Amended 3/16/06
JUDICIARY
March 2, 2006
Minutes
Members Present: Tina Weatherwax-Grant, Dianne Holman, Deb Nolan, Rebecca Bahar-Cook, Steve Dougan and Board Chairperson Victor Celentino
Members Absent: Randy Schafer
Others Present: John Neilsen, Mark Grebner, Karen Chinn, Paul Elam, Bob Sheehan, David Easterday, Travis Faulds, Marc Thomas, Judge Lawless, Judge Baird, Judge Collette, Lisa Theis, Christina Bullmer, Sue LeDuc, Nervy Oliver, Malisa Pearson, Sherri Solomon, Kathy Davis, Rishan Butler, Carl Taylor, Becky Lopez, Al Way, Matt Wojack, Quincee Herbert, Ruth Hill-Schorsch, Sara Deprez, Maureen Winslow and others
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant at 7:33 p.m. in the Personnel Conference Room of the Human Services Building, 5303 S. Cedar, Lansing.
Approval of the February 16, 2006 Minutes
MOVED BY COMM. NOLAN, SUPPORTED BY COMM. DOUGAN, TOAPPROVE THE FEBRUARY 16 MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Absent: Comm. Schafer
Additions to the Agenda: None
Limited Public Comment: None
1. Presentation – Ingham County Action Plan for Juvenile Continuum of Care – February 17, 2006 Draft Report
a. Karen Chinn: Presenter from Chinn Planning, Inc.
Mr. Neilsen introduced Ms. Karen Chinn, Chinn Planning, Inc., to the Committee. He then explained that a steering committee was implemented in 2005 to recommend a consultant to this Committee for the purpose of studying the County’s juvenile continuum of care. The steering committee voted unanimously to recommend Chinn Planning, Inc. Ms. Chinn has completed a draft report of her study to present to this Committee this evening.
Ms. Chinn explained the goal of her assessment is to determine whether an appropriate juvenile justice continuum of care model is in place, and whether services are appropriately and effectively targeting the needs of at-risk and delinquent youth and their families in the County. Based on the assessment, recommendations are made in this draft report which can be related to future use of the Juvenile Justice Millage funds to support a continuum of care model.
A mission statement should reflect the philosophy of the jurisdiction, and should provide direction related to the use of juvenile justice continuum of care services and sanctions and their use. Ms. Chinn stated the current Ingham County Juvenile Court mission and vision statements do not provide the appropriate direction and do not reflect the goals of having an appropriate continuum of juvenile services and sanctions. Based on national best practices in the juvenile justice field and in support of a continuum of care model, the County should consider including the following components in their mission statement:
· Least restrictive placement based on objective risk assessment
· Provide services close to a youth’s home community whenever possible
· Connect youth and families to services in the community
· Provide services that are family focused
· Support community wide efforts to reduce risk factors for delinquency
· Provide aftercare services and support
Ms. Chinn stated the Ingham County/City of Lansing Youth Violence Prevention Coalition developed a mission statement that reflects a philosophy of providing family focused services to youth and their families. The Coalition’s mission statement could provide the basis for revision to the County Juvenile Court mission statement. This mission statement is located on page 2-2 of the Draft Report.
Ms. Chinn reviewed the various Trends in her Report. Demographic Trends – the County experienced a slight decrease in total population between 1990 and 2000. The juvenile population in the County is projected to decrease by 6% between 2005 and 2020. Figure 2-2 on page 2-4 of the Report shows the national profile of “risk factors” associated with youth entering the juvenile justice system. Ms. Chinn stated many of these factors and characteristics are present in the County’s Juvenile Justice System population. Efforts to reduce delinquent behavior should start early, risk factors should be addressed, be comprehensive and long-term. The Juvenile Justice system should attempt to intervene before serious and chronic delinquent behavior emerges.
