HomeMy WebLinkAboutDoc 373 - Juv Crime Prevention PlanDeschutes County
HIGH RISK
JWENILE CRIME
PREVENTION PLAN
2010-2014
Updated April 2010
Commission on Children & Families
:130 NW Haniman, Suite A • Bend, OR 97701 •5413854717
DESCI{U!ES COUNTY
COMMISSION ON
(IIRDIEN6 Imaue
Dc 2,Q I.Q • 373
Overview
In the last several years, Deschutes County has seen a number of positive trends in the well-being of
at -risk adolescents, their families and the community. These include a 13% drop in referral rates and
11% drop in the annual number of offenders since 2001 despite being one of the fastest growing
counties in Oregon, and a six percent reduction in recidivism in the same time period (Juvenile
Justice Information System Annual Reports 2002-2008). Generally, juvenile offender trends are
positive, which allows the county to examine the subsets of offenders with whom we do not find as
much success. These are the chronic offenders (3+ offenses within one year) with additional chro iic
detention admissions and/or long stays in detention due to inability to return home or
personal/family or public safety reasons. The juvenile department also continues to find challenge; in
being successful with juveniles who present with multiple risk factors in the family functioning and
school life domains, and with young offenders. Following statewide trends made available in draft
form by the Oregon Youth Authority, the department wishes to improve its identification, assessment
and intervention of the high-risk younger youth who have law enforcement contact, as this
population re -offends at a greater rate than juveniles making a first contact with law enforcement at
older ages.
Juvenile Services/JCP History in Deschutes County
➢ Funding to counties for juvenile services began in 1979 with requirements for a
comprehensive plan including a county wide needs assessment and funding priorities. The
process was informal and based on local ideas about what worked to support children and
families.
➢ In 1994 increased requirements for accountability and a focus on public safety were required.
➢ Over the next several years, Deschutes County became an innovative leader in developing and
applying the Balanced and Restorative Justice model and for not only including 10-17 year olds
in the continuum of services model but for including younger children and early intervention in
the JCP continuum. While resources have declined, the spectrum of available programs and
services in the continuum have likewise declined; however, the services continuum model
established years ago continues to be adhered to today (see Attachment A).
➢ In 1999, a second JCP Planning process was developed and implemented in 2000
➢ In 2000, Deschutes County was granted an early childhood waiver to have the option of using
JCP funds for programs targeting a younger population (0-8). This waiver was granted based
upon the availability of adequate resources to fund services for the 10-17 population.
➢ The requirement for using resources for evidence based practices began in 2003 and remains
in effect today (S8267).
1
Juvenile Crime Prevention Services, 2001 to Present
Currently, counties receive funds for juvenile justice services in three categories: prevention, basic
and diversion. In Deschutes County, the Commission on Children & Families manages the prevention
funds and the Juvenile Community Justice Department manages the basic and diversion resources.
For the 2009-2011 biennium basic and diversion funds were allocated for the following strategies:
1. Basic ($367,844): Evidence -based family -based treatment (Functional Family Therapy) for
medium and high risk juveniles who have been referred and adjudicated and on probation, or
agreed to a Formal Accountability Agreement, in relation to a criminal offense, and who are at
risk for further involvement with the juvenile justice system.
2. Diversion ($312,169): Treatment foster care (Maplestar Oregon) for high-risk juveniles
adjudicated and on probation who are at imminent risk of being placed out of home
(residential treatment or close/secure custody w/ the state) due to continued criminal
offensive behavior.
For FY 2009-10 fiscal year Juvenile Crime Prevention funds were allocated under the ear/y childhood
waiver to the fo/lowing programs:
1. Healthy Families of the High Desert - (formerly Ready Set Go) Parole and Probation — This
program provides home visits to parolees/probationers with infants.
2. First Step to Success - is an early intervention program that helps young children (N5 years of
age) who are at risk for developing or who demonstrate anti -social or aggressive behaviors get
off to the best possible start in school.
3. Family Resource Center - Family Trax parent education program serves families of youth ages
0 to 18 and utilizes evidence -based programs to provide opportunities to strengthen parenting
skills, utilize community support services, and contribute to the development of healthy, viable
communities.
Due to the county's inability to meet all of the early childhood waiver criteria set by the Juvenile
Crime Prevention Advisory Council (JCPAC), the Juvenile Crime Prevention funds currently used to
fund early childhood service providers will cease at the end of the 2010 fiscal year (June 30, 2010).
With the Toss of the Community Youth Investment Program (CYIP) funds and the decline of resources
over the past eight years to serve youth, the county no longer has adequate resources available to
fund services for the 10-17 year old youth who fit within the JCP funding criteria.
Because of the uncertainty of state funding and potential budget reductions, the CCF board has made
the decision to not conduct a competitive RFP for the second half of the 2009-2011 biennium.
Instead, the board is in the process of developing a mechanism to provide funding to current
contractors in year two. Resources currently utilized to fund JCP prevention programs under the
waiver will be shifted to fund services targeting the 10-17 age group that fit the JCP funding criteria.
The decision-making process for 2010-11 funding is being driven by the JCP criteria and JCP Plan
findings.
--2--
For FY 2010-2011 Juvenile Crime Prevention funds are allocated to the following programs based on
the priorities set by this plan, the loss of eligibility for the early childhood waiver, the JCP funding
criteria and the CCF board decision to only fund 2009-2010 providers due to funding uncertainties.
1. Big Brothers & Big Sisters - Community Based Mentoring Program that provides youth with
positive prevention based mentoring opportunities.
2. Girls Circle Girls Circle - A program designed to build girl's resiliency and promote a safe
environment in which young females can develop strength, confidence and communication
skills.
3. Functional Family Therapy - Functional Family Therapy (FFT) is for youth and families to learn
strategies to change a youth's negative behavior. The goal of every FFT intervention is to
build on a family's assets to successfully impact their youth's risky behavior.
4. Runaway and Homeless Youth Program - Youth participants receive housing, life skills
training, medical, mental health, dental and A & D services. Additionally, youth are re-
connected with academic programs and/or vocational opportunities.
Section 1— SUMMARY OF THE PROCESS
Strategic Prevention Framework Decision -Making Model
In Deschutes County, as well as several other counties in the state, prevention efforts (including
juvenile crime prevention) are addressed using an evidence -based model for decision-making called
the Strategic Prevention Framework (SPF). Developed by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration, the SPF model has five distinct phases designed to facilitate logical decision-
making and realistic outcomes:
1. Assessment: Collected current local and community specific quantitative data and statistics to
determine the critical issues affecting juvenile crime in Deschutes County. Analyzed the data to
identify reasons why they occur. Process included a collection of qualitative data through
interviews with key stakeholders, survey of community leaders and a broad range of youth and
family service providers. Inclusion of youth who have had involvement in the juvenile justice
system also provided valuable insight regarding the system and its effectiveness.
2. Participation and Collaboration (Capacity Building): The SPF process recommends
participation and input from a wide range of community sectors including: youth 18 years and
younger, schools, youth services and other agencies that address youth issues, law enforcement,
health care, state or local government, faith community, civic and volunteer groups, business and
media. The local process included most of these sectors in the planning partnership team and all
of these sectors were included in the survey and information gathering processes. While there has
been considerable effort to ensure the inclusion of youth in planning and implementation efforts,
over the next year CCF staff and the Community Youth Development Action Team will work to
increase on-going participation from sectors not consistently represented (e.g. faith and busin( ss
sectors).
