HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuv Dept Report
Deschutes County Department of Community Justice
J. Kenneth Hales, Director
633360 Britta Street, Building 2, Bend, OR 97701
Adult Parole & Probation 541.385.3246; Juvenile Community Justice 541.388.6671
Memorandum
To: Dave Kanner
From: J. Kenneth Hales
Date: March 17, 2011
Re: Juvenile Services Economies
Attached to this cover note is the requested report on the cost and value of Juvenile Department
services. I am available at your convenience to discuss this further.
Juvenile Services and Budget Analysis
March 17, 2011
This report provides information on the cost effectiveness of Deschutes County juvenile
department services. The report identifies services and programs that juvenile departments are
required to provide and compare certain service costs to the state average. The report will also
identify services and programs that the Deschutes County juvenile department and comparable
departments provide which the law does not require. The report shall, to the extent possible,
identify the value of permissive services to the community.
Statutory Requirements:
State statutes prescribe a broad range of duties for counties and county juvenile departments to
perform. County and juvenile department duties identified in statute include:1
1. County shall have a juvenile department
2. County shall if over 400,000 population, operate a detention center
3. Juvenile department shall investigate and report… youth brought before the court
4. Juvenile department shall be present in court
5. Juvenile department shall furnish information and assistance, as the court requires
6. Juvenile department shall take charge of kids before and after court hearing
7. Juvenile department shall report monthly to school administrators
8. Juvenile department shall disclose youth records if... subject to disclosure
9. Juvenile court or juvenile department shall ... expunction of a record
10. Juvenile department... (shall) administer court services2
11. Juvenile department may operate a detention center if less than 400.000 population
12. Juvenile department, to the extent possible, shall create opportunities for youth to pay
restitution and perform community service.
Either explicitly or by interpretation and historical practice juvenile departments are required to
provide a broad range of pre-adjudication services for the court for youth accused of delinquent
offenses 3 and violations4 . The law is clear on juvenile department responsibilities for adjudicated
delinquents and delinquents on formal accountability agreements. In this writer’s opinion, the
law is vague and non-prescriptive as it relates to juvenile department duties with non-delinquent
youth and youth who are not brought before the court.
Comparable Counties:
To get an idea of what typical or unique juvenile services are we compared the Deschutes
County juvenile department to Jackson, Linn, and Douglas County juvenile departments because
these counties are most similar to Deschutes County.
1 ORS 3.260, 419A.010 et al, 419B.550 et al
2 Statutory language infers juvenile department responsibility for court services. Court services is defined as services
and facilities relating to intake screening, juvenile detention, shelter care, investigations, study and
recommendations on disposition of cases, probation on matters within the jurisdiction of the court… family
counseling, conciliation in domestic relations, group homes, and psychological or psychiatric or medical
consultation and services provided at the request of or under the direction of the court.
3 Delinquent offenses are acts that if committed by an adult would be a misdemeanor or felony crime.
4 Violations are status offenses because they apply only to youth. This includes but is not limited to minor in
possession of alcohol, possession of tobacco, curfew violations, and truancy.
Illustration 1 County Demographics
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Jackson Deschutes Linn Douglas
Juv Population
Per Capita Income
Juvenile Department Services:
All counties provide, either directly or through contract, the required basic court services. These
are:
• Records expunctions
• Intake5
• Making court reports and appearing in court hearings with suspected delinquents and
violators
• Providing or facilitating the provision of mental health and drug and alcohol evaluations 6
In addition, a department’s responsibilities to assist the court in deciding cases the counties are
also required to provide field services supervision.
As used in this report, field services includes supervising delinquents on court ordered probation,
supervising youth awaiting court disposition, and supervising youth on formal accountability
agreements in lieu of prosecution.
Illustration 2: Average Number of Youth on Field Service Supervision
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Jackson Deschutes Linn Douglas
Field Services ADP
Probation ADP
5 The term “intake” as used here refers to a set of activities stemming from what happens with
new police reports or citations. Intake involves the review of all new citations and police reports
and deciding what happens. The action may be referring youth and parents to community based
services; the case may be forwarded to the assistant district attorney for prosecution; or the case
may be placed on diversion from prosecution supervision with the department.
6 Although the law does not specifically identify juvenile department responsibility for providing
mental health and drug and alcohol evaluations and emancipation counseling, all juvenile
departments provided these services. The services could be inferred as part of the juvenile
department’s responsibility to provide other information and services to the court.
The law does not specify that juvenile departments supervise youth accused of or prosecuted for
violations. However, of the counties surveyed all but Jackson County provide some form of
violator supervision.
All counties in the comparison group operate juvenile detention facilities. Douglas and Jackson
Counties also operate a shelter.
Illustration 3: Detention and Shelter Facility Capacity and Average Daily Population
0
10
20
30
40
50
Jackson Deschutes Linn Douglas
Detention ADP
Detention Capacity
Shelter ADP
Shelter Capacity
Table 1 lists the most common permissive services provided by the detention centers in the
comparison counties.
Table 1
Detention Services Jackson Deschutes Linn Douglas
Mental health crisis / counseling N Y Y Y
Cognitive skill building Y Y Y Y
30‐Day program N Y Y Y
Alcohol and drug treatment N N N Y
In addition to the required functions and services commonly understood to be juvenile
department duties, there is a host of other restorative, prevention, or treatment services that
counties provide. Table 2 lists the permissive services provided by each county.