Many key indicators of risk for delinquency have worsened in this County over the past ten years as analyzed in the Kids County reports. The County is experiencing higher rates of abuse and placement than the rest of the State of Michigan. Ms. Chinn stated the County ranked 73rd of 76 counties in regard to out-of-home placements.
Ms. Chinn reviewed the Crime and Arrest Trends (page 2-6 of Report). Total reported offenses (juvenile and adult) in the County have decreased 23% between 1998 and 2004. Serious index offenses have decreased 26% for the same time period. This represents a 9% average annual decrease in serious crime in the County. The County’s index crime rate (40.3 Index Crimes per 1,000 population) is slightly higher than the statewide rate of 35.8.
Juvenile Court Trends – The number of juvenile delinquency petitions filed decreased 25.6% between 2000 and 2004. Ms. Chinn stated the number of intakes handled informally dropped from 341 in 2003 to 289 in 2004. The decrease illustrates fewer youth are being diverted from formal court proceedings. Neglect petitions dropped from 622 in 2003 to 561 in 2004. Through September 2005, 207 neglect petitions have been filed.
Ms. Chinn reviewed the Secure Detention portion of her Report. Figure 2-7, page 2-9 of the Report, indicated admissions to the Ingham County Youth Center peaked in 2000 and 2003. The admissions drastically decreased in 2004. The average length of stay in 2004 was 13 days.
Table 2-6, on page 2-8 of the Report, presents information on non-residential programs utilized by the Court. Approximately 1,600 to 1,800 youth were placed in various non-residential programs each year from 1998 through 2004. Costs for non-residential programs are substantially lower than costs for residential placements. Table 2-7 on page 2-11 included data on all residential placements used by the Court in 2004 and 2005.
Ms. Chinn stated the County contracts on a fixed rate basis for local residential programs, including Clarinda Transitional Living, Peckham Industries Footprints and StART. Since these programs are not being utilized at full capacity, the per diem rates are very high. The average length of stay for all in-state placements averaged 66 days in 2005. The average length of stay for all out-of-state placements was 145 days in 2005.
Table 2-8, on page 2-12 of the Report, presents a summary of the 2005 residential placements by the County’s Juvenile Court. Seventy-six youth were in residential placement on a daily basis in 2005. Thirty-five percent of residential placements were out-of-state placements. When detention is excluded, over half of all residential placements are out-of-state placements.
Ms. Chinn addressed the Risk Assessment Trends data in her report, page 2-13. In 2004 the County Juvenile Court began to implement a risk assessment process. Ms. Chinn reviewed the data which is detailed in the Youth Level of Services (YLS) assessment tool. The second portion of the YLS is the Case Management Inventory (CMI). This is meant to assist the Family Division personnel in developing an individualized and comprehensive case management plan for the youth.
Ms. Chinn stated the YLS-CMI has not been fully implemented by the court. Every youth entering the juvenile court system should receive an assessment. A Summary of Descriptive Statistics – YLS Project (September 2005) was included in figure 2-8, pages 2-13 through 2-15 of the Report. Risk assessment results are not currently driving placement decisions. Sample results of the YLS indicate the court may have opportunities for increasing community based non-residential programming. Youth scoring at low to moderate risk could be candidates for intensive community based non-residential programming.
Table 2-9 of the Report, page 2-16, presents trends in non-residential service costs. Non-residential service costs increased 59.8% between 2001 and 2005. This translates to approximately a 15% per year growth in expenditures. Residential service costs increased approximately 72% per year during the same time period. Ms. Chinn stated the vast majority of the Juvenile Justice Millage funds have been used to increase capacity for residential programs in the County.
Data in Table 2-10, page 2-16, shows expenditures for long-term (out-of-state) placements increased 800% between 2001 and 2005. Expenditures for short-term placements increased 709% between 2001 and 2005. Youth Center costs increased 31.5% in the same time period.
Ms. Chinn reviewed the Key Findings of the study on pages 3-1 through 3-2 of the Report. As the residential and non-residential programs have been expanded or implemented, it appears they have had an impact of “widening the net.” This is specifically relevant for the Truancy Court. More youth are placed in detention and further into the juvenile justice system as opposed to diverting youth from formal handling by the Court. Recidivism data being gathered through the Risk Assessment process will be available in 2006.