--3--
3. Planning: The CCF staff convene and facilitate a wide range of prevention groups, task forces
and advisory boards in the community; however, there currently is not a community advisory
committee specifically dedicated to the purpose of discussing JCP issues identified through the
community assessment and to identify or develop strategies to address those issues. The CCF
staff will be working with the Community Justice department, Local Public Safety Coordinating
Council, and the Safe Schools Alliance to address the identified needs and recommendations
coming out of the JCP Plan process.
4. Implementation: The CCF staff will work with the JCP Core Planning Team (described below) to
further coordinate, develop and implement the JCP Plan and strategies to address juvenile crime
in Deschutes County. While innovative approaches will be considered, evidence -based prevention
programs, practices and strategies will be prioritized. In addition, CCF will work with the local
juvenile justice department to coordinate and protect the continuum of JCP services, CCF funded
and other community services in the JCP continuum of services addressing and serving at -risk and
high-risk children and youth.
5. Evaluation: CCF staff assess the success of implemented strategies on an on-going basis to
ensure desired outcomes and changes are achieved. Data sources used to monitor this include
work plans and quarterly reports from funded programs and initiatives, annual analysis of
programs completed by NPC research, and other data collected and compiled by partner agencies,
service providers and the community.
In Deschutes County, the Board of County Commissioners designated the local CCF as the lead
planning agency for the JCP Plan. Two separate planning groups were created: the JCP Core
Planning Team and the JCP Partnership Team. CCF Board Member Howard Finck, who has extensive
background, training and expertise Nationwide in a wide range of youth services and models, led the
process and served as Chair for both the JCP Core Planning and the JCP Partnership teams.
Invitations to participate in the planning process were prepared and sent by Commissioner Tammy
Baney. The JCP Core Planning team consisted of a county commissioner, juvenile department
delegate, the JCP Plan Consultant (Teri Martin PhD), CCF staff and three CCF board members. This
group was responsible for developing and implementing the planning process, the frame work for the
plan, developing the planning team meeting agendas and the identification, gathering and analyzing
data. Core Team meetings occurred two times a month from December through April. The
Partnership Team met once a month from January through April. Two high school students who
currently reside at the Loft (a runaway and homeless shelter) also participated as members of the
Partnership Team. Additionally, they assisted in the development and implementation of the "5
Minutes for Families" survey and distributed it at the local high schools. The JCP Partnership Team,
The Professional Advisory Council to the CCF, the Local Public Safety Coordinating Council (LPSCC),
and the CCF Board reviewed the plan and provided comments prior to approval by the Board of
County Commissioners.
Section 2 - PARTICIPATION & COLLABORATION
Please refer to Attachment B for a list of JCP Partnership Team participants.
Section 3 - ANALYSIS
Data collected for the planning process included qualitative and quantitative data. Citizen,
community leader and provider surveys were conducted during the planning period and 1:1
stakeholder interviews were conducted by the JCP planning consultant. Members of the JCP
Partnership Team regularly participated in both small and Targe focus groups that occurred
throughout to planning process.
During the course of planning, several surveys were conducted, they include:
5 Minutes for Families - Utilizing "Survey Monkey" the 5 Minutes for Families survey targeted all
citizens including youth. Radio and website advertising resulted in over 830 responses, which
exceeded our expectations. Results from the survey were intended for use with the JCP Plan and the
Comprehensive Plan update and included requests for feedback relating to juvenile crime and other
child, youth and family issues. Synthesizing answers to open ended "comment" questions was
difficult because there were over 500 responses; however, there were common themes that
emerged. Citizens wanted more activities for kids, stronger parental involvement and stronger
accountability for youth and parents of youth offenders.
Community Leader Survey - Targeted provider and professional leadership groups, with 245
responses. Invitations to participate in the survey were distributed via email utilizing "Survey
Monkey" as the survey tool This survey was an attempt by three county departments (Community
Justice, Health Services and the CCF) to coordinate efforts and to develop one survey in which to
gather needed input and information for several state planning updates including the county's
Addictions and Mental Health (AMH) Plan, the AMH Prevention Plan, the Juvenile Crime Prevention
Plan and the Comprehensive Community Plan Update.
Weed & Seed - A process of prioritizing community risks was conducted during multiple focus group
meetings with Redmond residents for the purpose of identifying needs for the submission of a Weed
& Seed grant proposal. Crimes committed over the past two years were mapped out by location and
type to identify areas of high crime and the types of crimes occurring in different areas of the
community. Approximately 40 residents participated in the process.
Community Readiness Survey - A total of 333 people participated in this random survey prepared
by the Minnesota Institute of Public Health to indentify perception of problem behaviors relating to
alcohol, drugs and gambling. The risk factors listed below represent the common top three issues of
concern from all four surveys:
1. Youth substance abuse
2. Un -supervised youth
3. Poor family functioning
Ka Stakeholder Interviews
Teri Martin, Ph.D. conducted 34 key stakeholder interviews during January and February, 2010.
Participants included JCP Partnership Team members, the DA, juvenile department staff, law
enforcement, education, the CCF Director and youth. Participants were asked to respond to a list of
questions relating to accomplishments of current juvenile crime prevention approaches, f actors
contributing to the successes, gaps in the prevention system, priority strategies and implement ation,
and indicators of success. Although opinions varied, there were several common themes:
--5--
1. The Juvenile Department's and Commission on Children and Families' emphasis on evidenc
based programs has enhanced the quality and results achieved by prevention efforts. T ie
Juvenile Department maintains an analyst position to further its commitment to evidence-bas ;d
practice, and to seek out grants that support innovative programming.
2. Those concerned about the success of juvenile crime prevention efforts need to regroup, 1 e-
energize and work together to determine the direction Deschutes County wants to go as a whi lle
community. Deschutes County has the creative capacity and vision to continue as a leader in t �e
juvenile justice and crime prevention field.
3. Relatively few professionals outside of the Juvenile Department are familiar with or trained in i ne
use of the JCP risk assessment instrument.
4. Prevention programs should have funds that can be used to facilitate their clients' participatior in
sports and other positive activities inside and outside of school ("flex" or "barrier removal" fund ;).
A complete summary of interviews along with observations/recommendations from the consultant are
included in Attachment C.
Juvenile Crime in Deschutes County
Deschutes County, like all other Oregon counties, utilizes juvenile referral data to understand tre ids
in juvenile crime. Referrals, defined as a referral to the juvenile department by a law enforcerr ent
agency alleging one or more offenses (either that which would be a crime if the juvenile was an a cult
or a status violation that is illegal based on the juvenile's minor age status), are tracked consiste itly
through state-wide agreement on data entry, by juvenile justice departments and the state Yc uth
Authority in the Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS). The law enforcement commu city
uses its own Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS) to track arrests, citations and to some ext !nt,
convictions. Access to LEDS is highly restricted for non -law enforcement agencies and available mly
to certified, audited staff. Data entry practices into LEDS vary from police agency to police ag( ncy
and juvenile departments are not provided access to create or view aggregate reporting mechani! ms.
The state and advocacy groups (i.e. Children First for Oregon) occasionally releases "arrest rate" lata
on juveniles by county, citing LEDS data. There are several factors impacting arrest rates and
therefore this data is often misleading and rarely conforms to "referral rate" or other referral iata
from JJIS. Deschutes County prefers to work with referral trend data based on a state vide
agreement and the consistency through which data is entered.
