0.86 Montgomery 1.88 Cabarrus 1.71 Harnett 1.04 Henderson 1.97 Graham Wayne 1.26 Jackson 0.95 Stanly 0.87 Gaston 1.09 Moore 1.37 Polk 3.28 Cleveland 0.88 Craven 1.33 Mecklenburg 2.02 Lenoir 7.10 Transylvania 0.87 Macon 0.94 Pamlico 5.24 Cherokee 0.99 Cumberland 1.72 Clay 0.00 Jones 4.64 Sampson 1.53 Richmond 0.36 Hoke 0.76 Union 1.42 Anson 0.19 Duplin 0.77 Onslow 1.22 Carteret 1.66 Scotland 1.19 Legend: Index Values Robeson 1.06 Bladen 0.59 Pender 3.60 < 1.00 – Under Representation for Youth of Color Columbus 1.24 = 1.00 – Proportional Representation for Youth of Color New Hanover 1.82 Brunswick 1.22 > 1.00 – Over Representation for Youth of Color > 2.00 – 2x Over Representation for Youth of Color > 3.00 – 3x Over Representation for Youth of Color

  10. Relative Rate Index Youth Development Center Commitments NC–JOIN Data FY 2008-09 Alleghany Gates Northampton (5) Ashe Warren Surry 0.00 Caswell (2) Person 1.79 Rockingham 11.47 Stokes 0.00 Currituck Vance (4) Camden Hertford 0.64 Granville 0.69 Halifax (11) Pasquotank Watauga Perquimans Wilkes 0.00 Yadkin Chowan Orange 0.00 Forsyth 0.90 Guilford 3.19 Franklin 4.75 Mitchell Bertie (3) Avery 0.00 Durham (51) Alamance 2.54 Nash 0.76 Caldwell 3.63 Davie Alexander 1.67 Edgecombe (14) Yancey Madison Iredell 5.82 Madison Tyrrell (1) Martin (3) Washington (2) Dare 0.00 Wake 4.58 Davidson 1.27 Chatham Burke 1.12 Catawba 0.84 Wilson 1.52 Randolph 1.40 Catawba 5.34 McDowell Buncombe 0.65 Rowan 1.43 Pitt (24) Beaufort (4) Johnston 4.40 Haywood Hyde Swain Greene Lee 1.00 Lincoln 4.30 Rutherford 0.00 Harnett 1.89 Cabarrus 0.95 Montgomery (2) Henderson 0.00 Wayne 1.65 Graham Jackson Gaston 0.98 Stanly 0.87 Polk Moore (3) Craven 0.85 Cleveland 4.04 Lenoir (19) Mecklenburg 5.27 Transylvania (1) Macon 0.00 Pamlico 0.00 Cherokee 0.00 Cumberland 1.76 Clay Jones (2) Sampson 3.93 Richmond 0.40 Hoke 0.70 Union 8.15 Anson Duplin Onslow 2.49 Scotland (2) Carteret 1.34 Legend: Index Values Robeson 0.96 Bladen (1) Pender < 1.00 – Under Representation for Youth of Color Columbus (1) = 1.00 – Proportional Representation for Youth of Color New Hanover 4.01 Brunswick 0.97 > 1.00 – Over Representation for Youth of Color > 2.00 – 2x Over Representation for Youth of Color > 3.00 – 3x Over Representation for Youth of Color

  11. Department Initiatives • Data Collection and Analysis • Terry Sanford Study • Critical Decision Points Map • Race Matters Toolkit

  12. Data Collection and Analysis North Carolina-Juvenile Online Information Network (NC-JOIN) • System allows Department staff to track the progress and placement of court involved youth • System provides a way for gathering data on DMC at critical points within the juvenile justice system

  13. Terry Sanford Study Study by Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy at Duke University, 2003 Contributing factors to DMC in North Carolina • Family situations • Socio-economic conditions • Education system • Juvenile justice system

  14. Critical Decision Point Map Developed Critical Decision Points Map of the juvenile justice system. Key highlights • Shows where major decisions are made in the system that potentially impact DMC • Depicts role players at those decision points • Describes the level of influence the Department has at those decision points

  15. Race Matters Toolkit • Developed by the Annie E. Casey Foundation • Designed to assist organizations in obtaining equitable outcomes • Uses an embedded racial inequities lens approach

  16. Race Matters Tools • PowerPoint • What’s Race Got To Do With It • Fact Sheets • How To Talk About Race • Racial Equity Impact Analysis • System Reform Strategies • Community Building Strategies • Organizational Self-Assessment

  17. Plan of Action • Obtain DMC data to determine where DMC exists and its impact • Share information with Department leaders and their staff in the area offices • Develop strategies to reduce disproportionality

  18. Plan of Action • Provide training on the Race Matters Toolkit and instruction on using individual tools • Re-examine data on an annual basis to identify changes or trends in DMC • Adjust strategies as needed

  19. Other Initiatives • DMC Subcommittee • Demonstration Counties • Union County’s involvement with the DMC Action Network • Statewide DMC Conference

  20. Contact Information Jamal Carr Youth and Family Services Administrator (919) 733-3388 ext. 8176 jamal.carr@djjdp.nc.gov Website: www.ncdjjdp.org

More Related