Juvenile Diversion Guidebook

Prepared by the Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Workgroup Prepared by:

The Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Workgroup: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice National Juvenile Defender Center National Youth Screening and Assessment Project Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps

The preparation of this document was supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation through its Models for Change initiative. The authors represent ﬁve of the member organizations from the National Resource Bank, an association of organizations that provide technical assistance to states through Models for Change.

Anyone may use the content of this publication, as long as it is unchanged and in the whole, for redistribution, commercial and noncommercial, with credit to Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, National Juvenile Defender Center, National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, and Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps and by reprinting the copyright notice below.

© Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, National Juvenile Defender Center, National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, and Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps March 2011 Models for Change Models for Change is an effort to create successful and replicable models of juvenile justice reform through targeted investments in key states, with core support from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Models for Change seeks to accelerate progress toward a more effective, fair, and developmentally sound juvenile justice system that holds young people accountable for their actions, provides for their rehabilitation, protects them from harm, increases their life chances, and manages the risk they pose to themselves and to the public. Key states in the Models for Change initiative have been Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Washington, and through action networks focusing on key issues, in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin.

Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Prepared by the Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Workgroup

ModelsforChange Systems Reform in Juvenile Justice

Contents

Part I. Introduction ...... 7 Purpose for Guidebook...... 7 Background ...... 8 Part II. Overview of Diversion ...... 11 A Brief History ...... 11 Research Evidence on Diversion ...... 11 Review of Statutes ...... 13 Part III. Developing & Improving Juvenile Diversion Programs ...... 17 Getting Started ...... 17 About the Steps ...... 17 A. Purpose ...... 23 Step 1. The Objectives ...... 23 Step 2. Referral Decision Points ...... 25 Step 3. Extent of Intervention ...... 27 B. Oversight ...... 30 Step 4. Operations ...... 30 Step 5. Funding ...... 32 C. Intake Criteria ...... 34 Step 6. Referral and Eligibility ...... 34 Step 7. Screening and Assessment ...... 38 D. Operation Policies ...... 41 Step 8. Participant Requirements ...... 41 Step 9. Services ...... 44 Step 10. Incentives ...... 48 Step 11. Consequences of Failure to Comply .... 49 Step 12. Program Completion/Exit Criteria ...... 50 E. Legal Protections...... 52 Step 13. Information Use ...... 52 Step 14. Legal Counsel ...... 53 F. Quality ...... 56 Step 15. Program Integrity ...... 56 Step 16. Outcome Evaluation ...... 58 Appendix A. Models for Change ...... 69 Appendix B. Diversion Workgroup ...... 70 Appendix C. Advisory Board Members ...... 71 Appendix D. Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Survey Data Summary ...... 72 Appendix E. 50 State Statutory Review ...... 89

Attachment: Juvenile Diversion Workbook ...... 137

Part 1: Introduction

At one time or another, almost all adolescents engage system. These statistics, along with documented reports in risky behaviors, act without thinking, and make bad of inadequate and inappropriate care and treatment of decisions more often than they will as adults; thus, youth, have prompted reform efforts across the country many may engage in what would be judged as illegal at both the state and local levels. As a result, many behavior.1 Most youth are not apprehended every time states and localities are exploring diversion programs as they do so, but arrest is a common experience among a way to keep youth out of the juvenile justice system. adolescents, especially for youth of color in urban areas. This Guidebook aims to assist juvenile justice systems Yet only a minority of those youth will ever be arrested in developing and improving diversion programs and for a second delinquent act, or will become repeat processes. It was developed by the Models for Change offenders in adulthood.2 In other words, for the majority Juvenile Diversion Workgroup, funded by the John D. of youth who are arrested, their first delinquency is not a and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. In 2004, the sign of a future delinquency problem. MacArthur Foundation launched a major reform effort, known as the Models for Change initiative, in response Given these facts, a strong argument can be made to the concerns expressed here. The Models for Change for having a way to avoid formal processing of youth initiative is “grounded in a commitment to a separate through the juvenile justice system under certain justice system for youth that is responsive to their conditions. Without such a mechanism, large numbers developmental needs and focused on their practical of youth are unnecessarily charged and processed rehabilitation” and seeks to “harness and direct local through the system, thus increasing a youth’s probability reform work into a larger, coordinated effort to share of further delinquencies due to their exposure to other replicable models of reform and catalyze change across delinquent youth during this process. Moreover, by the nation.”5 See Appendix A for more information on formally processing these youth, resources available Models for Change. to the juvenile justice system are used in ways that weaken the system’s capacity to process and respond to the minority of youth who actually present a risk to Purpose for the Guidebook public safety and need juvenile justice adjudication and Programs that divert youth from involvement in the rehabilitation. juvenile justice system have become more frequent in response to the growing recognition that such Over 2 million youth in the U.S. under the age of 18 are involvement often is not necessary to achieve society’s arrested each year.3 Over 600,000 youth are placed in goals. The concept of diversion was first adopted by the detention centers annually, and approximately 95,000 adult criminal justice system, and in the 1960s, became reside in secure juvenile correctional settings on any a topic of discussion in the juvenile justice system.6 In given day.4 Many of these youth become involved 1967, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement with the juvenile justice system for relatively minor and Administration of Justice recommended exploring and nonviolent offenses. Often a lack of appropriate alternatives for addressing the needs of troubled youth community-based treatments and services to address outside of the justice system. In 1976, the Office of their specific needs plays a role in their admission Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s Special to juvenile justice programs. As a result, many youth Emphasis Branch provided $10 million in funding for the become unnecessarily enmeshed in the juvenile justice development of diversion programs.7 These efforts were

7 driven by the belief that diversion programs might yield Therefore, while diversion continues to emerge as an many benefits, such as: 1) decreased rates of recidivism; important practice in the juvenile justice field, these 2) less crowded detention facilities; 3) allowing youth inconsistencies in what constitutes “diversion” call the option to choose an alternative to processing; 4) for clarification. This Guidebook was created to offer providing more appropriate treatments at the community juvenile justice practitioners a roadmap for addressing level; 5) reducing the stigma associated with formal these inconsistencies.9 juvenile justice system involvement;8 and 6) increasing family participation. It is important for readers to recognize that this Guidebook does not consider all types of diversion While diversion has been discussed and practiced for programs in juvenile justice. Specifically, it does not nearly four decades, there is little consistency in terms of consider: what actually constitutes a diversion program or process. However, there is a common goal among diversion Diversion efforts after formal adjudication or in programs—to minimize a youth’s involvement in the juvenile corrections juvenile justice system—but the means and processes Diversion from pre-trial detention to achieve this goal differ in a number of ways, including: The focus of this document is on diversion programs The segment of the youth population the program designed to reduce the likelihood that youth will targets encounter formal processing prior to formal adjudication. Thus, detention diversion was excluded because it is Who makes the decision as to which youth can or cannot be diverted, different from other pretrial diversion situations that prevent youth from formal processing or adjudication. The processing point in the system at which youth Diversion from detention only diverts youth from being are diverted placed in secure custody while still being formally processed. Therefore, diversion programs considered How charges against the youth are handled here range from the point of police contact, to pre- and Consequences the youth faces for unsuccessful post-petition, and up to the time just prior to formal program completion adjudication.

Beneﬁts the youth receives for successful program completion Background

What community-based services are provided, if The development of this Guidebook involved the any collaboration of various individuals working together toward a common goal of assisting juvenile justice Likewise, some jurisdictions have diversion programs practitioners in establishing practices to support the that are governed by more formal rules and better- implementation and operation of successful diversion deﬁned service outcomes than others. programs. To create this document, the Models for Change Executive Committee established a Juvenile Diversion Workgroup with representatives from a

8 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook number of organizations assisting in the Models for scientific requirements for random sampling. Thus, the Change initiative. This Juvenile Diversion Workgroup results cannot be said to be representative of diversion included experts from the Center for Juvenile Justice programs across the country. The programs surveyed Reform, National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile were primarily those operating within states associated Justice, National Juvenile Defender Center, National with the Models for Change initiative and the purpose Youth Screening Assessment Project, and Robert F. was merely to garner examples from identified diversion Kennedy Children’s Action Corps (see Appendix B for programs, including the primary objectives of the more information on the organizations comprising the program, eligibility criteria and referral processes, how Workgroup). Together, the members of the Diversion the program is operated and funded, incentives and Workgroup developed a plan of action to create this consequences of youth participation or lack thereof, Guidebook. screening and assessment protocols, services provided, and outcome monitoring/quality assurance procedures. Part II of this Guidebook provides an overview of For purposes of this Guidebook, the diversion programs diversion, summarizing its history in juvenile justice, focused on were those that diverted a youth between his as well as its values and limitations. The research or her initial contact with law enforcement and the time summary also identifies the range of diversion processes of adjudication, excluding those that specifically diverted used across the country, clarifies the points within the youth from detention. Various programs are highlighted juvenile justice system at which diversion may occur, throughout this Guidebook. and reviews the key components and characteristics of diversion programs, their benefits, consequences, and Finally, the Guidebook includes a Juvenile Diversion challenges. Part II also includes a review, conducted by Workbook (see the attachment at the end of the the Workgroup, of the range of state statutes across Guidebook) that is intended to provide structure in the the country that provide for diversion, including the planning process when considering critical issues, differences among the identified objectives and eligibility various options, and the implications for structuring criteria specified for youth to be diverted. diversion programs or processes.

The centerpiece of the Guidebook, Part III, presents a set This Guidebook underwent numerous review processes, of steps jurisdictions should consider when planning, revisions, and drafts. An external advisory board implementing, or improving a juvenile diversion program. reviewed the information contained in the Guidebook For each of the 16 steps, the major options to be and board members provided suggestions from each of considered are laid out, as well as the pros and cons for their perspectives working in juvenile justice settings. each option. This Advisory Board included key individuals in the field (e.g., district attorneys, judges, defense attorneys, In addition to the research and statutory reviews, a probation officers, etc.) who provided necessary edits diversion survey questionnaire was administered to and revisions to make this Guidebook as useful as approximately 36 programs across 13 states in an possible to the juvenile justice field (see Appendix C for effort to get a picture of what diversion programs look the complete list of Advisory Board members). like, their similarities and differences (see Appendix D for the diversion survey and results). It is important to note that this survey was not designed to meet

9 10 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Part II: Overview of Diversion

A Brief History the 1967 President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice marked the beginning of The history of diverting arrested youth from formal a wave of diversion reform.14 The Commission urged processing began with the birth of the juvenile court that alternative ways needed to be found for treating itself. Juvenile justice, as conceived in the late 19th troubled youth outside of the traditional juvenile justice century, provided for a rehabilitation-based response to system.15-18 They envisioned juvenile court jurisdiction youths’ illegal behaviors. The juvenile court set aside being restricted to those cases of manifest danger, the punitive sanctions youth had been receiving in with most youths being diverted into various forms criminal court. As such, juvenile justice in its infancy of community-based services.19 The years following could be construed as a “diversion program.” It diverted the Commission’s report were characterized by an youth from criminal processing as this was believed to abundance of diversion approaches in the handling of be in the best interests of youth and society. Juvenile offenses by juveniles.20 courts were to order dispositions that were more attuned to the potential to change young lives through special rehabilitation programs, clinical services, and Research Evidence on Diversion educational guidance. In the early years of diversion, the main goal was to protect youth from harsh sanctions in juvenile courts U.S. Supreme Court decisions of the 1960s announced and the negative effects of holding cells. Many diversion the juvenile court’s failure to live up to its initial programs still list this as a primary reason for developing promise.10 In effect, the juvenile justice system a diversion program. A review of the diversion literature was diverting youth from punitive criminal justice over the past 35 years finds at least five emergent sentencing to punitive juvenile justice dispositions, themes identified by communities explaining why they thus representing no diversion at all. Criminologists of developed methods to divert youth from formal juvenile the time were challenging the effectiveness of juvenile court processing. These themes include 1) reducing sanctions and programming.11 Advocates and civil recidivism; 2) providing services; 3) avoiding labeling libertarians were documenting the lack of constitutional effects; 4) reducing system costs; and 5) reducing protections afforded youth, and many were claiming unnecessary social control. that juvenile justice processing was not protecting youth from legal penalties, but actually bringing more and Reduction of recidivism by youth is one of the most more youth under state control—a process they called frequently mentioned objectives and the most widely 12 “net widening.” Others pointed out inefficiencies in the used criterion for diversion program effectiveness.21 system and the high costs of secure placement, which Recidivism refers to re-offending by a youth or repeated 13 became a point of concern and focus for reform. delinquent behavior subsequent to the original offense. By reducing formal processing, diversion programs In this way, diversion from juvenile justice itself became attempt to reduce delinquency and recidivism, and in a topic of enormous interest during the 1970s and 1980s. turn, increase public safety.22 Might youth and society be better served by avoiding formal juvenile court processing for alleged offenses, The second general theme, providing services to youth, whenever feasible and safe? Recommendations of is not unrelated to the first. Several studies have

11 indicated that treating youth in the community using lessening the number of youth sent to expensive out-of- non-justice personnel can reduce further involvement community placements.32 Evidence for better outcomes with the juvenile justice system and have positive results of diversion strategies can also translate into reduced for the youth.23,24 Although not all youth need services, system costs. the types and quality of services and treatment provided through a diversion program may also be an indicator A final theme emerging from the diversion literature is of program effectiveness.25 In an important document the reduction of unnecessary social control. This theme on diversion, McCord and colleagues suggest that arises from a legal perspective focusing on civil liberties. the success of diversion programs requires providing Proponents have argued that the judicial system should intensive and comprehensive services that include not impose greater restrictions on individuals than the youths’ families and take into account community, are necessary to protect public safety. When youth school, and peer interactions, as well as use experienced engaging in low-severity offenses (e.g., status offenses) caseworkers.26 are formally processed through the juvenile justice system and taken out of the community, the judicial The third general theme, reducing labeling effects, system sometimes exerts a degree of control that is has been at the heart of diversion rationale for several disproportionate to the actual threat to public safety or decades. Labeling theory suggests that when a youth the needs of the youth. Diversion programs could reduce becomes identified with criminal activity, there is a social control by serving youth in the least restrictive negative label attached to the individual—both by environments that will satisfy their needs and the the individual and by society—that results in stigma community’s safety. and negative self-perceptions.27 From this labeling perspective, a deviant career does not come to fruition Until the early 1970s, the literature on diversion was directly from the initial act of delinquency, but rather mostly descriptive and theoretical, lacking in any critical from the imposition of a deviant label by society and the or empirical focus. From the 1970s to the present, much reaction of the youth to this labeling.28 Schur, an early more of the literature on diversion has been based on researcher of labeling, claimed that it was best to “leave research studies. That literature can be divided into the kids alone whenever possible,” because labeling two time periods: research prior to the late 1980s, and resulted in a self-fulfilling prophecy that created a higher research published from the late 1990s to the present. potential for future crime.29 Diverting youth from juvenile justice processing could reduce labeling effects and In 1983, Blomberg performed a major review of various avoid stigma by minimizing exposure to the “delinquent” evaluations of diversion programs. By this time, it was label.30 apparent that diversion programs, although having potential benefits, might also have limitations or even Reducing system costs has often been a theme of negative consequences for some youth. Blomberg diversion programs. The costs of community-based categorized the existing studies into those that services are less than the costs of incarceration.31 In documented positive results of diversion and studies that general, diversion programs were seen as having the documented negative results.33 Most diversion studies potential to reduce system inefficiencies, including of the time evaluated effectiveness based on recidivism decreasing the number of cases formally processed and rates—that is, the degree of subsequent delinquency.

12 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Several studies in Blomberg’s review found positive compared youth who were formally processed to youth results for diversion, including lower juvenile arrests34 who received diversion, and diversion programs were and lower rearrest rates for diverted youth compared to categorized according to whether or not youth were similar cases handled by the juvenile justice system.35-40 provided services in connection with their diversion. Blomberg’s review however, also found some troubling Petrosino’s review concluded that youth who were effects of diversion.41 One of these was evidence of formally adjudicated (not diverted) had higher recidivism “net widening.”42-53 Net widening refers to the process rates than youth who were assigned to diversion by which, ironically, a greater number of youth are programs, even when various differences in the groups brought into contact with the juvenile justice system as a in case characteristics were controlled. In addition, result of the introduction of diversion programs.54 Some youth who were diverted to services in the community research had suggested that a number of youth who had a lower re-offending rate than adjudicated youth, participated in diversion programs would not have been whereas youth who were diverted without services processed by the system if court diversion programs (e.g., simply reprimanded and dismissed) were not much were not in place.55,56 different from non-diverted youth in re-offending rates. While some researchers have argued that this study was How could this happen? Blomberg’s review noted that flawed or limited in its method, it suggests an avenue of some diversion programs specified that a youth’s failure future research, specifically whether formal processing to comply with its conditions would result in referral to is less effective for youth than diversion from formal juvenile court. For example, when families themselves processing without services and even less effective than were unable to comply with various diversion program diversion with community-based services. requirements, the youth were often removed from the home and placed by the juvenile court, thus causing greater penetration into the juvenile justice system than Review of Statutes had they not become involved in the diversion program. The majority of states have statutes governing or In addition, mere contact with diversion programs, referring to an alternative to formal court processing. particularly for youth not subject to justice control before Such laws acknowledge a state’s support for diverting the advent of diversion programs, sometimes increased youth from formal court processing in the juvenile youths’ visibility (that is, they were watched more closely justice system. They also create a framework for by authorities). This sometimes resulted in an increased diversion programs by establishing consistent guidelines likelihood of arrest on minor infractions that might for diverting youth from juvenile court. Through 57,58 otherwise not have been observed by authorities. legislation, states may codify a diversion program’s purpose, eligibility criteria, duration, conditions, Diversion research waned following the wave of services, confidentiality provisions, or any other research in the 1970s and 1980s, but then revived element that would benefit from support and consistent around the beginning of the 21st century, resulting in implementation. a new wave of studies on diversion effectiveness.59 In 2010, Petrosino and colleagues performed a review that The ways in which statutes classify or label the process used a selective set of studies, 22 from the 1970s and of diverting youth from juvenile court vary by state. 60,61 1980s and 7 from 1990 to present. Each of the studies Some states have more than one process through which

13 juveniles may be diverted from court, and accordingly from formal court processing or base eligibility on the have more than one statute and classiﬁcation for the seriousness of the charged offense.74 process.62 Regardless of how a state law labels the process, however, the intended outcome of these Statutes vary, however, in their approaches to identifying statutes is the same: to provide youth with a less formal eligibility for diversion. An alternative approach in alternative to court processing than adjudication. some statutes avoids a strict set of eligibility criteria, allowing for greater discretion on a case-by-case basis. Some states label the alternative to court processing For instance, many statutes require a consideration of “diversion,”63 while other states use terms such as what is in the best interest of justice and/or what is in informal processing, adjustment, supervision, or the best interest of the child in determining whether it proceeding to refer to the very same thing.64 Some is appropriate to divert a case.75 Another approach used states have more unique labels for the diversion process, by some statutes is to provide a set of “factors to be such as probation adjustment,65 deferred prosecution,66 considered” in making the eligibility determination.76 deferral of delinquency proceeding,67 civil citation,68 Examples include: (1) the nature of the alleged offense; consent decree,69 or formal accountability agreement.70 (2) the minor’s age; (3) the minor’s character and conduct; Kentucky, for example, does not describe the process (4) the minor’s behavior in school, family, and group itself, but simply identiﬁes diversion as one of the settings; and (5) any prior diversion decision made duties held by the county attorney and court-designated concerning the minor and the nature of the minor’s workers.71 compliance with the diversion agreement.77

Diversion statutes usually define various procedures Statutes do not always make legislative intent apparent. or rules that will be applied to diversion practices in However, state diversion statutes frequently articulate the state. Some of the most commonly mentioned a purpose, policy, goal, or objective for diverting youth provisions include: criteria for eligibility, the purpose of from the formal court process. Reducing and preventing the program, and the voluntary nature of participation. juvenile crime is commonly cited as an objective or policy Nearly all state statutes governing alternatives to goal in state diversion statutes. To this end, statutes formal court processing provide a set of criteria to guide specify reduced recidivism as one of their objectives the corresponding decision-maker in deciding which of diversion.78 One codified diversion process aims to youth are eligible to be diverted. A common set of provide outreach and advocacy services to youth who eligibility criteria is based on the nature of the youth’s may be at risk for committing wayward or disobedient underlying offense. Some state statutes provide a list of acts.79 Another statute referring to reduced recidivism enumerated offenses that, if alleged to be committed by specifically articulates the goals of preventing youth the juvenile, disqualify the juvenile from being eligible from entering the juvenile justice system and helping for the diversion process.72 Other statutes do not specify make these youth ready for adulthood.80 the disqualifying offenses, but require that a juvenile must not have committed a “dangerous” crime, be a State diversion statutes also often require that diversion threat to public safety or a chronic offender to participate occur in a manner that will assure youths’ accountability in diversion.73 Alternatively, several statutes specify for offenses for which they were charged, although in that only first-time offenders are eligible to be diverted ways that are different from the penalties that would

14 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook apply if they were adjudicated and found guilty of the of counsel, as set forth and discussed at greater length offense.81 For example, statutes sometimes cite victim in Part III of this Guidebook. See Appendix E for a 50 restitution82 and restorative justice83 as related policy State Statutory Review Chart. goals of the corresponding diversion processes. In summary, preparation of this Guidebook involved Promoting judicial economy is another commonly stated a systematic review of the literature, a review of objective of statutes governing diversion processes. This state statutes pertaining to diversion, and a survey is expressed in various ways. For example, statutes may administered to various diversion programs in the refer to reducing costs and caseloads in the juvenile United States. It became clear that existing research is justice system,84 or providing an efﬁcient alternative inconclusive as to the effectiveness of diversion. The to court85 that deals with delinquent acts in a speedy statutory review demonstrated that some states have informal manner while allowing the judicial system to made system-wide commitments to diversion; however, deal effectively with more serious cases.86 there is much variation in their approaches. The survey results help to describe some of those variations, but Almost one-half of the state statutes require that they do not necessarily represent normative practices as diversion cannot be employed unless youth voluntarily the survey did not use a random national sample. participate by providing knowing and intelligent consent.87 Some states further add that the youth and The development of this Guidebook was motivated parent must be clearly advised of their right to consent to by requests from Models for Change states for or refuse diversion.88 This is often considered important, direction and guidance on how to plan or implement since entry into some diversion programs requires, in a successful diversion program. This Guidebook was effect, that the youth waive constitutionally protected created to provide juvenile justice practitioners with rights. This is the case in programs for which youth a set of recommendations, or steps, to assist them in are not eligible for diversion unless they admit their establishing and/or improving practices to support the participation in the offense that was charged, which implementation and operation of a successful diversion then leads to informal rather than formal processing. program. These recommendations are offered in Part III In doing so, they are waiving their right to be tried, to and represent a compilation of the best information and plead not guilty, to contest the charges, and to present research available on diversion. evidence in their defense, all of which could potentially lead to dismissal of the charges and avoidance of any penalties.

While criteria for eligibility, program purpose, and voluntary participation represent three of the most common considerations made in state diversion laws, the statutes address many more considerations. These considerations include elements such as: the referral decision point; operations; participant requirements; incentives; consequences; information use; and the role

15 16 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook PART III: Developing and Improving Juvenile Diversion Programs: 16 Steps

This section offers a guide for planning, implementing, or Third, some communities conduct an inventory of the improving a juvenile diversion program.89 It breaks down various youth services available in the community. Many the process into 16 “steps” to consider when designing diversion programs have, as part of their objective, the a diversion program to reduce youths’ exposure to referral of diverted youth to appropriate community formal juvenile justice processing. Each step focuses on a programs that focus on prevention, skill-building, mental question pertaining to a critical element of the plan. health or substance use needs, or family assistance. Having an inventory of these services helps to inform Getting Started later steps of the process. When a community is considering the development of a About the Steps diversion program, several preliminary activities help set the stage for engaging in the 16 steps recommended in The steps described here are intended to guide planners this Guidebook. in thinking through the questions associated with developing or improving a diversion program and making First, many communities choose to bring together decisions about its features and operations. One might planners. A wide range of participants may be wonder why we did not simply present a model program considered: local juvenile justice administrators, juvenile that communities could follow without having to make defense attorneys and prosecutors, local juvenile justice decisions about each of a program’s components. We system program directors, and perhaps stakeholders in would have done so, if there were a “model” program the private or public child services system and schools that would work well at all possible points for diversion within the community. This group can work together and in communities of all sizes with widely differing over time to develop a comprehensive plan as to what police practices, community-based services, and state their future diversion program will look like. Of course, laws. Such a program does not exist though. Therefore, this is only one way to start a diversion program. Some we offer a guide that allows each community to develop a programs may be started by a district attorney’s office or diversion plan best suited to its needs. probation office. In this Guidebook, the term “planner(s)” will be used to describe the individual or group that The 16 steps are arranged in the order that planners may is planning, developing, implementing, or improving a want to discuss and resolve them. It is important to note, juvenile diversion program. however, that planners may proceed according to what seems logical for their situation and community, perhaps Second, regardless of whether the planner is an beginning somewhere within the first set of questions and individual or a group, many communities find it helpful then circling back to other steps as needed. These steps to review pertinent data before beginning the planning are simply a guide to motivate discussions around the process. Sometimes the local court, for example, will key points that should be addressed when developing or have data on the number of youth involved in the local improving juvenile diversion programs. juvenile justice system each year. They may even have data on the number of youth with first offenses and with Each step begins with a description of an essential minor offenses (identifying the size of the group that is question that planners may want to address. Several most likely to be the target for diversion). options are set forth to respond to the issue the question

17 identiﬁes. Each step concludes with several considerations The 16 Steps are shown in Figure 1, grouped according that planners may want to think about when deciding how to their general category. They are described in detail to proceed with developing their diversion program. on the following pages, along with some of the key questions diversion program planners will want to For most of the steps, we do not arrive at a single address for each step. recommendation. Instead, we discuss the potential results that should be considered for the available options. We illustrate the questions and options with information obtained from diversion program descriptions, from this Workgroup's survey of diversion programs and from our review of laws and statutes relevant to diversion programs and their operations. This allows planners to decide for themselves the proper answer to each step in light of their own community’s circumstances.

