Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

50
Mentoring High- Risk Youth in Juvenile Justice Settings Welcome to the California Mentoring Partnership, Northern California Training! Trainers: Sarah Kremer and Roger Jarjoura, Ph.D.

Transcript of Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Page 1: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Mentoring High-Risk Youth in Juvenile Justice Settings

Welcome to theCalifornia Mentoring Partnership,

Northern California Training!Trainers: Sarah Kremer and Roger Jarjoura, Ph.D.

Page 2: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training
Page 3: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Why are we here today?

Page 4: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Learning Objectives

Participants will gain an understanding of:

• Six juvenile justice settings• The advantages and challenges of offering

mentoring services within each setting• Promising practices mentoring within or in

partnership with each setting with a focus on the referral stage

Page 5: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Definitions

Page 6: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Juvenile Detention

Juvenile Corrections

Juvenile Probation

Delinquency Court

Youth Court/Teen

Court

Dependency Court

Six Juvenile Justice Settings

Page 7: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Juvenile Detention

Secure facilities that provide for the short-term,

temporary, safe custody of juveniles alleged to have committed a delinquent act/offense

Page 8: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Juvenile Corrections

Secure, residential facilities that

provide for the long-term,

safe custody of juveniles adjudicated on felony or multiple misdemeanor offenses. These facilities typically are considered to be high security.

Page 9: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

What is the difference between

detention and

corrections?

Page 10: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Juvenile Probation

Community-based corrections program where probation officers supervise and monitor youth under court jurisdiction, ensuring they comply with all court orders. Probation officer provides direction, guidance, rehabilitation.

Page 11: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Delinquency Court

Delinquency Courts have

jurisdiction over juveniles, juvenile delinquents, status offenders and children and youth in need of supervision. The Delinquency Court is most commonly associated with the Juvenile Justice System and juveniles who have committed a crime, status offense and/or violation.

Page 12: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Youth Court/ Teen Court

Diversion programs in which peers sentence juveniles for minor crimes, offenses and/or violations. These programs are administered locally by law enforcement agencies, probation departments, delinquency courts, schools and local nonprofit organizations.

Page 13: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Dependency Court

The Dependency Court is most

commonly associated with foster care, abuse and neglect issues involving children and youth younger than 18.

Page 14: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Project Overview

Page 15: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Project Overview

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is a leader in recognizing that well-designed and well-implemented mentoring can have a tremendous, positive impact on a youth's life chances in particular, “high-risk” youth.

Page 16: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Project Overview

OJJDP funded Researching the Referral Stage of Youth Mentoring in Six Juvenile Justice Settings:

• Juvenile Corrections• Juvenile Detention• Juvenile Probation• Delinquency Court• Youth/Teen Court• Dependency Court

Page 17: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Project Overview

This exploratory research is designed to inform the mentoring referral process for delivery of mentoring services to “high-risk” youth for the purpose of reducing delinquent behavior, alcohol and drug abuse, truancy, and other problem behaviors.

Page 18: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Partner Organizations

MENTOR

Global Youth Justice

National Partnership for Juvenile Services

Research Team

J. Mitchell Miller, Ph.D.

Holly V. Miller, Ph.D.

J.C. Barnes, Ph.D.

Page 19: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Research Questions

• What are the best practices in identifying and referring youth to mentoring programs across distinct juvenile justice settings?

• What is the capacity of the mentoring community to support the youth identified for mentoring from six juvenile justice settings?

• What intermediate outcomes are achieved by mentoring throughout the settings?

Page 20: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Qualitative Data

Site visits

Interviews with staff and administrators

Questionnaires

Page 21: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Quantitative Data: Survey Sample

The survey netted a large

sample size (N = 1,197)

All 50 United States were

represented by the survey

respondents

Program respondents hailed from a

variety of community types

ranging from urban, suburban, rural, and tribal communities.

Page 22: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Key Findings

Page 23: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Juvenile DetentionWhile mentoring is not used as a diversion from adjudication per se, it is, in many instances, viewed as one component of a holistic approach to delinquency prevention and intervention.

Page 24: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Conceptual Model of the “Typical” Referral Process

Step 1

• Identification phase• Sources of identification: law enforcement or juvenile probation, family, social worker

Step 2

• Court appearance• Types of court: youth, family, dependency, delinquency

Step3

• Eligibility assessment by court• Judge or other governing body assess youth for eligibility in mentor program

Step 4

• Referral to mentor program by court

Step 5

• Referral received by mentor program• Eligibility determination and assessment by mentor program

Step 6

• Potential mentor identified

Step 7

• Match made between mentor and mentee

Page 25: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Who refers youth in JJ settings?

