Youth Experiences at Giddings State School Survey Findings

room away

pushes urges length active aware limit televisions kids

threats Fights anger take around guys confused involved downs pushed charge prepare world intimidate try never hard high ities physical power l especially vocational confined

respect fighting

happen negativity health tougher aci trainings free groups

f weak listen

TYC weakling horticulture PlayStations system-involved reentry mployees home punishment times helped care motivated Without

lace Visitations fair build locked teacher

hit support safe often

violence show perso ant many fight learning mak

going make medications neighborhood much go almost empathy ups cope money changes treatment mentor ing far

one hope

control GED lost er stay changes getting

staff job ng minimum lessenough youth see campus know everything Tell trying feel ished secure everyone waive put visits keeps gangs

family succeed hours think resources afraid better Staying Now credits riots woodshop trauma problems harder done school

YOUTH EXPERIENCES AT GIDDINGS STATE SCHOOL 2012 SURVEY FINDINGS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Juvenile Justice Sta! Benet Magnuson, J.D. Jennifer Carreon, M.S.C.J

Report Editor Molly Totman, J.D.

Report Designer Kim Wilks

Executive Director Ana Yáñez-Correa, Ph.D.

We would like to express our gra tude to the sta of the Giddings State School for opening their doors to us. Their willingness to allow us to survey youth proves their commitment to strengthening the provision of treatment and services for those in their care.

We also extend our sincerest apprecia on to the youth who provided us feedback about their experiences with the system. Their perspec ve is cri cal to making real improvements in youth jus ce.

Lastly, we commend the work of Debbie Unruh, Ombudsman for system-involved youth in Texas, whose dedica on to improving the lives of troubled and at-risk youth is a cri cal component of the youth jus ce reform movement.

MARCH 2012

The Texas Criminal Jus ce Coali on iden ﬁ es and advances real solu ons to the problems facing Texas’ juvenile and criminal jus ce systems. We conduct policy research and analysis, form e ec ve partnerships, and educate key stakeholders to promote e ec ve management, accountability, and best prac ces that increase public safety and preserve human and civil rights.

Dear prac oners, families, and advocates,

This is a cri cal but challenging me for juvenile jus ce reform in Texas. The new Juvenile Jus ce Department and its Board have an important, though daun ng, task ahead of them. They are deciding ques ons related to the Department’s funding, accountability, transparency, and rehabilita ve goals, and their decisions now will have a profound impact on the futures of the 60,000 children referred each year to the Texas juvenile jus ce system. The Department cannot undertake this e ort alone. Community-based prac oners, advocates, family members, policy-makers, and others are crucial to the full realiza on of the Department’s mission.

Likewise, we must always consider the perspec ve of those who are directly impacted by the system – the youth. The goal of our survey, conducted through individual interviews with 115 youth at the Giddings state secure facility, is to help bring the voice of these children to the important conversa ons of juvenile jus ce reform now taking place across Texas.

The picture that emerges from our interviews o ers both encouragement – the youth largely reported feeling safe and hopeful in the Texas juvenile jus ce system – as well as opportuni es for improvement – for example, in family involvement, sta training, and youth violence against other youth. We have included speciﬁ c ﬁ ndings and recommenda ons in this report, and the Texas Criminal Jus ce Coali on looks forward to working with advocates, prac oners, and others to build on those strengths and to address areas in need of improvement.

The responses of these youth also challenge some conven onal wisdom. The youth iden ﬁ ed educa on, treatment programs, and voca onal training as the most helpful part of the juvenile jus ce system, sugges ng these youth are highly mo vated to succeed at school and are eager for the opportunity. They also reported frequent family visits at county facili es, sugges ng these families want to be involved, and that the lack of family involvement at state secure facili es is a result of distance more than apathy.

These survey fi ndings hold enormous poten al, and I encourage all state and county agencies responsible for delinquent youth to take the opportunity this year to survey the youth in their care to learn from their experiences. I am confi dent that the pa erns we report here accurately refl ect the experience of these system-involved youth. In order to reduce interviewer biases, our survey team included eight interviewers, diverse in age, race, and sex. The youths’ responses were though ul and remarkably consistent across interviewers.