Referral Rates (see table below)
Referral rates have been declining since 2002, with a significant drop in 2008. Property cr mes
topped the list of types of crime. Female arrests for most crime categories were significantly I )wer
than the males, with the exception of status offenses.
Comparing Juvenile Population and Referral Rate
Changes Since 2002
0.2 -
0.15
0.1 -
0.05 -
ter-- Juvenile Population
Change
T Juvenile Referral Rate
Change
--6--
Recidivism Rates
Rates of recidivism for Deschutes County dropped from 2007 to 2008 and typically fall below he
state average. In 2008, 70.2% of youth referred to the Juvenile Department did not receive a r �w
referral within one year.
Risk Factors (see table below)
Findings from assessments conducted on 240 youth revealed that over half (59%) experien :ed
household problems and 64% reported past problems with alcohol and other drug use. Data from the
JCP Risk Assessment that was conducted with 397 youth in 2009 and revealed that 60% of the yc uth
were NOT involved in extra curricular activities.
JJIS (n=240
Section 4 - STRENGTHS & CHALLENGES
Family
Strengths:
1. Child Abuse and neglect rates are low compared to state averages
2. Teen pregnancy and foster care rates lower than the state average
3. Continuum of early childhood prevention programs to train and support parents
4. Functional Family Therapy for high-risk youth and families
Cha/lenges
1. Domestic violence rates - calls increased last year (see table below)
2. 59% of youth currently on probation report household problems (see table on following pagr )
Number of calls
Deschutes Co. Hotline Calls for Domestic Violence
2000
1000
0
1,93
1.77
1,454
1,689
)1,971
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
--7--
Anti-
social
behavior
Anti-
social
peers
School
Family
AOD
First
offense <=
12
None or
anti -social
peers
Problems
at school
Poor
school
attendance
Household
w/
problem
history
Past
problem
AOD
use
Current
AC D
prob ems
2007
25.6%
15.3%
39.5%
32.7%
48.9%
49.0%
7.7°/
2008
21.9%
11.9%
38.7%
30.7%
41.3%
28.5%
9.00/
2009
25.7%
19.0%
36.7%
34.5%
59.2%
64.6%
10.9 Y0
JJIS (n=240
Section 4 - STRENGTHS & CHALLENGES
Family
Strengths:
1. Child Abuse and neglect rates are low compared to state averages
2. Teen pregnancy and foster care rates lower than the state average
3. Continuum of early childhood prevention programs to train and support parents
4. Functional Family Therapy for high-risk youth and families
Cha/lenges
1. Domestic violence rates - calls increased last year (see table below)
2. 59% of youth currently on probation report household problems (see table on following pagr )
Number of calls
Deschutes Co. Hotline Calls for Domestic Violence
2000
1000
0
1,93
1.77
1,454
1,689
)1,971
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
--7--
60%
40%
20%
0%
Households of Adjudicated Youth w/ Parental Criminality
Deschutes County
2007
2008
2009
Source: JCP assessment results of youth adjudicated and assigned to probation.
Community
Strengths:
1. Declining referral and recidivism rates
2. Citizens and businesses willing to support and invest in children and families
Challenges:
1. Lack of afterschool activities that are accessible and affordable for all families
2. High number of families transitioning
3. Unemployment rates exceed national/state averages
4. Lack of community awareness of the scope and importance of juvenile crime prevention efforts
5. Of the total 1,840 homeless persons in the Deschutes County one -day homeless count in January
of this year, 782 (43%) were children under the age of 18.
School
Strengths:
1. Community School initiative implemented in several Redmond schools. Plans underway for
expanding the community schools initiative in Redmond and for implementing the initiative in both
Sisters & LaPine
2. The percentage of students graduating from high school is significantly higher than the state
average
3. School based heath centers — more being added in Bend, Redmond and Sisters
4. School resource officers
5. County behavioral health services are available to students in many schools and additional
services are being added in areas with identified need (e.g. Sisters and La Pine)
6. In 2009, Deschutes County Health Services (DCHS) received a five year, $651,054 per year,
federal LAUNCH grant (Linking Actions for Unmet Needs in Children's Health). LAUNCH is a
collaborative wellness and early intervention program for children 0-8 years and is being
implemented through the community school based health centers.
--8--
Challenges:
1. Confidentiality policies in some schools prevent collaboration with agencies
2. Budget restraints prevent collaborative opportunities between schools and providers outside the
school environment
3. Deschutes rated 2nd to last among Oregon counties for kindergarten readiness (see table beim
100%
50%
a
0%
Ready to Learn
Source: Dept. of Education 2006
Deschutes
94%
87%
Oregon Benchmark
4. The percentage of students receiving free or reduced lunch is lower than the state average (48° 3)
in most Deschutes County schools. The exceptions are Marshall High School (71%), Pilot But :e
Middle School (63%), LaPine Middle School (65%) and LaPine High School (67%)
5. Most Deschutes County high schools report meeting or exceeding state benchmarks for readir g
and math, with the exception of LaPine, which is falling behind the state average (see table below)
100%
80%
® 60%
Q 40%
20%
0%
LaPine Schools Reading Scores '08-'09
62% 66%
3rd Grade 8th Grade 10th Grade
Source: Dept. of Education
• LaPine
■ Oregon
Individual/ Peer
Strengths:
1. A very small percentage of youth are involved in gang activity
Challenges:
1. 30 -day alcohol use among 8th and 11th graders exceeds the state average.
--9--
Section 5 - JCP COMMUNITY ISSUES
1. High unemployment and homeless rate has taken its toll on Deschutes County families. Some
believe there is a strong correlation between these conditions and the increase in domestic
violence calls.
2. Lack of supervision and economic stressors associated with many single parent or two parent
working households increases the risk delinquent behavior. This concept was supported by citizen
survey comments that revealed a strong desire for more out of school time activities and stronger
accountability for parents who fail to supervise their children.
3. Lack of resources continues to plague most youth serving agencies, especially non- profit
organizations. Historically, these agencies have had a strong base of business supporters. Deep
cuts to the construction and tourism industries resulted in cancelation or poor participation in fund
raising events resulting in declining support to programs and services.
4. Lack of knowledge of resources continues to be an issue for schools, social service agencies, and
families especially for those with adolescents who are exhibiting negative behaviors at home and
school. School personnel and service providers tend to make referrals without a clear
understanding of eligibility and other factors resulting in youth being under served or participating
in services or activities that are not suitable. Reductions in school personnel, due to budget
constraints, have created limitations on how much time counselors and other school staff can
network, collaborate and receive program information and training from youth serving providers.
Section 6 - TARGET POPULATION
The target population has been identified as non adjudicated youth aged 10-14 with an emphasis on
transition years (elementary to middle school and middle school to high school), who have come to
the attention of government or community agencies, schools or law enforcement. The planning team
further defined this population as exhibiting behaviors that exemplify risks associated with poor
family functioning, negative peer association, anti -social behavior and school failure.
Section 7 - STRATEGIC APPROACHES & STRATEGIES
The JCP Partnership Team created a list of potential activities tied to the targeted population and
desired outcomes (tied to risk and protective factors).
