by Martha Moore, USA Today
May 19th, 2010

Washington, D.C., a city with a long, sad history of failing its youth, has achieved a rare victory in dealing with troubled kids. On a swath of federal land in suburban Maryland, the District of Columbia has transformed its juvenile lockup. What was once a filthy prison for boys is now a new, campus-like setting where the city's worst young offenders work their way through a heavily structured program of individualized education, group therapy, behavior modification and unusual programs such as "Guns to Roses," the art project that turned 28 illegal weapons, melted down by police, into sculptures.

Washington based its $46 million facility — built as part of a court-ordered agreement from a 25-year-old lawsuit over its treatment of juvenile offenders — on programs used for decades in Missouri, the state with the lowest rate of juvenile repeat offenders in the nation.

New Beginnings, a 60-bed lockup that opened in June, is the most prominent example of increasing interest from other states and cities in the "Missouri model" for turning around deeply troubled, and troublemaking, young people.

The attention to Missouri's measurable success is prompted by money, frustration and federal edict.

Budget deficits are forcing states to rethink juvenile incarceration. States are looking for more cost-effective methods than spending more than $200,000 a year per child — the cost in New York, according to a recent state juvenile justice task force — to lock up the same violent kids over and over. U.S. Department of Justice investigations over abusive treatment of youths in state care are forcing change to old models of reform schools.

But remaking juvenile custody along Missouri's guidelines is a difficult and expensive road to follow — and one that gets rough when youths are charged with serious crimes.

This month, three young men under the supervision of the Washington juvenile agency have been charged with the murder of a popular middle school principal, putting the agency under intense scrutiny.

A sharp contrast to the boot camps and scared-straight approaches of the 1980s and 1990s, the Missouri model puts delinquent youths into small residential settings, where they get intense peer and professional counseling.

Unlike state "training schools," which are sometimes hundreds of miles from the youths' homes, the facilities are closer to the communities where the kids live. Physical restraint, which federal investigations have found to be common in some other states, is used sparingly. Empty hours spent in isolation have been replaced with non-stop group activity.

"We know, after a couple of hundred years, that the large institutions just don't work," says Edward Loughran, executive director of the Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators, a national association of agency heads. "They're impersonal, youth fall through the cracks, abuses creep in very easily."

Missouri's approach not only seems more humane — "it feels good," says former Washington, D.C., juvenile agency head Vincent Schiraldi — it appears to succeed at preventing kids from becoming career criminals.

Fewer than 10% of the youths who go through Missouri's juvenile program are recommitted within two years of leaving, according to the state Department of Youth Services. Recidivism rates are difficult to compare, because juvenile justice systems and definitions of repeat offenders vary from state to state.

Yet by their own measures, other states have far less success than Missouri.

During the next 90 days, the U.S. Senate will consider some major pieces of legislation and the Senate needs to hear that they need to be sure that S. 678, the Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Act reauthorization legislation is on the Senate floor schedule so that it can be voted on this year by the full Senate!

The JJDPA was first enacted in 1974 and provides federal funding to states that comply with a set of best practices aimed at avoiding the detention and incarceration of young people in juvenile and adult facilities.  However, this law is three years overdue for reauthorization! The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a JJDPA reauthorization bill (S. 678) but it is awaiting action on the Senate floor.  

It's a good law, and is needed now more than ever to end the over-incarceration of young people of color in the justice system and stop the inappropriate use of adult jails for warehousing children charged as adults.  

If you believe that it is urgent to stop putting youth in adult jails and prisons, to end the over-incarceration of youth of color in the justice system, and instead to devote more resources to effective juvenile justice programs such as alternatives to detention and incarceration, contact the Senate now – even if you have contacted your Senators before -- and urge them to put juvenile justice reform on the Senate schedule for a vote!

Actions you can take:

(1) Call: Call your two Senators and urge them to cosponsor S. 678, the JJDPA reauthorization bill, and urge them to contact Majority Leader Harry Reid to urge him to put S. 678 on the Senate schedule for a floor vote as soon as possible.  Let them know you’d like to get a response to your request in writing and provide them with your name and address. Find your Senator here: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

(2) Write a Letter: If you would prefer to contact your Senators in writing, click here to send a letter: http://www.change.org/campaign4youthjustice/petitions

(3) Call Media: Contact your local media outlets and urge them to produce a news story on juvenile justice reform and interview your Senators to find out what they are doing to ensure that the JJDPA is voted on by the full Senate as soon as possible. If you would like the BI to assist you in producing a localized media list - contact Shadi Rahimi at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it with the region needed.

(4) Join: Join the Act 4 Juvenile Justice campaign Fan page.

(5) Share: Spread the word with your friends by sharing this Action Alert!

For additional information including sample letters, visit: www.act4jj.org.

Philadelphia’s “flash mobs” have been the subject of recent media frenzy. Teens organizing online or through text messages have been gathering on South Street and in shopping malls to hang out. A small number of them have violently acted out.