We are deeply grateful to the O ce of the Independent Ombudsman and the sta of the Giddings state secure facility for their support of this survey. Their openness inspires conﬁ dence, and we hope that this report will prove helpful to them in their work on behalf of Texas youth.

Sincerely,

Ana Yáñez-Correa, Ph.D. Execu ve Director, Texas Criminal Jus ce Coali on

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Survey Methodology ...... 1

Need For Further Research ...... 1

Key Findings ...... 3

Recommenda ons for Texas Juvenile Jus ce Department (TJJD) . . . . 4

Safety: Survey Responses ...... 6

Safety: Recommenda ons...... 9

Hope: Survey Responses ...... 10

Hope: Recommenda ons ...... 12

Top Issues for Youth...... 13

Most Helpful for Youth’s Future ...... 14

Least Helpful for Youth’s Future ...... 15

If You Could Change One Thing...... 16

References ...... 17

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

This exploratory survey was conducted to provide general context for ongoing policy discussions.

The survey was conducted on January 4, 2012, at Giddings State School. All youth at the facility were invited to par cipate in the survey, and they were told the survey was voluntary, anonymous, and independent from the Texas Juvenile Jus ce Department (TJJD). Ul mately, 115 youth chose to par cipate.

To reduce response bias, the interviews were conducted one-on-one in separate cubicles. The interview team was comprised of: 3 men and 5 women; 2 African American, 2 La no, and 4 white; ages ranging from 20 to 44.

Youth were surveyed about their experiences in state secure facili es, as well as their previous experiences in county secure facili es.

In order to interview as many youth as possible, the survey was divided into short-answer and long-answer sec ons. 58 youth received only the short-answer sec on; 11 youth received only the long-answer sec on; and 46 youth received both the short- and long-answer sec ons. If a youth was unable to provide a clear answer on a ques on – for example, what county facili es he had stayed in – his response is omi ed in the results.

To gauge the reliability of the self-reported responses, the issues of safety and programming were assessed using both open-ended and closed-ended ques ons (including scaled and ordinal ques ons). The consistency across ques ons suggests the broad pa erns reported here are an accurate reﬂ ec on of the youths’ experience in the Texas juvenile jus ce system.

Each survey ques on is reprinted in the results sec on beginning on page 6. If a youth was asked to choose a response from an op ons list, those op ons are listed in the parentheses following the ques on.

NEED FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

To more fully understand the experience of youth in Texas, surveys should be conducted throughout the juvenile jus ce system. In par cular, there is a pressing need to survey the girls at the Ron Jackson state secure facility, the youth with serious mental illness at the Corsicana facility, and the youth in the custody of county facili es across the state.

Addi onally, surveys of sta at both state and county facili es will be essen al as TJJD moves forward with its reforms. Our informal conversa ons with sta for this report provided important insight on the issues facing the juvenile jus ce system.

Finally, as this survey shows, family involvement is a cri cal component of successful reform. To be er understand the obstacles to greater family involvement in lives of their loved ones, surveys of families with system-involved members should be conducted throughout the state.

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 1 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org

Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

KEY FINDINGS

The majority of youth reported feeling safe and hopeful in the Texas juvenile justice system. Only 5 percent reported not feeling safe in county secure facili es. 10 percent reported not feeling safe in state secure facili es. 74 percent reported feeling “a lot of hope” about their plans for the future.

The youth identifi ed education, treatment, interactions with staff, youth-on-youth violence, and family involvement as the most important issues facing them in the juvenile justice system. Youth iden fi ed educa on, treatment programs, and voca onal training as the most helpful in preparing them for their future a er the juvenile jus ce system. These responses suggest that these youth appreciate the value of educa on and treatment, and they are mo vated to succeed when given the opportunity. Youth iden fi ed nega ve interac ons with sta as the biggest barrier to their future success. Youth similarly iden fi ed more sta training as the number one thing they would change about the juvenile system. Nega ve sta interac ons increase misbehavior, hinder treatment, and create a percep on of favori sm and unfair rule enforcement, youth report. Youth-on-youth violence is the most important issue to the surveyed youth. This strong response was likely infl uenced by the large race/gang fi ght at the Giddings facility a month before the survey. Youth directly referenced that fi ght in several interviews; a month a er the fi ght, the youth were s ll ac vely processing the trauma c event. Barriers to family involvement are a major issue for the surveyed youth. Barriers to family involvement was second only to youth-on-youth violence when youth were asked about the importance of various issues, and second only to sta training when youth were asked what should be changed about the juvenile system.