Figure 1. 16 Steps for Creating a Diversion Program

A. Purpose D. Operation Policies 1. Objectives 8. Requirements 2. Referral Decision Points 9. Services 3. Extent of Intervention 10. Incentives B. Oversight 11. Consequences of Failure to Comply 12. Program Completion / Exit Criteria 4. Operations 5. Funding E. Legal Protections C. Intake Criteria 13. Information Use 14. Legal Counsel 6. Referral and Eligibility 7. Screening/Assessment F. Quality 15. Program Integrity 16. Outcome Evaluation

18 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Quick Reference: 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program A. Purpose 1) Objectives: The main purpose(s) for developing a diversion program will need to be identiﬁed. What will be the primary objectives of the diversion program? In your community, what stakeholders from the juvenile justice public/private youth services systems will be involved to provide input and support in shaping the development of your diversion program? 2) Referral Decision Points: There are various points within the juvenile justice processing continuum where youth can be targeted for diversion. At what point or points will referral decisions be made? Who, within the processing spectrum, will be responsible for making the decision to divert youth? 3) Extent of Intervention: The diversion program must consider the kind and degree of intervention it will have in the youth's life. What degree of intervention(s) will the program utilize? Will the program provide the youth with a written contract (either formal or informal)? B. Oversight 4) Operations: It is necessary to determine who will have primary responsibility for implementing and operating the diversion program and what the level of community oversight will be. What agency or entity will establish and maintain the program policies, provide stafﬁng, and take responsibility for program outcomes? Will an advisory board or panel be developed to oversee the development of policies and procedures for the diversion program? How will the engagement and buy-in of stakeholders be obtained? 5) Funding: Jurisdictions developing or implementing a diversion program must determine how the program will be funded and sustained for both the short and the long run. How will the diversion program be funded? Are secure funding streams currently in place that can help to sustain the program in the future? Has the possibility of using other local, state, or federal resources to help support the diversion program or key aspects of the program been explored? C. Intake Criteria 6) Referral and Eligibility: A diversion program will need to establish criteria that specify who is eligible for entry into the diversion program. What youth will be eligible for diversion? What offenses will be accepted for diversion? Are there any offenses that might make a youth ineligible and will there be options for discretion? Are there any offenses that might make a youth ineligible and will there be options for discretion?

19 Quick Reference: 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program continued 7) Screening and Assessment: Diversion programs may utilize evidence-based screening and assessment tools to assess risk, needs, and behavioral or mental health problems. Will any screening and/or assessment methods/tools be used to determine a youth’s eligibility, and if so, how will these tools be chosen and who will administer them? For what purposes will screening and assessment be used? Are there any protocols in place to deal with the sensitive nature of information collected and how, if at all, it can be shared among child-serving agencies? D. Operation Policies 8) Participant Requirements: It is important to determine the conditions and responsibilities youth will have to follow in order to ensure meaningful program participation. What obligations and conditions will the program require for the youth’s participation and successful completion? How will requirements focus on youths’ strengths, address behavioral health needs, satisfy victim concerns, and involve community efforts? 9) Services: The diversion program will need to consider what services, if any, will be provided to the youth by the program or through referral to community-based services, as well as how those services will be administered. What services will be provided for the youth while participating in the diversion program? Will the diversion program need to perform an inventory of community services, and if so, who will be responsible for this effort? Will the diversion program encourage or require the youth’s family to participate in services? Are there any agreements in place or Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) among the program and community service providers that will better facilitate services to the youth? 10) Incentives: Incentives should be employed by a diversion program in order to motivate youth and caretakers to meet the terms of the diversion program and to ensure successful program completion. Will the diversion program use any incentives to motivate youth and/or caretakers throughout the diversion process? If so, what forms of incentives will be used? Is the use of incentives economically feasible for the diversion program and what funding source will support incentives? Will the court agree to dropping charges against the youth or expunging records once the youth successfully completes the terms of diversion? 11) Consequences of Failure to Comply: Consequences must be speciﬁed for youth since some may have trouble fulﬁlling the terms of their diversion, either by failing to comply with the program’s requirements or by declining to participate altogether. Will there be any negative consequences for youth who fail to comply with the diversion program’s requirements? If so, what will these sanctions be? Will the youth ultimately be formally processed for failing to comply with diversion?

20 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Quick Reference: 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program continued 12) Program Completion/Exit Criteria: Criteria must be established that will define when a youth has successfully completed the terms of their diversion and is ready to exit the program. How will the diversion program monitor a youth’s success or failure during program participation? How will successful program completion be defined, and will there be established exit criteria? E. Legal Protections 13) Information Use: The diversion program will need to consider what procedures and protocols should be in place that will establish how sensitive information is collected and will be kept confidential. What will be the conditions/guidelines for the use of information obtained during the youth’s participation in the diversion program? How will policies concerning the collection and use of information be clearly established and conveyed to youth and caretakers prior to participation in diversion? 14) Legal Counsel: In the absence of a state statute or local policies, the program should have established guidelines for the role of counsel. What role will defense counsel play? Are there local policy provisions in place or statutory guidelines that establish the role of counsel? Will the diversion program make counsel available to youth and family? F. Quality 15) Program Integrity: It is important to carefully attend to the diversion program’s development and maintenance to ensure continued quality and program fidelity. Are there clear policies and procedures that will be put into manual form for program personnel to maintain program quality and fidelity? How will training be developed and delivered for diversion program personnel? How will information be collected and in what formats? Will the program conduct a process evaluation? 16) Outcome Evaluation: To ensure the diversion program is meeting its objectives and goals, a record- keeping and data collection system should be in place to assist in providing periodic evaluations. What kind of record keeping and data collection will be used to provide periodic evaluations of the diversion program and monitor achievement of goals and objectives? What youth and program outcomes will be used to measure success?

21 22 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook A. Purpose

Step 1. Objectives: and education.92 The accompanying text box shows some areas that may be negatively inﬂuenced when a What will be the main purpose(s) for developing youth has a juvenile record of adjudication. a diversion program? Options Background Checklist of Pennsylvania Juvenile Collateral Before discussing the various possible purposes for Consequences of Adjudication Checklist* developing a diversion program, it is worthwhile to recognize some basic facts about youth and their A juvenile court record can affect any of the following behaviors that may bring them in contact with police and areas: juvenile justice. These facts can offer a background for Employment Opportunities discussions of the purposes of a diversion process. Records Open to the Public Juvenile Court Open to the Public As described earlier in Part I, adolescence is a time Public Housing when youth—at one time or another—engage in risky Military Admissions behaviors, act without thinking, and make bad decisions Carrying a Firearm more often than they will as adults; thus, many of them Driver’s License 90 engage in what would be judged as illegal behavior. Access to Schools Most youth are not apprehended every time they do so, Access to Higher Education but arrest is a common experience among adolescents, Fines, Court Costs, and Restitution especially for youth of color in urban areas. Yet only Sex Offense Registration a minority of those youth will ever be arrested for a DNA Samples second delinquent act, or will become repeat offenders Opportunity for Expungement of Records 91 in adulthood. In other words, for the majority of youth Voting who are arrested, their ﬁrst delinquency is not a sign of Jury Service a future delinquency problem. Therefore, it is important Immigration Status to have a way for youth to avoid formal processing Adult Sentencing under certain conditions. Without such a mechanism, large numbers of youth are unnecessarily charged and * Pennsylvania Juvenile Indigent Defense Action Network (PA–JIDAN), May 2010 processed through the system, thus increasing a youth’s probability of further delinquencies due to their exposure to other delinquent youth during this process. The research literature on juvenile diversion programs and state statutes governing diversion provide Avoiding formal processing under certain conditions several purposes for developing ways to avoid formal is important considering the collateral consequences processing of youth. The following list is not meant to a youth may encounter after obtaining a juvenile be exhaustive, but to provide an idea of some of the record. Diversion can be a way for youth to avoid the objectives used by various diversion programs. They consequences associated with a juvenile court record, include: including the effects a record can have on employment

23 Reducing Recidivism: Decreasing repeat Reducing Disproportionate Minority Contact offending, thereby contributing to public safety.93 (DMC): Assuring that minority youth are not overrepresented in the juvenile justice system. Providing Services: Assuring that youth who are in need of intervention and treatment receive Considerations services that will help to reduce the likelihood of future offending and meet their developmental Individuals, diversion planners, communities and youth and problem-related needs. authorities will differ in their views regarding which of these possible objectives are more or less important. Reducing System Costs: Assuring that the juvenile Diversion planners may even develop objectives in justice system’s resources are reserved for use addition to those listed. Some programs may have with youth who must be formally processed, multiple priorities and establish multiple objectives. adjudicated, and rehabilitated.94 The important thing is for planners to clearly endorse objectives that express the intent of their community. Reducing Unnecessary Social Control: Assuring that youth, as citizens, are subjected to no more This ﬁrst step is especially critical for several reasons. state intervention than is necessary, and that The program’s statement of purpose will guide planners' caretakers (rather than the state) are responsible choices throughout the remaining 15 steps. There are for their children whenever possible. many ways to build the pieces of a diversion program, and program objectives will increase or decrease the Increasing Successful Outcomes for the Youth: Diversion programs may seek to increase school logic for selecting certain options as one moves from engagement, offer opportunities for positive one step to the next. For example, if a community’s skill development, increase prosocial activities, objective focuses exclusively on reducing juvenile or target other criteria that measure success for justice costs associated with formal processing, there youth. would be no need to include the provision of services to diverted youth as part of the diversion program. The Assuring Accountability: Assuring that youth— program could simply send some youth home following while avoiding adjudication—understand the apprehension by police rather than send them to juvenile seriousness of their actions and the effects court, thus saving the court the cost of processing cases. that their behaviors may have on the victim(s), On the other hand, if its primary objective is to reduce community, their family, etc., and holding them recidivism for youth with behavioral health issues, we accountable through some type of restitution know from studies reviewed in Part II that the provision instead of juvenile court sentencing.95 of community and clinical services—not merely sending youth home—may be helpful to achieve this. Avoiding Labeling Effects: Reducing the likelihood that youth—were they to be formally Planners will begin to learn a great deal about their processed—obtain a social label or self- differing perspectives by discussing and reviewing perception as “delinquent,” which may actually objectives. They may discover differences of opinion contribute to further delinquency. regarding what is important in responding to youth who are apprehended, and what is valued in one’s

24 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook community. Some may emphasize the need for services moment at which a referral to the diversion process is for youth, while others may emphasize the need to made based on initial eligibility criteria. impress upon youth and families the importance of making the most of the chance they are being given to Options avoid formal processing. The following are examples of the pre-adjudication Selecting the objectives is especially important because points when diversion might occur: a program’s purpose becomes its measure of success. Arrest or Apprehension: When a law enforcement The 16th and final step (Outcome Evaluation) in this official has contact with a youth. planning process is the development of a method that will be used to evaluate whether the diversion program Intake: When a police officer or other authority is achieving its objectives. Thus, the objectives that delivers a youth, after apprehension, to an office the planners ultimately choose will eventually be used that is authorized to “book” the case (This may to define whether the diversion program has met or include intake at a pretrial detention center). failed to meet the expectations of its funders and the community. Petitioning: The point at which (or immediately before) the court would be petitioned to begin the Step 2. Referral Decision Points: process leading to potential adjudication. Pretrial Probation Contact: A court or probation Which of the various points within the juvenile officer engaging in pretrial interviewing of a youth justice processing continuum will be targeted and family in the course of formal processing. for diversion? (See Figure 2 on page 26 for a diagram of Background points at which diversion may occur, and some specific programs—described throughout the Diversion can take place throughout the juvenile Guidebook—that focus on those points in the pre- justice process – from the initial contact with law adjudication process.) enforcement officials all the way through to diversion from adjudication. As noted in the Introduction, this The Workgroup's review of state statutes reveals Guidebook focuses on pre-adjudication diversion— diversity across states regarding the different points diversion up to and prior to formal adjudication in the pre-adjudication process on which diversion (excluding detention diversion). Most programs will programs focus. Over a dozen state statutes provide want to have specified criteria that will allow decision- that the diversion process or informal court processing makers to determine which youth are appropriate for should be implemented prior to the filing of a petition the diversion program. For example, a few broad initial in juvenile court.96 Florida’s civil citation statute further eligibility criteria (e.g., no prior adjudicated offenses) specifies that its pre-petition processing is to take place might be necessary for someone to refer a youth to before the point of arrest.97 Some states have laws the diversion program. Another way to think about the that articulate that the diversion process should be “decision point,” therefore, is to consider it to be the implemented post-petition.98 A few other state statutes

25 Figure 2. Diversion Points Along Continuum*

Arrest/Apprehension Pretrial Probation Contact Lancaster Youth County Ogle County BARJ Program Aid Panels (See pg. 50 for (See pg. 43 for program program information) information)

Intake Petitioning Dallas Front-End Diversion Juvenile Offender Services Initiative (See pg. 31 for Diversion (JOS) (See pg. 47 program information) for program information)

* TeamChild Advocacy for Youth is one example of a program that accepts youth referred at any point of the juvenile justice processing continuum above. (See page 54 for additional program information.) base the implementation of the diversion process around address those criteria are likely to be available at various the adjudication stage, specifying that diversion is to referral decision points. occur before adjudication.99 Certain combinations of referral decision points will Considerations tend to defeat many of the purposes for diversion. For example, a plan that allows for diversion referral only Since one of the primary functions of diversion is to at the point of petitioning or pretrial probation contact avoid or minimize formal processing, some program will restrict all diversion referral decisions until formal planners will want to consider initiating diversion at processing has already begun. By the time the youth’s the earliest possible point of contact with the youth. case has reached those points, it is on record, a period Some will want to strive for a conclusion that allows for of detention might have occurred, and the youth will referral at more than one point among the options listed have experienced contacts and questioning with various above. juvenile justice personnel. Some of the purposes for diversion, therefore, are more likely to be met if diversion One strategy to approaching this step is to make initial occurs earlier in the continuum illustrated in Figure 2. choices regarding the desired referral decision points, then to table the ﬁnal decision until later in the planning process when “entry criteria” are discussed. Options for referral decision points might depend in part on the eligibility criteria established and whether data that will

26 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Hamilton County Juvenile Community Courts Ohio

Overview: The Hamilton County Juvenile Community Courts in Ohio divert youth who have committed minor, first- time delinquency, or status offenses to an unofficial court where community volunteers assess the youth’s offense and impose sanctions. If requirements are completed successfully, the youth avoids the formal filing of charges. The program operates on the premise that youth will be more inclined to change their behavior after learning how their offenses impact members of their community. The Hamilton County Juvenile Community Courts have been in effect since 1958 and are operated and funded through a partnership between a juvenile assessment center and local law enforcement. Target Population: The program targets youth between the ages of 10–17. Generally, they are first-time offenders charged with minor misdemeanor offenses. Program Description: The juvenile court trains community volunteers to serve as referees at a semi-formal, yet unofficial hearing about the juvenile’s delinquent behavior at which time they impose a disposition. Any first-time offender can be set before the community court as long as the complaint came from the school or police. Penalties include community service, counseling, essays, and unofficial probation periods. Restitution is ordered if it is agreed upon by the defendant and the victim. If the youth has no other claims filed against them within one year, the report on the original offense is destroyed and the youth will have no official juvenile court record. An outside study of 393 cases heard in the Hamilton Community Courts over one year found that only 10.1% of youth recidivated in the year following their hearing. Program Contact: Hamilton County Juvenile Court, 800 Broadway, Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone: (513) 946-9455 Website: http://www.hamilton-co.org/juvenilecourt/default.asp

Step 3. Extent of Intervention: Options The following list provides a way to consider the range What kind and degree of intervention(s) will the of options from minimal to greater intervention. diversion program have in the youth's life? Warn and Release: This diversion process uses Background minimal intervention, involving police ofﬁcer warning or Programs vary considerably in what they do beyond encouragement, and providing assistance to the youth “stopping” formal processing. Some offer interventions in arriving at a safe place (typically home) immediately and services, while others do not. Among these after arrest. alternatives, some involve various degrees of intervention. It is this general level of decision about the No Conditions: The youth is discharged and if no new program’s intervention status that is needed at this stage contact with the law occurs, charges are automatically of program development.

27 16th JDC Prosecutor’s Early Intervention Program (PEIP)

Louisiana

Overview: The Prosecutor’s Early Intervention Program (PEIP), established in 2006, identifies and provides services for middle school-aged youth who have committed status or other minor offenses. PEIPs mission is to “address risk factors and enhance protective factors through early identification, assessment and intervention with status offending youth and youth with delinquency charges for minor offenses thereby reducing exposure of youth to the juvenile justice system.” The program is funded and operated by the local District Attorney’s office Family Services Division and serves 7 of the 13 middle schools in the 16th Judicial District, Louisiana. Target Population: The diversion program targets youth in grades 6–12 that have school behavioral or attendance problems, or who have committed minor delinquent offenses, and are assessed to be at risk for future delinquency. Program Description: School personnel may refer a youth due to truancy, violation of school rules, or if the youth’s parent or caretaker refuses to meet with school personnel to discuss the problem behavior. Once referred, youth are required to attend a family conference where an Informal Family Service Plan Agreement is completed. This Agreement outlines the recommended services for the youth and family and contains the plan for the delivery of those services. Progress is monitored by school-based case managers. If the youth complies with their service plan and the case manager sees demonstrated improvements in behavior, the case can then be closed. If not, the case manager may then refer to the youth to a committee or to juvenile court where a mandate to comply with the terms of the Agreement can be requested. Preliminary outcome data analyzed by the Office of Juvenile Justice shows a reduction in the number of youth entering the system. District court data shows the number of middle school-aged youth sent to court has declined, as has the number of youth adjudicated delinquent. Program Contact: Family Service Division- 16th JDC, 300 Iberra Street, Suite 200, New Iberia, LA 70560 Phone: (337)369-3804 Website: http://16thjdc-g.com/index.html dismissed within a certain time period (usually 6–12 Considerations months). Whichever extent of intervention is agreed upon, it is Conditions and/or Services: The program provides important that the terms be documented in a clear and for the fulfillment of certain conditions (restitution, concise manner. With warn and release situations, this community service, etc.) and/or referral to services may just be an official documentation of the incident. (minor level of services, such as skill building, through Programs employing conditions and/or services often higher level of services, such as substance abuse formulate a written agreement (formal or informal) treatment). These conditions constitute an agreement between the youth, the caretaker/family, and the between the program and the youth and family. Upon diversion program. These agreements often: successful completion, the charges are dismissed.

28 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Express objectives that are measurable (deadlines, work hours, restitution amount, etc.);

Clearly reﬂect that the child knowingly and voluntarily consents to participate in diversion;

Clearly reﬂect that the juvenile and parents have been notiﬁed of their right to refuse certain conditions/requirements of diversion;

Set a deﬁnite, limited duration;

Include provisions relating to both incentives and sanctions; and

Express provisions for what constitutes successful completion and termination of charges.

The caretakers and youth agree to seek the relevant services, and the diversion program agrees to work with the caretakers and family across time while they are receiving those services. When youth do not have family members or caretakers ready and available to participate in diversion services, the youth should still be considered for diversion and for services.

The program may also monitor the youth’s progress. Both parties have obligations, and typically a set of incentives is built into the plan to drive the arrangement. Like any agreement, there may also be sanctions for failing to abide by its terms. The speciﬁc types of obligations, incentives, and disincentives that might be employed are discussed in Steps 8 through 12.

29 B. Oversight

Step 4. Operations: Community-Based Service Agency: Among these are public mental health or other youth services What ofﬁce or agency will have primary agencies, as well as private organizations serving responsibility for implementing and operating youth and family needs. the diversion program, as well as for providing Law Enforcement: The local police station or community oversight? sheriff’s ofﬁce.

Background Options for forming an advisory board or panel are as There are two primary questions to address regarding diverse as the range of community programs serving who will operate the diversion program. One pertains youth and families. In general, one would wish to to what office or agency will have primary responsibility consider having legal, social service, victim, and for implementation and operations. Typically, this will be community consumer representatives. On the “legal” one office or agency, although collaborations between end of the community spectrum are the juvenile court, agencies are possible. The second question pertains prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers, and to community oversight. A diversion program, although law enforcement officers. On the services end are public run by one agency or party, will not operate in isolation. mental health, schools, and various organizations in To be successful, most diversion programs need the the community that provide critical services to youth involvement and “buy-in” of the community’s legal, and families. A community’s victim advocacy group social, and behavioral health services. The importance or someone to represent the perspective of victims is of their involvement typically warrants the development important. Consumers typically would include caretakers of an advisory board or panel that can help the primary or someone in the community who is part of neither operations agency develop policies and anticipated legal nor clinical services and who has the respect of procedures for the work of the diversion program. the community’s families—for example, a local religious leader who is active in public affairs. Options Maryland law provides an example of how some The following are examples of agencies or entities that diversion programs are coordinated, monitored and operate diversion programs in some communities: supported using local management boards.100 These boards are required by statute to “[convene] a local County Juvenile Justice Services: Often this planning group consisting of parents, youth, and is the county’s juvenile probation office or a representatives of public and private agencies that have juvenile center that includes other juvenile justice knowledge of and experience working with at-risk youth services, such as pretrial detention. and families.”