The following is a list of potential strategies developed by JCP Partnership Team:
For youth screened and eligible for JCP programs
Case management tool
Progress indicator
SST's- ID youth at risk
Level risk assessment
Mentorinq
Peer mentors/adult mentors
--10--
Access to services in schools: expanded and/or enhanced services via:
School Resource Officers (SROs)
Health care providers in schools (school based health centers)
Family Access Network (FAN) advocates
School counselors and other professionals
School nurse
Cognitive, thinking errors — groups
Mentoring for parents, families
Parent training
Family mediation
Activities that youth are passionate about
Job training.and work experience
Service learning
The following is a summary of the recommended strategies for the 2011-13 biennium:
System Improvement Plan: To address one of the issues identified in the analysis and interview
process and recommendations from community partners, provide JCP risk assessment training to
identified partners needing and/or requesting to be trained. This will allow for JCP risk assessments
to be conducted at various locations throughout the county, by either a case manager or trained
professional. Following the assessment, the case manager will meet with the youth and make a
recommendation for services. The case manager will coordinate with school staff, parents and
providers to insure that the youth engage in recommended services or activities. This will result in
the consistent use of the JCP assessment tool and a baseline of more accurate risk and protective
data collection for future planning.
With local partners and stakeholders, the Commission on Children & Families will explore the concept
of resurrecting the Juvenile Crime Prevention Advisory board or utilizing and existing advisory body
for this function, if appropriate. The lack of a consistent structure or mechanism for group decision
making or collaboration relating to juvenile crime prevention issues is problematic based on
information gleaned in the stakeholder interviews.
Referrals will come from schools, families, juvenile department and law enforcement:
Schools identify children and youth are who are exhibiting concerning behaviors
Law enforcement, including juvenile department refer youth that have come to their attention
but have not been adjudicated
Youth meeting a minimum of two risk factors will be assessed utilizing the JCP screening tool and if
found to meet the criteria, the youth will be referred to the appropriate services from a menu of
choices.
Service Delivery Plan: A pool of client specific flex funds will be used to purchase services for
youth following the assessment. Criteria for how these funds can be used will be developed by the
JCP Core Team and/or the local JCP Advisory board.
Section 8 - MEASUREMENT
Following twelve months of service, the youth will be re assessed utilizing the JCP tool. We will
measure the listed outcomes:
°AD of youth connected with services
0/0 of youth exhibiting decrease in risk factors
% of participants with a criminal referral to the Juvenile Department
Section 9 - CONTINUUM OF SERVICES
Over the years, beginning with the visionary leadership of the late Community Justice Director Dennis
Maloney, Deschutes County has been an innovative leader in developing and applying the Balanced
and Restorative Justice model; part of the uniqueness of the local continuum of services model has
been that it not only includes 10-17 year olds in the continuum of services model but also includes
younger children (0-9 years of age) and early intervention in the JCP continuum (see Attachment A).
Unfortunately, with the continuing decline of resources to serve youth in the community and with the
loss of the early childhood waiver and the Community Youth Investment Program (and the wealth of
funds for prevention efforts that came as a result of it), the continuum of prevention and early
intervention services targeting younger children has declined significantly and these programs are at
risk of going away permanently.
The JCP Basic and Diversion funding in Deschutes County is administered by the Juvenile Community
Justice Department through a contract with the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA). The juvenile
department complied with the required elements of the OYA planning process in the spring of 2009
for the 2009-2011 biennium Basic/Diversion funds. The OYA does not require a formal plan
coordination with any other agencies. The department informed the Local Public Safety Coordinating
Council of the plan and the CCF Director is a member of the LPSCC. The timing of the Oregon
Commission on Children and Families JCP Plan process this year did not allow formal coordination
between the two plans.
The Basic/Diversion 2009-2011 plan is in conformance with the results of the OCCF JCP Plan results,
identifying family functioning as the highest priority risk factor among juvenile department involved
youth. Currently, 100% of Basic funds are used to finance Functional Family Therapy and this will
continue. In keeping with the purpose of Diversion funds, the department utilizes 100% of the
Diversion funds for community-based short-term treatment foster care, to avoid placement at the
OYA while also keeping a juvenile in the community, close to positive family members and other
supports.
Section 10 - BUDGET INFORMATION
JCP funds will be utilized to hire 1-2 case managers who will be responsible for conducting the JCP
risk assessments, developing a plan for services for the youth and providing case management for
the youth. The case managers will also be responsible for helping to reduce barriers that historically
have kept youth and their families from follow up services. The case manager will be responsible for
entering data into the system and conducting the 12 month assessment.
Flex funds will be used to purchase client specific services to meet the case plan goals. Guidelines on
how these funds will be allocated will be developed by the JCP Core Team or the Advisory Board.
2009-2010 Budget
JCP Revenue
114,771
JCP Expenditures
Admin (10%)
11,477
Family Trax
47,052
First Step
19,473
Ready, Set, Go
36,769
2010-2011 Budget
JCP Revenue
114,771
JCP Expenditures
Admin (10%)
11,477
Big Brothers & Big Sisters
28,000
Girls Circle
5,000
Functional Family Therapy
35,000
Runaway and Homeless Youth
35,294
2011-2013 Bud et
3CP Revenue
229,542
3CP Expenditures
Admin (10%)
22,954
Personnel
164,814
Flex Funds
41,774
c
c
0
U
c
0
C
4-1
c
H
c
0
c
N
L
CL.
•
E
c
G)
1"1
�J
c
z
O
U
t
COQ
State Custody
POST-
ADJUDICATION
Chronic/Serious Offenders
c
-
EaE
E
E
In
=
0
a C
}
= Oo
I
!_
i°E
lo
LL
E
v=m
. HrnEo
X D.
0 1- T L.
w > C a
Ts a
o La 1-
t.? a 5c $ Jo'u r.-
EE c.. t d `N vC
c = a�?
o� v maiZ. N
aU
rov=o ='± Zra
yaci 'IA --z }E au '1?
OE OUImi Ou 1�Ii,_
Lower Risk Less SupervisionMore Supervision Higher Risk
I
Lower Cost Higher Cost
Balanced and Restorative
Intervention & Treatment
FILING
Multiple / More Serious
Offenders
rCpQ
u.�0�Ga.0
1
a�
U
, C 0
E a Y*1-... j 1.
m In 0 o .O .
O.01 -0a — u m
a. -Q Inn >
•C C u c C
� o` c � �' o. Ewa
E v to 0 v o
u a U I O� -c >
0
c C
-
a0+ C=
o
a
c
_
E
Q u z
C
c
-to
o
a'
C
o
v1
c
O Q
o m -z
o>
>. L
O C
ro
u�j w
C C m c G
I° a"L y
m
w E o
d 4; Ii li a
PRE -FILING
First Time / Less Serious
Offenders
°:tit
wm
d
c
C
o
L m-0
a
•10-/1
a E o
r7^ a
E a c �
a`
y o
> L 0
m ui cQ
'N y Ot
m L !ts C
m• -E a `Kaci
= y a` L,
0 0 0- C 17
u i. v O
... 0wroc,HI
6, 2_
q
r0 C
W .0
Z
O C
¢a:
C
.cC
L.0
t1La.01C1UD.+�>. a+'vviG
oo
rm
..
t`0 0
v(13
Z
Eoly
—Q
Community Development
& Prevention
TARGETED/AT RISK
Selective & Indicated Prevention
di
E
y'
L
01
L
1
z>
m 2jj
4 14 0
_v
a p
Q' y
.. C
i i= Z^
m 0 0 C
a v
r J t
if
c)uy
;
m w
m
E s C
L
u C E
LA U1 >
y .- -
wa(
2.v
L
y m
w a
v i
E CO
IL Ot
I m
'r
1
o
o
U
to co
>, v w
r0 c 72 In
L
at .0 Y-0 -
]. O ,- C
C m Ti A
r0 > _
'i0s) _
"` m Cy :Ua
-u
E E>
L__,
u
I
I
o,
o
4
0to
to
a Z
0
3o
mC
C
ALL KIDS
Universal
Prevention
�
r3
aft
d _v
u W _c
y'
-int
ju C
,
o c ki
0.1 � cn3 -
G= U
i Z
E
o
y
a�,_L
to
C
Ea
ii
-
LEo
to
G
O
E `->>
C Q
u >u�v
l� aui —_
G Ywt0
10
7vvc
m4 >--�_.1Ii
v
'~ .'
o n3N
uWE
�C �
o.