A centralized intake and assessment process should be available for at-risk youth in the County. Youth are penetrating deep into the juvenile justice system in order to access needed services. Ms. Chinn stated there is a heavy reliance on residential placement versus community-based programming. Based on data analysis, interviews and observations, the program areas that should be expanded include:
Ms. Chinn reviewed her Recommendations at this time. The County should formally adopt the Ingham County Youth Violence Prevention Coalition continuum of care model. A comprehensive juvenile assessment center should be created at the earliest point possible. Staff conducting the assessments should be trained to make appropriate diagnostic decisions. The estimated capital costs and operating costs are specified on pages 4-9 and 4-10 of the Report.
Truancy intervention strategies should be enhanced. Ms. Chinn further stated a day treatment program should be created which would provide a highly supervised alternative to residential placement. The County could either expand its current contract with Peckham Industries or create a County operated day treatment program. This program should have varying levels of program duration for both pre-adjudicated and adjudicated juvenile offenders. Youth could attend their home school and typically report to the day treatment center Monday through Friday from 3:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m.
Space requirements for a day treatment center to accommodate up to 20 youth are shown in Table 4-2 on page 4-13. The estimated capital and operating costs are detailed on page 4-13.
Community-based treatment services should be expanded in the community which would include substance abuse and mental health services. Capacity for respite/crisis intervention beds should be established to support community-based programming.
Ms. Chinn continued her review of the recommendations. Fifteen to twenty youths should be targeted to return from out-of-state placements. Local programming, particularly non-residential programming, would be much less costly and should have a greater impact on changing youth behavior and reducing the likelihood of recidivism. The Court should fully utilize appropriate local residential programming before placing youth out-of-state.
Information reporting and monitoring should be improved. Currently, basic information on court involved youth is difficult to access. This information should be accessible for each placement and program used by the Court. Outcome and performance measures should also be monitored and reported. If programs do not meet performance criteria, providers should make changes to their programs or the County should discontinue using those providers.
Ms. Chinn explained she is not recommending that a new building be constructed to house the recommendations and programming in her report. The County could develop a master plan for a site for future use.
The specific steps to be taken in order to implement the recommendations were listed by fiscal year on pages 4-18 and 4-19. Steps for fiscal year 2006 include:
· Review Recommendations and Adopt Priorities
· Create a Mission Statement for serving at-risk and delinquent youth
· Develop sub-committees of Youth Violence Prevention Coalition to
oversee Program development
· Develop and approve final program budgets
· Determine available funding by fiscal year
· Develop an Assessment Center site and Facility Options
· Establish data elements and reporting process
· Establish a quarterly meeting schedule to review implementation and
Outcomes
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant expressed her appreciation to the key stakeholders, the Court and its staff for meeting with and working with Ms. Chinn. This is a draft report; therefore, dialogue can continue regarding the report and concerns regarding the report. The final report will be available in a few weeks.
Comm. Nolan asked if the risk assessment could be conducted in the same facility as the day treatment center. Ms. Chinn explained that most day treatment centers are small in nature where youth receive one-on-one attention. The two activities could, however, be placed in the same facility. Assessments should not be conducted in a detention center because that would not be a good situation for all involved.
Comm. Bahar-Cook asked if the Recommendations were listed in order of priority. Ms. Chinn stated the items are listed in order of priority; however, not all of the items are prioritized. Comm. Dougan asked if the assessment activities and the day treatment center would be provided through the County or via a contract for services. Ms. Chinn stated either arrangement would be acceptable. She then stated the County could issue RFP’s to gain an understanding of what the vendors could provide the County. If the County decides to contract for services, the program should be monitored.