Prosecutor: Often this is the county juvenile Considerations prosecutor’s ofﬁce. There is no research literature to suggest that diversion Court: A municipal, county or state court. programs are more or less successful depending on the types of agencies that operate them. We suspect

30 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Dallas Front-End Diversion Initiative

Texas

Overview: The Dallas Front-End Diversion Initiative (FEDI), established in 2009, serves Dallas County, Texas. It is operated and funded by the Dallas County Juvenile Department (county juvenile corrections) and overseen by the Texas Youth Commission. FEDI is a non-judicial, early-intervention program that strives to assist youth in becoming productive, law-abiding citizens, in an effort to prevent their further penetration into the system. Target Population: The program targets first-time, low-risk offenders, ages 10–17, that have not been charged with a status, serious, or aggravated offense. FEDI targets youth with unmet mental health needs, although it is not a requirement. A youth is diverted at intake, and does not have to admit to the charges against him/her to be eligible for the program. Caretaker consent/involvement is mandatory for program participation. Program Description: Once referred into the program, screening and assessment is done to determine the youth’s mental health, substance abuse, and risk needs; this information is used for determining eligibility and service planning. A Probation Officer oversees the provision of services (provided by direct service or through referral), which may include substance abuse and mental health treatment services, mentoring, family counseling, educational assistance programs (school/job placement), caregiver respite/support, life skills training, assistance in obtaining Medicaid, parenting classes, and support groups for caretakers of youth with disabilities. Youth are required to participate in services and abstain from new arrests. Failure to complete or follow the program requirements may result in a warning, filing of a petition, temporary detention, increased frequency or intensity of monitoring, and unsuccessful discharge from the program. Upon successful completion of the program, the youth’s record is expunged and charges are dropped. The average length of program participation and maximum length of participation is 6 months. Of the 55 participants who started and were discharged from the program between February 1, 2009, and January 31, 2010, five percent (3) had a new referral at 30 days; 18% (10) at 90 days; and, 24% (13) at 6 months. Program Contact: Dallas County Juvenile Department, 2600 Lone Star Drive, Dallas, TX 75212 Phone: (214) 698-4223 Website: http://www.dallascounty.org/department/juvenile/juvenile.html

that this decision will be based on at least two factors. there will be a tendency for the operating agency to First, the readiness of an agency to operate a diversion be the one most strongly motivated to propose the program is likely to depend on the past roles of speciﬁc development of a diversion process. agencies within a community. Choosing a juvenile justice-based agency over a social service agency, or The importance of constructing an advisory board the reverse, may simply depend on their histories in cannot be overstated. Diversion programs are usually the community in question, and not on any inherent community-based programs that are dependent on advantage of one type of agency over the other. Second, community support and collaboration. In their most

31 comprehensive form, some diversion programs will The most often identiﬁed primary sources of funding connect youth with a wide range of services in the included: community. Moreover, many diversion programs are not merely brokers of services but instead work directly with County Juvenile Corrections or Probation Agency the various participating community service agencies Municipal/County/State Court to assure a youth’s success. Those operations and relationships will evolve much more smoothly if the Prosecutor community stakeholders are involved from the beginning of the formulation of the program’s objectives, policies, Other sources of funding identiﬁed by survey responders and procedures. included:

Juvenile or Community Assessment Center Step 5. Funding: Private/Community-Based Service Agency How will the diversion program be funded and sustained for both the short and long run? State Juvenile Corrections Agency or Detention Center Background State Substance Abuse Agency Any jurisdiction that is developing or improving a Local Law Enforcement Agency diversion program or process will inevitably have to address how it will be funded and then sustained in County/State Commissioner’s Office the long run. Given recent fiscal crises affecting many jurisdictions across the country, this is not necessarily Juvenile Accountability Block Grants an easy task. There is often no single, clear funding A few programs surveyed also cited federal funding stream available, and identifying sources of funding can from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services pose a challenge to any community. More particularly, Administration (SAMHSA) and the Office of Juvenile funding for juvenile justice programs is seldom a priority Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). Federal and it is now common for state legislators to search funding for juvenile justice initiatives usually comes from state budgets for areas to cut, including those covering OJJDP or the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), and 101 juvenile justice programming. these funding streams are generally administered by the state governments.102 Options

There is no one model for jurisdictions to follow when Considerations attempting to secure funds. Multiple sources of funding While there are many challenges to ﬁnding and securing can be tapped, and it is up to a jurisdiction to research funding, there are some strategies that jurisdictions may the various options for available funding. Of the diversion choose to pursue that will assist them through what can programs the Workgroup surveyed, a number of different be an arduous process. The following are just a few of funding sources were identiﬁed by the responders. the many differing strategies jurisdictions may pursue:

32 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Ensure meaningful collaborative relationships Prevention. Juvenile Accountability Block Grants (JABG), with other child-serving and community-based also administered by OJJDP, are another source of agencies. federal funding. The goal of the JABG program is to “reduce juvenile offending through accountability- Have an administrative or legislative evaluation based programs focused on juvenile offenders and the of the program conducted to demonstrate cost- juvenile justice system.” In addition to these federal effectiveness and use those results to redirect grant programs, jurisdictions may also look for possible 103 spending from ineffective programs. funding from the following areas: Incorporate program outcomes into program design and outcome evaluations. Designated funds from their state legislatures; County/community grants; Shift the focus from program cost to investment in 104 public safety and crime reduction. Medicaid;

Utilize volunteer services to enhance traditional Private or public foundation grants; funding sources—volunteers may be able to assist in the “follow-up, tracking, and case Health insurance; management tasks.”105 The use of volunteer State Advisory Group; or services can also be used as a way to lower program costs and sustain program efforts. Local businesses and community agencies.107

Incorporate existing programs into diversion While there is no one model blueprint for funding, efforts.106 there are multiple funding streams and nontraditional funding sources to consider. In addition, it is important It is also important for those in the position of running to consider funding for the long term and to keep all key or starting up a diversion program to be aware of stakeholders involved in this process. This will inevitably the various funding resources available within their enhance the likelihood that programmatic efforts communities. For example, federal grants such as the initiated can be sustained or even expanded. Formula Grants Program are awarded to State Advisory Groups and are used to support programs that address delinquency prevention, intervention efforts, and system improvements and target diversion programs that keep youth out of the juvenile justice system. In addition to Formula Grants, the Community Prevention Grants Program funds go toward the planning and implementation of collaborative and community-based delinquency prevention efforts, including juvenile diversion programs. Both the Formula Grants and Community Prevention Grants Programs are overseen by the Ofﬁce of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

33 C. Intake Criteria

Step 6. Referral and Eligibility: or office can say, “This is a youth who fits the criteria for referral to the diversion program.” That person or office Which youth will be eligible for diversion? may have very specific rules regarding the case facts What criteria will the diversion program use to that would make a youth eligible to be referred. This is determine eligibility? what we mean by “initial eligibility criteria.” Indeed, for many diversion programs, if the youth is eligible, that Background person or office is strongly encouraged to refer the youth to the diversion program. Only youth who are not eligible It is important that a diversion program have very for diversion would be sent for formal juvenile justice specific criteria that define eligibility for program entry. processing. Written guidelines must be developed that set forth the intake process as well as the criteria that define Once a youth is referred to the diversion program, the eligibility for program entry. The criteria must be firm and youth and family typically have an initial meeting with definitive to be of use to decision-makers, yet flexible a staff person working in the diversion program. In our to permit the exercise of discretion. The criteria should further description of this diversion staff person, we will seek to maximize the opportunities for diversion without call him or her a “diversion counselor,” although various 108 widening the net. programs may have different titles for this person. At the first meeting, the diversion counselor will gather Before discussing eligibility criteria, it is important to information about the youth and caretakers, through recognize that most diversion programs will need to start interview and any past records. They will talk about the with a determination of “legal sufficiency.” This refers to program and engage in agreements about the youth and whether the facts alleged in the complaint are sufficient family’s participation. During this process, other facts in terms of jurisdiction (they are within the authority might arise that would make entrance into the diversion of the juvenile court) and in terms of facts (the known program inappropriate for that youth. Thus, not all youth facts of the case) to indicate that the allegation can be who are referred to diversion will necessarily engage substantiated. Without legal sufficiency, the case should in the diversion program. Given that some youth who be dismissed. Diversion should not be a “dumping were referred (met initial eligibility) are later deemed ground” for cases that should never have been initiated. inappropriate for diversion programming, we refer to the Without requiring consideration of legal sufficiency, latter criteria as “de-selection criteria.” diversion processes run the risk of net widening. Options Once legal sufficiency is considered, the diversion program needs guidelines outlining eligibility criteria Deciding on the program’s initial and de-selection criteria for entry into the program. There are two broad types of can be one of the most important set of decisions that eligibility criteria, which we will call (a) initial eligibility will be made by planners of the diversion program, and criteria and (b) de-selection criteria. The following possibly the most complex. We describe below the explains what these are and how they differ. options that planners often consider for both types of criteria, followed by some points planners may want to After a youth is apprehended by police officers, the consider while deciding which options to choose. program will have one or more points at which a person

34 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Initial Eligibility Criteria: We offer three initial Focus entirely on status offenses, excluding eligibility criteria to consider. The ﬁrst is age, and the all youth arrested for behaviors that would be other two pertain to types of offenses. categorized as delinquencies.

Age: Planners must decide about the age range of Focus entirely on youth arrested for potential youth who will be eligible. In our survey, the most delinquencies, excluding all youth apprehended common age range was 10 years to the highest on status offenses or truancies. age that is under the jurisdiction of the juvenile Focus on both status offenses and delinquencies. justice system (typically 17th or 18th birthday, but varies from state to state). If the program includes youth apprehended for behaviors that would be delinquencies, the next level of decisions History: In most diversion processes, intake pertain to the types of delinquencies that will be eligible. criteria include consideration of a youth’s prior Here there are several options: history with diversion and the court. While most programs specify that youth are eligible if they Misdemeanors only have no prior offense, decision-makers can make diversion available to those youth who have Misdemeanors and felonies previously successfully completed diversion and Misdemeanors and felonies but with exclusion of even those who previously have been adjudicated some felonies delinquent. Diversion planners should consider the target population for diversion as they decide Regarding those options, our survey found that a majority how the youth’s criminal history affects their of diversion programs accepted only misdemeanors eligibility for diversion. (the first option above), and that most programs that accepted felonies excluded certain specific felonies. Type of Current Alleged Offense: Diversion The specific felonies that were mentioned most often as programs often exclude youth from eligibility ineligible for diversion were: based on the type of current charge. This refers to the charge that would be filed if the youth were Weapons-related offenses formally charged on the basis of the behavior for which they were apprehended. Jurisdictions Gang-related offenses differ in the manner in which they classify Violent offenses (ranging from battery to murder) offenses; however, most jurisdictions have broad classifications for (a) status offenses (would not Some programs use a set of “risk factors” to apply be criminal offenses if the youth were an adult), to cases when deciding on their initial eligibility. Risk (b) misdemeanors, and (c) felonies. factors are facts about a case that have been determined to identify a decrease or increase in the likelihood that a Regarding the “Type of Current Alleged Offense,” several case will result in negative outcomes during some period levels of decisions may need to be made. The first of time in the future. Ideally, the risk factors themselves pertains to the program’s objectives. Some programs: are known, based on past research, to be valid estimates of future risk of repeated general or violent offending.

35 Typically the risk factors together are referred to as a Youth and Caretaker Decline: Diversion programs “tool,” and the tool’s manual allows the case to be rated typically are voluntary. Youth and caretakers may or scored on each risk factor. A cut-off score is applied decline to participate in the diversion program to the sum of the risk factor scores, indicating youth who after they are informed of the conditions of are not eligible for diversion due to higher risk scores. participation, especially those matters that will be required of them. Their declination would de- The risk factors themselves typically are small in number select them from the diversion program. (5–10 items). To be used as initial criteria, they should be easy to score or rate without an interview or any special Considerations assessment of the youth. In other words, they must be Offense Criteria: The process of selecting initial answerable based on past records and law enforcement eligibility criteria gets to the very heart of motivations information about the youth’s behavior at arrest. and concerns regarding diversion programs. The criteria described above clearly seek to avoid formal processing De-Selection Criteria: As noted earlier, de-selection of youth for a first-time offense. This makes sense, given criteria are applied during a first interview with a that we know that most youth who offend for the first diversion counselor (after the youth has been referred time do not offend again. Making them formal first-time to the diversion program based on initial criteria). They offenders (by formally processing them) simply increases are a set of factors that may lead to non-participation their exposure to the juvenile justice system and the in the program, even though the youth has met initial chances that they will begin to identify themselves (and criteria. The following are more common examples of be identified by others) as “delinquents.” de-selection criteria: On the other hand, our desire to protect the public is Risk Factors (again): Some programs choose to equally as strong as our desire to avoid unnecessary employ an additional set of risk factors at the formal processing of youth. Planners may want to diversion program’s intake interview. For example, develop initial eligibility criteria with an eye to avoiding some screening tools employ risk factors that harm to others by those minority of youth who may go on are important but require information that goes to commit serious delinquent acts. beyond case facts that were used as initial criteria. These additional risk factors can be Devising “prior offense” and “type of current offense” identified in the intake interview with youth and criteria, therefore, may require careful attention to caretakers. In addition, sometimes the interview balance between two primary values—avoiding formal will reveal that the case facts that were applied processing while ensuring access to services, and to the threshold decision were wrong. Thus, assuring public safety. It is good for planners to realize in a minority of cases, this second risk factor that both values work together, in the following ways: screening might identify reasons to de-select the youth from the diversion program because of high Failure to attend to public safety concerns can risk for re-offending that was not apparent when lead to the diversion program’s failure to provide the threshold criteria were applied. youth with community-based services. Too many youth might engage in serious offenses while in a

36 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook diversion program, leading to public disfavor and Discretion: Whatever the initial eligibility criteria, a lack of continued support for the program. procedural question to consider is whether those who apply the criteria “must” refer each youth who meets Creating highly conservative threshold criteria the criteria, or whether they are allowed to use their in the interest of public safety will decrease discretion to override the eligibility criteria in some the number of youth eligible for diversion. This cases. We suggest that it is better for a program’s decreases the opportunities for the diversion policies and procedures to see initial eligibility criteria program to direct youth to community services as creating a presumption of referral to diversion. A known to reduce recidivism, thus potentially program that allows decision-makers to simply “take increasing long-range risks to public safety. the initial criteria into consideration,” while then Decisions about eligibility criteria often require using discretion to decide whether or not to divert, is considering both science and community standards. in danger of applying the diversion opportunity in an Research tells us that some risk factors are important inconsistent and potentially unfair manner. It provides predictors of future re-offending, while others that we no accountability for judgments that may, in the end, might suspect to be warning signs are not actually be arbitrary and based on factors that should have related to re-offending. On the other hand, community nothing to do with the community’s expressed interest in standards and perceptions must also be weighed. For diversion. example, research tells us that youth who engage in a sex offense for the first time are very unlikely to engage Having said this, planners may not want to employ initial in one again. Yet public perception in some communities eligibility criteria that provide no option for discretion may simply not allow youth arrested for a first-time sex in unusual cases. It is inevitable that authorities who offense to be included in diversion programs, despite apply the initial criteria will encounter cases in which their low likelihood of re-offending. the criteria are met, but additional information that is available to them strongly indicates that the youth or the Youth programs of all kinds are often advised to include community is in grave and imminent danger if the youth attention to the strengths of the youth. Does the youth is diverted without immediate control by the juvenile have a supportive family? Are there resources available justice system. For example, imagine that a reviewing to the youth that may make diversion the best option? officer finds that a youth meets all threshold criteria, but It is important to recognize not only the offense and is also known (from records) to have attempted suicide risk factors, but also the positive qualities of the youth twice in the past few weeks. Formal processing may and family, and how these contribute to the decision to be necessary simply to manage the immediate safety divert. of the youth, especially if the diversion program intake be completed until after the weekend. The reverse Judgments about initial eligibility criteria can be can also happen. For example, a reviewing officer may improved by reviewing sources of information about find that a youth does not meet all of the threshold reliable risk factors. One source is validated risk criteria, yet knows them to have a supportive family and screening tools. It is also suggested that planners seek extensive resources available to them. The officer may the guidance of researchers and others in the field who think diversion is the best option for this youth, and use are familiar with the literature on youth risk factors. discretion to include them in diversion.

37 For these reasons, planners may want to consider a strengths, and problem areas for a given youth; and “must” rule, but with a tightly deﬁned discretionary special considerations related to behavioral and/or option to override in extraordinary circumstances and mental health problems. with such decisions subject to documentation. The discretionary override may require: Screening refers to a brief process, often involving no more than 10–15 minutes per youth. Its purpose is to additional information not previously known; determine youth who warrant immediate attention and intervention, and youth who may need a more an extraordinary circumstance; comprehensive review. prior discussion with a second authority; Assessment refers to a more comprehensive review. a process of documentation of the exceptional If screening suggests that a youth needs further reason; evaluation, an assessment may be used in this smaller number of cases to offer a more comprehensive, a review at a monthly or quarterly meeting of the individualized, and in-depth examination of the needs, diversion program. strengths, and problems identiﬁed during an initial Caretaker and Youth De-Selection: When discussing screening. This may include the type and extent of de-selection criteria, we noted that some youth and mental health issues or substance use disorders, other caretakers may decide not to accept the diversion problems/issues associated with the disorders, skill program. Diversion programs are voluntary. Some sets, strengths, and recommendations for services and programs require that youth and caretakers assume a intervention. Assessments typically require individualized variety of responsibilities as a condition of the program. data collection, including past records, interviews, and These requirements vary considerably from one collateral information. program to another. Moreover, some programs impose consequences if the youth and caretaker fail to honor the When choosing a screening or assessment instrument, responsibilities to which they agreed when they entered it is important to try to use tools that are empirically the program. When the conditions are not acceptable to validated (sometimes this is called “evidence based”). By the caretaker or youth, they should be able to decline. this, we mean that the tool is:

standardized: always done the same way every Step 7. Screening and Assessment: time with every youth;

Will evidence-based screening and assessment relevant: it will assist with making the necessary methods be used to assess risk, needs, and decisions at hand and will be compatible with the behavioral or mental health problems? skill level of your staff;

Background reliable: research indicates that two independent raters would usually get the same results; and Screening and assessment tools can be used to assess the risk of future harm to self or others; the needs, valid: there is research-based evidence that the tool is actually measuring what it claims to

38 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook measure. When a tool is backed by research, likelihood that youth with behavioral health problems you can be more conﬁdent that the tool will be receive services in the community. effective and help with decision-making. Assessment tools (more intensive follow-up) are Options sometimes used at the point of determining initial Screening: Various types of screening tools that may eligibility for diversion, if the system has adequate be important for use by a diversion program include the assessment resources to do so. More often, the need following: for more comprehensive assessment is decided after a youth has been referred to a diversion program, Risk Screening: These tools are used to determine the when the need for speciﬁc diversion services is being likelihood that a given juvenile will re-offend. determined.

Mental Health Screening: These tools help identify Screening and assessment tools, when implemented mental health symptoms in need of immediate response, successfully, can increase the chance that diversion— such as suicide risk, while also targeting youths that may and the services that it might provide—are made require further evaluation. available in an effective manner. The best screening and assessment tools have been developed to be fair with Substance Use Screening: These tools help identify regard to gender and race/culture in arriving at their youth who warrant further attention because they may results. This reduces the bias that might be involved if have a substance abuse problem. opinions about youths’ needs are decided based merely on staff interviews and personal judgments. Screening Assessment: Assessment tools typically require more and assessment tools can also help a diversion program training, and often they must be administered by clinical allocate resources for youth, reserving them for staff (that is, individuals with specialized master’s those youth at the highest risk of re-offending and/or or doctoral level degrees). There are many types of experiencing considerable psychosocial issues. assessment tools, designed for obtaining more detail on: (a) mental health problems; (b) substance use problems; Whether a tool is evidence based is an important (c) trauma-related disorders; (d) special educational consideration in choosing tools. A tool’s feasibility must needs; (e) speciﬁc problem areas of adjustment in a also be considered. Some screening tools are briefer youth’s life (e.g., family issues, peer relations); and (f) than others, require more or less in-service training to personality traits related to offending. administer, and have greater or lesser ﬁnancial costs associated with their purchase. Some assessment tools Considerations can only be given by professionals with formal education in administering and interpreting tests. Many diversion programs use risk screening when applying the initial criteria for eligibility. Some also Therefore, choosing screening and assessment tools include a brief mental health and/or substance use can be complex. Many programs seek the assistance screening tool, especially if the diversion program of clinicians with special training in screening and intends to favor diversion objectives that increase the assessment to advise them in tool selection. This might be someone in the community’s juvenile justice system,

39 mental health system, or a psychology department in a local college or university.

It is important for diversion planners to consider development of a screening and assessment protocol that all staff will follow. Doing so will ensure that staff know when the screening tools will be utilized in the process, and if needed, when an assessment or further evaluation should be required.

40 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook D. Operation Policies

Step 8. Participant Requirements: Options Requirements: Requirements for participants will vary What are the conditions and responsibilities a great deal depending on the type of diversion process. the youth will have to meet in order to ensure For example, “warn and release” diversion programs their meaningful participation in the diversion may have no requirements at all. For those that do program? however, one or more of the following requirements and/ Background or conditions are common:

When youth agree to participate in diversion, Participation in screening and assessment typically they also agree to abide by conditions and Participation in community service programs responsibilities associated with program participation. Failure to do so may result in termination from the Attendance at scheduled diversion program diversion program, as well as other penalties. These appointments conditions should be clearly reﬂected in a formal written agreement between the youth, the family, and the Continued participation for a speciﬁed length of diversion program. Written agreements often contain the time following: Restitution

Measurable objectives and conditions to be Other Requirements: There are many other possible met by the youth (for example, agreement to participant requirements that diversion programs may participate in services, hours of community use. Some examples include: services, exact amount of restitution) rather than vague conditions (show respect). These conditions Admission to the illegal behavior that led to a should be deﬁned in detail and provide a time line referral to diversion for completion. Acceptable demeanor when meeting with the A formal process for reviewing and monitoring diversion program contact compliance. Attendance A system of rewards for compliance and sanctions for noncompliance. Absence of new arrests

A statement of the agreement's duration. Consent to participate in diversion

Veriﬁcation that victim input was sought and Signing of diversion agreement taken into account.

Veriﬁcation that the youth and caretaker were notiﬁed of their right to refuse diversion.

41 Considerations be informal—for example, by phone—to determine the youth’s continued use of services. Whatever the There are two broad considerations when addressing arrangement, it is important that participants are clearly this step in the process: (a) the specific types of informed at the outset that once they are enrolled in the requirements, and (b) the nature of the youth’s and program, continuation will be contingent upon satisfying caretaker’s consent. these requirements for meetings with the diversion counselor. In addition, some of the programs we Types of Requirements: For some programs, the surveyed required that participants agree to “stay with requirement to participate in screening and assessment the program” for a specified period of time. For those directly furthers the objective to obtain services for the programs, the average was 3–6 months. youth and caretaker that are matched to their needs. This typically will include evidence-based mental Some programs require that the youth take responsibility health screening and assessment tools and structured for the actions that resulted in their referral to the instruments to assess a youth’s needs. But some diversion program.109 This is based upon the Balanced programs also require such methods as urinalysis to and Restorative Justice concept of “accountability,” screen for drug use that might indicate the need for which proponents believe can contribute to the youth’s special substance use treatment services. If a program is positive development as well as their openness to primarily service oriented, failure on the part of the youth influence by service programs. “Accepting responsibility” to engage in screening and assessment methods may is also associated with requirements found in some defeat the program’s primary objective. programs regarding “demeanor” when in contact with the diversion program: for example, attending sessions Most of the diversion programs surveyed by the on time and dressing appropriately. If a program requires Workgroup required that the youth and caretaker agree that a youth take responsibility for his/her actions (for to make use of one or more of the community services example, admit to the behavior that was the reason for that the program prescribed. They are informed that the charges), it is important that information remain failure to do so is a breach of the agreement and can confidential, so as to not later punish a child for meeting result in a termination of the program’s services and the requirements of the program. reinstatement of the charges. School participation is sometimes included here, in that it is an important The requirement for the “absence of new arrests” was “service” for purposes of most youths’ positive noted by some surveyed diversion programs. Some development. programs terminate the participation of a youth when the youth is apprehended on a new charge while The requirement to attend scheduled diversion program participating in the program. Other programs allow for appointments varies across programs. Some programs continuance in diversion as long as the new arrest is for require weekly meetings of youth and caretakers with behavior that continues to fit in the original eligibility the diversion program counselor. For other programs, criteria. regularly scheduled appointments are not necessarily required following the first few sessions during which the youth has been connected with community services. In these instances, subsequent contact may simply

42 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Ogle County Balanced and Restorative Justice Program

Illinois

Overview: The Ogle County, Illinois Juvenile Justice Council oversees the Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ) program. Established in 2008, the mission of this program is to “protect the community from crimes committed by minors through the promotions, establishment, education, and interagency coordination of community-based programs for families and minors designed to prevent unlawful and delinquent behavior, incorporating principles of the BARJ model which holds each youth accountable for his or her behavior.” The program is operated through the Ogle County Probation Department and the Ogle County Juvenile Justice Council. Target Population: The program targets Ogle County youth ages 10–17 who are ﬁrst-time offenders. Youth can be referred to the BARJ Program at their initial contact with law enforcement, at petitioning, or at the time of case processing review (juvenile arrest reports are reviewed twice a month). Program Description: Once diverted, youth gain access to a variety of services which may include mentoring, family counseling, mental health or substance abuse treatment services, educational assistance, and life skills training. A BARJ Coordinator oversees the provision of services to the youth. A contract is made for the youth, which requires the completion of certain conditions. These may include: an apology letter to the victim; a victim-offender conference; accountability worksheets; community service; and the payment of restitution. Failure to adhere to the terms of their agreement may result in the youth’s discharge from the program and the ﬁling of a petition. Program involvement typically lasts between 3–6 months. In 2009, approximately 188 youth were diverted to the BARJ Program and successfully completed the terms of their program. Program Contact: Ogle County Juvenile Justice Council, 106 5th St., Suite 100, Oregon, IL 61061 Phone: (815) 732-1180 Website: http://www.oglejjc.org

Youth and Caretaker Decisions to Participate or (c) the potential consequences of failure to abide Refuse Participation: Diversion programs typically see by required conditions if the youth chooses to youths’ participation as voluntary—they can decide to participate; and participate or not. Therefore, it is important that they are fully informed before they make the decision. Youth and (d) the potential consequences if one decides not to caretakers participating in the diversion program must be participate in the program. clearly informed at the outset about:

(a) the program’s potential beneﬁts;

(b) what will be required of the youth and caretaker;

43 When youth and/or caretakers decide not to participate Step 9. Services: in diversion, some programs do not simply dismiss the charges, but rather proceed with formal processing of What services, if any, will be provided to the the charges through the juvenile justice system’s normal youth by the diversion program or through adjudication process. Some youth and parents might referral to community-based services, and how see adjudication as preferable, if they believe that the will those services be administered? youth was not responsible for the offense he or she was alleged to have done. But the decision to proceed Background with formal processing is a serious one that can have The primary function of a diversion program depends negative consequences for the youth. on the program’s objectives. Some youth will not Under such circumstances, programs face a legal require services and some diversion programs will not uncertainty. Must the youth’s decision about acceptance provide services to youth. But if an objective of a given or refusal of the program meet legal requirements diversion program is to resolve the underlying causes of for “informed” consent? If youth decide to accept delinquent behavior by engaging youth and caretakers in responsibility and participate in the diversion program, services and interventions, a useful step in developing rather than to decide to defend themselves against the program is to create a coalition of community-based the charges, is this tantamount to a decision to “plead programs. Planners who are developing services- guilty?” If so, then some jurisdictions would see the oriented diversion programs will want to consider what decision to accept or refuse diversion participation as is available in their community and those services that requiring informed consent—that is, that it must be are willing to work with their program. Additionally, made knowingly and intelligently by a youth who is when deciding what services will be provided through considered competent to decide. the diversion program, it is important for planners to consider conducting a community needs assessment How this question is handled will depend on local with respect to their targeted diversion populations. This juvenile laws and policies, because there is no over- assessment may help planners determine what services arching legal precedent to provide an answer. We can the community needs to serve the population of youth to only recommend, therefore, that planners consult local be diverted. juvenile prosecutors and defense attorneys regarding a resolution of this question. Programs that do not formally Once program planners identify the services the process youth who choose not to participate are less community needs and those that are available, likely to encounter this problem, because the immediate they should determine how these services will be consequences of refusal to participate in such programs administered. Will the services be administered directly are not as serious as in programs in which refusal results through the program or will the program refer youth to in formal processing and potential adjudication of the services operated by others? Some diversion programs charges. might do a combination of both, providing some services in-house and creating a coalition of services in the community to administer other services through a referral process. These alternatives are described in the following section.