The distant location of the surveyed facility imposes rehabilitation challenges, especially on family involvement, mentorship, and positive interactions with staff. Although posi ve family involvement signifi cantly improves outcomes both during and a er placement in secure facili es,1 the youth reported that the long distance between home and the state secure facili es caused family visits to drop precipitously following commitment to the state secure facili es. 62 percent reported receiving visits at least once per week while in county facili es, but only 15 percent reported receiving visits at least once per week while in a state secure facility. TJJD reports that mentored youth in its state secure facili es achieve signifi cantly be er educa on and recidivism outcomes than non-mentored youth,2 but sta at the surveyed facility noted during informal conversa ons that the rela vely remote loca on of the facility hinders the recruitment and reten on of mentors. As a result, only 7 percent of the surveyed youth reported having a mentor in state secure facili es, compared with 13 percent who reported having had a mentor at the county level. Some sta at the surveyed facility noted during informal conversa ons that the long commute to the facility hinders their job performance, and youth reported that sta o en seem angry when they arrive at work. Youth iden fi ed nega ve sta interac ons as the biggest barrier to success and the number one thing they would change about the juvenile jus ce system.

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 3 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TEXAS JUVENILE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT (TJJD)

1. Expand support for local programs that keep kids in their home counties.

These survey ﬁ ndings highlight the structural advantages of local programs for sta , volunteers, youth, and families. Policy-makers and TJJD should expand support for local programs by increasing Grant C diversion funding.3

2. Increase staff training on positive interactions with youth and de-escalation skills.

From the perspec ve of the surveyed youth, nega ve sta interac ons increase misbehavior, hinder treatment, and create a percep on of favori sm and unfair rule enforcement. Based on informal conversa ons with sta and administrators, those nega ve interac ons also increase sta turnover, injuries, and job dissa sfac on. Not surprisingly, the surveyed youth iden ﬁ ed nega ve sta interac ons as the greatest barrier to their rehabilita on. Policy-makers and TJJD should support posi ve sta interac ons by increasing funding for training programs at state and county facili es, such as Bexar County’s successful Restraint and Seclusion Reduc on Ini a ve training program.

3. Build on the successful reduction of staff violence against youth at Giddings State School by implementing programs to reduce youth violence against other youth.

These survey fi ndings reveal the las ng trauma c e ects of youth-on-youth violence in secure facili es: A full month a er a major gang/race fi ght at the facility, the youth frequently men oned the event in the survey interviews. Research shows simply witnessing violence is trauma c for youth.4 The youth reported they had been in a high number of fi ghts at the facility, o en associated with gang ac vity, and they iden fi ed youth-on- youth violence as the most important issue to them. Policy-makers and TJJD should reduce youth violence by increasing funding for: trauma counseling, especially following large fi ghts; gang interven on programs designed for secure facili es; and sta training programs to address youth-on-youth violence.

4. Increase funding for mentorship programs at both the state and county level.

Mentors are remarkably e ec ve at preven ng delinquency and reducing recidivism.5 However, only 7 percent of the surveyed youth reported having a mentor in state secure facili es, and only 13 percent reported having had a mentor at the county level. Many county departments report that mentor programs are usually at capacity. TJJD should connect more youth with mentors by designa ng new preven on grants for county mentor programs, and policy-makers and TJJD should increase funding for mentor programs at all state secure facili es.

Increase support for families who want to be more involved with their children.

The surveyed youth reported frequent family visits at the county level, but only occasional family visits at the state secure facili es. Youth men oned the high costs of travel as the main reason for the decrease in family visits at the state facility. The youth comments in the interviews suggested low family involvement at state secure facili es is nega vely impac ng treatment programs, safety, educa on, and reentry, in line with

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 4 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

research on the issue.6 TJJD should support family involvement by increasing the me youth are allowed to talk to family each week by phone and by increasing family par cipa on in case plan mee ngs. Furthermore, policy-makers should help TJJD defray the cost of phone calls and travel for low-income families living far away from secure facili es.