Most recently, a young man at work was attacked by a mob of teens trying to enter a pizzeria. Before that, 100 teens rampaged a Macy’s store. The incident was dubbed “Macy’s Mayhem” by news media.

Of the thousands of teens in any town there are bound to be a few a violent ones that exploit large gatherings – but in Philadelphia, one judge has been using his power to punish adolescents far beyond the extent of their actions. In an exchange with one 15-year-old boy, Judge Kevin Dougherty reportedly threatened a year in the juvenile justice system for every “lie” – what he characterized explanations by youth who said they had gone downtown to go shopping or meet girlfriends.

“By the time the boy was taken away in handcuffs, he had received three years,” a reporter observed. “Despite getting the information he wanted, Dougherty seemed determined to send a message about the flash mobs.”

It is not a juvenile court judge’s job to send a message about a citywide problem that points to the boredom or frustration of its teenagers. Some of Philadelphia’s teens behaved recklessly. But because mob acts are drawing negative attention to the city, the initial response has been to round up youth for harsh punishment. We know that punishment won’t prevent teens from getting into trouble. That is the very nature of adolescence. Few of us did not make any mistakes as teens.

Instead of contemplating such issues, Philadelphia police are on high alert and Mayor Michael Nutter is promising that he will “ruin” the lives of teens caught in flash mobs. His threats also include tighter curfews and limited access to downtown by minimizing the hours teens can use free transit passes. And the arrest of anyone caught in flash mob. All this in an effort to “get tough on young people.”

The more punitive that Philadelphia city officials get, the more they are negatively impacting these youth’s futures. They are catapulting them into a downward spiral.

Richmond’s City Council has postponed its vote on whether to impose a daytime curfew for minors – a proposal put forth by the city’s Police Department.

The curfew, which will be decided at a later date, would allow police officers to arrest school-aged minors who are not in school between the hours of 8 a.m. and 2:30 pm. The curfew only targets youth in the City of Richmond, where 80 percent of the population is people of color.

The Police Department’s proposal states that such “truants” will be taken to a police-run attendance center, where the youth will be held until their parents can pick them up, or until school hours are over. The penalties for truant youth include citations and fines up to $500. Youth caught being truant more than three times in one year face further penalties, like a misdemeanor charge and government intervention in their home.

Police Chief Fred Deltorchio was quoted saying that making truancy part of the municipal code, rather than relying solely on state educational code, adds teeth to the law. But why do we want to figuratively chew up our children?

When youth rebel, the adult impulse is to suppress the rebellion. Repressive tactics might work temporarily, but it’s only a matter of time before the problem once again rears its ugly head. This proposal is a response to a serious situation, and yes, truant children should be in school. But criminalizing them is not the answer.

In this situation, an increased number of juvenile delinquents will only perpetuate Richmond’s reputation as a crime-ridden city. If the curfew passes, juveniles would be delinquent based on their inability or refusal to pay a court fine or by ditching school again, perhaps to make a stand about what they perceive as an unfair punishment. Such actions may seem defiant and silly, but when you’re a teenager, adolescent actions are your way of making sense of a world in which you have little say.

A recent story broadcast on Omaha television highlighting the heartbreaking death of a juvenile justice system-involved 15-year-old illustrates the complexities of the reform needed within system.

Everette Williams, a high-school freshman, was one of 3,000 active juvenile cases in Douglas County, NE, when he was shot at a bus stop while wearing an ankle bracelet. In its story, the Omaha television station, WOWT, featured two voices: Don Kleine, the chief law enforcement officer in Douglas County, and an adult who was incarcerated as a minor.

Kleine said the opportunity to turn someone in the right direction at an early age is key: "We have had some homicides recently that were committed by 14, 15, 16, 17 year-olds, that maybe had a history in juvenile court and obviously they didn't get what they needed."

The article continued with a personal success story from the adult, who as a minor was placed in secure confinement for nine months for stealing a car stereo. He is now “a father of two with a great job” the reporter touted. While intriguing, this success story is the exception rather than the rule. Highlighting secure detention as a way to successfully address juvenile delinquency is a misguided and dangerous notion. Instead, the policies and practices of justice must be driven by data that demonstrates what is effective.

The facts show that the use of secure detention for non-violent juvenile offenders is overwhelmingly harmful. Detention often hampers a youth’s developmental process and propels them in a negative life direction, as shown by recidivism rates of 50 percent to 80 percent for youth who have been incarcerated, according to a 2008 report published by the Annie E Casey Foundation.

Yesterday’s protests should send the message that students, parents, teachers and other education staff are fed up with higher tuition for fewer services. Instead, news coverage has focused heavily on the havoc created by those who broke from the larger protests yesterday across California.

The 150 people in the Bay Area who walked onto the 1-880 Freeway were consequently arrested and taken to jail. Ten of the arrested protestors were youth. This ploy to gain media attention was certainly successful. By now, we have all seen the screenshots of protestors face down on 880, but what has been lost in the coverage is the reason for it all. It is a huge statement when youth decide that potentially being arrested or injured by a car is a small price to pay for a better future. This statement is lost however, when reports of broken windows and stopped traffic are deemed the only news fit to print.