44 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Options The survey of diversion programs also provided a list of other types of programs that can augment the above Building Coalition: Many programs begin by taking services: inventory of what services the diversion population in the community likely needs and what the community Respite and support services for caregivers actually has to offer by way of these services. The (especially caretakers of youth) Workgroup's survey of diversion programs provides some examples of the types of services one may want to look Transportation services to other intervention for. Quite a few of the programs are associated with services services in the following areas: Financial aid to defray program costs, if any

Family interventions, including family counseling, Wraparound services Multi-Systemic Therapy, Functional Family Therapy, and other family-based interventions Medicaid assistance

Substance use intervention, including everything After school recreational and support programs from detox services to individual and group After services have been inventoried and examined for programs to reduce alcohol and drug use and quality, some planners will want to build in a period dependence of time for enlisting the involvement of the relevant Mental health treatment, ranging from individual community services. Typically this will involve making psychotherapy and counseling to more intensive contacts with them and indicating the future program’s mental health services, as well as services that interest in referring youth to them. The contact are not “diagnostically specific”—for example, could include discussion of each service’s specific anger management programs requirements and exclusions regarding the youth referred to them. Mentoring, referring to a range of services that focus on connecting youth with caring adults who Administering the Services: As mentioned previously, can provide positive one-on-one “big brother” and some diversion programs will choose to administer “big sister” types of relationships services directly to youth entering their program. They may have service providers in-house and youth Life-skills training, referring to programs that would come to the location of the program to receive teach skills related to the workplace and to roles their recommended services. Other programs prefer as caretakers and partners to make referrals to services for youth. They will set Educational assistance programs, including a up agreements with certain service providers in the range of services that assist youth in improving community for diverted youth. This is where creating their study and comprehension skills a coalition of services will have the most benefit. The diversion program would simply refer the youth to the Job placement services, which can help youth find specified service and set up some form of reporting to summer and part-time jobs track the youth’s progress in the service.

45 Combination of Both: Some diversion programs will least of these is the program’s dependence on what is combine the above two options. They could choose to available in the community. In recent years, budgets establish a coalition of services in the community to have not been kind to agencies that provide community which they refer youth and to provide some services services to youth. On the other hand, many communities through the diversion program in-house. There may have found that when they explored what is available be some services the diversion program is unable to in both the public and private sector, they have been provide, and that is when the coalition of services in the surprised at the range of services they can consider. community can be of great assistance. Services may range from minor level services (skill building, after school recreational activities, and peer Considerations mentoring) to medium level (educational assistance and counseling) and higher level services (family The process of conducting a community needs interventions, substance use treatment, and mental assessment and inventory of community youth programs health treatment). need not begin from scratch. Needs assessments and inventories often are already available in many When developing a coalition of community-based communities. For example, child mental health services services, planners should be sure to utilize the often have a list of resources in the community that information gathered in the community needs might meet the more general needs of youth. Both public assessment to match the needs of the youth to the and not-for-profit organizations should be identified. services the community offers. The importance of matching youth needs to the appropriate services cannot The process of obtaining collaborative agreements be overemphasized. Planners can go about doing this from community services that are willing to participate by getting a list of services each community provider can typically be done through contacts during the offers and recognizing the specific needs of the youth in inventory. Other mechanisms used by some diversion that community. A service matrix of some sort could be programs are Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs), utilized, matching up needs to the appropriate services which simply state the conditions for the diversion and providers. program to work with each of the community services. Typically the MOU will spell out the types of youth The matter of availability is the starting point, but more that the community service will accept on referral, as is needed to arrive at a set of interventions for the well as any agreements that are reached regarding the program’s portfolio. When an inventory of available sharing of information and working with the diversion programs is assembled, planners may want to contact program in its monitoring and assistance of the youth experts to determine which of the resources are using and caretakers. Some programs convene a meeting of “evidence-based" methods. This means that there representatives from all of the participating community has been research that indicates that the method has services, to identify their mutual commitment and to produced positive results. Typically it is best to contact explain the policies and procedures of the diversion local juvenile justice experts in academic settings or program. to contact one of the several national clearinghouses available to provide consultation on juvenile justice If programs decide to create a coalition of community- rehabilitation and treatment services. But planners based programs, several challenges may arise. Not the

46 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Juvenile Offender Services (JOS) Diversion

Colorado

Overview: Colorado’s 4th Judicial District’s Department of Juvenile Offender Services (JOS) Diversion program was established in 1978 and serves El Paso and Teller Counties. It is operated and funded by the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s Office. The program’s goals include holding juvenile offenders accountable for their behavior while providing intervention that results in improving the youth’s self-esteem and ability to make healthy choices that will positively impact his/her life, and reducing court and prosecutor caseloads. Target Population: The program targets first-time offenders, ages 10 – 18, who have been charged with a nonviolent/ non-sexual offense. Youth are diverted into the program by a District Attorney referral and must admit to the charges in order to participate in services. Program Description: Once referred into the program, screening and assessment is done to determine the youth’s mental health, substance abuse, and risk needs; this information is used for service planning. A program case manager is responsible for overseeing the youth’s “Individualized Program Requirements,” which may include substance abuse treatment, family counseling, mental health treatment, mentoring, educational assistance, and life-skills training. Failure to complete or follow the program stipulations may alter the youth’s Individualized Program Requirements and can result in a number of sanctions ranging from a warning to unsuccessful discharge from the program and the filing of a petition. Upon successful completion of the program, the charges against the youth are dropped and their record expunged. The average length of program participation is 7 months and cannot exceed 12 months. In 2009, 79% of the JOS Diversion Program participants successfully completed the program; successful completion is achieved by completing all program requirements and refraining from further law violations. Program Contact: Juvenile Offender Services Diversion Program, 4th Judicial District Attorney’s Office, 105 E. Vermijo Avenue, Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Phone: (719) 520-6178 Website: http://www.4thjudicialda.com/juvenileoffenders.aspx should not rigidly exclude services for which there is need not apply to all types of intervention programs. It little or no research evidence. For some communities, is most relevant for mental health, substance use, and these may be the only resources available. Some family services. Once resources have been discovered communities have not yet developed child community and reviewed, planners will want to determine the interventions that use evidence-based methods. willingness of community-based service providers to Realistically, diversion programs in those communities take referrals from the proposed diversion program. would have mental health or substance use resources if There must also be a way to determine the types of they applied the evidence-based criterion in an absolute youth the various services will consider to be appropriate sense. If the services seem promising, we do not suggest in light of their own intake requirements and program refusing their use. The evidence-based recommendation features.

47 In some cases, certain services are targeted toward enforcement records. As part of their diversion programs, youth and family needs/issues and require the planners should establish who will assist youth in involvement of both the youth and his or her family. getting their records expunged, preferably at minimal or If a diversion program plans to provide services to no cost to the youth and family.111 youth, planners may want to consider this issue and develop strategies for encouraging caretaker and family Diversion programs also sometimes employ the involvement. following incentives:

Reduced Program Requirements: Some of Step 10. Incentives: the diversion programs gradually reduce program requirements if the youth stays on track as the program Will the diversion program employ incentives to proceeds. This can include decreased reporting, less motivate youth and caretakers? If so, what forms supervision time, and reduced monitoring. of incentives will be used?

Background Other: A wide range of other incentives were noted in our survey of diversion programs, including awards/gifts Diversion programs typically use incentives to motivate and verbal accolades/praise. Programs can get creative youth and their caretaker(s) to fully engage in the in what they decide to use to motivate youth to fully diversion process. engage and participate.

Options Considerations

The primary incentives that diversion programs offer When thinking about the incentives a diversion program include: will employ, program planners may want to consider the following: No Further Action: Diversion programs often provide that once a program has been successfully completed, Effectiveness: Program planners should consider the original cause of action will be dismissed. No further what leads to successful completion of the action should be taken and the juvenile’s participation in diversion program. What incentives have been the program may not be used against him/her in future effective in their community or other similarly proceedings.110 In some states this is provided by statute situated communities? and in others by local juvenile court policy. Feasibility: Program planners should consider if Expunge Records: Diversion programs typically offer certain incentives are possible for their program to expungement of the youth’s record upon successful offer. Is the program able to provide the resources completion of the diversion program. If this expungement necessary for the incentive? For example, is not automatic (that is, if it requires that the youth planners cannot simply agree to expungement of apply for expungement), youth who successfully records; ultimately the juvenile court is the only complete diversion programs should be encouraged authority that can offer this incentive. Is the staff to pursue expungement of their juvenile court and law able to keep track of the youth’s progress to give certain incentives when appropriate?

48 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Step 11. Consequences of Failure to Considerations Comply: There is much to be said for limiting a diversion program’s sanctions to program adjustments that create Will there be consequences for youth who fail to greater monitoring and/or dismissal and ineligibility for comply with program requirements and how will diversion in the event of a future arrest. The alternatives those consequences be specified? to these responses—immediately petitioning for formal processing upon dismissal from the program—present Background various difficulties that tend to defeat the purpose of diversion. For example, many youth in diversion Planners must decide on the consequences that will programs are first-time minor offenders. If they do not apply if youth who choose to participate in diversion obey diversion requirements, a policy that sends them eventually do not abide by the program’s requirements. back to juvenile court for adjudication gives them a delinquency record. Programs that do not return diverted Options youth to juvenile court when they disobey diversion Dismissal from Program with Formal Processing: rules may result in a few of those youth being arrested Many diversion programs respond to youths’ failure on future charges, but many will not be arrested in to adhere to program requirements by “rescinding” the future and will never have a delinquency record. diversion and returning the youth to formal juvenile Considering the consequences of these two approaches, justice processing. Typically this would mean that the second seems to satisfy the purposes of diversion (to the youth is charged on the alleged offense for which avoid adjudication when possible) better than the first. formal processing was originally declined in favor of diversion.112

Dismissal from Program without Formal Processing: Some diversion programs employ sanctions that simply recognize the youth's failure to abide by the requirements of the program. That is, if a youth is unreliable in accessing the services that were offered, the youth is simply dismissed from the program (without formal processing). Some programs add that the youth will be ineligible for diversion a second time if he or she is later arrested on other charges.

Program Adjustments: A substantial number of diversion programs that were surveyed responded to youths’ failure to comply with program requirements (e.g., unreliable use of services) by increasing the frequency or intensity of monitoring, or by increasing the length of program participation.

49 Lancaster County Youth Aid Panels

Pennsylvania

Overview: In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, Youth Aid Panels are used as a means for diverting youth who become involved with the juvenile justice system. Established in the early 1990s, the Youth Aid Panel program has two goals: to prevent youth from becoming more involved in delinquency and poor decision-making, and to make youth accountable for their actions through services to the victim and/or their community. The program is overseen by local law enforcement and the Lancaster County District Attorney’s Office. Funding is received from the District Attorney’s office and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Target Population: To be eligible for this program, youth must be between the ages of 10 and 18, charged with committing a nonviolent offense, and admit to the charge. Diversion occurs at the youth’s initial contact with law enforcement. Program Description: The Youth Aid Panel comprises citizens of varying ages, professions, ethnicities, and socio- economic groups. They review the youth’s case and determine a resolution for both the victim and the offender, utilizing the input of the offender and his/her family and resulting in some form of restitution to the victim. Diversion contracts may require youth to write an essay, perform community service, attend an educational class, provide a verbal or written apology letter to the victim, etc. For the youth to continue involvement in the program, they must participate in required services and maintain attendance at reporting sessions. Failing to do so might result in sanctions ranging from a warning to unsuccessful discharge from the program and the filing of a petition. Program Contact: Lancaster County Courthouse, 50 North Duke St., P.O. Box 83480, Lancaster, PA 17608 Phone: (717) 299-8100 Website: http://www.co.lancaster.pa.us/da/cwp/view.asp?A=1102&Q=599924

Step 12. Program Completion / Exit Options Criteria: There are several ways to address criteria for exiting the program: How will “successful program completion” be deﬁned? Will the diversion program employ Time-Based Criterion: Some diversion programs certain exit criteria? specify a length of time that all youth must participate in the program. This ensures that youth are not kept in the Background program for an overly extensive amount of time. In some cases, keeping a youth in a diversion program for too Diversion programs will want to deﬁne the conditions long may have negative consequences. under which youth exit the program. Jurisdictions that do not establish a list of exit criteria will likely have Performance-Based Criterion: In this approach, the frustrated youth and frustrated program employees. youth’s agreement establishes goals that are measurable

50 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook and are evaluated regularly (e.g., four weeks with no Most programs will want to monitor the youth and school absences, an agreed-upon restitution, making track their progress in the program to ensure they are contact with and beginning a community service, etc.). improving. With some degree of monitoring established When these goals have been accomplished, the youth in the diversion agreement, programs can keep cases exits the program. from falling through the cracks. Additionally, in programs where services are provided to the youth, monitoring Failure to Comply Criterion: Certain unacceptable can help diversion programs discover easily remedied behaviors may be stated, with an infraction regarding reasons for a youth’s failure to access or maintain any of these behaviors signaling exit from the program contact with interventions or services. It is important to (e.g., re-arrest, a number of absences from school, etc.). encourage youth throughout the program and monitor their progress to help them attain successful program Considerations completion. There are several ways a program can Exit from the diversion process is provided for in state monitor youth, ranging from minimal monitoring to diversion statutes in a variety of ways. Some statutes intense monitoring, with the purpose being to ensure the set a maximum time limit over which the diversion youth are following the terms of the diversion agreement process may not extend.113 Other statutes provide that and staying on the path to successful program the diversion process may be terminated when and completion. if a juvenile participant violates any of the terms and Minimal Monitoring: The program may choose conditions of the diversion.114 The diversion process may not to employ any particular monitoring process also be terminated, according to some statutes, when outside of regular contacts with the youth and designated stakeholders feel that diversion is no longer caretaker. Some youth may not need services, and the appropriate process for a given juvenile.115 therefore, the program just checks in occasionally Note that some diversion programs may want to employ to gauge how the youth is doing. multiple exit criteria. For example, a program may have As-Needed Reporting: If the program is one a performance-based criterion, while also providing that that links the youth to services, there could be all youth will exit by some maximum time period (thus an agreement that the provider will contact the providing a time limit for youth who do not meet the diversion program whenever there is a loss of performance-based criterion). contact with the youth receiving services.

It is important to note that planners may not want to Formal Reporting of Progress: There may be develop inﬂexible exit criteria. The program should have reporting arrangements with community-based clear expectations that are explained to the youth and services to which the youth is referred. caretaker(s) at the outset of the program, but which also leave room for ﬂexibility in terms of how well the youth Referral Monitoring: If the youth agrees to is doing in the program. Program completion can depend participate in a community-based service, the on the program’s exit criteria and the youth’s progress in diversion program can have a procedure to the program. determine whether the youth makes contact with the service provider.

51 E. Legal Protections

Step 13. Information Use: diversion or informal processing shall not be used later against the declarant.117 What procedures and protocols will be in place to establish how information is collected In nearly all jurisdictions that have confidentiality during the youth's participation in the diversion policies, the core component of the policy is that any program? potentially incriminating statements made by the youth will not be subsequently used against them. Some Background jurisdictions say this protection extends to the entire course of the diversion process (Vermont),118 while others From the initial screening and assessment through exit limit it to the screening, assessment, and treatment from the program, the diversion process includes many elements of the diversion program. communications among youth, caretakers, and diversion program personnel. Some states require that program Confidentiality When Required to Admit to Offense: staff report on certain matters (e.g., suspected child The issue of confidentiality is of the utmost relevance in abuse). In recent years, many jurisdictions have begun diversion programs where the youth is required to admit to address confidentiality in the diversion process by to the offense as a prerequisite for the program. Many developing policies and/or passing legislation with programs have such a requirement in order to hold the regard to statements made and information shared youth accountable for their actions (one of the basic during diversion.116 premises of Balanced and Restorative Justice). These statements have the potential to be used against the Confidentiality policies must be clearly revealed to the youth should they fail to complete the program and the youth and caretakers in the process of explaining their case be returned to court. However, such an “admission” obligations and the program’s responsibilities (Step #9 could arguably be deemed “involuntary” at a suppression Services) to realize the full benefits of such policies. hearing and therefore inadmissible, so there is no real benefit in not allowing these statements to be kept Options confidential. In fact, certain diversion policies, and a Confidentiality with Incriminating Statements: number of state statutes, specifically bar the admission When developing a program, an important initial of such statements (for example, Cook County, Illinois; decision is what, if any, information will be kept Georgia; Montana; Nevada).119 confidential. While a few jurisdictions have required youth to consent to release all information related Programs can still require that participants accept to their participation in the diversion program, most responsibility for their actions. In fact, if there is denial jurisdictions have formal and informal policies that by the youth that a crime has been committed, many generally deem certain statements or information programs do not see diversion as a viable option. divulged during diversion as confidential (subject to However, the benefit (if any) of using an admission statutory and constitutional conditions). Approximately of guilt in any criminal case against the youth would ten state diversion statutes provide that an incriminating be minimal and outweighed by the open exchange statement made by a juvenile participant during of information that would result if such information remained private.

52 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Written Policies and MOUs Concerning health issues and when discussing the youth’s past Confidentiality: The development of policies criminal history for the purposes of a risk assessment. addressing confidentiality during diversion has been Jurisdictions that do not provide any type of privacy undertaken at many levels. Several states have protection run the risk of restricting the degree of developed statutes specifically describing what information or collaboration obtained from the youth and information collected during diversion may be released. caretaker during the course of the program and violating For example, recent legislation passed in Pennsylvania a child’s due process protections. provides that “no statements, admissions, or confessions made by, or incriminating information obtained from a One common goal of programs is to address child in the course of a screening or assessment that is behavioral issues that may exist. By encouraging open undertaken …shall be admitted into evidence against communication during screening, assessment, and the child on the issue of whether the child committed the treatment, better outcomes for youth and the entire delinquent act...or on the issue of guilt in any criminal system are possible. When developing a program with proceeding.”120 some privacy protections, the benefits gained from open disclosure usually far outweigh any costs. While statutes provide the most legal protection for these statements of guilt, many other jurisdictions have developed written policies about confidentiality that Step 14. Legal Counsel: also serve to encourage the youth to share information In the absence of a state statute or local policy, openly. Finally, other jurisdictions have attempted to what will be the guidelines for the role of formalize these confidentiality policies by developing counsel? Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) among relevant stakeholders (Ogle County, Illinois). Background

Therapist-Patient Confidentiality: Some jurisdictions Since these guidelines encompass all pre-adjudication have upheld confidentiality during diversion by extending diversion, counsel will clearly play a role in cases where the service provider the status of a mental health a petition is filed and the right to counsel has attached. therapist, thereby invoking the therapist-patient privilege But what role does counsel play in the cases that are of confidentiality (Ogle County, Illinois). Most have simply diverted before a petition is filed? While a majority of outlined what types of information (such as information states do not have statutes on this issue, approximately collected during screening, assessment, and treatment) one dozen state laws set forth some role of counsel in 121 should be kept confidential. diversion. Under the most common of these statutory schemes, the role of counsel during diversion is limited Considerations to the initial intake when the youth is deciding whether or not to participate.122 Because of the importance of open communication in diversion programs, it is important that jurisdictions There are jurisdictions in which the role of counsel consider confidentiality provisions that encourage the is not addressed by statute, but covered by policies free exchange of information in the context of diversion, and guidelines. In Louisiana, for example, the District especially when addressing potential behavioral Attorney’s Diversion Guidelines provide that “the youth

53 TeamChild Advocacy for Youth

Washington

Overview: The TeamChild program in Washington State was established in 1995 under federal violence and delinquency prevention grant funds distributed by the Washington State Advisory Group. TeamChild attorneys provide free legal advocacy and community education to help justice-involved youth secure education, housing, healthcare, and other vital supports to achieve positive outcomes. The program started as a pilot in King County and currently provides services to youth in six additional counties, as well as training and technical support statewide. TeamChild currently receives funding from the state and county general funds as well as from private foundations. Target Population: The program is targeted to low-income youth, ages 12-18, who are at risk of or already involved in the juvenile justice system. A youth can be referred to TeamChild at any point of the juvenile justice processing continuum and can also be referred by community providers. Program Description: TeamChild was built on the simple premise that many youth can be diverted from delinquency and violence if their basic needs are met. Youth are referred to TeamChild to address a variety of civil legal needs. For example, TeamChild works with youth in danger of dropping out or getting pushed out of school by helping them understand and exercise their rights to an education. TeamChild also helps youth with disabilities access quality, appropriate, mental health services and helps youth without a place to live secure safe and stable housing. By securing community supports, TeamChild helps young people stay connected to their families and communities and gives courts viable alternatives to incarceration. An independent evaluation of the program found that TeamChild participants were almost four times less likely to come into contact with the juvenile justice system than those in a matched comparison group 6 months post-program involvement. Program participation is voluntary and lasts as long as is necessary to address a youth’s complex needs. TeamChild has served over 9,500 children since its inception. Program Contact: TeamChild Advocacy for Youth, 1225 S. Weller, Suite 420, Seattle, WA 98144 Phone: (206) 322-2444 Website: http://www.teamchild.org should have an opportunity to consult with an attorney.” Options Even where the right to counsel is not covered in state statute or other jurisdictional policy, some diversion In the absence of a state statute or local policy programs provide for a wide range of defense counsel provisions, programs have several options to consider roles from the full right to counsel throughout program when determining what role counsel will play. These participation to little or no role for defense counsel. include:

Provide counsel throughout the diversion process

Provide counsel for the participation decision

54 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Make no provision for counsel, but youth may retain counsel privately Considerations

The confidentiality provisions of a program will affect the role counsel plays in these cases. The need for counsel is greater where all admissions, communications, screenings, assessments, evaluations, and reports conducted during diversion are not confidential and can be forwarded to the prosecutor, judge, probation officer, or any other official in a subsequent adjudication.

For youth to understand the choice they are making to enter into diversion, and appreciate the consequences should they fail to meet the requirements, it is crucial that they have a good understanding of the legal ramiﬁcations, conditions, and process of diversion. As noted in Step 8 (“Participant Requirements”), the decision to refuse to participate in diversion (which in many programs requires admission to the behavior that was charged) has signiﬁcant legal implications if the alternative is potential adjudication. The argument for the need for legal counsel, therefore, is stronger in programs of that type. Having youth consult with an attorney ensures that the youth is properly informed. This problem is less at issue, of course, in jurisdictions that do not make formal processing a consequence of the youth deciding not to participate in diversion.

55 F. Quality

Step 15. Program Integrity: Design: Most program planners will want to begin by surveying diversion programs and looking for How will the diversion program ensure quality evidence that the programs produce the outcomes and program fidelity? sought for the youths to be served. The design of the program could involve several evidence-based Background components (e.g., Life Skills Training, Mentoring, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy) offered by one Diversion program planners should attend carefully to provider, or it may involve referring youth to one of both development and maintenance in order to have several different service providers, each of which a high quality program. In its development, program offers just one evidence-based component. The planners should start with the best available knowledge key is to identify those program efforts that show about the diversion process, build support from key promise toward achieving the desired results and stakeholders and participants, set out clear policies describe those efforts carefully in the program and procedures, create a training curriculum, and set design. up data collection procedures. In its maintenance, program planners should provide for quality assurance by Stakeholder Support: It is critical to build support creating monitoring processes, collecting and reporting from entities that will refer youth to the program data, reviewing policies and procedures and updating (e.g., law enforcement, prosecutor, probation) as necessary, providing for retraining, and checking for as well as defense counsel, victims, and those program fidelity. who will participate in the program (e.g., youth, parents). This can be done through traditional It is encouraging to report that a majority of the means of marketing using informational bulletins, programs we surveyed reported that they had written flyers, or presentations, etc., once the program policies and procedures, training that is provided to has been designed. However, it is also important program staff on these written policies and procedures, to include representatives of consumer and family systematic monitoring of their program outcomes, and groups in the actual design of the program and a management/oversight process in place to monitor its policies and procedures. It is also critical to quality assurance and fidelity to program policies and build a base of support from funding sources procedures. or potential funding sources through sharing of information and solicitation of input regarding the Options program’s design and operation.