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant asked if the public wished to comment on the presentation. The public did not wish to comment at this time.
b. Circuit Court / Family Division: Ingham County Youth Action Plan for Continuum of Care – Review of Chinn’s Recommendations Guiding Principles
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant asked the Court if it would like to comment on the previous presentation.
Mr. Faulds distributed copies of Judicial Presentation – Juvenile Justice Review dated March 2, 2006 to the Committee. Judge Lawless thanked the Committee for the opportunity to respond to Ms. Chinn’s draft report. She also informed the Committee that several Court employees were in attendance this evening.
Judge Baird explained the information distributed contained recommendations from Ms. Chinn and from the CCJR Report. The recommendations were identified as to whether they originated from Ms. Chinn or the CCJR Report. Judge Baird stated Ms. Chinn’s Vision and Mission statements did not specify what the Court is required by law to provide.
Mr. Faulds stated 40 Court personnel have received approximately 3,136 total hours of structured didactic and experiential training on the Youth Level of Services/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). This training was based on a recommendation of the CCJR report. The results of this training indicated the Court is making good choices regarding County youth.
Staff has administered 1,347 YLS Inventories since April, 2004. Of the 34 youth currently in residential placement: 28 are delinquency cases and six are truancy cases, 18 are males and 16 are females. Seventy-seven percent of the 34 youth are in the High Risk category and 23% of the youth are in the moderate risk category. Inter-rater reliability (scoring consistency) rates have improved from the middle 80% to low-to-mid 90% since the onset of the project. The national average on published studies is typically in the low 80% range for an assessment instrument.
Reasons for implementing the Family Division’s juvenile assessment center include providing: single-point entry, centralized intake functions, early identification of risk, needs and appropriate interventions, uniformity in assessment and coordinated case management.
Mr. Faulds stated 410 Truancy Court cases have been initiated by the Ingham County school district in the 2004-2005 school year. Two hundred-eighty one cases were initiated by the Lansing School District and 197 of those were successfully dismissed within the first four weeks of the program. Five students were provided with residential treatment for serious emotional, behavioral or addiction problems. Zero students were placed in residential treatment programs solely for truancy issues.
Last spring, the Family Division Judges and Administration proposed to build a Continuum of Care Facility which would house and treat delinquent and disturbed youth in the County. At that time, it was proposed the facility would consist of the following programs:
· Residential Treatment Facility
· Day Treatment Center
· Night Reporting Center
· Enhanced In-Home Detention Program
· Intensive Aftercare Program
· Community Resources/Assessment Center
Mr. Faulds stated page nine of the Court’s recommendations lists Programs and Services which are currently provided but which were not reflected in Ms. Chinn’s draft report.
Although the Court has made a great deal of progress in its goals, the Court acknowledges there is still much work to be done. The Court believes it currently has the professional staff and resources to turn its promises made to the voters into a reality. Mr. Faulds further stated the Court also believes an investment into the Court’s current proposals would pay huge dividends for our youth, families and the community.
The Court and the Youth Center’s Response to the CCJR Recommendations were contained on page 11 of the Court’s report. The seven CCJR recommendations have been implemented by the Court.
Mr. Faulds reviewed the Risk Assessment Project – Timeline of Events – 2005 and 2004. This information was included in the Court’s report. He further stated the last few pages of the report contains Dr. Latessa’s “32 Steps” – an Informal Blueprint for Developing Model Juvenile Justice Programming (updated February, 2006). The Court has completed several of the recommendations and is also in the process of implementing several more of the recommendations.
Mr. Faulds expressed the Court’s appreciation for the Board of Commissioners’ support. He also stated the Court believes the County should move forward to better meet the needs of the County’s youth.
Comm. Holman stated all interested parties have come a long way over the past few years. A determination needs to be made regarding the expenditure of the remaining Juvenile Justice Millage funds. Programming will naturally change from year to year.
Comm. Bahar-Cook asked if the Assessment is open to the community. Mr. Faulds stated kids have been brought to the attention of the Court regarding their need for assessments.