Expand reentry planning at both state and county facilities.

Reentry resources are a major concern for youth, who ranked the issue third in importance, behind only youth-on-youth violence and family involvement. The youth’s anxiety about returning to their communi es underscores the central importance of reentry planning to their future success.

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 5 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

SAFETY: SURVEY RESPONSES

HowHow safesafe do didyouyou feelfeel atat thesethose facilifacilities? es? (Very Safe,(Very Safe,KindKind of Safe,ofSafe, OK,OK, NotNot Safe,Safe, VeryVery Unsafe)Unsafe)

60 63% 50 44%

40 Responses 30 of 23% 22%

20 Number 17% 15% 9% 10 4% 1% 2% 0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility VerySafe KindofSafe OK NotSafe VeryUnsafe

How Howmany many mes times were were you in in a aphysical physical fight ﬁ ght withwith other other youths youth atat those these facilities? facili es? 60

56% 50 44%

40 Responses 30 of 28% 20% 20 Number 15% 12% 11% 9% 10 3% 2%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility 0 1to5 6to10 11to20 21+

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 6 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

How muchHow much power power did did gangs gangs have in in those those facilities? facili es? (No Power,(No Power, A Li Ale Little Power, Power, A LotA Lot of of Power, Power, AA Huge Huge Amount Amount of Power) of Power) 45 47% 40 46%

25 Responses 25%

of 24% 20 23% 20%

15 Number

10 8% 7% 5

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility NoPower ALittlePower ALotofPower AHugeAmountofPower

HowHow many many timesmes werewere you you hit hit by staffby sta at those at those facilities? facili es? 90 92% 85% 80

50 Responses of 40

30 Number

20 14% 10 6% 2% 1% 0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility Never 1to5times Morethan5times

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 7 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

How manyHow many mes times were were you you confinedconﬁ ned to toyour your room room as as punishmentpunishment for for more more than than 2424 hours hours at atthose those facilities? facili es? 60 59%

50 45% 42% 40 Responses 30 of 27%

20 Number 14% 13%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility Never 1to10times Morethan10times

What problems, if any, did you have receiving What problems, if any, did you have receiving healthhealth care care or or medicamedications ons at atthose those facilities? facili es? 100

90 97%

80 73% 70

60 Responses 50 of

Number 30 27%

10 3%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility NoProblems DelayorRefusalofMedicalAttention

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 8 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

SAFETY: RECOMMENDATIONS

Youth responses regarding safety at Giddings State School show a facility in transi on: Sta violence against youth is rela vely low, while youth violence against other youth remains a signiﬁ cant concern. This seems to be a familiar pa ern for juvenile facili es in the middle of reforms. Bexar County, for example, documented a similar decrease in sta violence and increase in youth violence in the middle of its Restraint and Seclusion Reduc on Ini a ve, followed by a precipitous decrease in both sta and youth violence as its reform e orts matured. That experience suggests Giddings has completed an important ﬁ rst step by reducing sta violence against other youth, and that Giddings should now press ahead and double down on reforms to reduce youth violence against other youth. “The sta should be more aware of the weak. They don’t do anything about it, especially when they know a weakling is being pushed around. It’s not fair.” – Giddings youth

RECOMMENDATION 1: Build on the successful reduc on of sta violence against youth at Giddings State School by expanding sta training programs to address youth-on-youth violence. Bexar County’s Restraint and Seclusion Reduc on Ini a ve training program successfully reduced both sta -youth and youth-youth violence in its secure facili es.

The youth frequently men oned gang-related violence in their survey interviews, including the large gang/race fi ght that occurred in late November 2011 at Giddings. A full month a er that fi ght, the youth were s ll ac vely processing its emo onal and psychological impact. The youths’ responses highlight both the role of gangs in youth-youth violence at the facility, as well as the con nuing trauma caused by that violence. “There’s too much fi gh ng on this campus. Fights, riots, gangs – trying to see who’s tougher. It makes me feel less safe.” – Giddings youth

RECOMMENDATION 2: Increase trauma counseling for youth a er ﬁ ghts, especially following riots. Implement gang interven on programs designed for secure facili es.