Program Development: As noted in Step 1 Policies and Procedures: Clear, well-reasoned (Objectives), programs should proceed from a clear policies and procedures are one of the hallmarks statement of their goals, objectives, and desired of quality programming. Developing these will outcomes, which are the foundation upon which guide the operation of the program on a daily 123 quality programming rests. Once that foundation is basis, directing the practices of each individual established, planners can turn to the following elements working with the program. It is important to set to further establish the program’s integrity in its out the policies and procedures in a manual to aid development. with training and implementation in a consistent

56 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook manner across diversion providers and over An obvious part of the quality assurance process, to be time. Planners may want to include information carried out by the personnel who operate the diversion on the program’s obligations to meet the needs program, is to periodically update the policies and of the youth, to be just and unbiased, and to be procedures manual and provide for periodic retraining developmentally appropriate. of program personnel and providers to account for staff turnover. Training Curriculum: It is important to provide training to all personnel who operate the program, Internal Monitoring Processes: The most as well as the providers of diversion services important monitoring process may be the within the community. The training would cover production of periodic reports based on ongoing the policies and procedures that govern the data collection that provides information about operation of the program. Training would also the program’s conduct of work processes, cover topics that help practitioners to understand client characteristics, program activities, and the characteristics of, risks presented by, and achievement of the program’s goals. Other service needs of youth served. monitoring processes may involve site visits to program providers, interviews or surveys with Data Collection: Setting up a good data collection system is important to measure the performance program participants, program audits of providers’ of the program for integrity and to provide the program records, and the providers’ submission foundation for program evaluation. Program of periodic reports. Although tracking outcomes planners could begin by reviewing the work may be a subject more appropriate for program they have done to develop their program and evaluation, it can also be a part of the monitoring determine what questions they want to be or performance measurement in quality able to answer regarding the performance of assurance. their diversion programs. This will allow them Process Evaluation: Monitoring program ﬁdelity to determine what data elements they need to may also be a part of quality assurance. The collect. Further, they may want to establish how, performance of the program's activities could and in what formats, the information is to be be measured against the program's descriptions collected, what their capacity is for automation of of goals and purposes, policies and procedures, the data collection and subsequent generation of and treatment regimens. Data could be collected reports, and who is going to do the input for the on such items as the number of youth referred, data collection process. A related issue will be to number of youth accepted, length of time in the decide whether to have standardized reports from program, and the characteristics of the youth program providers. participating in the program to help determine Quality Assurance: Quality assurance can be achieved whether the program is reaching the intended by establishing a set of internal and external monitoring target population. Speciﬁc data also could be processes and conducting a process evaluation. collected regarding adherence to the program's Monitoring processes in this step relate to the program policies and procedures. Examples of such items as opposed to the monitoring of a participant’s progress. could include whether youth are screened and assessed using the prescribed instruments,

57 whether youth receive copies of their agreements, more public this knowledge, the more likely it is that the whether the referring entity (e.g., District community will support quality programs. Attorney, probation intake) receives timely notice of youth participation and performance in the Another area of consideration in this context is how program, or whether youth appear for their weekly one gets the best performance out of service providers. reporting sessions. Some jurisdictions have accomplished this by instituting performance-based contracting. This can be a useful External Monitoring Processes: One effective tool for diversion programming. For example, a service external monitoring process is the use of an provider contracts and pays for the number of youth who advisory board or panel. The provision of periodic enter the program and avail themselves of services, as reports to an advisory board or panel, the opposed to the number of youth who were referred. funding sources, and local governing bodies (e.g., County Boards, City Councils, Juvenile Justice Commissions, etc.) is a good method of external Step 16. Outcome Evaluation: monitoring to achieve quality assurance. This What kind of record keeping and data collection might be accomplished best by establishing a system is necessary to provide for periodic requirement that these reports be generated evaluation of the program’s achievement of its periodically, inviting the external entities to goals and objectives? critique the program’s performance and enforcing external accountability for the diversion program. Background Another method of external monitoring is to bring the consumers into a program review process, Every diversion program should have a way to determine giving them access to the program’s reports of its whether it is meeting its goals and objectives. Program progress and/or using survey instruments or focus evaluation is important for many reasons. One of its groups to gain insights about the program’s daily greatest values is to determine the need for program operation. adjustments over time. Good program evaluations not only indicate whether objectives are being met, but also Considerations identify when, why, and for whom they are not. This Most diversion program planners will want to consider provides guidance for periodic modifications to improve political issues that may need to be addressed to outcomes. Ultimately, of course, program evaluations secure a base of support for the highest quality of that manifest positive outcomes can be used to argue programming. Too often, underperforming program for funding that sustains the program and its benefits providers stay funded because they have effectively for the community. Program evaluations that manifest lobbied elected officials or funding sources who then poor outcomes over a significant period of time may are reluctant to take funds away despite a program’s sometimes signal the need for the community to invest inadequate performance. The entities that operate the its resources in more promising programs. diversion program may need to educate public officials Program evaluation typically requires a systematic way and funding sources regarding best practices and the of collecting data throughout some period of time of the tools employed to conduct quality assurance. In fact, the diversion program’s operation. Therefore, while we list

58 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook this as the last step, a plan for program evaluation must Figure 3 on the following page is an example of what a be in place before the program begins. The outcomes to logic model for diversion programs might look like. be evaluated will depend on the original objectives of the diversion program. As such, examples of options for Options collecting evaluation data will be described in relation to Some diversion programs may have more than one each of the example objectives described previously. One objective or a combination of different goals; thus, more way to prepare for good program evaluation is to have a than one of the following may apply: template and guide that provides a foundation for such. The development of a logic model for the program is one Evaluating Reduction in Recidivism: First, planners way to accomplish this. A logic model is a commonly should operationalize what is meant by recidivism. used tool for assuring program integrity by clarifying and The Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators depicting the logical connections between a program's (CJCA) recently attempted to standardize the definition purpose and ultimate outcomes. Many different logic of recidivism and how it is measured by various model formats exist, but they all contain the same core jurisdictions throughout the United States.124 According concepts. to CJCA, recidivism is defined as the “commission of an offense that would be a crime for an adult, committed 1. A clear mission or purpose for the program: by an individual who has previously been adjudicated a clear, brief statement that specifies the delinquent.” The CJCA report also points out that organization’s primary focus or thrust; “because most delinquent offenses and crimes are 2. Mission-driven goals: statements that define not known to the justice system, recidivism is typically what an organization is trying to accomplish measured in terms of actions taken by justice system relative to its mission; officials.” Evaluating this outcome may require collecting 3. Unambiguous objectives: specific and measurable recidivism data on each youth during some period of strategies or implementation steps to attain the time after they have completed the diversion program, identified goals (effective objectives include a and then comparing it to recidivism data of similar defined completion date); youth (e.g., types of offense) in the community in past 4. Specific activities: tasks conducted in support of years. Past recidivism data may be available in some program objectives; communities and not in others. It can be obtained, 5. Program inputs: resources, contributions, however, if funding can be found to retrieve data from investments that are required for the program to a random sample of existing juvenile justice records operate; for recent years. This will also require attention to 6. Program outputs: activities, services, events and examining the re-arrest rates of youth who enroll and products that reach people who participate or complete the diversion program and those who do not. who are targeted by the program; 7. Program outcomes: the results or changes for Evaluating Provision of Services: A program that individuals, groups, communities, organizations, wishes to evaluate whether youth received services communities, or systems. they would not otherwise have obtained might want to keep a running account of the proportion of youth in the program who do access services. It will also be

59 Figure 3. Jail Diversion Program Logic Model Process Goals Objectives Outputs Outcomes Establish a Define the Convene key A clearly defined Process strategy to avoid purpose of the stakeholders statement of the Planning Committee formal processing diversion program Achieve purpose and goal convened of youth in the of diversion consensus on Implementation of funding juvenile justice purpose system designed strategy to achieve one Diversion candidates referred or more of the MOUs completed following: Training program established Reduce recidivism Short-Term Provide Number of juveniles referred services and number diverted Avoid labeling Number of juveniles successfully completing terms Reduce of diversion system costs Amount of restitution Increase ordered/paid successful outcomes Hours of community service assigned/completed Increase accountability Number of diverted youth who commit new offenses while on diversion status Long-Term Number of diverted juveniles who re-offend after diversion is completed Retention in school and school progress Documentation of cost- benefits of diversion programs

60 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook necessary to identify the extent to which the community the seriousness of their actions, as well as the effects services experienced an increase in youth served, that their behaviors have on the victim(s), themselves, compared to their records for the year or two prior to the and their community. Evaluating whether or not youth start of the diversion program. are being held accountable can be achieved simply by keeping records of the number of youth who were Evaluating Reduction in System Costs: Evaluation provided “accountability” requirements during their of the financial impact of programs can be complex diversion programming. On the other hand, evaluating since it is difficult to define or identify all of the costs whether it in fact increased their sense of responsibility a program incurs or saves. Some simple statistics, would require complex research methods that are however, are possible to examine. For example, diversion beyond the reach of most diversion programs. might decrease the number of youth who are placed in detention awaiting their adjudication, and most Evaluating Reduction in Labeling and Its Effects on detention centers keep track of monthly admission Delinquency: This is a laudable objective, but typically statistics. Moreover, many detention centers know the it will not be feasible to evaluate the psychological average per diem financial cost of housing a youth. So effects of the diversion program on youth. This type of a reduction in the number of youth detained before and evaluation would require psychological testing or clinical after the start of a diversion program can be translated interviewing of a sample of youth who have been served into financial costs without much difficulty. Some cost by the program, and comparing to similar testing results reductions can be described in non-financial terms. of youth who were not provided diversion services. This For example, reductions in formal processing can be requires a level of complexity and expertise that exceeds calculated. These reductions might not translate into the resources of most communities. dollar figures. However, juvenile court personnel may be able to provide insight into how the reduction of cases Evaluating Reduction in Unnecessary Social that needed to be processed contributed to the quality Control: Recall that this objective focuses on assuring of attention the court was able to provide to those youth that youth are subjected to no more state intervention who were processed. than is necessary, and that caretakers (rather than the state) are responsible for their children whenever Evaluating Increased Successful Outcomes possible. Evaluating this type of objective may require for the Child: Successful outcomes for youth can examination of data on youth who were formally involve increasing their school engagement, helping processed (before and after the start of the diversion them develop positive skills, increasing their prosocial program), with special attention to the proportion of activities, and providing other opportunities for success those that received placements in secure facilities after in their life. Typically, a diversion program itself will not adjudication. be able to evaluate this last outcome effectively because it requires long-term follow up with youth and complex Considerations measures of “outcomes.” Planners need not examine their programs in relation Evaluating Increased Accountability: This to all of these objectives. A program can select its most objective focuses on assuring that youth understand important objective(s) and focus on obtaining data related to their evaluation.

61 Many diversion programs seek the guidance of a to numbers but offers a perspective on a program’s specialist in program evaluation to help them sort out success. For example, a program can engage in follow- the nature of data they need in order to evaluate their up interviews with caretakers and youth some months objectives. Specialists in program evaluation can often after the youth has completed the diversion program. The be found in psychology or sociology departments in local youth's reﬂections on the meaning of the diversion program academic settings. in their own life, when multiplied by a sufﬁcient number of cases, can offer valuable information about the degree The description of program evaluation offered here has to which the program has been meeting its objectives. focused on quantitative evaluations—things that can be measured and given numeric value. But there are other important types of evaluation that can rely on qualitative information—that is, information that cannot be reduced

Miami-Dade Civil Citation

Florida

Overview: Florida’s, Miami-Dade Civil Citation program intervenes with first and second time misdemeanor offenders. Eligible participants receive an assessment and application of appropriate, targeted interventions. The county-wide initiative began in April 2007 and currently all 37 local arresting agencies refer youth to the Miami Dade Civil Citation Program. Target Population: The program targets youth, 17 years and younger, charged with a misdemeanor offense. Certain misdemeanor offenses (e.g., gang-related, sexual related behavior, and weapon offenses) are not eligible. Program Description: Police officers may refer eligible youth to the Juvenile Services Department (JSD) where they will receive an assessment and application of appropriate, targeted interventions. When an assessment is completed a treatment plan is generated and if deemed appropriate, referrals to mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, mentoring, family counseling, educational assistance programs, and community service are made by a case manager. Case-management services are provided for approximately 3 months, to ensure the completion of all services and sanctions in the youth’s treatment plan. If successful, the youth avoids the stigma of a formal arrest. According to outcome data, over 8,000 youth have participated in the program since April 2007. As a result of the Civil Citation initiative, juvenile arrests have been reduced by 21%. An independent economic study of the program concluded that civil citation costs less than half the cost of detention. In addition, intake and screening time has been reduced by over 60%, and paperwork has been significantly reduced, resulting in savings of time and money. Program Contact: Miami Dade Juvenile Services Department, 275 NW 2nd Street, 2nd Floor, Miami, FL 33128 Phone: (305) 755-6120 Website: http://www.miamidade.gov/jsd

62 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Conclusion

While the concept of diversion and what constitutes diversion have presented numerous questions and concerns within the juvenile justice ﬁeld in recent years, it has been the aim of this Guidebook to answer those questions and address the concerns that many jurisdictions have had with regard to starting up or improving upon a juvenile diversion program or process. These 16 Steps represent the foundation upon which diversion planners can build. While there is no one roadmap for creating a juvenile diversion program, this Guidebook provides the needed guidance and direction to communities and motivates planners to think about the important questions to ask and the various options to consider when structuring or improving on a diversion program or process.

63 Endnotes

1 Scott, E. & Steinberg, S. (2009) Rethinking juvenile justice. Juvenile delinquency and youth crime. Washington, DC: Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Government Printing Office. 2 Moffitt, T. (1993) Adolescence-limited and life-course- 15-18 Blomberg, T. (1983). Diversion’s disparate results persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. and unresolved questions: An integrative evaluation Psychological Review, 100, 674-701. perspective. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 3 Puzzanchera, C. (2008). Juvenile Arrests 2008. 20, 24-38; Gensheimer, L., Mayer, J., Gottschalk, R., & Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office Davidson II, W. (1986). Diverting youth from the juvenile of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and justice system: A meta-analysis of intervention efficacy. Delinquency Prevention. In Apter, S., Goldstein, A. (Eds.) Youth Violence: Programs 4 Sedlak, A. & McPherson, K. (2010). Conditions of & Prospects. New York; Bilchik, S. (1999). Detention Confinement: Findings from the Survey of Youth in diversion advocacy: An evaluation. OJJDP Juvenile Residential Placement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department Justice Bulletin, NCJ 171155.; and Cocozza, J., Veysey, B., of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Chapin, D., Dembo, R., Walters, W., & Farina, S. (2005). Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Diversion from the juvenile justice system: The Miami- Dade juvenile assessment center post-arrest diversion 5 Models for Change Systems Reform in Juvenile Justice. program. Substance Use & Misuse, 40, 935-951. July 2010. http://www.modelsforchange.net 19 Blomberg, note 15. 6 Walters, W., Dembo, R., Beaulaurier, R., Cocozza, J., De La Rosa, M., Pothyress, N., Skowyra, K., & Veysey, B. (2005). 20 Gensheimer, et al., note 16. The Miami-Dade Juvenile Assessment Center National 21 Regoli, R., Wilderman, E., & Pogrebin, M. (1983). Using Demonstration Project: An overview. Journal of Offender an alternative evaluation measure for assessing juvenile Rehabilitation, 41(1): 1-37. diversion programs. Children and Youth Services Review, 7 Dunford, F., Osgood, D., & Weichselbaum, H. (1982). 7, 21-38. National Evaluation of Diversion Projects. Washington, 22 Hamilton, Z., Sullivan, C., Veysey, B., & Grillo, M. (2007). DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Diverting multi-problem youth from juvenile justice: 8 Whitehead, J., & Lab, S. (2001). Juvenile justice: An Investigating the importance of community influence on introduction (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing placement and recidivism. Behavioral Sciences and the Company. Law, 25, 137-158. 9 See Appendix B for the Diversion Workgroup Members 23,24 Patrick, S., Marsh, R., Bundy, W., Mimura, S., & Perkins, T. that were established by the Models for Change Executive (2004). Control group study of juvenile diversion programs: Committee. An experiment in juvenile diversion – the comparison of three methods and a control group. The Social 10 In re Gault, 387U.S. 1, 1967; Kent vs United States, 383 Science Journal, 41, 129-135; Severy, L., & Whitaker, J. U.S. 541, 1966. (1982). Juvenile diversion: An experimental analysis of 11 Austin, J. & Krisberg , B. (1981). Wider, stronger, and effectiveness. Evaluation Review, 6 (6), 753-774. different nets: The dialectics of criminal justice reforms. 25 Hamilton, et al., note 22. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 18, 165- 196. 26 McCord, J., Widom, C., Crowell, N. (2001). Diversion. In J. McCord, C. Widom, and N. Crowell (eds.), Juvenile crime, 12 Cohen, S. (1979). The punitive city: Notes on the dispersal juvenile justice. Washington, DC: National Academy of social control. Contemporary Crises, 3 (4), 339-363. Press. 13 Bullington, B., Sprowls, J., Katkin, D., & Phillips, M. 27 Severy & Whitaker, note 24. (1978). A critique of diversionary juvenile justice. Crime and Delinquency, 24, 59-71. 28 Rausch, S. (1983). Court processing versus diversion of status offenders: A test of deterrence and labeling 14 President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and theories. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Administration of Justice. (1967). Task force report: 39-54.

64 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook 29 Schur, E. (1973). Radical nonintervention: Rethinking the evaluation of juvenile diversion programs: Second annual delinquency problem. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, report. Sacramento: California Youth Authority; Blomberg, pg.155. T. (1977). Diversion and accelerated social control. The 30 Osgood, D. (1983). Offense history and juvenile diversion. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 68 (2), 274- Evaluation Review, 7(6), 793-806. 282; Austin, J., Krisberg, B., & Lawrence,W. (1978). Open 31 Osgood, note 30. space, community detention, Pittsburgh-Antioch diversion and (AB 312); Diverting the status offender. San Francisco: 32 Whitehead & Lab, note 8. Research Center West, National Council on Crime and 33 Blomberg, note 15. Delinquency; Sarri, R. (1979). Juvenile aid panels: An 34 Duxbury, E. (1973). Evaluation of youth service bureaus. alternative to juvenile court processing. In P. Brantingham Sacramento: California Youth Authority. and T. Blomberg, (Eds.) Courts and diversion: Policy and 35-40 Baron, R., Feeney, F., & Thornton, W. (1973). Preventing operations Studies. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; Polk, K. (1981). delinquency through diversion. Federal Probation, 37(1), Youth service bureaus: The record and prospects. Mimeo. 13-18; Thornton, W., Barrett, E., & Musolf, L. (1972). Eugene: University of Oregon; and State of Florida. (1981). The Sacramento county probation department 601 Evaluation of the juvenile alternative services project. diversion project. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento County Tallahassee: Health and Rehabilitative Services. Probation Department; Forward, J.R., Kirby, M., & Wilson, 54 Fischer, D., & Jeune, R. (1987). Juvenile diversion: A K. (1974). Volunteer intervention with court diverted process analysis. Canadian Psychology, 28 (1), 60-70. juveniles. Boulder: University of Colorado; Klein, M.W. 55,56 Patrick, et al., note 23; Polk, K. (1984). Juvenile diversion: (1975). Alternative dispositions for juvenile offenders. A look at the record. Crime & Delinquency, 30 (4), 648-659. Los Angeles: University of Southern California; Ku, R., & 57,58 Klein, note 38; Fishman, R. (1977). Criminal recidivism in Blew, C.H. (1977). A university’s approach to delinquency New York City: An evaluation of the impact of rehabilitation preventions: The adolescent diversion project. and diversion services. New York: Praeger. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office; and Quay, H.C., & Love, C.T. (1977). The effect of a juvenile diversion 59 Gensheimer, et al., note 16. Note: Prior to the diversion program on rearrests. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 4 (4), research efforts of the 1990s, a meta-analytic study 377-396. was performed by Gensheimer and colleagues (1986), including 44 outcome studies on diversion intervention 41 Blomberg, note 15. with delinquent youth from 1967 through 1983. The 42-53 Vorenburg, N., & Vorenburg, J. (1973). Early diversion from study was inconclusive, however, due to the unreliable the criminal justice system: Practice in search of a theory. conclusions of the studies examined. In L.E. Ohlin, (eds.) Prisoners in America. Englewood Cliffs, 60,61 Petrosino, A., Turpin-Petrosino, C., & Guckenburg, S. NJ: Prentice Hall; Elliot, D. (1974). Evaluation of youth (2010). Formal system processing of juveniles: Effects on service systems: FY 1973. Boulder, CO: Behavioral Research delinquency. Campbell Systematic Review, 1, 1-88; Note: and Evaluation Cooperation; Klein, note 38; Kutchins, H., More of the studies used random assignment to diversion & Kutchins, S. (1975). Pretrial diversionary programs: New or non-diversion, limited themselves to non-adjudicated expansion of law enforcement activity camouflaged as youth, and included better descriptions of specific rehabilitation. Paper presented at the Pacific Sociological conditions of diversion. Association Meetings, April, Honolulu, Hawaii; Mattingly, J., & Katkin, D. (1975). The youth service bureau: A re- 62 See F.S.A. §§ 985.12, 985.125; 705 ILCS 405 §§ 5-305, invented wheel? Paper presented at the Society for the 5-310; N.R.S. 62C.200 - N.R.S. 62C.230; O.R.S §§ Study of Social Problems Meeting, August, San Francisco; 419C.225 - 419C.245; 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 63223, 6340, Klein, M., & Teilman, K. (1976). Pivotal ingredients of 6341b; V.T.C.A. Family Code §§ 52.03, 52.031; W.Va. Code police juvenile diversion programs. Washington, DC” §§ 49-5-2a, 49-5- 3a; W.S.A. 938.32, 938.245. National Institute for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 63 See A.R.S. § 8-321; A.C.A. § 9-27-323; C.R.S.A. § 19-2- Prevention; California Youth Authority. (1976). The 303; F.S.A. § 985.125; I.C. § 20-511; MD Code, Human

65 Services §§ 8-601 8-604; M.C.L.A. §§ 722.821 722.831; 78 See M.S.A. § 388.24 (subd. 2); Neb.Rev.St §43-260.03; M.S.A. § 388.24; Neb.Rev.St. §§ 43-260.02 43-260.07; 10A Okl.St.Ann. § 2-2-404(D) (A program for juveniles N.H. Rev. Stat. § 169- B:10; N.C.G.S.A. § 27-20-10; O.R.S. identified .as having committed acts not serious enough § 419C.225; RI ST § 42-72- 33; RCW § 13.40.080; W.Va. to warrant adjudication, but which do indicate a need Code § 49-5-2a. for intervention to prevent further development toward 64 See Ala.Code 1975 § 12-15-119; AS § 47.12.060; Ga. juvenile delinquency). Code. Ann. § 15-11-69; HRS §§ 571-31.4 . 571-31.5; IC §§ 79 RI ST § 42-72-33(a). 31-37- 9-1 . 31-37-9-10; I.C.A. § 232.29; Miss. Code. Ann. 80 MD Code, Human Services, At Risk Youth Prevention and § 43-21- 405; V.A.M.S. 211.083; MCA § 41-5-1301; N.R.S. Diversion Services § 8-601. 62C.200 . 62C.230; NDCC § 27-20-10; 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6323; 81 See C.R.S.A. § 19-2-303(1); 705 ILCS 405 § 5-310(1) (.The T.C.A. § 37-1- 110; W.Va. Code § 49-5-3a. goal is to make juveniles understand the seriousness of 65 705 ILCS 405 § 5-305. his/ her actions and the effect that a crime has on the 66 W.S.A. 938.245. minor, his/ her family, victim and community); M.S.A. § 67 Okl.St.Ann. § 2-2-404. 388.24(subd.2); O.R.S. § 419C.225. 68 F.S.A. § 985.12. 82 M.S.A. § 388.24 (subd. 2); Neb.Rev.St §43-260.03. 69 N.R.S. 62C.230; W.S.A. 938.32. 83 C.R.S.A. § 19-2-303(1); M.S.A. § 388.24 (subd. 2). 70 O.R.S. § 419C.230. 84 C.R.S.A. § 19-2-303(1); M.S.A. § 388.24 (subd. 2); Neb. 71 KRS § 635.010. Rev.St §43-260.03. 72 A.R.S. § 8-321; N.C.G.S.A. § 7B-1701; ORS 419C.230. 85 F.S.A. § 985.12(1). 73 A.R.S. § 8-321; DC ST § 16-2305.01. 86 F.S.A. § 985.125; 705 ILCS 405 § 5-310. 74 See DC ST § 16-2305.01 (Juvenile must previously had 87 See AS § 47.12.060(b)(1); A.C.A. § 9-27-323(c)(3); Ga. little or no contact with the juvenile justice system .); MCA Code. Ann. § 15-11-69(a)(3); HRS §§ 571-31.5(a), 571- § 41- 5-1302 (A consent adjustment may not be used to 31.4(a); IC § 31- 37-9-2; I.C.A § 232.29(1)(c); Neb. Rev. dispose of a youth’s alleged second or subsequent offense St § 43-260.04; N.R.S. 62C.200(3); N.H. Rev. Stat. § if: (a) the youth has admitted to or has been adjudicated 169-B:10(III)(c); N.C.G.S.A. § 7B- 1706; NDCC § 27-20- for a prior offense that would be a felony if committed by 10(1)(c); 42 Pa.C.S.A § 6323(b)(2); T.C.A. § 37-1-110(a)(3); an adult; (b) the subsequent offense would be a felony if U.C.A. 1953, § 18A-6-1203(3)(e); W.Va. Code § 49-5-3a; committed by an adult and was committed within 3 yrs W.S.A. 938.245(1)(c). of a prior offense; or (c) the subsequent offense would 88 A.C.A. § 9-27-323(2); Ga. Code. Ann. § 15-11-69(3); I.C.A be a misdemeanor if committed by an adult and was § 232.29(1)(b); N.H. Rev. Stat. § 169-B:10(V)(III)(c); NDCC committed within 3 yrs of a prior offense, other than a § 27-20-10(1)(c) (The director of juvenile court or other felony); 10A Okl.St.Ann. § 2-2-404; ORS § 419C.230; RI officer designated may counsel parties with a view to ST § 42-72-33(c); V.T.C.A. Family Code § 52.031(a); RCW § an informal adjustment if . . . [t]he child and the child’s 13.40.080. parents/ guardian consent thereto with knowledge that 75 Ga. Code. Ann. § 15-11-69(a)(2); MCA § 41-5-1301(1)(b); consent is not obligatory.); 42 Pa.C.S.A § 6323(b)(2); T.C.A. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 169-B:10(V)(III)(b)(Referral to diversion § 37-1-110(a)(3); W.Va. Code § 49-5-3a. or other community resource after filing is appropriate 89 It should be noted that while the Guidebook refers to a if . . . [r[eferral of the case is in the best interest of the Diversion Program, diversion is a system or a process; not public and the minor.); NDCC § 27-20-10(1)(b); 42 Pa.C.S.A always a specific program. § 6323(b)(1); T.C.A. § 37- 1-110(a)(2); W.Va. Code § 49-5- 90 Scott & Steinberg, note 1. 3a(a)(2); W.S.A. 938.245(1) (a). 91 Moffitt, note 2. 76 See M.C.L.A. § 722.824; Neb. Rev. St. § 43-260.04. 77 M.C.L.A. § 722.824(Sec. 4).