Ms. Chinn stated 139 kids in the County have been arrested for serious crimes; therefore, she stated she does not understand the Court’s number of out-of-state placements. There must be many more truant youth who are driving up the number of residential placements by approximately 800%. She stated some of those youth must be appropriate for community-based programs.
Judge Baird stated she hears serious sex-offender cases in her court. These youth are placed out-of-state for appropriate treatment. Judge Collette stated he continues to be confused by the statistics contained in Ms. Chinn’s draft report. Today there are more dangerous, violent criminals than in the past. Judge Collette further stated 1,300 felony petitions were issued in 2005. He stated Ms. Chinn’s draft report should reflect actual numbers from Ingham County.
Comm. Dougan asked why the local programs are underused. Mr. Faulds explained that it is difficult to transfer out-of-state placements into a six-bed program. The Court is in the process of meeting with other counties to discuss the possibility of them renting vacant local beds. If another county rents bed space from the County, it would be given a 30-day notice of their need to transfer the youth due to incoming Ingham County youth.
Judge Baird stated she is not a proponent of out-of-state placement. Michigan does not have residential programs similar to the out-of-state programs. Mr. Faulds stated flexibility should be built into the local programming so that month-to-month adjustments can be made as necessary.
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant explained the purpose of tonight’s presentation was to respond to Ms. Chinn’s draft report and to identify any inaccuracies or concerns with the report. Once the County receives the final report from Ms. Chinn, the data will be reviewed in detail with all interested parties.
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant asked when the Court changed the language in its Vision and Mission statements. Judge Baird stated the changes were made within the last few days to clarify the Court’s actual role. Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant asked if the Court would like their revisions to be reflected in Ms. Chinn’s final report. Judge Baird stated that is the wish of the Court.
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant asked if the Court had any further concerns regarding Ms. Chinn’s draft report. Judge Baird stated Ms. Chinn’s report did not include a local residential placement program for high-level offenders. Judge Lawless stated services provided at the out-of-state placements are not provided locally on a residential basis.
Comm. Grebner asked if the Court is requesting additional secure beds. Mr. Faulds explained the Court is requesting additional beds which are staff secure.
In response to Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant, Mr. Faulds stated the Court agrees with several of Ms. Chinn’s recommendations; however, there are holes in the County’s current programs. The Court has identified a need for specific services on page seven of these minutes. The County should have a “one-stop shopping” center. Short and long-term local residential programs are needed. Ms. Chinn’s draft report did not identify a need for local residential programs.
Comm. Holman asked if the assessments are currently conducted in a centralized location. Mr. Faulds stated many of the assessments are conducted at the Court. Judge Baird stated she was not aware of a reason for a centralized assessment center.
c. Public Comment Period on Ingham County Action Plan for Juvenile Continuum of Care – February 17, 2006 Draft Report
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant invited the public to comment on the draft report. The public did not comment.
Chairperson Weatherwax-Grant stated Ms. Chinn would finalize her report. If anyone has any recommendations regarding the report, that information can be forwarded to Mr. Neilsen who will then forward it to Ms. Chinn.
(The Committee recessed at 9:19 p.m.)
(The Committee was called back to order at 9:37 p.m.)
(Chairperson Celentino left the meeting at this time.)
2. Circuit Court/Family Division – Resolution to Reorganize Management Staffing of the Ingham County Circuit Court, Juvenile Division
MOVED BY COMM. DOUGAN, SUPPORTED BY COMM. HOLMAN, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO REORGANIZE MANAGEMENT STAFFING OF THE INGHAM COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, JUVENILE DIVISION.
Comm. Holman asked for clarification regarding the two positions to be reorganized. Mr. Easterday explained the Juvenile Program Director (Level 11) will be changed to Juvenile Program Director (Level 13). The Deputy Court Administrator/Juvenile Division (Level 14) will be changed to Level 16.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Absent: Comm. Schafer
Announcements: None
Public Comment: None
The meeting adjourned at 9:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra Neff