Here’s some news. In California it costs $604,552 per day to incarcerate the nearly 9,000 juveniles the state holds in residential placement. That is approximately $24,641 per year to incarcerate one youth. By contrast, it is a mere $3,048 to send one student to a CSU university to school for the year. The figures speak for themselves about our priorities. But what price are Californians paying for this practice?

“It just really sends a clear message that in 10 years they expect us to be in one of those correctional facilities that they keep pumping money into – the money taken from our school system,” says Rosa Baltodano, program coordinator at the Center for Young Women’s Development in San Francisco.

The correlation between the lack of educational opportunities and imprisonment is direct, according to a report by Northeastern University. The study found that 18-to-24-year-old male high school dropouts had an incarceration rate 31 times that of males who graduated from a four-year college." If you're a young black male with no high school diploma, you are 60 times more likely to end up behind bars than your classmates who earned a bachelor's degree.

A recent incident in San Francisco, coupled with other cases across the country of students being arrested in schools, demonstrate a serious lapse in our juvenile justice system and the way that we overreact to youth misbehavior.

In this particular situation, a 13-year-old boy was arrested on suspicion of punching a classmate and stealing 46 cents during an after-school program. For this act, the boy was charged with felony robbery, extortion and assault – and faces deportation plus a bench warrant that will be issued if he fails to attend a March 8 hearing in San Francisco that is 3 days after he and his mother are deported back to Australia.

The news coverage has highlighted the issues of immigration, deportation and the negative impacts that those policies can have on families. It has focused primarily on a politically charged aspect of the incident, the deportation of the undocumented boy and his mother to Australia as a result of his felony charge. At issue in most local coverage is San Francisco’s much debated sanctuary policy, and “whether officials should shield undocumented youths from deportation when they are suspected of a felony crime.”

However, what is missing is one of the most alarming aspects of this particular incident – the charges leveled against the boy. The charges reported are completely unjust given the alleged act, and illustrate the widespread issue in juvenile justice of ramped up charges against young people whose behavior is typical of adolescents their age. In New York recently, a 12-year-old Latino girl was arrested for doodling on her desk. In Florida, an 11-year-old girl was arrested at her school for a scuffle at a bus stop with a classmate three days prior.

According to media reports in San Francisco, the parents of the sixth grader who the 13-year-old boy had bullied had filed a police report. The 13-year-old was arrested after he and his parents spoke to the police officer.

“I think my son was in shock, as I was, “ his stepfather, Charles Washington said in a press conference. “What he actually did, and what the actual charges are, they are universes apart. Back when I was in school, at worst, a bully was sent home for the day, creating problems for them at home, when they explain to their parents why they’ve been sent home.”

It is shocking and puzzling that such charges would be leveled against a 13-year-old boy who allegedly took 46 cents from another boy after punching him - essentially acting as a bully. Why would a rational adult level such serious charges at a boy who was in a schoolyard fight?  What happened to conflict resolution?

The boy’s stepfather said his stepson was held for a week at Juvenile Hall. “We did not understand why this was happening,” Washington, who is a bus driver, said at the press conference. “Kids on my bus get on and do way worse things than he actually did, and the police usually make their presence known, but there is no worry about going to Juvenile Hall.”

Is anyone in the public protected by charging this youth with such felonies? To me this is yet another example of our broken justice system and of prosecutors abusing their power by targeting youth.

In this case and many others across the country, no one is held accountable for their pivotal role in changing the outcome of a youth’s childhood.

By Sarah Covert

On a daily basis, youth call our hotline at the Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana (JJPL) to talk about the horrors they face in prisons across the state. In the past six months, we’ve received reports of youth who were jumped by other youth, resulting in broken jaws and knocked-out teeth, as well as of guards employing excessive use of force. 

It isn’t often that we are heartened by the moves of our statewide justice system. But, last week the Louisiana Office of Juvenile Justice (OJJ) announced that a center for the developmentally disabled would be converted in 2011 to a moderate-security juvenile facility. It is the first time that the state of Louisiana is looking to design small therapeutic facilities that are home-like and lack razor wire and cells, a rarity in Missouri.

OJJ should get the credit that they deserve for moving toward the building of this first moderate-security facility and taking one critical step toward the expectations set forth in a 2003 law, Act 1225, which demanded Louisiana’s system be modeled after Missouri’s. That state’s successful juvenile justice system includes residential facilities and fully-funded community-based alternative programs that allow for treatment of delinquent youth in their homes.

We know that new facilities such as the one proposed by the state cannot come in addition to the large, correctional style facilities where youth are currently housed and often face inhumane conditions. They also cannot come at the expense of community-based alternatives to incarceration, which research demonstrates would more effectively serve a significant proportion of the youth currently in the state’s care.