66 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook 92 For more information on Collateral Consequences, see The 102 Skowyra, K.R., Cocozza, J.J. & Shufelt, J.L. (2010). Pennsylvania Juvenile Collateral Consequences Checklist Systems of Care Programs That Serve Youth Involved with on www.modelsforchange.net. the Juvenile Justice System: Funding and Sustainability. 93 See M.S.A. § 388.24 (subd. 2); Neb.Rev.St §43-260.03; Washington, DC: Technical Assistance Partnership for 10A Okl.St.Ann. § 2-2-404(D F.S.A. § 985.125; 705 ILCS Child and Family Mental Health. 405 § 5-310(1);RI ST § 42-72-33(a);MD Code, Human 103 National Juvenile Justice Network, note 101. Services, At Risk Youth Prevention and Diversion Services 104 National Juvenile Justice Network, note 101. § 8-601). 105 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 94 C.R.S.A. § 19-2-303(1); M.S.A. § 388.24 (subd. 2); Neb. Administration. (1995). Treatment Improvement Protocol Rev.St §43-260.03; F.S.A. § 985.12(1); F.S.A. § 985.125; (TIP) Series 21: Combining Alcohol and other Drug Abuse 705 ILCS 405 § 5-310. Treatment with Diversion for Juveniles in the Justice 95 See C.R.S.A. § 19-2-303(1); 705 ILCS 405 § 5-310(1) (The System. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental goal is to make juveniles understand the seriousness of Health Services Administration, Center for Substance his/ her actions and the effect that a crime has on the Abuse Treatment (DHHS Publication No. SMA 95-3051). minor, his/ her family, victim and community); M.S.A. § 106 SAMHSA/CSAT Treatment Improvement Protocols, note 388.24(subd.2); O.R.S. § 419C.225. 105. 96 ARJP Rule 15(c); A.R.S. § 8-321(A); F.S.A. § 985.12(1); 107 SAMHSA/CSAT Treatment Improvement Protocols, note Ga. Code. Ann. § 15-11-69(a) (Before a petition is filed, 105. parties may receive counsel with a view to an informal 108 Griffin, P. & Torbet, P. (2002). Desktop Guide to Good adjustment if ..); HRS § 571-31.4; KRS § 635.010(1)(c); Juvenile Probation Practice. Pittsburg: National Center for M.C.L.A. 722.823(1)(b); Miss. Code. Ann. § 43-21-405(1); Juvenile Justice. N.R.S. 62C.200; N.C.G.S.A. § 7B-1706(B)(5) (requiring that 109 See A.R.S. §8-321; A.C.A. § 9-27-323(1); F.S.A. §985.12; a diversion contract indicate that all parties agree that HRS §§ 571-31.4(a), 571-31.5(a); I.C. § 20-511; 705 ILCS the juvenile’s successful completion of the contract shall 405 § 5-310; I.C.A. § 232.29(1)(a); N.R.S. 62C.200(1)(a); preclude the filing of a petition); NDCC §27-20-10(1); 42 10A Okl. St. Ann. § 2-2-404(A)(2) ([a] court may defer Pa. C.S.A. §6323(2); W. Va. Code § 49-5- 2a(a); W.S.A. delinquency proceedings for 180 days if the child: (2) 938.245. waives the privilege against self-incrimination and 97 F.S.A. § 985.12(1) (.any law enforcement officer, upon testifies that the allegations are true). making contact with a juvenile who admits having 110 A.R.S. § 8-321(G) (If the juvenile successfully complies committed a misdemeanor, may issue a civil citation). with the conditions set forth by the probation officer, 98 DC ST § 16-2305.01(3) (defining diversion as a noncriminal the county attorney shall not file a petition in juvenile alternative to adjudication); RI ST § 42-72-33(c); W.S.A. court and the program’s resolution shall not be used 938.32. against the juvenile in any further proceeding and is not 99 Neb. Rev. St. § 43-260.04(4) (.[a] juvenile pre-trial an adjudication of incorrigibility or delinquency.); A.C.A. diversion program shall .[b]e offered to the juvenile prior § 9-27-323(h)(3); F.S.A. § 985.125(3); Neb.Rev.St § 43- to an adjudication but after the arrest of the juvenile .if .a 260.04(7); O.R.S §§ 419C.239(1)(e); TN Rules of Juvenile decision has been made .that the offense will support the Procedure Rule 23(d); 3 V.S.A § 163(9)(e). filing of a juvenile petition or criminal charges.);10A Okl. 111 Guide to Developing Pre-Adjudication Diversion Policy St. Ann. § 2-2- 404(A); 3 V.S.A. § 163(c)(1). and Practice in Pennsylvania. (2010). Prepared by the 100 MD Code, Human Services, § 8-603(b). Diversion Subcommittee of the Mental Health/Juvenile 101 National Juvenile Justice Network. (2010). The Real Costs Justice state work group of the Models for Change and Benefits of Change: Finding Opportunities for Reform Initiative in Pennsylvania. During Difficult Fiscal Times. Washington, DC: National 112 See Ala.Code 1975 § 12-15-119; HRS §§ 571-31.4(d), 571- Juvenile Justice Network. 31.5(b); KRS § 635.010(f),(g); M.C.L.A. §§ 722.825(5)(.If

67 the minor fails to comply with the terms of the diversion 122 R.R.S. Neb. § 43-260.04; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 62C.200; agreement and the referral plan, the law enforcement ICA § 232.29; MCL § 722.825; 3 V.S.A. § 163 (2010). official or the court intake worker may revoke the 123 For further discussion, see Phase I, Mobilization and diversion agreement. If the diversion agreement is Advocacy, from Wiig, Janet K. with Tuell, John A., revoked, a petition may be filed with the court as provided Guidebook for Juvenile Justice & Child Welfare System by law and a petition may be authorized as provided by Coordination and Integration: A Framework for Improved law..); N.C.G.S.A. § 7B-1706(b); O.R.S §§ 419C.239(1)(d), Outcomes, CWLA Press, 2004, Revised 2008, pp. 1-17. 419C.242(1); TN Rules of Juvenile Procedure Rule 23(c); 124 For further discussion, see Harris, P.W., Lockwood, B., V.T.C.A. Family Code § 52.031(j)(1); W.S.A. 938.32(2)(a). & Mengers, L. (2009). A CJCA white paper: Defining 113 See ARJP Rule 15(D) (setting forth that the informal- and measuring recidivism [White paper]. Retrieved from adjustment process shall not continue beyond a period http://www.cjca.net. of 6 months from its commencement); A.C.A. § 9-27-323; Ind. Code § 31-37-9-7; M.S.A. § 388.24; Miss. Code. Ann. § 43- 21-405; N.H. Rev. Stat. § 169-B:10; N.C.G.S.A. § 7B- 1706 ([a] fter six months the juvenile court counselor shall close the diversion plan or contract file); NDCC § 27-20- 10; 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 6323(c); W.Va. Code. § 49-5-3a. 114 Ala. Code. 1975 § 12-15-119; F.S.A. § 985.12(4); KRS § 635.010(f); N.C.G.S.A. § 7B-1706(b); O.R.S. § 419C.239; M.C.L.A. 722.825(5); TN Rules of Juv. Proc. Rule 23; V.T.C.A. Family Code § 52.03. 115 Ala. Code. 1975 § 12-15-199 (providing that the juvenile intake court officer may terminate the informal-adjustment process if at any time the child appears to have received all possible benefit); HRS § 571-31.4. 116 Ga. Code. Ann. § 15-11-69(c); 705 ILCS 405 § 5-305(3); M.C.L.A. § 722.825(2); MCA § 41-5-1303; Neb.Rev.St § 43-260.04(5); N.R.S. 62C.200(6); NDCC § 27-20-10(3); 42 Pa.C.S.A § 6323(e)(.An incriminating statement made by a participant to the person giving counsel or advice and in the discussions incident thereto shall not be used against the declarant over objection in any criminal proceeding or hearing under this chapter..); V.T.C.A. Family Code § 52.031(k); 3 V.S.A § 163(5); W.S.A. 938.245(5). 117 See note 116. 118 V.S.A § 163(5). 119 Ga Code. Ann. § 15-11-69(c); Mont. Code Anno. § 41-5- 1303; N.R.S. 62C.200(6). 120 42 Pa.C.S. § 6338. 121 See ICA § 232.29;Miss. Code. Ann. § 43-21-405(2); MCL § 722.825; Missouri Sup. Ct Rules 112.01, 112.03;NDCC § 27-20-26(1); R.R.S. Neb. § 43-260.04; Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 62C.200; O.R.S § 419C.225; RCWA § 13.40.080(11); 3 V.S.A § 163(2).

68 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Appendix A: Models for Change

In Models for Change, there is an understanding that there is no one single model per se, rather multiple models grounded in the core principles of the Models for Change initiative. These core principles include: fairness (for youth, families, victims, and communities), the recognition of developmental differences between youth and adults, individual differences (in development, culture, strengths and needs), youth potential, responsibility (youth must accept responsibility for their actions as well as accept the consequences of their actions), and safety (rights of individuals and communities to feel safe). Each state participating in the Models for Change initiative identiﬁed various areas in need of reform. These included: mental health, increasing the availability of evidence-based practices and community-based services, addressing the issue of disproportionate minority contact, aftercare services, juvenile court jurisdiction, and alternatives to formal processing. The Models for Change initiative advances the notion that “In a model system, responses to delinquency should be local and informal whenever possible, and all but a limited number of youth should be supervised, sanctioned, and treated in community settings” (www.modelsforchange.net). Its overarching goal is to hold youth accountable for their actions, and provide for rehabilitation and protection from harm, while increasing their life chances.

In addition to the original four Models for Change states, multi-state Action Networks have been established. These Networks are collaborative partnerships between the original four Models for Change states and 12 additional partner states. The Networks provide a forum for peer-to-peer support, as well as for the exchange of ideas and information in support of juvenile justice reform. These states have been working together to create and implement models of reform, strategies, and tools that can be disseminated to other states and communities around the country interested in reform. The focus is on the common goal of supporting the MacArthur Foundation’s investment in juvenile justice reform. The multi-state Action Networks are targeting their reform efforts in the areas of mental health and juvenile justice, disproportionate minority contact, and indigent defense. As a result, Models for Change is now an initiative that spans across 16 states.

69 Appendix B: Juvenile Diversion Workgroup

The Models for Change Executive Committee established a Juvenile Diversion Workgroup with representatives from members of the National Resource Bank (NRB). The NRB is made up of key leading organizations specializing in juvenile justice advocacy, research, and reform that provide technical assistance and training to the Models for Change states and Action Network sites. The Diversion Workgroup is represented by experts from:

Center for Juvenile Justice Reform: The Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University’s Public Policy Institute is designed to support public agency leaders in the juvenile justice and related systems of care.

National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice: The Center was established to assist the ﬁeld in developing improved policies and programs for youth with mental health disorders in contact with the juvenile justice system, based on the best available research and practice.

National Juvenile Defender Center: The Center was created to respond to the critical need to build the capacity of the juvenile defense bar and to improve access to counsel and quality of representation for children in the justice system.

National Youth Screening Assessment Project: The National Youth Screening & Assessment Project (NYSAP) is a technical assistance and research center at University of Massachusetts Medical School focused on juvenile justice and mental health services.

Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps: RFKCAC serves children in both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, providing innovative and comprehensive programming (residential treatment, education services, community-based services, and therapeutic support) and promoting the integration and coordination of those two systems.

70 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Appendix C: Advisory Board Members

Bruce Knutson Director, Juvenile Court Services Department of Youth Services (Washington)

Robert Listenbee Chief, Juvenile Unit The Juvenile Defender’s Association of Pennsylvania

Jim Rieland Director of Juvenile Probation, Retired Allegheny County Juvenile Probation (Pennsylvania)

Lourdes Rosado Senior Attorney Juvenile Law Center (Pennsylvania)

Joseph Ryan Associate Professor, Faculty Fellow, Child and Family Research Center University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Andy Shealy Assistant District Attorney Lincoln Parish District Attorney’s Ofﬁce (Louisiana)

Keith Snyder Deputy Directory Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission (Pennsylvania)

Doug Thomas Senior Research Associate National Center for Juvenile Justice (Pennsylvania)

Wansley Walters Director Miami-Dade County Juvenile Services Department (Florida)*

* Currently Secretary for the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice

71 APPENDIX D: Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Survey Data Summary Overview Due to growing concern about the often unnecessary involvement of youth into the juvenile justice system, many state and local jurisdictions across the country have established programs and practices that divert youth from the juvenile justice system. While these efforts share the common goal of preventing further contact with the juvenile justice system, the means and structure used to accomplish that goal are often very different. Diversion programs can vary widely in terms of the target population, who makes diversion decisions, the point in the system at which youth are diverted, how charges are handled, consequences and beneﬁts of successful and unsuccessful program completion, and services that are provided. Furthermore, some jurisdictions do not establish formal “diversion programs” and instead have “diversion processes.” As a result, while the growth of diversion programs and practices across the country is an important trend that has the potential to improve the lives of youth and their families, the variations in what is meant by “diversion” has at the same time caused considerable confusion in the ﬁeld.

In response, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, as part of its Models for Change initiative, has established a Diversion Work Group.1 Models for Change is an effort to create successful and replicable models of juvenile justice reform through targeted investments in key states. This initiative is underway in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Washington, and through action networks focusing on key issues in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin. The Work Group is developing a technical assistance report designed to provide states and local jurisdictions with guidance and information on diversion practices and programs. The publication will outline some of the critical issues that should be considered when planning a diversion program, the various options for structuring diversion, and the implications of each option. Purpose of this Survey In an effort to learn more about the range of diversion programs and practices in place within the Models for Change states, the Work Group is conducting a survey of diversion programs within those states. Your program has been identiﬁed by the Models for Change Lead Entity or Action Network Team Leader within your state. The survey is designed to collect basic information about how the program is structured, funded, and operated; the characteristics of the target population; the types of services provided; and screening and assessment practices within the program. The goal of this survey is to assist the Work Group in understanding the current state of diversion within Models for Change, and to identify practical program and practice examples that can be included within the report.

1 This Work Group includes representatives from the Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, Child Welfare League of America, National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, National Juvenile Defender Center, and National Youth Screening and Assessment Project.

72 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook N=36 I. General Description of Program 1. What are the primary objectives of the program (check all that apply)?

Decrease recidivism: 83% (30)

Improve system efﬁciency: 75% (27)

Reduce the level of system involvement or penetration: 92% (33)

Lower costs: 72% (26)

Reduce unnecessary restriction of freedom: 36% (13)

Help youth and their families access needed services and programs: 81% (29)

Reduce burden on justice system: 78% (28)

Use available research and best practices: 72% (26)

Early identiﬁcation of needs to prevent youth from becoming repeat offenders: 75% (27)

Other: 33% (12)

Includes: Reduce DMC (3 Programs); Educate juveniles and parents on dangers of criminal behavior; Deter juveniles from offending by providing legal education, activities, adult role models in safe and healthy learning environment; Reduce criminalization of mental illness; Refer youth to treatment/education programs; Accountability and restorative justice, as well as substance abuse prevention; Divert youth with mental health needs from jj system and provide community-based services; Divert ﬁrst-time misdemeanor offenders; Provide multi-modal comprehensive out-patient counseling; Generate Best Practice knowledge

No Answer: 3% (1)

2. What is the mission statement of the program?

Many of the programs indicated in their missions the concept of holding juvenile offenders accountable for their actions, preventing further involvement in the juvenile justice system by providing community-based services to reduce recidivism while stressing the importance of community safety.

73 3. What is the geographic service area/jurisdiction served by the program?

County/Parish: 58% (21) Judicial District (can include multiple parishes or counties): 14% (5) Partial County: 8% (3) Schools: 6% (2) Serves More than one County/Locality: 11% (4) Statewide: 3% (1)

4. What year was the program established?

Within the last year: 11% (4) Within the last 2-3 years: 17% (6) Within the last 5 years: 6% (2) Within the last 5-10 years: 11% (4) More than 10 years ago: 56% (20)

5. How many youth participated in the program last year? (On Average)

Less than 50: 17% (6) Avg.: 23 participants 50-150: 25% (9) Avg.: 80 participants 150-500: 22% (8) Avg.: 237 participants More than 500: 25% (9) Avg.: 1,038 participants No Available Data: 11% (4)

6. How many youth successfully completed the diversion program last year? (On Average)

In Programs with less than 50 Participants: Average: 74% 50-150 Participants: Average: 80% 150-500 Participants: Average: 82% More than 500 Participants: Average: 76% No Available Data: 12 Programs

74 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook II. Eligibility Criteria / Referral Process 1. Please indicate whether or not the program has established eligibility criteria along each of the dimensions below. If yes, please describe the restrictions/requirements. Established Dimension Eligibility Restrictions Criteria? - Regular court offenders/members (Grades 7-12) (1) - Pre-court offenders (Grades 4-6) (1) - 7th/8th graders within schools (1) - Middle school students at identified schools (1) - Youth aged 7-17 (1) - Youth aged 10-16 (3) - Youth aged 10-17 (9) No – 6 - Youth aged 10-18 (3) Age - Youth aged 10-21 (1) Yes – 30 - Youth aged 12-15 (1) - Generally youth aged 12-17 (2) - Youth aged 13 and up (1) - Youth aged 12-18 (1) - Youth aged 13-18 (1) - Youth aged 14-18 (1) - Generally youth aged 16-18 (1) - Crime must be committed prior to youth’s 18th birthday (2) No – 36 Gender Yes – 0 - Primarily first-time offenders, but repeat offenders who were not previously referred are accepted (1) - Do not have to be a 1st time offender (1) - 1st and 2nd time offenders accepted (3rd time offenders accepted at referring officer’s judgment) (1) First-Time No – 16 - Low level misdemeanor offenses, gross misdemeanor, Class C felony offenses Offenders Yes – 20 (1) - Must be a 1st time offender (8) - 1st time property offender (1) - 1st and 2nd time behavior-based school offenses (1) - Must be for drug court; otherwise at court’s discretion (1) - Youth can participate in program two times a year (1)

75 Established Dimension Eligibility Restrictions Criteria? − No status offenders accepted (5) Status No – 26 − Truant minors (1) Offenders Yes – 10 − Accepts status offenders (3) − Depends on type of offense (1) − Misdemeanor offenses (2) − Exclude weapons charges, arson, and usually sex-related offenses (1) − Generally only accept nonviolent, non-sexual offenses but some exceptions may be made (1) − Generally only accept minors in possession of alcohol; small marijuana possession; possession of paraphernalia (1) − Delinquent level offenses, misdemeanor, or felony offenses (1) − Gang-related crimes not accepted, animal cruelty charges on case by case basis, −battery charges require the victim’s approval (1) − Accept all misdemeanors and 3rd degree felonies (1) − Only nonviolent, drug-related offenses (1) − Cannot be charged with a violent crime or crime-causing injury (court can override by own discretion) (1) − Youth who are not attending school (1) Youth No – 10 − Serious forcible felonies and any other heinous crimes (murder) not accepted charged (1) with speciﬁc Yes – 26 − Accept domestic battery charges (1) crimes − Exceptions to acceptance include violent/sexual/drug/gang related or weapons related offenses, as well as residential burglary (1) − Minor drug/alcohol offenses on school grounds, minor weapons offenses, theft, battery between students, gang afﬁliated behavior (1) − Accept only property crimes (1) − Accept delinquent behaviors/nonviolent offenders (1) − No violent or serious offenses accepted (1) − Excluding murder or any class A offense against a person under Maine Criminal Code (1) − Must be nonviolent offense (1) − Cannot be charged with a felony (1) − Cannot be serious or aggravated offense (1) − Excludes any violent or sex-related offense (1) − Low level misdemeanors (1)

76 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Established Dimension Eligibility Restrictions Criteria? - No restrictions unless they can be better served through court system (1) - Try to avoid taking youth with mental health needs (1) - Not allowed (diverted to mental health court) (1) Youth with No – 22 - Not admitted for Conduct Disorder alone, unless diagnosed with an additional mental health MH disorder (1) disorders Yes – 14 - Targeted population but not limited to youth with MH disorders (1) - Discretion based on severity of disorder (1) - Youth with a diagnosable mental health disorder (1) - Only those involving alcohol and/or marijuana (1) - Must participate in drug/alcohol program (1) - Must have a substance abuse disorder (1) Youth with - Occasionally permitted but usually diverted to Drug Court (1) substance No – 21 - Not admitted for substance abuse disorder alone unless accompanied with a abuse Yes – 15 disorders co-occurring MH disorder (1) - There is a specialized drug diversion program - Would have to have a co-occurring mental health disorder (1) - Discretion based on severity of abuse (1) Includes: No gang activity or pattern of violence; Youth must be in need of some service (mental health, behavioral health, family in need of services, etc.); Youth on probation with not enough credits to graduate; Other Yes – 9 Criminal acts against schools when school requests diversion; Family agreement to participate; Must be pre-adjudicated youth; Youth with mental retardation not permitted; Youth who would otherwise be placed on probation

77 2. At which point(s) in the juvenile justice processing continuum are youth diverted to your program (check all that apply)?

Initial contact with law enforcement: 39% (14) Intake: 47% (17) Petitioning: 42% (15) Adjudication hearing: 28% (10) Detention: 14% (5) Other: 33% (12) Includes: DA Referral; County Court; Truancy Ofﬁcer; Intake at ERC; Formal station adjustment prior to petition; Case processing review; Referred by schools; ADA’s screen cases and assign to diversion; Pre-Trial; Probation ofﬁcer/attorney referral; Court referral; Following behavioral health screening at detention center; Prosecution through court (voluntary)

3. Are youth / caretakers afforded the right to obtain the advice of indigent defense counsel during their participation in the diversion program?

Yes = 64% (23) No = 36% (13)

4. Must a youth admit to the charges against him/her in order to participate?

Yes = 58% (21) No = 42% (15)

5. Must a youth’s family agree to participate in the program?

Yes = 81% (29) No= 19% (7)

78 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook III. Program Structure / Features 1. Please indicate which agency(s) operates and/or funds the diversion program (check all that apply). Agency Operates Funds Local law enforcement agency: 4 2 Juvenile/Community assessment center: 3 3 Mayor’s Office/ City Council: 1 1 Private/community-based service agency: 9 4 Municipal/county/state court (criminal and family): 8 10 Prosecutor/public defender’s office: 9 7 County juvenile corrections/probation agency: 14 12 County child welfare agency: 0 1 County substance abuse agency: 1 0 County mental health agency: 1 1 State juvenile corrections agency/detention center: 1 3 State child welfare agency: 0 0 State substance abuse agency: 0 3 State mental health agency: 0 0 State Advisory Group: 0 2 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention: 1 3 Other: State Department of Juvenile Justice: 1 1 Other: Nonprofit: 1 0 Other: County Commissions/County Commissioner 0 2 Other: State Department of Criminal Justice 0 1 Other: State Legislation (SB94) 0 1 Other: Restitution Earned Income Funds 0 1 Other: State Law Enforcement Agency 0 1 Other: State/County/Parish Department of Juvenile Justice: 1 1 Other: County Public Schools: 0 1 Other: Juvenile Court Programs Unit: 1 0 Other: Private Foundation Grant: 0 1 Other: SAMHSA 0 1 Other: Grant 0 1 Other: Domestic Violence Shelter 1 0 Other: IL DHS/ IL State Commissioner 0 2 Other: Michigan State University 1 1 Other: County Human Services 1

79 2. For youth who are accepted into the program, which of the following are required for continued participation in the program (check all that apply)

Youth must participate in services: 92% (33) Caretakers must participate in services: 64% (23) Attendance at reporting sessions: 58% (21) Absence of new arrests: 44% (16) Youth must pass urinalysis screening: 19% (7) Other: 42% (15)

Includes: Must show up at mediation and reach an agreement; Participation requirements are individualized and vary on a case-by-case basis; Parents must participate in diversion intake; Youth must maintain appropriate school grades; Youth must show up to services; Follow guidelines/requirements indicated by DA; Absence of probation violations; violation of requirements by ERC does not terminate diversion services; drug testing; Follow conditions outlined in diversion contract; participation is voluntary

3. What is the average length of program involvement for those youth who successfully complete the program’s requirements (in months)?

Less than 1 month: 8% (3) 1-3 Months: 22% (8) 3-6 Months: 44% (16) 6-12 Months: 19% (7) No Answer: 6% (2)

3a. Is there a minimum length of participation that is required?