The survey responses suggest county programs have advantages that support higher safety outcomes for youth. Combined with the responses on family involvement, mentorship, and sta interac ons, the youths’ perspec ves on safety o er important guidance to TJJD as it implements the goals of SB653,7 including to “support the development of a consistent county-based con nuum” of e ec ve services, and to “locate the facili es as geographically close” as possible to family, necessary workforce, and services.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Expand support to county programs by increasing Grant C diversion funding.

A signiﬁ cant number of youth reported a delay or refusal of medical a en on at state secure facili es. They raised a wide variety of issues, ranging from a two-day delay to visit the inﬁ rmary for an injury that later required hospitaliza on, to denial of access to a youth’s inhaler during an asthma a ack.

RECOMMENDATION 4: Review youth complaints regarding access to medical a en on. As necessary, revise policies, training, and oversight to ensure youth receive mely access to appropriate medical a en on.

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 9 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

HOPE: SURVEY RESPONSES

How muchHow hope much hope do youdo you have have about your your plans plans for the for future? the future? (A Lot(A of Lot Hope, of Hope, A ALi Little le Hope,Hope, or orNo NoHope Hope at All) at All)

74% 70

50 Responses 40 of

Number 24% 20

10 2% 0 ALotofHope ALittleHope NoHopeatAll

How manyHow manymes times did adid family a family member member visit visit you youat those at facilities?those facili es? (More than Once(More athan Week, Once Oncea Week, a OnceWeek, a week, Once Once or Twice a Month, a Month,A Few Times, A Few or Never) Times, or Never) 35 33% 30

31% 31% 27% 25 25%

20 Responses of 15 17%

Number 11% 10 10% 9% 6% 5

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility MorethanOnceaWeek OnceaWeek OnceorTwiceaMonth AFewTimes Never

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 10 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

Did youDid have you have a mentor a mentor whilewhile you you were were at those at thosefacilities? facili es? 100 93% 90

80 87%

60 Responses 50 of

40 Number 30

20 13% 10 7%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility Yes No

How helpfulHow helpful was was your your individual individual case case plan plan at those at facilities?those facili es? (Very(Very Helpful, Helpful, A ALi Little le Helpful,Helpful, Not Not Helpful, Helpful, Not Sure) Not Sure) 50 52%

40 39% 35 36%

30 Responses 25 of

20 21% 21% Number 15 15% 12% 10

5 4%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility VeryHelpful ALittleHelpful NotHelpful NotSure

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 11 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

HOPE: RECOMMENDATIONS

“The sta pushes me to my limit, trying to help me with what I want to be. They helped me get my GED.” – Giddings youth

The youth at Giddings State School have very high hopes for their future. They feel empowered by their educa on, treatment programs, and voca onal training, which the youth iden ﬁ ed as the three parts of the juvenile jus ce system most helpful in preparing them for the future. The surveyed youth appreciate the value of educa on and treatment, and they are mo vated by opportuni es to succeed. When asked speciﬁ cally about their individual case plans, most youth at Giddings said the plans had been helpful at the state secure facili es, though they were largely unsure about case plans at the county level.

RECOMMENDATION 1: Expand resources for youth case plans at the county level to ensure youth have the same opportuni es to succeed in their communi es as they do in state secure facili es.

“Without family support, it’s harder to succeed and be mo vated to do be er.” – Giddings youth The survey responses show families want to be more involved in the juvenile jus ce system, but the remote loca on of state secure facili es is a major barrier to family involvement. The youth ranked family involvement as the second most important issue to them, and their comments in the interviews suggested low family involvement at state secure facili es is nega vely impac ng treatment programs, safety, educa on, and reentry.

RECOMMENDATION 2: Increase family par cipa on in youths’ case planning. As necessary, revise visita on policies to support greater family involvement.