Table 2
Other Programs & Services Jackson Deschutes Linn Douglas
Community Service Crew N Y Y Y
Community Service non‐crew Y Y N N
Victim Advocacy N Y Y Y
Victim Offender Mediation Y Y N N
Girls or Boys Circle Y Y Y Y
Teen Court N Y N Y
Community Accountability Court N Y N N
FFT/Other Family Therapy CONTRACT Y N N
Cognitive Skills in ‐ Community Y Y Y Y
Family skill building/intervention CONTRACT Y Y Y
Sexual Offender Treatment CONTRACT N Y Y
Cost Value Analysis:
A thorough discussion of the cost and value of required juvenile department services like basic
criminal justice services is extremely complex and beyond the scope of this report and mute in
the sense that we cannot chose not to perform those services. Some activities like intake, court
appearances, court reports, emancipations, expunctions have expense but do not have a public
safety value. The direct services the activities performed directly with juveniles have a public
safety value related to expense and the value can be positive or negative. For example, research
has proven that there is a cost avoidance value to probation and diversion supervision if
probation is provided in lieu incarceration and if diversion is provided in lieu of prosecution.
The cost value is not derived from reduced recidivism, but from providing accountability less
expensively without increased risk to public safety. Research indicates there is a positive impact
on public safety through reduced recidivism if high-risk offenders receive both supervision and
treatment. Research also indicates that intensive correctional supervision or incarceration when
applied to low risk offenders have a negative value because it waste of resources without an
increase in public safety and can increase, not decrease recidivism. Therefore, as it relates to
required services, the challenge is to provide them in the correct way to the correct juveniles.
The consideration is different with permissive services. These we can choose not to do.
Community impact and cost avoidance research is available on some permissive services
provided by Deschutes County and other counties. See Table 3. What we learn from this is that
all the permissive community based services we provide are researched based except supervising
violators.
Although there is strong sentiment among some community partners that the juvenile department
should be involved with non-delinquent youth, there is no research supporting a criminal justice
value for supervising youth for status offenses 7 or violations.
Table 3
Program or Service Effective in
reducing
recidivism and or
victimization*
Effective in
promoting
community
and or
victim
benefits*
Ave #
Clients
(Annual)
Unit Cost Cost
Avoidance
(Victims +
System)*
Violation supervision 200 $ 98 U/K
Community Service Crew X 100 $ 15 U/K
Victim Advocacy X 200 $ 84 U/K
Victim Offender Mediation X X 10 $ 168 U/K
Teen Court X X 36 $ 1,111 $ 16,908
Community Accountability X 12 $ 1,667 U/K
FFT/Other Family Therapy X 85 $ 3,500 $ 52,156
Sexual Offender Treatment X $30,000 $ 57,504
*Based on 2009 Washington Institute Public Policy and 2010 OJDDP Research / Summaries of
EBP/Model Programs
7 Status offenses are offenses that are not crime for adults such as minor in possession of alcohol.
All other programs listed have been proved to reduce recidivism or victimization and/or provide
benefit to the community or victims. Research indicates that family therapy and sex offender
treatment provide the highest cost avoidance value.
Comparison of cost data between counties and programs is notoriously unreliable. Nevertheless,
the information available to us is that the cost to house a youth in the Deschutes County juvenile
detention center is $253 a day and to incarcerate a youth in an Oregon Youth Authority juvenile
correctional facility is $219 a day. The average cost per day for juveniles on Deschutes County
field service supervision is $13 a day; the average for all Oregon counties is $10 per day and for
the Oregon Youth Authority it is $18 a day.
Illustration 4 Cost Comparisons
*Per capita expenditures based on county juvenile population. Deschutes County Juvenile
Department budget based on current year projected expenditures and does not include
contingency.
As displayed in illustration 4 Deschutes County has the highest and Jackson County has the
lowest per capita expenditure rate of the comparison counties. This can be explained in part by
the higher salaries paid to Deschutes County juvenile division employees. Jackson County
juvenile probations officers and level I juvenile detention staff are compensated at 19% and 27%
less respectively. In addition, Jackson County has the highest percent of their field service
population on diversion supervision. The cost of diversion should be less than the cost of
probation because it is less intensive and of shorter duration. Lastly, Jackson County does not do
victim advocacy or supervise a community service crew.
Of the permissive programs or services provided by Deschutes County, Functional Family
Therapy and the juvenile community service crew are the most costly. However, I do not
recommend reducing the investment in these two programs. Functional Family Therapy has a
very high cost avoidance value and non-county general funds revenues cover much of its
expenses. The juvenile community service crew has evolved into the juvenile and adult
community service crew. It is the department’s most visible restorative justice program, and is of
considerable value to the community. Additionally, although supervising a community service
crew is not specifically required, it is our way to meet the statutory requirement to create
opportunities for youth to fulfill their community service obligations. The cost of the other
permissive services listed in Table 3 is indirect in that these services are provided by juvenile
probation staff in addition to their primary duties to provide court and probation services.
Conclusions:
Significant further economies cannot be derived from the cost of detention operations without
closing another living unit, which may result in insufficient capacity to serve current and near
future demand. However, anticipated changes in Oregon Youth Authority incarceration practices
and diversion grant policy resulting may create opportunities to fill some unoccupied capacity in
the detention center and increase out of county revenue. Occupancy rates and revenue trends
shall be examined again prior to finalizing the FY 2013 budget.
Since FY 2007, the number of FTE assigned to juvenile field services is unchanged whereas the
number of youth under supervision has declined by approximately 30%. Unless there is a
significant change in service demand as a result of changes in Oregon juvenile correctional
policy or other factors unknown at this time, a reduction in the number of juvenile probation
officer positions filled may be warranted in FY 2013.