Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.
-
Upload
lily-kerry-fletcher -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.
![Page 1: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Youth Engagement in Court
Perspectives from Two States
![Page 2: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 3: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
BackgroundThe ABA Center on Children and the Law has long had a project that worked to include children in court.
The youth had consistently addressed the concerns a lot of people had about including youth with a general theme that not having youth in court was problematic, even traumatic.
But that was anecdotal. There was not a lot of research on child/youth attendance or engagement in dependency court proceedings.
![Page 4: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
BackgroundWe helped develop a technical assistance bulletin and a guide on evaluating youth court engagement projects.
TA Bulletin (2012) www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/files/CIC_FINAL.pdf
Evaluation Guide (2013)www.ncjfcj.org/sites/default/files/children_in_court_programs_final.pdf
![Page 5: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
One of the few studies looked at how attendance at review hearings was harmful or beneficial children/youth ages 8 to 18.
Approximately half the children in the study attended court.
SurveysInterviewsCourt Observation
Around 100 kids total. All were interviewed (attended & did not attend)
Weisz, V., et. al., Children’s participation in foster care hearings. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35(4): 267-272 (2011).
Background
![Page 6: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
They found...
-Anxiety levels for children were overall low
-They were even lower for those that attended court after the hearings
-Children who attended court viewed the judgments are more fair
-Children who attended had a better understanding of their case plans, especially older youth
Weisz, V., et. al., Children’s participation in foster care hearings. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35(4): 267-272 (2011).
Background
![Page 7: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 8: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
A Youth’s Perspective
• Your experiences• What about common concerns?– Court will be upsetting– Court is not child friendly– They will miss school– Seeing people in court may be difficult– Judge may not do what the child wants
![Page 9: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 10: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Issue Identification
• How did your states decide improving youth engagement in court should be a focus?
• What did you do to explore the problem?
![Page 11: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 12: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Kansas Interventions
3 counties – large, rural, frontierYouth 12+
• Youth friendly notices• Judges use benchcards & encourage youth to attend• Youth court report• Youth Calendar (guides on court and court processes)• GAL training• Peer to Peer training (by and for youth)• Modified court orders
![Page 13: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
New Jersey Interventions
3 counties – large, medium, smallAll ages
• Site visits to each county• Local implementation teams• Training for all stakeholders• Law Guardian toolkits• Modified court orders
![Page 14: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 15: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Data Collection
• In both states looking at:– How children feel about process• Emotionally• Reflections on due process
– How professionals think presence affected process• Case planning• Well-being information in court
• Not as much long-term outcome data– Very challenging to eliminate other variables
![Page 16: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Kansas Data Collection
• Judicial surveys• Court observations by CASA• Youth surveys• Court order data• Pre & Post data periods
![Page 17: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
New Jersey Data Collection
• Surveys of all stakeholders after court• Monthly surveys of professionals• Court order data• On-going data collection
![Page 18: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 19: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Kansas Results
Judge Surveys: Do you think the young person was prepared for the court hearing? N = 31; 44
![Page 20: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Kansas Results
Judge Surveys: Did the youth answer questions you had about ______? (Yes) n = 31, 45
![Page 21: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Kansas ResultsJudge Surveys:
Compared to just reading the written reports, did you find out more information from the young person about (list of topics): 2013 2014
Average - Yes 39% 51%n = 29; 43
Did you observe anything about the youth that was not reflected in the reports to the court?
2013 2014Yes 29% 64%n = 31; 44
![Page 22: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Kansas Results
Judge Surveys: Did the youth being present impact your decision making?
2013 2014Yes 71% 81%n = 31; 43
![Page 23: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Kansas ResultsCourt Observations: Most of the observation form items detailed the judge’s interactions with the youth. N= 13; 38• These included topics such as placements & visitation and• Actions such as avoiding acronyms & encouraging the youth to attend the
next hearing.
Overall there was an increase from 38% to 61% of these discussions/actions from 2013 to 2014.