“I’ve never had a mentor. I want one.” – Giddings youth Mentorship programs face signiﬁ cant challenges at both the state and county level, and few youth report having a mentor. County departments have noted that local mentor programs are o en at capacity, and Giddings sta noted that state facili es face addi onal challenges in recrui ng and retaining volunteer mentors because of the rela vely remote loca on of the facili es. TJJD has reported that those youth who do have mentors in state secure facili es achieve be ers outcomes in educa on and recidivism than non-mentored youth.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Increase access to mentors at state and county facili es by designa ng new preven on grants for county mentor programs and increasing funding for mentor programs at all state secure facili es.

“They don’t prepare you for the changes and how to cope when you leave.” – Giddings youth Reentry resources are a major concern for youth, who ranked the issue third in importance, behind only youth-on- youth violence and family involvement. The youths’ anxiety about returning to their communi es underscores the central importance of reentry planning to their future success.

RECOMMENDATION 4: Expand reentry planning at both state and county facili es.

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 12 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

TOP ISSUES FOR YOUTH

From the following list of issues, which three are the most important to you?

30 YYouth-on-youthouth-on-youth vviolenceiolence 28 YouthTTooooon ddiiyouth cultcuviolencelt fforor familiesfamilies toto bbee iinvolvednvolved 25 Toodifficultforfamiliestobeinvolved 25 RReentryeentry resourcesresources Reentryresources 21 RRehabehab pprogramsrograms ddon’ton’t wworkork Rehabprogramsdon'twork 20 19 TToooo mmuchuch ppre-adjudicare-adjudica onon llockupockup 18 Toomuchpreadjudicationlockup 16 16 SSeclusioneclusion Seclusion Responses 15 RRestraintsestraints of Restraints SStata --on-youthon-youth vviolenceiolence Staffonyouthviolence Number 10 9 NNotot eenoughnough mmentalental hhealthealth ttreatmentreatment Notenoughmentalhealthtreatment 7 NNotot enoughenough prevenpreven oonn pprogramsrograms Notenoughpreventionprograms 55 JJuvenileuvenile jjusus cece systemsystem isis raciallyracially 5 Juvenilebbiasediasejusticed systemisraciallybiased 2 StaffSStatadoesn't doesn’tdoefollowsn’tsuicide ffollowollopreventionw ssuicideuicid e policies pprevenreven oonn ppoliciesolicies 0 IssuesofTopConcern

*57 youth received this ques on. For more informa on, see Survey Methodology.

Representative quotes from youth interviews: “Without so much violence, everything here would be safe and secure. There are a lot of threats from other youth.” “Visita ons don’t happen enough. TYC should spend more money for family visits and less on televisions and PlaySta ons.” “There’s not enough resources to help me go back to my neighborhood so I can go home and be a be er person. I’m afraid I’m going to come back to TYC if I don’t get help a er I leave.”

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 13 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

MOST HELPFUL FOR YOUTH’S FUTURE

What has been the most helpful to prepare you for your future a er you leave the juvenile system?

Educa on, GED and diploma 25 24 Education,TreatmentGEDand programsdiploma 22 TreatmentVoca programsonal training and cer ﬁ cates 20 Vocationaltrainingand certificates 18 Structure and general Structureandgeneral atmosphereatmosphereofasecure of facilitya secure facility Staffarepositiveandsupportive Responses 15 Sta are posi ve and suppor ve of Reentryplanning Reentry planning

Number Nothing 10 Nothing 8 Familyvisits Family visits Thestagessystem The stages system 5 3 Peersareapositiveinfluence 22 Peers are a posi ve inﬂ uence 111

0 Whathasbeenthemosthelpfultoprepareyouforyour f f l h jil ? *57 youth received this ques on. Some youth named more than one element. For more informa on, see Survey Methodology.

Representative quotes from youth interviews: “Before, I wasn’t going to high school. Now I’m almost done with GED and I have a lot of credits.” “Staying in treatment keeps you mo vated and ac ve. It teaches you how to control your anger and urges. The groups help you build empathy and respect.” “I’ve ﬁ nished cer ﬁ ca ons in woodshop and hor culture. That’s going to help me get a job.”