O
o
L�InalW
aoiui0
a
ciobm
coa0
M
o
a)Ecartn
1cCc
'�
>
a y p
C 'O a C
0 2 a
N.
.- .c
7
> -2 a
O}01Q
ATTACHMENT A — Continued — Deschutes Co. Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan
Current Deschutes Co. Resources Identified
January 11, 2010 Partnership Planning Team
PRIMARY- Universal
Boys & Girls Club (6-18 years)
Community Schools (K-12 Redmond)
OHP MH Assessment and Services
Positive Behavior Supports (PBS)
Life Skills Training — Middle School
Safe School Alliance
School Resource Officers
Challenge Day
Family Access Network (FAN)
Family Resource Center (FRC)
Choice Friday (Redmond)
SECONDARY - Selective
SRO
Cascade Youth and Family Services — The Loft
Basic Center Funding (10-21 years)
Big Brother Big Sister (BBBS) (6-15years)
Community Schools by specific invitation (K-12)
Girl's Circle (11-14 years)
YES — LaPine Youth Diversion Services (JCAP)
Sisters Outlaw Justice
Alternative programs in schools (by school)
Central Oregon Government Council programs
First Step (5-9 years)
MA -youth led (14-18 years)
SMART Recovery- Cognitive group (14-18 years)
Safe School Alliance
Truancy — Redmond Police and Schools (K-12)
Caldera Arts — mentoring (11-18 years)
Friendly PEERsuation — girls (11-18 years)
Safe School Assessment — MH (K-12)
Art Central
Rimrock Trails — Chemical Dependency (12-17 years)
Youth Challenge — National Guard
FFT (11-17 years)
Youth Build Heart of Oregon
Project Stay Out
SRO's
Safe School Alliance
Grandma's House (Bend)
TERTIARY - Indicated
Diversion
Cascade Youth and Family Services — The Loft
Girl's Circle (14-17 years)
Youth Enhancement Services (YES)
FA Agreements (diversion -could have expunged)
Youth Challenge — National Guard (YCC)
Truancy program
Safe School Assessment
Rimrock
Sally Phiefer and Associates
FFT (11-17 years)
Treatment Foster Care (15-17years)
- 15 -
Attachment a
]CP Partnership Team Members
Bruce Abernethy
Deschutes Prevention Coalition/Bend LaPine School
District
Stephanie Alvstad
J Bar J (Youth services/runaway and homeless youth
provider)
BoCC
Tammy Baney*
Lisa Burbidge
Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Oregon
Cory Darling
Bend Police Department
Bill Davidson
CCF Board Member
Vicki Ertle
Family Resource Center (Parent Ed service
Provider)
Howard Finck*
CCF Board Member
Erica Fuller
Rimrock Trails (adolescent A & D serviceproviderr
c/o Diocese of Baker (Youth Ministry)
The Loft (client, youth member)
Joe Hayes
James Hill
Deevy Holcomb*
Deschutes County Juvenile Department
Cynthia Irving
The Loft (client, youth member)
Bob Jones
Bend/LaPine School District
Bill Lindemann'
CCF Board Member
Diane Luckett
First Steps (Service provider)
Desires Margo**
Redmond School District
Donna McClung
Oregon Youth Authority
Maryanne McDonnell
Mental Health
Kate Moore
DCHS (Public Health)
Hillary Saraceno
CCF Director & member of LPSCC
Marianne Straumfjord, MD
DC MH/Addictions Advisory Board (LADPC)
Dave Tarbet
Redmond Police Department
Amy Ward
Bend Police Department (SRO - Bend H.S.)
*JCP Core Team Members
BOLD: Members required by statute
- 16 -
Attachment C
Deschutes County Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan 2010
Stakeholder Interview Summary
by Teri K. Martin, Ph.D.
April 2010
This summary outlines what I learned from individual and small group interviews with over 30
Deschutes County professionals from a wide range of agencies and disciplines. The composite of
observations and opinions is organized into three categories: strengths to build on, challenges to
address, and opportunities and future directions to consider.
Strengths to Build On
Policy and Organizational Strengths:
• There is a strong history of collaborative policy development and program implementation around
children, youth and families in Deschutes County, and a continued willingness to be involved in
productive partnerships to address juvenile crime prevention issues.
• The Deschutes County Juvenile Department (JD) pioneered the Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARD)
model, and is still committed to approaches that balance requiring accountability, repairing harms done,
and offering opportunities to build competencies and succeed. The JD is currently writing policies and
procedures that will help to sustain this commitment into the future.
• The Juvenile Department's and Commission on Children and Families' emphasis on evidence -based
programs has enhanced the quality and results achieved by prevention efforts. The JD maintains an
analyst position to further its commitment to evidence -based practice, and to seek out grants that
support innovative programming.
• Safe Schools Alliance members represent nearly all of the agencies that are key to establishing and
sustaining a collaborative approach to juvenile crime prevention: District Attorney's office schools, SROs,
and juvenile department probation officers.
• There are benefactors, both businesses and individuals, in the County who are willing to invest in family
and children's programs. There are also a number of younger retirees who have made this their
"community by choice" and are willing to volunteer their time and talents.
Program Strengths:
• Deschutes County, with the support of both the Commission on Children and Families and, historically,
the Juvenile Department, has built a continuum of excellent early childhood prevention programs,
including First Step, Healthy Beginnings, Ready -Set -Go, Healthy Families, Family Access Network, He 3d
Start, and the Family Resource Center.
- 17 -
• The Juvenile Department provides the evidence -based program Functional Family Therapy (FFT) to high
risk youth with family issues using JCP Basic funds.
• The community schools initiative in Redmond is a well -funded opportunity to test creative ideas for after-
school and outside -of -school programs for children and youth, and to explore effective ways to involve
parents, businesses, and other volunteers in providing out-of-school activities.
• School-based health centers are available in a number of schools, and are being planned for others.
• Girl's Circle is a valuable resource in schools where it is offered. The annual Girls Summit in LaPine is
another valued gender -responsive offering for high school girls.
• As a result of efforts by the Safe Schools Alliance, school districts and local law enforcement agencies,
School Resource Officers (SROs) are present in most high schools and available to a number of middle
schools. They contribute significantly to keeping school environments safe and supporting children,
youth and their families. The number of school-based incidents referred to the Juvenile Department has
reportedly declined over the past several years.