![Page 24: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Kansas ResultsCourt Observations: Some discussion/action examples:
![Page 25: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Kansas Results
Judge Surveys: Overall, how engaged would you rate the young person? N= 31; 45
![Page 26: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Kansas Results
Youth Surveys: Youth survey response rate was very low post. Too low to do meaningful data analysis.
What did we learn? Very hard to reach youth by phone and get them to complete surveys days after court.
Future plans to survey youth immediately after court.
![Page 27: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
New Jersey Results
Two types of surveys professional and youth. A total of 301 attorneys, 116 judges, 75 caseworkers, 24 CASA Case Supervisors, 21 Parents/Resource Parents, 9 CASA volunteers, 3 volunteers, and 41 other professionals (N=597) and 134 youth completed surveys after court; 170 professionals also completed monthly surveys.
![Page 28: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
New Jersey Results
Youth wanted to come to court even though some reported being anxious.
Did you want to come to court today? N=110Yes 97%
How do you feel right now? N= 117Relaxed 62%Nervous 12%Neither 26%
![Page 29: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
New Jersey ResultsThey seemed well prepared. Youth pre surveys: Who spoke with you about court and what to expect? N=117
![Page 30: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
New Jersey Results
In contrast to Kansas (12+), all ages of children have a right to attend court in New Jersey. Still, the vast majority could understand the process.
Youth post surveys:Did the Youth Understand Questions from the Court? N=133
![Page 31: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
New Jersey Results
Stakeholder surveys: Youth discussed their case plans, placements, and school the most during hearings. n=386
![Page 32: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
New Jersey Results
Stakeholder surveys: There seemed to be fewer barriers to getting youth to court than anticipated. (only 13% reported barriers on daily surveys – n=578)
But some practical barriers like transportation were persistent. A fair percentage of youth did not want to attend, but because surveys were done at court, we lack details as to why.
![Page 33: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
New Jersey Results
The vast majority of youth felt the judges ‘heard them.’ 89% n=115.
But to an open-ended question about what would happen after court, many youth recognized that they had an influence, but the judge had to weigh options.
![Page 34: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
New Jersey ResultsOverall, the vast majority thought court was good or very good. N=112
![Page 35: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
New Jersey ResultsBut even though 19% of the youth had a neutral or negative experience…97% said they were glad they came, and99% said they would come to court again.
N=111
![Page 36: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
New Jersey ResultsStakeholder Surveys: The majority of professionals and others in court thought it was beneficial to have the child present. N=580
Significant numbersof those in the ‘no’category were referring to youngerchildren.
![Page 37: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
New Jersey ResultsStakeholder Surveys: How did the child/youth’s presence benefit the court process? N=121
![Page 38: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 39: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Judicial Perspective
• How has increasing youth presence and engagement changed court for you?– For the better?– For the worse?
• Has it changed the culture/climate in court?• What about parental rights? Representation?• What kinds of things do you learn more about
when youth are in court?
![Page 40: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 41: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Working with the Agency
• How have these efforts affected the child welfare agency?
• How has transportation been handled?• Buy-in from stakeholders• Cross-system training
![Page 42: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 43: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Children’s Attorney Perspective
• How have these efforts affected the job of children's’ attorneys?
• What advice do you have for children’s attorneys who are– Part of a panel?– A organizational model?
• Do you think best interest v. expressed interest models make a difference in this context?
![Page 44: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Outline• Background• A youth perspective• Identification of issue• Interventions• Data collection• What we learned• Judicial perspective• Working with the Agency• Children’s Attorney perspective• The future of these efforts
![Page 45: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Future Efforts
• Update on pilot activities– New Jersey expansion state-wide
• What could/should further research look into?
![Page 46: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Questions?
![Page 47: Youth Engagement in Court Perspectives from Two States.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062503/5a4d1b0d7f8b9ab05998cb4a/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Presenter Information
Lorraine Augostini – New JerseyHon. Daniel Cahill – KansasKaysie Getty – YouthMark Gleeson – KansasStephanie Petrillo - New JerseyScott Trowbridge - ABA