Yes = 47% (17) No Answer: 6% (2) No= 47% (17) Less than 1 month: 6% (2) 1-3 Months: 17% (6) 3-6 Months: 19% (7) 6-12 Months: 3% (1)

80 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook 3b. Is there a maximum length of participation that is allowed?

Yes= 56% (20) No= 44% (16) Less than 1 month: 3% (1) 1-3 Months: 11% (4) 3-6 Months: 22% (8) One Year: 17% (6)

4. What incentives are used to motivate youth and caretakers to fully participate in the diversion program?

Verbal accolades/praise: 86% (31) Awards/gifts: 17% (6) Reduced program requirements (e.g. decreased reporting): 42% (15) Record expunged/charges dropped upon successful program completion: 75% (27) Other: 47% (17)

Includes: Parent/Adolescent Mediation or taking AYC law class for reduced hours; Incentives tailored to individual youth; Awarded with activities such as skiing, rafting, wilderness activities; Reduced sentencing/ probation instead of detention; Youth advocate joins youth in court which often results in reduced sentencing; School suspension not recorded/no expulsion; Food/meals provided at some program activities; Assistance with job/school placement; ﬁeld trips; Connection with diversion manager/suspension of judgment/building of relationship/partnering to reach a positive goal for youth and parents; Engage youth in setting the goals of representation

81 5. What are the potential consequences for youth who fail to complete or follow the stipulations of the diversion program (check all that apply)?

Filing of petition: 86% (31) Temporary detention: 31% (11) Increased frequency/intensity of monitoring: 44% (16) Increased length of program participation: 42% (15) Unsuccessful discharge from the program: 78% (28) Warning: 50% (18) Other: 50% (18)

Includes: Intake ofﬁcers may refer youth for additional consequences, more closely monitored program; Change program requirements/implement or increase drug screening; Graduated sanctions; Increase in treatment services; Filing of arrest charges leading to criminal record; Placed on probation; Ordered to attend another round of the program; Ceasing of services; Counseling; Additional supervision; Suspension/expulsion; Going to court to see judge/ Community service/Essays/ Administrative hearing/ Home Detention; Potential loss of driver’s license if alcohol-related offense; Filing of charges; Reassessment by case manager and supervising staff/meeting with DA/readjustment of diversion plan; If youth decides not to use TeamChild, they can drop out

82 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook IV. Screening/Assessment 1. Does the diversion program use standardized screening/ assessment instruments? Yes = 61% (22) No = 39% (14) 1a. If yes, please use the table below to provide the speciﬁc names of the instruments used (under the appropriate category of instrument), and indicate the purpose(s) for which the instrument is administered.

Instrument Instrument Name For what purpose? Category (please do not use abbreviations) CYOLSI = Colorado Youthful Offender Level of Service Instrument (2) MAYSI-2 = Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (8) GAIN-Q = Global Appraisal of Individual Needs (1) PACT= Positive Assessment Change Tool (1) Determine eligibility BERS= Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (1) BASC= Behavior Assessment System for Children (1) Service planning Mental PADDI= Practical Adolescent Dual Diagnostic Interview Readiness for program completion Health (1) DSM IV-TR (1) Assess program outcomes Youth Outcomes Questionnaire- Version SR (1) Other ______YASI Pre-screen= Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (1) *Some programs utilized more than one instrument and one program respondent did not know the instrument used.

83 Instrument Instrument Name For what purpose? Category (please do not use abbreviations) Colorado Juvenile Risk Assessment (1) YLS= Youth Level of Service Inventory (2) YLS-CMI = Youth Level of Service Case Management Inventory (Long form) (2) PACT= Positive Achievement Change Tool (1) MAYSI-2= Massachusetts Youth Screening and Instru- ment (3) YASI Pre-screen= Youth Assessment and Screening Determine eligibility Instrument (2) Service planning YOS Self Report (1) Risk/Need NCAR= North Carolina Assessment of Risk (1) Readiness for program completion Mental Health Evaluation (1) Assess program outcomes Juvenile Inventory for Functioning (1) SAVRY= Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Other ______Youth (1) Texas Juvenile Probation Commission’s Risk/Needs Instrument (1) YouthZone Screening for Positive Youth Development (1) *Some programs utilized more than one instrument and 3 programs used an internally developed instrument.

84 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Instrument Instrument Name For what purpose? Category (please do not use abbreviations) SUS= Substance Use Survey (2) MAYSI-2= Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (3) GAIN-Q= Global Appraisal of Individual Needs- Quick (1) PACT= Positive Assessment Change Tool (1) CRAFFT 2 out of 5= Car, Relax, Alone, Forget, Friends, Trouble) (1) TASI= Teen Addiction Severity Index (1) Determine eligibility JASAE= Juvenile Automated Substance Abuse Service planning Evaluation (1) Substance ASAM=American Society of Addiction Medicine Readiness for program completion Abuse Patient Placement Criteria for the Treatment of Assess program outcomes Substance-Related Disorders (1) CASI= Comprehensive Adolescent Severity Inventory (1) Other ______YASI Pre-screen= Youth Assessment and Screening Instrument (1) SASSI= Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (1) YouthZone Screening for Positive Youth Development (1) *Some programs utilized more than one instrument CYOLSI = Colorado Youthful Offender Level of Service Instrument (2) MASYI-2= Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument (4) Determine eligibility GAIN-Q= Global Appraisal of Individual Needs- Quick (1) Service planning PACT= Positive Achievement Change Tool (1) Suicide BASC= Behavioral Assessment System for Children (1) Readiness for program completion YASI Pre-screen= Youth Assessment and Screening Assess program outcomes Instrument (1) Other ______*One program indicated that if the MH Assessment score came back high, they would be referred to psych analysis to get clearance for program participation

85 Instrument Instrument Name For what purpose? Category (please do not use abbreviations) Sex Offender Instrument (2) SHOCAP Scoring Table= Serious Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Program (1) Additional Psych Evaluations for screening IQ, Cognitive Impairment, etc. (2) Determine eligibility Level of Supervision (1) Service planning OHIO Scales (2) Other Behavioral Health Screening (1) Readiness for program completion Test of Verbal Intelligence (1) Assess program outcomes BASC= Behavioral Assessment System for Children (pre and post test for youth and parents) (1) Other ______Domestic Violence Behavior Checklist (1) *One program stated that first-time offender eligibility was determined by computer system, as well as by police officers/agencies (for a specific program offered)

2. Are written policies in place regarding the use of information collected from youth and families during the administration of screening/assessment instruments, or during program participation?

Yes = 75% (27) No= 17% (6) N/A = 8% (3)

2a. If yes, are the policies clearly explained to youth and their families prior to acceptance into the program?

Yes = 72% (26) No = 3% (1)

86 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook V. Services 1. Which services/ programs are available to youth / caretakers through the diversion program/practice (either by direct service provision or referral)?

Mental health treatment: 72% (26) Substance abuse treatment: 75% (27) Educational assistance programs: 61% (22) Caregiver respite /support: 28% (10) Life skills training: 64% (23) Family counseling: 72% (26) Mentoring: 64% (23) Other: 64% (23)

Includes: Transportation; Financial Aid; Educational Classes/Workshops; Victim Impact/Victim-Offender Mediation; Job Placement Services; Wraparound Services; Advisement of available community resources; Anger Management; Parent-Coach Liaisons; Medicaid Assistance; Individual Therapy; Support Groups; Restorative Justice; Wilderness Therapy; Teen Media Project; After-school Art Program; Step-Up Group Counseling; Individual Counseling; Aftercare Planning; Parent and youth coaching; Parent classes; Employment education; Child management/Child Advocacy; Housing; Legal Advocacy

2. Who is responsible for overseeing the provision of services?

Probation ofﬁcer: 25% (9) Court appointed person: 3% (1) Caregiver: 3% (1) Case Manager: 42% (15) Other: 53% (19)

Includes Sentencing Coordinator; Diversion Ofﬁcers/Diversion Unit; Program Manager/Director; Youth Advocate; Clinician; Hearing Ofﬁcer/Police Staff; BARJ Coordinator; Panel Member; Juvenile Diversion Counselor; Staff Attorney

3. Do youth in the diversion program have access to evidence-based practices? Yes = 69% (25) No = 31% (11)

87 3a. If yes, please list the evidence-based practices available to youth in the program.

Includes: Victim-Offender Mediation; Restorative Justice; Teen Court; Botvin Life Skills; Arise Life Skills; Mentoring; Motivational Interviewing; Functional Family Therapy; Multi-Dimensional Family Therapy; Brief Strategic Family Therapy; Multi-Systemic Therapy; Multi-Dimensional Treatment Foster Care; Thinking For A Change; W.A.I.T.; Insight; Peer Jury; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Positive Adolescent Choice Training; Student Created Aggressive Replacement Ed.; Strengthening Families; Cannabis Youth Treatment Series; A.R.T.; Solution-Focused Therapy; A-CRA; ACC; Project Toward No Drug Use; Reconnecting Youth; Systems of Hope; Parenting with Love and Limits VI. Outcome Monitoring/Quality Assurance 1. Are program outcomes monitored systematically?

Yes = 92% (33) No = 8% (3)

2. Have written policies and procedures been developed?

Yes = 92% (33) No = 8% (3)

3. Is training provided to program staff on written policies and procedures?

Yes = 97% (35) No = 3% (1)

4. Does the program have a management/oversight process in place to monitor quality assurance and ﬁdelity to program policies and procedures?

Yes = 89% (32) No = 11% (4)

5. Has an evaluation been conducted of the diversion program?

Yes = 64% (23) No = 36% (13)

88 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook APPENDIX E: 50 State Statutory Review

89 Performance Measurement Services Provided also may adjustment Informal the of consent the with include, parent(s)/guardian(s),, and child juvenile the by supervision temporary and officer probation persons with child the of placement parent(s)/legal her or his than other made be may Referrals guardian(s). to officer probation juvenile the by which agencies, private and public services or assistance provide may to the child and his/her parent(s)/ legal guardian(s).Rule 15(B) tment Discretion & Oversight has complaint verified a After petition a before and filed been need in or delinquency alleging juvenile the filed, is supervision of to subject officer, intake court court, juvenile the of direction the to advice and counsel give may an of purpose the for parties the to pursuant adjustment informal the by adopted procedure of rules Rule Alabama. of Court Supreme (C) 15 Incentives & Outcomes Upon termination of the informal- a of dismissal and process adjustment the proceedings, further without child been has who officer probation juvenile intake court juvenile a be to designated his/her and child the notify shall officer and thereof guardian(s) parent(s)/legal court. juvenile the to action that report officer probation juvenile A (E). 15 Rule juvenile a designated been has who terminate either may officer intake court process informal-adjustment the further without child a dismiss and proceedings or terminate the informal- in petition a file and process adjustment child (1) time: any at if court juvenile the possible all received have to appears (2) adjustment; informal from benefit participate to declines guardian or child child (3) process; adjustment informal in Other (8) ... process with comply to fails terminating for exist reasons sufficient Ala. process. informal-adjustment the Code 1975 § 12-15-119. The informal- continue not shall process adjustment its from months 6 of period a beyond (D) 15 Rule commencement. 50 State Statutory Review The chart below represents a non-exhaustive 50 state review of laws governing the diversion process Alabama Ala.Code 1975 § 12-15-119 Informal adjustment of certain cases prior to filing juvenile petition; ARJP Rule 15 Adjus Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information:

90 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided habitual of violation a for (4) (b) possession in or consuming minor 04.16.050(d) AS under control or that agreement an include must of hours 96 perform minor the the that provide work, community permit, or license driver’s minor’s to privilege or drive, to privilege six for revoked be license a obtain ... months Discretion & Oversight inquiry preliminary a Following entity the or department the (1) the dismiss may it by selected prejudice; without or with matter to action informal take may (2) or matter the adjust Incentives & Outcomes minor habitual of violation a for (b)(4) control or possession in or consuming [minor’s] the … 04.16.050(d) AS under to privilege permit, or license driver’s license a obtain to privilege or drive, months 6 additional an for revoked be not is adjustment informal the if has minor the because successful work community perform to failed to submit to failed has or ordered, as the complete successfully or evaluation recommended; treatment or education dept the by selected entity or dept the for responsible agency the notify shall informal an of licenses driver’s issuing an of or paragraph this under adjustment adjustment unsuccessful continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Alaska AS § 47.12.060. Informal action to adjust matter Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions delinquent a be to alleged is who minor a to applies Section (a) has it by selected entity an or department the whom for and informal elects department the If (b) inquiry. preliminary a made of consent the with made be (1) must adjustment the adjustment, the of conditions and terms the to parents his/her and minor the victim a is there if restitution juvenile’s a include (3) adjustment; involved in the alleged offense Additional Information:

91 Performance Measurement acknowledges juvenile the If … (F) responsibility for the delinquent/ juvenile the act, incorrigible the require shall officer probation of more or one with comply juvenile unpaid (1) conditions: following the a (2) work; restitution community program counseling approved court family strengthen to designed repetitive prevent and relationships court a (3)(4) delinquency; juvenile to program education approved behavior delinquent further prevent drug or alcohol with deals that or program nonresidential (5) abuse; of rehabilitation or supervision (6) a or restitution victim of payment (7) monetary assessment Performance Measurement Services Provided filed is petition a before ... (A) adjudication or admission an or attorney county the held, is hearing a of prosecution the divert may a committing of accused juvenile of accused child a or act delinquent community a to act incorrigible an a to or program alternative based by administered program diversion county the ... (C) court juvenile the to discretion sole has attorney defer or divert to whether decide offender. juvenile a of prosecution designate may attorney county The retained be shall that offenses the diversion for court juvenile the by directly referred be shall that or alternative based community a to county the by authorized program attorney Services Provided Discretion & Oversight successfully Juvenile If (G) petition no program completes program’s the and filed be shall against used be not shall resolution proceedings, future in juvenile the of adjudication an not is does delinquency, or incorrigibility disabilities civil any impose not juvenile the disqualify not does and application service civil any in holding After (J) appointment or the in participants the meeting a alternative based community legally any on agree may program that consequences reasonable are determine participants the resolve fairly and fully to necessary the matter except confinement. Discretion & Oversight have shall prosecutor The C. defer or divert to discretion sole juvenile a of prosecution the a or incorrigible an of accused community a to act delinquent a to or program alternative based by administered program diversion court. juvenile the Incentives & Outcomes acknowledge must Juvenile A act; delinquent for responsibility commits he/she if eligible not is juvenile felony chronic a is crime; dangerous a of number a committed has offender; is statute); (see offenses enumerated offense an committed have to alleged or possession purchase, the involving previously has and liquor of consumption based community a in participated program diversion or program alternative before months 24 within times 2 least at the alleged offense. Incentives & Outcomes into accepted is juvenile the If C. court the program, diversion a notify shall program the administering the victim, as provided by law. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Arizona A.R.S. § 8-321 Referrals; diversions; conditions; community based alternative programs Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions based community conditions; diversions; Referrals; 8-321 § A.R.S. alternative programs Additional Information: of Proc., Rule 22 Pre-Petition Investigation and Diversion 17B A.R.S. Juv.Ct.Rules Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions

92 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided shall agreements Diversion (e) (1) for: providing to limited be the under probation Nonjudicial supervision of the intake officer/ which during officer probation to required be may juvenile the conditions specified with comply activities; and conduct concerning (2) Participation in a court- education, of program approved (3) treatment; or counseling, court-approved a in Participation a in Participation (4) and court; teen program. court drug juvenile Discretion & Oversight attorney, prosecuting the If (a) intake the with consultation after diversion a that determines officer, the in is case delinquency a of and juvenile the of interests best the with officer the community, the or his and juvenile the of consent custodian or guardian, parent, her satisfactory a make to attempt may diversion of a case. Incentives & Outcomes has complaint a of diversion a If (f)(1) upon based petition a made, been original the which of out events the during only filed be may arose complaint was agreement the which for period the within filed is petition a If (2) into entered compliance juvenile’s the period, this terms reasonable and proper all with for grounds be shall agreement the of (h) court. the by petition the of dismissal the of completion satisfactory the Upon be shall juvenile The period:(1) diversion proceedings; further without dismissed written furnish shall officer intake The (2) and juvenile the to dismissal of notice The (3) and parent/guardian; her or his all and agreement, the and complaint by expunged be may thereto, references file. juvenile’s the from court the continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Arkansas A.C.A. § 9-27-323 Diversion--Conditions--Agreement--Completion Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions The conditions:(1) following the to subject is case a of Diversion act; delinquent in involvement her or his admitted has juvenile guardian his/her and juvenile the advises ofﬁcer intake (2)The and ﬁling formal demand and diversion refuse to right their of into entered be shall agreement diversion Any (3) adjudication; diversion The (4) juvenile; the by intelligently and voluntarily or juvenile a of supervision the for provide shall agreement for agency private or public a to juvenile the of referral the diversion a of terms other All (5) months; 6 exceed to not services juvenile The (6) and months; 9 exceed not shall agreement diversion the terminate to right the have guardian his/her and agreement at any time Additional Information:

Performance Measurement determines officer probation the “If involved not has minor the that specific the in herself or himself the days, 60 within programs immediately shall officer probation a that request or petition a file prosecuting the by filed be petition the of conclusion the At . . . attorney undertaken supervision of program the section, this to pursuant and prepare shall officer probation the of report followup a maintain taken.” measures program actual Welf. & Inst. § 654. Services Provided crisis facilities, Sheltered-care and parent homes, resolution parent services, counseling child programs, education child and counseling and rehabilitation drug programs. Discretion & Oversight a into minor a enter to Whether to up totally is program diversion probation the of discretion the not may authority this and officer v. S. Charles See delegated. be Cnty, Angeles Los of Court Superior 1982); Dist. 2 (App. 144 Rptr. Cal. 187 of Court Superior v. M. Alsavon 434 Rptr. Cal. 177 Cnty, Angeles Los (App. 2 Dist 1981). Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart California & Inst. Code § 654 Programs of supervision Cal. Welf. Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions about or jurisdiction the under is minor a which in case any In probation the court, juvenile the of jurisdiction the under be to supervision. of program specific a create to decide may officer cannot guardians, and minor of consent with done be Must diverting of purpose the for designed be must months, six exceed system. justice juvenile the from minor the victims. his to restitution make to required be may minor A 144 Rptr. Cal. 187 Cnty, Angeles Los of Court Superior v. S. Charles (App. 2 Dist. 1982). of assessment individualized an make must officers Probation cannot officers Probation diversion. for eligibility minor’s each v. P. Kody guilt. admit must minors that rule categorical a make 2006). Dist. 3 (App. 763 3d Rptr. Cal. 40 Court, Superior of interest the officer probation the of judgment the in “[W]hen probation the protected, be can community the and minor the diversion. with proceed” to effort diligent a make shall officer Welf. & Inst. § 654. Additional Information:

94 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement contract a for applying When (5) justice criminal of division the with diversion juvenile provide to project community a services, of list a review for submit shall of list a objectives, project’s the practices, justice restorative the the in included applicable, if progress the of report a project, if year previous the during made implementing toward applicable annual an objectives, stated the providing project Each (6)(a) budget objectives develop shall services such toward progress report and rules by required as objectives by promulgated regulations and shall director The (b) director the diversion these monitor regularly progress that ensure to projects the accomplish to made being is objectives of this section. Services Provided program, the effectuate to .. (2) contract may division the and units governmental with to agencies nongovernmental youth eligible for services provide projects community-based through a to alternative an providing or hearing, adjudicatory an petition, delinquent juvenile a of dispositions not is but include, may “Services” . diagnostic of provision to, limited general assessment, needs a during counseling and counseling tutoring, specialized situation, crisis placement, and training job community programs, restitution recreational constructive service, day and reporting day activities, follow-up and programs, treatment The (8) 19-2-103) (C.R.S.A. activities. mental a implement may director to program screening illness in participate who juveniles screen the juvenile diversion program. t systems to reduce juvenile crime and recidivism, promote accountability, support the rights of of rights the support accountability, promote recidivism, and crime juvenile reduce to systems t stem stem ith section 19-2-303. catory trial pursuant to part 8 of this article, or disposition of a juvenile delinquent pursuant to section section to pursuant delinquent juvenile a of disposition or article, this of 8 part to pursuant trial catory Discretion & Oversight to agree may attorney district The a in participate to juvenile a allow diversion program Incentives & Outcomes alternative an as serve may Program adjudicatory an petition, a ﬁling to juvenile a ﬁnding dispositions or hearing, delinquent continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Colorado C.R.S.A. § 19-2-303 Juvenile diversion program--authorized; 19-2-704 Diversion Policy Goals: (1) Program should integrate restorative justice practices to provide community-based alternatives formal cour victims, heal the harm to relationships and community caused by juvenile crime, reduce costs in justice sy Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information: C.R.S.A 19-2-704 provides: As an alternative to a petition ﬁled pursuant section 19-2-512, adjudi 19-2-907, the district attorney may agree to allow a juvenile participate in diversion program established accordance w

95 Performance Measurement

Services Provided the by provided be to Services Division: Services Support Court project tutoring peer A “(1) offenders juvenile for designed community perform to required residential Specialized (2) services; on offenders juvenile for services expelled been have who probation services Social (3) school; from juvenile female for counseling and cognitive in Training (4) offenders; self-supporting A (5) building; skill (6) and program; entrepreneurship to designed program mentoring A adult positive with juveniles match role models.” § 46b-121 local by provided be to Services “(1) Bureaus: Service Youth counseling; group and Individual family and training parent (2) placement work (3) therapy; (4) counseling; employment and educational special and alternative recreational (5) opportunities; programs; enrichment youth and insure to programs outreach (6) by planning and participation the for community entire the and regional of development services; youth community-based including programs, preventive (7) suicide, youth pregnancy, youth drug and alcohol violence, programs (8) and prevention; youth positive develop that involvement.” §10-19m Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes Support Court the in Ofﬁcers Probation juvenile dismiss can division Services a of completion successful after cases supervision program. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Connecticut C.G.S.A. §46b-121; §10-19m; §46b-133; Connecticut Family Court Criminal Rule 6A Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Juveniles may be diverted to a juvenile probation ofﬁcer for non- Services Bureau. judicial handling or to a Youth state’s the runs which Division, Services Support Court The juvenile probation program, has established regulations for non- applies handling Non-judicial cases. juvenile of handling judicial delinquency minor for summons/referrals time second or ﬁrst to to agree and responsibility admit must parents and Child issues. six to up for last may program treatment or Supervision program. months. Additional Information:

96 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided arbitration the appropriate, When for continuance a grant may officer terms the complete to juvenile the of his arbitration agreement. Discretion & Oversight of result the as agreement Any to reduced be shall arbitration successfully juvenile the If writing. the of conditions the completes charges the agreement, arbitration dismissed. be shall as dismissed are charges if Even still are they arbitration, of result a offense. prior a as counted Incentives & Outcomes is office General’s Attorney The to cases sending for responsible and Judges proceedings. arbitration the to case a refer can officers hearing for consideration for General Attorney arbitration. the by outlined Eligibility for Criteria first-time Court: Family of Judge Chief misdemeanors, with charged offenders, through gone previously not have who generally are program arbitration the arbitration. for appropriate arbitration: from excluded be to Cases where cases (2) charge, felony any (1) citizen, private a to owed is restitution any (3) entities, business including not a against charges (4) charge, graffiti pending other any has who juvenile charges. from excluded be to presumed Cases a on referred be may but arbitration misdemeanor (1) basis: case-by-case of breach or order judicial of contempt misdemeanor (2) releases, of condition (4) threatening, terroristic (3) assault, indecent including offense sexual any controlled a of distribution (5) exposure, escape, or arrest resisting (6) substance, (7) any motor vehicle violation. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Delaware Delaware Family Court, Internal Policy Memorandum No. 08-002 Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information:

97 Performance Measurement Services Provided panied by the lawyer at any preliminary conference 16-2305.2(b) Discretion & Oversight Social of Director the Where (b) after recommends, (DSS) Services , conducted is inquiry preliminary a of interests best the in not is it that recommend to public or child the petition, delinquency a of filing the recommend so shall DSS the Corporation the of Office the to Corporation the and Counsel, determination a make shall Counsel for case the of suitability the of include may which adjustment, diversion. Incentives & Outcomes the inquiry, preliminary the At (d) inform shall Services Social of Director of present be to entitled person each the and of, limitations and function the process, adjustment the to, alternatives to right a has she or He (1) that: and process, adjustment the in participate limited not is but include, may which at attendance testing, drug periodic to, in participation or classes, parenting educational or treatment, counseling, Services Social The (2) programs; cannot and to authorized not is Division any at appear to person any compel or papers, any produce conference, order;(5) court absent place any visit Services Social the to made Statements Corporation the of Office the or Division parent her or his or child the by Counsel purpose any for admissible be not shall proceeding court subsequent any during confidentiality the to subject are and chapter; this in contained provisions is process adjustment the If (6) and successfully not and commenced participating persons the concluded, in or orally notified be may therein Services Social the by fact that of writing to referred be will case the that Division, and Counsel Corporation the of Office the confirmed be must notification oral that in writing. 16-2305.2 continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart District of Columbia 16-2305.2 - 16-2305.01 §§ ST DC Policy Goals: Program is reformative and protective in nature; a noncriminal alternative to adjudication 16-2305.01 Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions the with contact no or little had previously must Juvenile (c) not must supervision, of need in be system, justice juvenile offense pending the and safety public the to danger a present suitable is case if determine to (c) 16-2305.01; nonviolent be must the of Office the w/ consultation in DSS, the adjustment, for circumstances, following the consider shall Counsel, Corporation involved: allegedly conduct the (2)If child; of (1)Age others: among serious or death, cause to threatening or causing act(s) (A)An possession knowing or use (B)The another; to injury physical of use threatened or use (C)The instrument; dangerous a of violence to compel a person engage in sexual contact; (D) (E)The property; obtain to violence of use use/threatened The restrain to intent w/ force physical deadly of use use/threatened explosion or fire a of starting intentional (F)The another; of liberty the of welfare/safety the to risk serious (G)A damage; in resulting safety the endangered seriously which act (H)An or community; the that likelihood substantial a is (3)there person; another of there Whether ; conferences scheduled at appear not will child participate not will child the that likelihood substantial (4)a is: adjustment the during cooperate or programs diversion the in require would child the that likelihood substantial (5)a process; 6 than less in effectively administered be not could that services the during will, child the that likelihood substantial (6)a months; an by committed if which, act an (A)Commit process: adjustment endangers that conduct in (B)Engage or crime; a be would adult, the of member a or child the of health emotional or physical the to seeking person the (C)Harass or household; or family child’s person’s that of member a or filed, petition delinquency a have threats; or conduct prior by demonstrated where household, Whether: (7)another proceeding involving the child is pending; (8) has (9)there adjournments; or adjustments prior been have there substantial a is (10)there delinquency; of adjudication prior a been successful be not would process adjustment the that likelihood unless the child is temporarily removed from his/her home; (11) acting for person another against instituted be will proceeding a otherwise would case juvenile (12)the and child; the with jointly Counsel. Corporation the of Office the by petitioned been have 16-2305.2 Additional Information: The Director of Social Services shall permit any participant who is represented by a lawyer to be accom