Probation officers Judges Magistrates Social Workers and Case Managers Public Defenders Administrative Office of the Courts Police Officers Court Clerks Public Defenders School Officials and Administrators

Page 26: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

• Juvenile justice settings use mentoring60%

• Mentoring programs serve youth from juvenile justice40%

• Mentoring programs use individually based mentoring80%

• More likely when programs utilized Elements of Effective Practice for Mentoring

Positive Outcomes

Key Findings: National Survey

Page 27: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Key Findings: National Survey

Risk Assessment Prior to Referral De

Majority of juvenile justice settings reported between 76 to 100% of youth are charged with a crime prior to being referred to a mentoring program

Relatedly, the majority of juvenile justice settings reported always assessing youth for their level of risk prior to making a referral to mentoring program.

Page 28: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Key Findings: National Survey and Site Visits

Top Reasons for Match Failure

Youth or family refusal or lack of

support

Serious mental health issues on the part of the

youth

Lack of suitable adult mentors

Page 29: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Staff meetings

Mentoring juvenile justice youth is more successful when mentoring

program staff are involved in regular probation or other staff

meetings.

Key Findings: Site Visits

Page 30: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Voluntary participation

Youth have a greater degree of commitment to the

mentoring experience when participation is voluntary.

Key Findings: Site Visits

Page 31: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Knowledge about Juvenile Justice System

Mentor/staff should have a background understanding of the

Juvenile Justice System.

Key Findings: Site Visits

Page 32: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Close working partnerships

Probation officers and other juvenile justice staff working in close

partnership with mentoring program staff is key to successes.

Key Findings: Site Visits

Page 33: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Definition of Embedded Programs

A program that is housed inside a juvenile justice setting either:

• developed by the juvenile justice setting or

• implemented by an outside mentoring program

Page 34: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Greater access to information about youth’s needs

More seamless referral process

Greater success in matching and shorter waiting lists

More understood and valued by juvenile justice staff

Better able to track youth’s long term outcomes

Key Findings: Site VisitsReported Advantages of Embedded Mentoring Programs

Page 35: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Specialized Programs

Mentoring programs with a specific and/or sole purpose of serving youth from a specific JJ setting have an advantageous level of knowledge, skill and ability in providing effective mentoring services for a wide range of high-risk youth involved in JJ settings.

Page 36: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Youth in longer-term placements can

build longer-term mentoring

relationships.

Page 37: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Lunch Discussion Questions1.Why do mentoring programs want to work

with youth involved with juvenile probation?

2.Why do those who work in juvenile justice settings want youth involved with mentoring programs and mentors?

3.Which of our youth are best suited for mentoring?

Page 38: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Small GroupsHow are youth from this

setting identified and referred to mentoring

programs in our community? What works

well? What has not?

What best practices must we adopt in our

community in order to serve youth from this

juvenile justice setting?

What are the pros and cons of mentoring for youth involved in this

setting?

Page 39: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training
Page 40: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Resources: Profiles, MOUs, and Elements of

Effective Practice

Page 41: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training
Page 42: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Resources: Setting Profiles

Overview of content:

• Definition of Setting• Youth Served• Frequently Asked Questions• What's Working

• Example of Promising Strategies

• Challenges and Action Steps• Terms and Definitions• Resources

Page 43: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training
Page 44: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Resources: MOU’s

Overview of content:

• Definitions• Tips and Strategies for Writing

MOU’s• Policy and Programmatic

Discussion Points• Training and Technical Assistance

Resources

Page 45: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

What is an MOU?Document that describes a common understanding of a

working relationship

Provides a framework for partnership

Not a binding contractOutlines a

commitment between parties

MOU

Page 46: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Why is an MOU

important?

Page 47: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

The MOU provides a

structure for a working relationship and clarifies what each of the partners will do to further the

collaboration.

Page 48: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Opportunities for Partnership

Page 49: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Relationships MOUs

Page 50: Northern California OJJDP 2012 Training

Additional Resources

Juvenile Detention

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention – Mentoring Resources

http://www.ojjdp.gov/programs/mentoring.html

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention – Model Program Guide/Mentoring

http://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/progTypesMentoring.aspx

Global Youth Justice Website – Mentoring High Risk Youth Resources

http://www.globalyouthjustice.org/Mentoring.html

National Partnership for Juvenile Services – Mentoring High Risk Youth Resources

http://www.npjs.org/

MENTOR: The National Mentoring Partnership

http://www.mentoring.org/