• The Loft transitional living center provides a safe and supportive place to live for youth who can't go
home.
• There are residential treatment programs available in the County for substance abusing youth (Rimrock)
and for chronically delinquent boys (3 Bar 3).
Challenges to Address
Policy and Organizational Challenges:
• Because the BAR] approach has now become standard practice in many juvenile justice agencies across
the country, the shared sense of being leaders on the cutting edge that pervaded Deschutes County
more than a decade ago has diminished substantially, and with it the creative energy that fueled
legislative, policy and program innovations.
• Changes in leadership of the Juvenile Department and the CCF have diminished the historically strong
collaboration between these key agencies on juvenile crime prevention policymaking, program design
and performance measurement.
• The recent loss of Deschutes County's waiver that permitted investing the CCF's JCP funds in prevention
programs for children under 10 threatens the continued stability of programs that have relied on that
funding source.
• There are questions about whether Youth Service Teams (YSTs) are functioning optimally, i.e., providing
a forum for schools, treatment providers, juvenile department, OYA, DHS, the courts and law
enforcement to share information and develop collaborative intervention strategies for individual children,
youth and their families.
- 18 -
• Some are concerned that schools have often not been willing partners in juvenile crime prevention
efforts, in part because budget constraints mean that they don't have staff or other resources to
contribute, and also because of confidentiality issues around sharing student information.
Resource Challenges:
• There has been a significant reduction in resources for prevention programs for youth during the past
several years; OYA has reduced diversion/CYIP funding to all counties and Boys & Girls Clubs of Central
Oregon has cut back on its teen programming locally.
• There are not sufficient residential placement options, particularly shelter care beds, to serve as
alternatives to secure detention.
• There is not enough capacity to serve the mental, physical and dental health needs of children and youth
covered by the Oregon Health Plan (OHP).
• Respite care, especially for families with older children, is very limited.
Assessment and Eligibility Challenges:
• Relatively few professionals outside of the Juvenile Department are familiar with or trained in the use of
the JCP risk assessment instrument.
• There is a lack of clarity regarding eligibility criteria for locally available residential treatment options
(Rimrock Trails, 3 Bar 3), which can contribute to program failure of inappropriately placed youth.
• If parents are unwilling to participate or to give their consent for their children to participate in
prevention programs, this is both a risk factor and a significant barrier to providing appropriate
supportive services.
Performance Measurement Challenges:
• There is little or no local data about what kind of substance abuse treatment (residential and outpatient)
works best for different types of youth, which makes it difficult to match clients to the services that
would be best for them.
• Deschutes County does not have a historic baseline of information about the JCP risk profile of its youth,
since the instrument has not been used to assess those admitted to JCP -funded programs. (The Juvenile
Department only recently began to use the risk assessment tool routinely.)
• Initial risk assessments of troubled families often look more positive than reassessments after several
months, because it can take that long for trust to develop between family members and
treatment/service providers. This means that programs may appear not be effective if the only measure
of success is reduction in risk levels from initial to reassessment.
- 19 -
Opportunities and Future Directions to Consider
Policy and Organizational Opportunities:
• Those concerned about the success of juvenile crime prevention efforts need to regroup, re-energize and
work together to determine the direction Deschutes County wants to go as a whole community.
Deschutes County has the creative capacity and vision to continue as a leader in the juvenile justice and
crime prevention field.
• We need to challenge each other to innovate and take risks rather than retreating to our narrow
perspectives/silos and adopting a survival mentality. We know from our own past experiences that
successful collaboration depends to a large extent on our willingness to share resources, including not
only dollars but also ideas and the kudos that come with success.
• We should continue to explore structural and policy mechanisms to strengthen collaboration and
communication among key agencies, both at the case management and policy-making levels.
Collaboration is more than cooperation or co -location of agency offices.
• Those who value the process of planning and decision-making must work with those who are anxious to
take action and those who are good at tracking results. All of us must value process, action and
evaluation equally.
• The sustainability of any juvenile crime prevention effort depends on the active involvement and ongoing
support of locally elected leaders.
• Business people can contribute not only financial resources but also their expertise in designing
innovative customer -focused perspectives to designing effective JPC systems.
• Youth must be actively engaged in JCP policy-making, governance, community organization, and
intervention. Their involvement can strengthen any initiative.
• We must clarify the definition of "juvenile crime prevention" and describe the continuum of services and
programs that should be in place for Deschutes County children, youth and families.
• JCP funds could be used as a spur to innovation and greater collaboration through funding a pilot project
to test a new approach to juvenile crime prevention (rather than just using the funds to patch gaps in
the continuum).
• Rather than competing for resources, we should be determining which agency or program is best able to
provide the services or functions required.
• Consider ways that the Safe Schools Alliance could serve as a forum to assist in the process of
developing and implementing a continuum of collaborative approaches to juvenile crime prevention. For
example, schools using Positive Behavioral Supports and juvenile justice practitioners of BARD could learn
from one another, and develop coordinated, consistent approaches to working with and disciplining
children and youth.
• There should be county -wide coordination of agencies and organizations applying for state and federal
grant opportunities, so we are not competing with each other, and are able to "put all of our best feet
forward."
- 20 -
• Agencies should collaborate to recruit, train and supervise volunteers who can augment paid staff in
accomplishing JCP goals; Volunteer Connect, a new program in Bend, offers help with matching
volunteer interests to agencies' needs.
Training and Education Opportunities:
• To improve collaboration at staff and mid -management levels, agencies should collaborate to providing
cross -training and "sit -along" opportunities, and shared training on topics of mutual interest. All those
who work in prevention and treatment roles should be involved (private mental health and substance
abuse treatment providers, SROs, Juvenile Department staff, DHS and County Health staff).
• Training should be made available to school personnel, primary care physicians, and faith community
leaders to help them learn to identify signs that children and youth are at risk (of suicide, aggressive or
criminal behavior, or other bad outcomes), and about resources available to help these children and
youth.
• There should be more public education about risk and protective factors and their relationship to
juvenile crime and other negative outcomes.
• One way to engage community members is to have a community speakers' bureau that exposes them
to new and inspiring information about JCP programs and promising practices, presented by powerful
speakers who are leaders in their fields.
Program Opportunities:
• Deschutes County shouldn't just pick an "evidence -based" practice from the shelf; it should build its
own practice —based evidence for innovative, fresh program designs tailored to the risk factors and
needs of the County's youth and their families.
• The County should continue to invest in early childhood prevention efforts for at -risk families, because
that is the best "bang for the buck." Parents of younger children are usually easier to engage, less
defensive and more open to trying new approaches.
• For first offenders with few risk factors (who are unlikely to continue to commit offenses), we should
focus simply on holding them accountable and instilling a sense of responsibility for the consequences
of their actions.
• School-based prevention programs (supportive services and treatment) are an essential part of the
continuum. The school-based professionals who provide them are more accessible and better
positioned to identify youth earlier in their path toward juvenile crime and other bad outcomes (e.g.,
school failure or dropout, substance abuse, teen pregnancy).
• In particular, mental health and substance abuse counselors should be located in more schools to
increase access and reduce stigma.
• When youth enter middle school, part of their orientation should be a session in which youth who
successfully avoided continuing down the path to juvenile crime talk about their experiences and
perspectives.