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 14 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

LEAST HELPFUL FOR YOUTH’S FUTURE

What has been the least helpful to prepare you for your future a er you leave the juvenile jus ce system? 14 Staff putyoudown,provoke you,Stahave - negativeput youattitude down, provoke you, have nega ve a tude 12 Generalatmosphereofasecure 12 facility General atmosphere of a secure facility Peers badinfluence Peers - bad inﬂ uence 10 10 Treatment/Programming not effectiveTreatment/Programming - not e ec ve 9 PeersPeers don't - don’tfeelsafe feel safe 8 8 StaffStainconsistent - inconsistentenforcement enforcement of rules 7

Responses ofrules

of Treatment/Programming - not enough Treatment/Programming not 6 enougha enattention on fromfrom caseworkers and counselors caseworkersandcounselors Toofarfromfamily Number Too far from family 4 Programming - not enough recrea onal 4 Programming notenough ac vi es 33 recreationalactivities MedicalMedical insufficient - insu medical cient caremedical care 2 2 Seclusion 111 Seclusion Stages system Stagessystem 0 Whathasbeentheleasthelpfultoprepareyouforyour

*57 youth received this ques on. Some youth named more than one element. For more informa on, see Survey Methodology.

Representative quotes from youth interviews: “Some sta put you down a lot. They have ups and downs. If they have problems, they take it out on us.” “It’s hard ge ng to know this place. I get lost. I get confused in this place.” “The guys here have a lot of nega vity. I don’t listen to it. They try to in midate you.”

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 15 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 2012 SURVEY F INDINGS

IF YOU COULD CHANGE ONE THING…

If you were in charge and had the power to change one thing about the juvenile system, what would you change?

12 MoreMore staffsta training training more - morepositive posi ve interac ons, 11 respectinteractions, and respect,fairer rulesandfairer enforcement rulesenforcement EasierEasier tosee seefamily family furloughs, - furloughs, phone calls, phonecalls,visits 10 visits 99 EarlierEarlier releaserelease no- nostages stagessystem, system, complete treatmentcompletetreatment communityincommunity a er MLS afterMLS MoreMore alternativesalterna vesto tosecure secure placement 8 placement Be er food Betterfood More ac vi es

Responses NothingMoreactivities 6 of 5 More protec on from violent peers Nothing Less punishment for minor viola ons

Number 444 No fences 4 Moreprotectionfromviolent peers 3 Change name back to TYC MoreLesspunishment communityfor involvmentminor 2 violations 2 More advocates with inside knowledge Nofences 1111111 Add a commissary BeChange er caseworkersnamebacktoTYC

0 Be er treatment programs Ifyouwereinchargeandhadthepowertochangeonething Morecommunityinvolvment about the juvenile system, what would you change? *57 youth received this ques on. Some youth named more than one element. For more informa on, see Survey Methodology.

Representative quotes from youth interviews: “If I were in charge, I would have all of my employees show respect to everyone. Tell them not to talk down to us [system-involved youth].” “I’d make it easier for kids to go home and see their families.” “I think we should leave a er our minimum length of stay. If you don’t have your treatment done, they should waive them, or you could do them in ‘the free.’”

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 16 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

REFERENCES

1 See, e.g., Ryan & Yang “Family contact and recidivism: A longitudinal study of adjudicated delinquents in residen al care” (2005).

2 Texas Juvenile Jus ce Department “Annual Review of Treatment E ec veness” (2011) pp. 34-5.

3 Grant C diversion funding was ﬁ rst authorized by the 81st Texas Legislature (2009) to assist local juvenile proba on departments in diver ng youth from commitment in state secure facili es to community-based supervision.

4 See, e.g., Foy & Goguen “Community violence-related PTSD in children and adolescents” (1998).

5 See, e.g., McGill, Mihalic, & Grotpeter “Big Brothers Big Sisters of America: Blueprints for Violence Preven on” (1998).

6 See, e.g., Ryan & Yang “Family contact and recidivism: A longitudinal study of adjudicated delinquents in residen al care” (2005).

7 SB 653, enacted by the 82nd Texas Legislature (2011), abolished the Texas Youth Commission and the Texas Juvenile Proba on Commission and transferred the powers and du es of those agencies to the newly created Texas Juvenile Jus ce Department. SB 653 also established purposes and goals for the new agency to guide reform towards a more community-based rehabilita ve juvenile jus ce system.

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 17 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org 510 S. Congress Avenue, Suite 104 Austin, Texas 78704 (512) 441-8123 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org