- 21 -
• We should pay more attention to the negative impacts of school culture on youth, and increase our
efforts to help break down barriers to understanding and cliques (e.g., like the Challenge Day done in
LaPine Middle School a few years ago).
• Youth should be encouraged to talk to adults about problems they or their friends are facing. They
should feel safe to ask for help, including an alternative place to live other than with their parents or
guardians, without fear of negative consequences. When youth report that they are experiencing issues
at home, school or elsewhere, their concerns should always be taken seriously.
• Consider providing alternative learning environments for more students beginning in middle school; too
many are not able to succeed in a regular school setting.
• Community service opportunities are good for all middle and high school kids, especially those who
may be struggling in school and need success experiences.
• There is a significant need for more mentoring resources for youth, by both adults and peers.
• Youth need more opportunities for healthy recreation and activities. Children's and teen centers like
those operated by BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL OREGON are a promising approach, especially if
transportation issues can be resolved.
• Consider the role school buses could play in getting children and youth to after-school activities not
sited at schools.
• After-school programs that offer creative arts options may be more successful in engaging a broader
range of youth.
• To engage more youth in academic after school activities, consider using a system like that of Boys &
Girls Clubs Of Central Oregon and Redmond community schools in which youth trade homework time
for time in "fun" classes and activities.
• Prevention programs should have funds that can be used to facilitate their clients' (children, youth and
their family members) participation in sports and other positive activities inside and outside of school
("flex "or "barrier removal" funds).
• Parents need a "clearinghouse" where they can go to get information about services and support
available to help them and their children.
• Consider contracting with Oregon State University's team (guided by Clara Pratt) that developed a
"parenting ladder" of training options for parents of younger children to do the same for parents of 10
to 17-year-olds.
• Use trained parent (peer) educators as well as professionals to provide parenting training for at -risk
families.
- 22 -
• Interventions that are designed to support troubled families in managing their lives and parenting their
children that continue over an extended period of time (18 months or more) are most likely to have
long-range impacts on children and youth.
• There should be more programs that can work with children and youth whose parents are resistant to
change, or even enabling negative behaviors; the family court could help by holding parents
accountable along with their children.
• Programs that work with higher -risk youth in groups should provide opportunities to work separately
with girls and boys to ensure that they are gender -responsive and therefore maximally effective wit i
both boys and girls.
• Consider expanding family drug court to include men as well as women with children, to have a
positive impact on more children of addicted parents.
• Provide more wraparound services and residential options for youth who can't go back to their fami y
homes (like the Loft).
• The County needs a shelter facility for youth who must be temporarily removed from their homes it
order to address behavioral and family issues.
Targeting Opportunities:
• There are a number of youth risk factors that may be relevant to the choice of target group and/or
treatment or program type for the CCF JCP dollars:
lack of caring adult
poor family functioning
substance abuse/addiction
chronic truancy,
peers and/or family with antisocial attitudes and values
families that move frequently
parents or other family members who are or have been on probation or in prison
• The optimal time to intervene with youth 10 to 17 to prevent them from committing crimes is when
they are in middle school.
• Consider further focusing on the transition years from elementary to middle and middle to high school.
• Consider whether the target age range should be older for boys, since they reach puberty with its
associated challenges later than girls.
• The LaPine area is lower-income, with a higher rate of adult substance abuse putting children at ris c,
so perhaps more JCP resources should be focused there.
- 23 -
Assessment Opportunities:
• All partner agencies need to develop a common language and understanding of risk and protective
factors, and expertise in using the JCP risk assessment tools.
• We should use the JCP instrument to identify those who are at risk and thus eligible for JCP -funded
programs.
• In using the JCP risk assessment, we should consider looking not just at the number of risk factors or
domains in a youth's life, but also whether their risk factors are related to the program they are being
considered for (e.g., family functioning if the program is family -focused).
• In any assessment process, we should look for strengths, i.e., the things that youth or family are doing
right that can be built upon (protective factors and more).
Performance Measurement Opportunities:
• One important measure of a juvenile crime prevention program's impact is the change in participants'
risk/protective factor profile. In interpreting observed changes, it is important to take into account the
possibility that initial assessments may be more positive than reassessments because at first parents
and children do not feel comfortable disclosing the full extent of their difficulties to professionals they
do not yet know and trust.
• Other outcome measures to consider for JCP programs in addition to avoiding referral to the Juvenile
Department are improved grades, increased attendance, and high school graduation or earning a GED.
• Partner agencies should collect, analyze and publish data and findings on outcomes of JCP programs in
a format agreed upon by all stakeholders. One index that could be used is return on investment, or
ROI.
Outcomes should be regularly published to keep partners and the public informed about results
achieved and to provide the basis for fine-tuning to improve outcomes as necessary.
- 24 -
Observations and Recommendations
Teri Martin, Ph.D.
April 2010
Deschutes County has many strengths that can be built on to enhance its juvenile crime prevention
(JCP) efforts.
• Skilled, experienced and committed staff, managers and administrators of agencies that are kev
to JCP.
• Business people and other citizens who are willing to invest their time, talents and resources in
the children, youth and families of Deschutes County.
• A continuum of excellent early childhood intervention and prevention programs.
• Evidence -based programs that serve high-risk youth
• Innovative programs that support children, youth and families with health, mental health, and
school -related issues and concerns.
There are also several challenges that Deschutes County must address in order to make progress in
JCP;
• Resource scarcity is likely to worsen before it improves.
• Key agencies in JCP cooperate but they do not collaborate on an ongoing basis.
• Loss of the waiver permitting investment of CCF JCP funds in programs for younger children
threatens continued stability of key early childhood interventions.
• Most Deschutes County professionals who work with youth are not familiar with or trained in the
use of the JCP risk assessment tool that is required to be used to determine eligibility for JCP -
funded programs.
In order to put in place a comprehensive and effective juvenile crime prevention system, Deschutes
County policymakers must recognize that how they do this work is just as important as what gets
done.
• True collaboration involves all partners bringing their resources to the table and being willing to
make decisions together about how best to use them. It is about sharing the risks and the
rewards of innovation. Deschutes County needs to revitalize the collaborative JCP policy and
program development process that used to characterize the County.
• Deschutes County has been a national leader in juvenile justice and JCP practice, and it is time to
take the lead again. Innovation (being on the cutting edge) requires prudent risk-taking by
leaders who have a clear vision of where they are headed and what it will take to make the
journey, and who motivate others to travel with them.
• Resource scarcity should motivate agencies not to defend their "turf" but rather to work togetheu
to make optimal use of their collective capacities.
- 25 -
• There should be an ongoing mechanism (JCP planning or advisory body) to continue the work
that the Partnership Group has begun, with broad representation and involvement of those in
decision-making roles, both in the public and private sectors, throughout the County.
• JCP is a high priority for everyone in Deschutes County, and agencies doing this work should
redouble their efforts to engage citizens and the business community in donating their time,
talents and monetary resources to JCP programs.
• Agencies should invest in their most precious resource, their staff, by providing them with training
that builds their skills and encourages and enables them to collaborate with professionals in other
agencies.
Having a strategy and resources devoted to measuring and reporting JCP program impacts and
results (not just to funders and other professionals, but also to the community as a whole) is
essential to sustaining momentum in JCP work.
- 26 -
Signature Page
Deschutes County
2010-2014 High -Risk Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan
APPROVAL PAGE
GOVERNING BOARD OF THE
DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMISSION ON CHILDREN & FAMILIES
The 2010-2014 Deschutes County Local High -Risk Juvenile Crime
Prevention Plan was approved by the Deschutes County Governing Board
on
, 2010.
GOVERNING BOARD FOR THE
DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMISSION ON
CHILDREN & FAMILIES, OREGON
DENNIS R. LUKE, Chair
ALLEN LINGER, Vice Chair
TAMMY BANEY, Commissioner
\Ak<dz.A c,...,Akr0.-•,.---
MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN, Presiding Judge
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
1
Signature Page
1
Deschutes County
2010-14 High Risk Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan
REVIEW AND COMMENTS
LOCAL COMMISSION ON CHILDREN & FAMILIES
The Deschutes County Commission on Children & Families has reviewed the
High Risk Juvenile Crime Prevention plan for 2010-2014. Any comments are
outlined below.
Name of the Chair: John McLaughlin, CCF Chair
Address:
Telephone No. (541) 840-7130
1130 NW Harriman, Suite A; Bend, OR 97701
Signature:
Date:
Comments & Recommendations:
1. Nice job.
2. Looks thorough and appears to have included broad range of participants.
3. Appreciate the time and energy Howard and all of our partners invested in
order to complete this important task.
Signature Page
Deschutes County
2010-14 High Risk Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan
REVIEW AND COMMENTS
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL (LPSCC)
The Deschutes County Local Public Safety Coordinating Council has reviewed
the High Risk Juvenile Crime Prevention plan for 2010-2014. Any comments and
recommendations are attached.
Name of the Chair: The Honorable Michael C. Sullivan
Address: 1100 NW Bond Street; Bend, OR 97701
Telephone No. (541) 388-5300
Signature: .c1 Q C • s,i1L„._
Date: May 3, 2010
Comments & Recommendations:
The Deschutes County Local Public Safety Coordinating Council voted to
unanimously support the 2010-2014 JCP Plan on May 3, 2010.
Signature Page 1
Deschutes County
2010-14 High -Risk Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan
CCF PROFESSIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (PAC)
REVIEW AND COMMENTS
The Deschutes County Professional Advisory Council has reviewed the High Risk
Juvenile Crime Prevention plan for 2009-2011. Any comments are attached.
Name of the Chair: Tim Rusk
Address:
Telephone No.
Signature:
Date:
2125 NE Daggett Lane; Bend, OR 97701
(541) 322-6820
`ti^-t-.wL(
May 20, 2010
Comments & Recommendations:
1. Looks pretty comprehensive. I do like the fact that (CCF) is looking at
funding existing programs that are performing well for the next funding
cycle rather than opening up the process for competitive RFPs.
2. Nice work.
3. Looks really good. Recommend changing title on "Households with
Parental Criminality" on page 8 (note: this was done).
4. Thank -you for seeking feedback on the JCP Plan. The plan covers the
bases well and leaves flexibility to address the stated challenges. You
have documented well the involved and lengthy processes to collect input.
The plan outlines the work and parameters for the JCP Partnership Team
and option for the advisory group.
5. Overall, the information gives some concern for our future decade. 25% of
Kindergartners not ready to learn, subjected to increased family violence,
and a corresponding reduction in resources to serve this group looks like a
problematic recipe. The work that Sarah and Vicki presented at the last
PAC meeting to find betters ways to connect the neediest and resistant
families will be more and more critical. As a community we have
considerable work ahead.
6. The continuum of early childhood programs has been noted as a strength
in the report, let's continue to build on this strength and not lose the
momentum we have begun and maintained (over the past 13 years).
7. early childhood programs such as First Step, Healthy Families and Family
Trax are essential to breaking the cycle of generational crime, continued
abuse, and domestic violence. Research confirms the connection between
child maltreatment and juvenile delinquency.
8. Additional comments from Kathy Thompson, below:
Feedback by Kathy Thompson
Program Manager
Healthy Families of the High Desert
Comment #1
In reference to Section 9 — Continuum of Services
"Due to the loss of the early childhood waiver and CYIP funding, the
continuum of early childhood prevention services targeting younger has
declined significantly and these programs are at risk of going away
permanently"
We have been fortunate in Deschutes County to have the flexibility to provide
services to high risk families who are involved in the Community Justice System with
intensive home visiting and parenting skills training. The plethora of research
documenting the relationship between adult criminality and juvenile crime leaves
little doubt that intervention with families early on is a must. Over the past 10 years
a strong partnership between Deschutes County Community Justice and Healthy
Families of the High Desert has been established to coordinate services for families
involved in Parole and Probation. These services include intensive home visiting
providing weekly visits either from a Family Support Worker of HFHD or nurse.
Monthly meetings occur between P & P staff and HFHD staff to collaborate on family
plans and share referrals and information. This project has resulted in positive
outcomes with 75% of families enrolled improving in positive parenting practices.
If funding is lost to continue this collaboration, I am concemed that the partnership
will no longer continue and we all know that once a project or program goes away, it
is difficult to re -implement. Partnerships would need be reinstated including referral
procedures, case management etc.
Comment #2
In reference to the recommendation "Resource scarcity should motivate
agencies not to defend their turf but rather to work together to make optimal
use of their collective capacities."
While I believe Deschutes County is known for its great collaborations and
partnerships among agencies, we still have a long way to go with programs working
together to share resources and funding opportunities. This is evident when
observing numerous fundraisers in the community that promote the same kind of
events such as art auctions, luncheons, dinners and runs. I wonder how many of
these agencies refer to the same donor lists. While each agency is worthy of
community support I believe a collective event (fundraiser) to honor all worthwhile
and like agencies would show the community that we really do work together and
promote the value of the work that we do. This task would take the effort of each
program director and boards to give up a little bit of their "turf" issues.
In addition to the numerous fundraisers held by like agencies, we also have several
agencies applying for the same grant opportunities. This was made evident to me
by a staff of the Oregon Community Foundation when she mentioned that she had
five proposals from Deschutes County programs for the same RFP. She asked how
we were working together to share resources and activities.
While this is a valid concern I am not sure what the solution might be. It might be
difficult for one agency to take the lead on this effort. Maybe the Commission could
take the lead or initiative to bring programs together to share resources.
The federal LAUNCH grant was an example of agencies working together to
promote this worthwhile project but very few of us are sharing in funds available
even though we are devoting staff time to coordination, referral and implementation.
Comment #3
I am not sure what recommendation or comment this might fall under but I am
increasingly concerned about the increase in bullying occurring at the
elementary and middle school levels.
Recently I have heard about children being victimized on the playgrounds, pushed
down stairs to where a child sustained a broken arm etc. Our staff witnessed a
preschooler urinating on another child on the playground at our office where Mt. Star
and Head Start is housed.
Children need to be taught from infancy on empathy skills. This can only come from
how the child is parented. Recently in the media the bullying that has occurred
where children have been severely burned and or humiliated to the point of suicide,
the schools have been blamed for lack of monitoring and educating. I believe more
of the responsibility falls on the parents. We all know that if a child develops a
healthy trusting relationship at birth, the ability to care for others and demonstrate
empathy will also be developed therefore reducing the potential for harming others
and or themselves. This also reduces the risk for future criminality.
Resources need to continue to support early childhood and prevention efforts to
promote positive parenting skills and attachment from prenatal through early
childhood. Parents will parent the way they were raised unless taught a different set
of skills.