98 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement the to report shall child The (3) performance service community days working 7 within monitor citation. the of issuance the after be shall assignment work The not of rate a at accomplished The week. per hours 5 than less intake the advise shall monitor reporting upon immediately office that monitor, the to child the by and reported fact in has child the which upon date expected the assignment work the of completion will be accomplished. Performance Measurement Services Provided services residential Specialized (2) probation on offenders juvenile for from expelled been have who school; Services Provided Discretion & Oversight program citation civil The . . . (1) local the at established be may of concurrence the with level circuit, the of judge chief the defender, public attorney, state law local each of head the and involved. agency enforcement law any program, this Under making upon officer, enforcement admits who juvenile a with contact misdemeanor, a committed having may issue a civil citation Discretion & Oversight or agency enforcement law A (1) with cooperation in district, school a establish may attorney, state the diversion postarrest or prearrest program. Incentives & Outcomes for timely report to fails juvenile a If (4) work a complete assignment, work a assigned with comply or assignment, the within services intervention or third a commits or time, prescribed officer the misdemeanor, subsequent has child the alleging report a issue shall which at act, delinquent a committed shall officer probation juvenile a point determination preliminary a perform Incentives & Outcomes diversion postarrest or prearrest The (3) the of agreement upon may, program program, the establish that agencies the of expunction the for provide who minor a of record arrest nonjudicial program a such completes successfully of result a As 943.0582. s. to pursuant to required be may juvenile program, a for license driver’s his/her surrender period that may not exceed 90 days continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Florida F.S.A. § 985.12 Civil Citation provide an efﬁcient and innovative alternative to custody of children who commit nonserious delinquent acts ensure swift appropriate consequences Policy Goals: (1) To Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions misdemeanor; the committing to admit must Juvenile and acts delinquent of instances ever-increasing reduce to attempt an in level community the at manner F.S.A.informal speedy, a in with dealt be may § acts 985.125delinquent commit who children which by system a provide Prearrest Goals:To Policy or postarrestpermit the judicial system to deal effectively with more serious cases diversion programsCriteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information

99 Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided counseling and services Social (3) for female juvenile offenders; Services Provided skill cognitive in Training (4) building; the case shall not be subject to informal adjustment, counsel, or advice without the prior written written prior the without advice or counsel, adjustment, informal to subject be not shall case the Discretion & Oversight the filed, is petition a Before (a) of officer other or officer probation court, the by designated court the direction, court’s the to subject the to advice and counsel give may informal an to view a with parties adjustment Discretion & Oversight reasonably child a When (a) section within come to believed or court the to referred is 571-11(2) informal agency, designated other to provided be may adjustment duly officer intake an by child the court family the by authorized Incentives & Outcomes made statement incriminating An (c) giving person the to participant a by discussion the in and advice or counsel shall thereto incident conferences or over declarant the against used be not a in except hearing any in objection court juvenile a in disposition on hearing proceeding criminal a in or proceeding conviction after declarant such against presentence a of purpose the for investigation. Incentives & Outcomes services and resources event the In (b) available, not are adjustment informal for to believed reasonably are failed, have respond to unable are or attempted, if fail family, or child the of needs the to with proceed shall officer intake the is as action such take or action, formal otherwise allowed under this chapter. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Georgia Ga. Code. Ann. § 15-11-69 Counsel and advice with view to informal adjustment Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions and counsel receive may parties filed, is petition a Before (a) the (1) appears: it if adjustment informal an to view a with advice (2) jurisdiction; court’s the within case the bring facts admitted best the in be would adjudication an without advice and Counsel his/her and child The (3) and child; the and public the of interest not is consent that knowledge with consent parents/guardian obligatory. Additional Information: (d) If a child is alleged to have committed designated felony act as defined in Code Section 15-11-63, notification of the district attorney or his her authorized representative. Hawaii HRS § 571-31.5 Informal adjustment, status offenders Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions (a) When a child reasonably believed to come within section 571- informal agency, designated other or court the to referred is 11(2) officer intake an by child the to provided be may adjustment facie prima establish to appear reasonably facts the where only obtained is consent a where and admitted are and jurisdiction child, the and custodian, legal or guardian, parent, child’s the from understanding. and age sufficient of if Additional Information:

100 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight petition, a of filing the to Prior (1) may attorney prosecuting the from inquiry preliminary a request to officer probation county the of interest the whether determine requires juvenile the or public the If proceeding. court formal a the required, not is action court utilize may attorney prosecuting refer and process diversion the county the to directly case the probation officer or a community- for program diversion based informal probation and counseling. filed been has petition the After (2) or admission the at where, and admits juvenile the hearing, denial the in contained allegations the to to decide may court the petition, the of adjustment informal an make petition. Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Idaho I.C. § 20-511 Diversion or informal disposition of the petition Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions admit must juvenile the petition, the of adjustment informal an For to the allegations contained in petition Additional Information:

101 Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided self-supporting A (5) entrepreneurship program; and Services Provided Discretion & Oversight the authorize may court The (1) a in confer to officer probation a with conference preliminary have to alleged is who minor her or his offense, an committed custodian, legal or guardian parent, other and Attorney, State’s the the concerning persons interested with petition, a filing of advisability cases suitable adjusting to view a except petition, a filing without insists Attorney State’s the when minor the when or action court on and hearing judicial a demands probation a with comply not will adjustment. Discretion & Oversight as heard informally are Cases mediation community the of part referral a following program station a as officer police a by officer probation a or adjustment, or adjustment, probation a as as Attorney State’s the by referred a diversion from prosecution. Incentives & Outcomes a during made statement No (3) to regard in conference preliminary the of subject the is that offense the into admitted be may conference at or hearing adjudicatory an at evidence under minor the against proceeding any his to prior State this of laws criminal the or her conviction under those laws. Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Illinois 705 ILCS 405 § 5-305 Probation Adjustment Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions crime a that effect the and actions his/her of seriousness the understand juveniles make to is goal The level. 705 ILCS 405 § 5-310 Community Mediation Program community the at manner informal and speedy a in acts delinquent commit who minors with deal To (1) Goals: Policy instances of delinquent acts while permitting the judicial system to deal effectively with more serious cases. victim and community while offering a method to reduce ever-increasing his/her family, has on the minor, Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions the in participate to opportunity the offered are who Minors for eligible be to offense the for responsibility admit must program program. the Additional Information:

102 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided designed program mentoring A (6) positive with juveniles match to adult role models. Discretion & Oversight preliminary the After (a) 1. Sec. the by approval upon and inquiry officer intake the court, juvenile of program a implement may officer the if adjustment informal that believe to cause probable has and child delinquent a is child the the from removed not is child the home. 31-37-9-1 child’s Incentives & Outcomes delinquent alleged is child the (1) If 3 Sec. fails parent/guardian child’s the (2) and informal of program the in participate to department probation the adjustment; petition a file may department the or filing Upon 4(a) Sec. compliance. for after and compliance for petition a for petition the on hearing a and notice order may court juvenile the compliance, a in participate to parent/guardian the A (b) adjustment informal of program participate to fails who parent/guardian adjustment informal of program a in in found be may court the by ordered of program A 7 Sec. court. of contempt exceed not may adjustment informal the of approval by except months, 6 may court juvenile The court. juvenile adjustment informal of program a extend an additional 3 months. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Indiana Ind. Code §§ 31-37-9-1 -- 31-37-9-10 Program of Informal Adjustment Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions or custodian, parent/guardian, his/her and child The 2. Sec. adjustment. informal of program the to consent must attorney 31-37-9-2 Additional Information:

103 Performance Measurement the performing person The (i) (1) file shall officer intake of duties with annually least at report a of number the listing court the during made adjustments informal conditions the time, reporting the number the case, each in imposed resulting adjustments informal of a of filing the without dismissal in informal of number the and petition, filing the in resulting adjustments original the upon petition a of complaint. Services Provided adjustment informal An (2) child a prohibit may agreement a for vehicle motor a driving from under or time of period specified the require circumstances, specific assignment work a perform to child the to or state the to value of make to child the require or public, monetary a of consisting restitution work a or victim the to payment the to value of directly assignment officer court juvenile The victim. department state the notify shall informal the of transportation of child the prohibiting adjustment from driving. Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes a of adjustment informal an If (h) (1) petition a made, been has complaint the which of out events the upon based filed be may arose complaint original months six of period the during only adjustment informal the date the from a If into. entered was agreement the period this within filed is petition and proper all with compliance child’s shall agreement the of terms reasonable petition the of dismissal for grounds be shall officer intake (3)The court the by school the of superintendent the notify the of charge in authorities the or district, informal any of school, nonpublic child’s years child,14 the regarding adjustment would which act an for older, or age of felony or misdemeanor aggravated an be if committed by an adult. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Iowa I.C.A § 232.29. Informal adjustment Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions permissible is complaint a of adjustment informal The (1) delinquent a in involvement admitted has child The (a) provided: parent/guardian and child the advises ofﬁcer intake The (b) act; informal the ) (c adjustment informal an refuse to right the of intelligently and voluntarily into entered is agreement adjustment the with or attorney, child’s the of advice the with child the by represented; not is child the if parent/guardian a of consent Additional Information:

104 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Kansas K.S.A. 38-2346 Immediate intervention programs Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions and policy a adopt may attorney district or county “[E]ach by program intervention immediate an for guidelines establish which a juvenile may avoid prosecution.” K.S.A. 38-2346(a). violations for intervention immediate for ineligible are Juveniles participated already have they if 8-1567) (K.S.A. law DUI the of in DUI of convicted been have DUI, for intervention immediate in collision a involved incident DUI the or state, other any or Kansas injury. personal in resulting a crime, off-grid an of violation “a for ineligible also are Juveniles severity drug or crimes nondrug for felony 3 or 2 1, level severity level 1 or 2 felony for drug crimes.” K.S.A. 38-2346(b)(2). juvenile the that require may programs intervention Immediate used be later can admission this and crime alleged the to admit K.S.A. program. the of terms the fulﬁll to fails he if him against 38-2346(c). the in participate to required be also may parents juvenile’s The immediate intervention program. K.S.A. 38-2346(d). Additional Information:

105 Performance Measurement Services Provided may agreement diversion A 1(e) of plan informal an include: its or court the by provided services public a to child the of referral staff; or agency, organization, private or person to assist the child and his/ problems the resolve to family her referral complaint; the in presented in program service community a to of provisions the with accordance limited restitution, 635.080(2); KRS property actual of amount the to the by incurred loss pecuniary or has youth the that provided victim, the acquire could or means the and restitution; make to means efforts or programs such other the benefit reasonably might which child. the and community Discretion & Oversight court-designated the If 1(c) the that determines worker public and child the of interests the with served, best be will county the of approval written that recommend may he attorney, be not petition offense public a recommendation a such If filed. court-designated the made, is the writing in advise shall worker and any, if victim the complainant, with agency enforcement law the the of jurisdiction investigative and recommendation the of offense each that and therefor reasons the from days 10 within submit may the to complaint a notice of receipt review special for attorney county upon attorney, county The (d) special for request a of receipt facts the consider shall review, and complainant the by presented worker court-designated the by recommendation the made who before filed, be petition no that final a makes attorney county the public a whether to as decision not shall or shall petition offense be filed. Incentives & Outcomes are agreement the of terms the If (f) successfully completed, the court- of dispose shall worker designated be shall charges the complaint, the further and dismissed considered child the If prohibited. is prosecution the of terms the with comply to fails court-designated the agreement, written days’ 10 provide shall worker notice to the child and his/her parent/ to intent his of counsel and guardian upon based petition offense public a file the whereupon complaint, original the meet shall worker court-designated and confer with the child his/ to counsel and parent/guardian her why viewpoint child’s the from consider the (g) and filed; be not should petition a in petition the with proceed shall court KRS of provisions the with accordance had agreement the if as 610 Chapter is petition a If formulated. been never that determination the upon based filed the with comply to failed has child the may child the agreement, an of terms move petition said of arraignment upon basis the on petition the of dismissal for substantially was agreement the that with. complied continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Kentucky KRS § 635.010 Complaint; duties of county attorney and court-designated worker Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information:

106 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided

Discretion & Oversight Art. 840 Form of Agreement adjustment informal An A. writing in forth set shall agreement the of conditions and terms the term the during supervision child’s shall It agreement. the in specified attorney district the by signed be the by and officer probation the or child and his parents. the that demonstrate must It B. understand parents his and child adjudication an to right child’s the also must It offense. the on hearing consent they that demonstrate adjustment the of terms the to that knowledge with agreement and obligatory not is consent their the of effect the of knowledge with in hereinafter out set as agreement Article 841. informal of period initial The C. six exceed not shall adjustment may court the however, months; additional for agreement the extend to not months, six of periods exceed a total of two years. the filed, been has petition a If D. filed be shall agreement adjustment in the record. Incentives & Outcomes Art. 841. Effect of Agreement: agreement adjustment informal An A. adjudication. an considered be not shall an such of existence the of Evidence the against used be not shall agreement adjudication any in objection over child evidence Such trial. criminal or hearing hearing disposition a in used be may purpose the for or court juvenile the in a after investigation presentence a of criminal conviction. agreement adjustment informal An B. the on proceedings the suspends the in charged acts delinquent terms the of any If complaint/petition. case the violated, are agreement the of hearing adjudication an to proceed may satisfies child the If charges. the on be shall he agreement, the of terms the and supervision, further from discharged be shall complaint/petition pending the dismissed with prejudice. by made statement incriminating Any C. the child to person giving counsel/ to incident discussions the in and advice shall agreement adjustment informal the over declarant, the against used be not or hearing adjudication an in objection, may statement such Any trial. criminal the in hearing disposition a in used be presentence a of purpose the for or court investigation after a criminal conviction. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Louisiana Code, Ch. 8., Arts. 839-41. Louisiana Children’s Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions of an Informal Adjustment Agreement: Art. 839. Availability court the or attorney district the petition, a of filing the to Prior A. informal an authorize may attorney district the of consent the with adjustment agreement. of attachment the before but petition a of filing the After B. authorize may court the 811, Article to pursuant jeopardy informal an effect to officer probation or attorney district the have attorney district and child the if agreement adjustment district the of concurrence with may, court The objection. no remain to petition the allow or petition the dismiss attorney, pending during the period of informal adjustment. the agreement, adjustment informal an entering When C. or utilize attorney, district the of concurrence with may, court a to fee a assess may and program court youth or teen a initiate participant in the program to offset costs. Additional Information:

107 Performance Measurement corrections community juvenile A “make to decide may officer adjustment informal whatever petition. a without practicable is community juvenile The effect may officer corrections adjustment informal whatever and juvenile the by to agreed is guardian parents, juvenile’s the juvenile the if custodian legal or a including emancipated, not is victim the with contract restitution performance and crime the of Informal service. community of longer no extend may adjustments § M.R.S.A. .” . . months. 6 than 3301(5)(B). legal juvenile’s the and juvenile The their of advised be must guardian must facts the rights, constitutional of jurisdiction facie prima establish juvenile’s the and court, juvenile the in consent must guardian legal adjustment informal the to writing plan. juveniles for applicable not Process in defined crimes with charged (DUI, 3103(1)(E)-(F) § M.R.S.A. failure intoxicated, while hunting while person injured an aid to hunting.) Services Provided victim the to restitution include May service. community and Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes connection in made admission “[A]ny be not may adjustment informal this with a if juvenile the against evidence in used later is facts same the on based petition filed . .” M.R.S.A. § 3301(5)(B)(2). are adjustment informal of Records confidential. M.R.S.A. § 3301(6)(A). continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Maine M.R.S.A. § 3301 Preliminary investigation, informal adjustment and petition initiation Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions “make to decide may officer corrections community juvenile A petition. a without practicable is adjustment informal whatever whatever effect may officer corrections community juvenile The the and juvenile the by to agreed is adjustment informal is juvenile the if custodian legal or guardian parents, juvenile’s victim the with contract restitution a including emancipated, not Informal service. community of performance and crime the of § M.R.S.A. .” . . months. 6 than longer no extend may adjustments 3301(5)(B). advised be must guardian legal juvenile’s the and juvenile The facie prima establish must facts the rights, constitutional their of guardian legal juvenile’s the and court, juvenile the of jurisdiction must consent in writing to the informal adjustment plan. defined crimes with charged juveniles for applicable not Process failure intoxicated, while hunting (DUI, 3103(1)(E)-(F) § M.R.S.A. in to aid an injured person while hunting.) Additional Information:

108 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook - - Performance Measurement board management local A (b) evaluate and monitor (3) shall: and prevention youth at-risk (6) performance; program diversion prevention youth at-risk measure outcomes; program diversion and § 8-603 Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided - - nt or divert youth from entering the juvenile justice system and to help make them ready for adult Discretion & Oversight and prevention youth At-risk be shall programs diversion and monitored, coordinated, management local by supported boards § 8-603 Discretion & Oversight of course the in If (1) 3. Sec. by offense alleged an investigating filed been not has petition a minor a has petition a if or court, the with not been authorized, a law enforce worker intake court or official ment making by matter the Divert (b) may section to pursuant agreement an or person a to minor the refer to 5 or organization private or public minor the assist will that agency family in resolv and the minor’s the initiated that problem the ing investigation. 722.823 - Incentives & Outcomes Incentives & Outcomes and to agreed is diversion if (1)(d) 5 Sec. the of terms the with complies minor the referral the and agreement diversion the with filed be cannot petition a plan, filed, been has petition a if or court, the petition cannot be authorized (2)… during minor the by divulged Information is diversion the after or conference the filed is petition a before but to, agreed authorized, been has or court the with If (4) minor. the against used be not shall agreement an and held is conference a a reached, not is (3) subsection under and court the with filed be may petition fails minor the If (5) authorized. be may to comply with the terms of diver plan, referral the and agreement sion court or official enforcement law the diversion the revoke may worker intake revoked, is agreement the If agreement. and court the with filed be may petition a authorized. 722.825 continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Maryland Prevention and Diversion Services §§ 8-601- 8-604 Citation: MD Code, Human Services, At Risk Youth Policy Goals: At-risk youth prevention diversion program are services provided to school-aged and their families preve hood by age 21 § 8-601 Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information: Michigan M.C.L.A. §§ 722.821 - 722.831 Juvenile Diversion Act Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions the of all minor, a divert to made is decision a Before 4. Sec. alleged the of nature The (a) examined: be shall factors following led that problem the of nature The (c) age; minor’s The (b) offense; (e) conduct; and character minor’s The (d) offense; alleged the to (f) and settings; group and family, school, in behavior minor’s The the and minor the concerning made decisions diversion prior Any agreement. diversion the with compliance minor’s the of nature 722.824 parent, guardian, or custodian at the confer and his/her parent/guardian (b) That an attorney may accompany the minor minor’s Additional Information: Sec. 5 (1) ... The law enforcement ofﬁcial shall inform the minor, ence held to consider alternatives the ﬁling of a petition. 722.825

109 Performance Measurement may program diversion A 3 Subd. diverted for goals establish (2) performance monitor and offenders provide (8) and goals; these of how on information accurate the in perform offenders diverted prosecutors, court, the to program probation and attorneys, defense officers. Services Provided provide (1) may: Program 3 Subd. court the to services screening to authorities prosecuting the and pretrial for candidates identify help chemical perform (3) diversion; of assessments dependency indicated, where offenders diverted for referrals appropriate make treatment monitor and treatment, individual, provide (4) aftercare; and counseling family and group, diverted assist (6) services; and identifying in offenders community appropriate contacting educational provide (7) resources; to offenders diverted to services school high a earn to them enable diploma or GED court; minimize recidivism; promote the collection of victim restitution; develop collaborative use of of use collaborative develop restitution; victim of collection the promote recidivism; minimize court; Discretion & Oversight decides prosecutor The 1 Subd. a to offender an refer to whether diversion program Incentives & Outcomes diversion pre-trial to referral A 1 Subd. the either that condition the on based is dismissed be will petition delinquency a after filed be not will petition the or offender the if time of period specified program the completes successfully continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Minnesota M.S.A. § 388.24 Pretrial diversion programs for juveniles Policy Goals: Subd. 2 An alternative to adjudication emphasizing restorative justice; reduce the costs & caseloads of juvenile demonstrated successful culturally speciﬁc programming Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Additional Information:

110 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided adjustment informal The (4) with discuss then shall counselor guardian parent, his and child the Recommendations custodian:(a) or the in conduct or actions for correct to child the of interest or behavior of conditions the exist; may which environment and conferences Continuing (b) his and child the with contacts by custodian or guardian parent, counselor adjustment informal the and persons; authorized other or behavior, general child’s The (c) environment school and home his the upon bearing factors other and (6) adjustment. informal proposed process adjustment informal The a beyond continue not shall its from months (6) six of period extended unless commencement additional an for court youth the by months (6) six exceed to not period the to prior authorization court by month 6 original the of expiration period. the informal adjustment counselor shall, at the commencement of the conference, inform them of of them inform conference, the of commencement the at shall, counselor adjustment informal the Discretion & Oversight process adjustment informal The (1) informal an with initiated be shall conducted conference adjustment adjustment informal an by judge the by appointed counselor or his designee. Incentives & Outcomes adjustment informal the during (3)(c) ﬁled; be will petition no process continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Mississippi Miss. Code. Ann. § 43-21-405. Informal adjustment conference and agreement Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions the agreement, adjustment informal an entering When C. or utilize attorney, district the of concurrence with may, court a to fee a assess may and program court youth or teen a initiate participant in the program to offset costs. the adjourn shall counselor the counsel, by represented be to desire a indicates parent/guardian his or child the either If silent. remain to child the of right Additional Information: (2) If the child and his parent/guardian appear at informal adjustment conference without counsel, the and counsel of appointment to right child’s the counsel, to right their conference to afford an opportunity secure counsel.

111 Performance Measurement Services Provided adjustment informal an Whenever provisions the under made is juvenile the 211.081, section of To child:(1) the allow may court reparation or restitution make caused loss or damage the for or restitution Any offense. his by reasonable be shall reparation to ability child’s the of view in the perform or payment make require may court The reparation. act to court circuit the of clerk the agent disbursing and receiving as (2) upon; agreed payment any for community of term a complete To the of supervision the under service selected organization an or court by the court. Discretion & Oversight make shall court the … 211.081(1) preliminary a made be to cause or facts the determine to inquiry not or whether determine to and of or public the of interests the seventeen person or child the further that require age of years of basis the On taken. be action may court juvenile the inquiry, this as adjustment informal such make or petition a without practicable is petition a of ﬁling the authorize may ofﬁcer. juvenile the by Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Missouri V.A.M.S. 211.081 PreliminaryPolicy Goals: Inquiry as to InstitutionCriteria for Eligibility / Conditions of Proceedings; V.A.M.S. 211.083 Informal Adjustments Additional Information:

112 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook - Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight by made be may Referrals c. and public to officer juvenile the provide may that agencies private services or guidance beneficial juvenile’s the and juvenile the to custodian. or guardian parents, juvenile the a.When 112.01; Rule informal an determines officer be to conference adjustment officer juvenile the appropriate, the and juvenile the request shall or guardian parents, juvenile’s or telephone letter, by custodian, informal the attend to otherwise, a at conference adjustment place. and time date, designated Rule 112.02 ------Incentives & Outcomes c. The juvenile and his parents/guard juvenile the by advised be should ian attendance their though that, (JO) officer conference adjustment informal the at participate to failure their voluntary, is adjustment informal the terminate may by filing the in result may and process the of interest the in petition a of JO the juvenile. Rule 112.02; a. The JO may ter process adjustment informal the minate without juvenile the dismiss either and in petition a file or proceedings further time: any at if juvenile, the of interest the or juvenile the that determines JO the (1) his parents/guardian has received maxi adjustment; informal from benefit mum parents/guardian his or juvenile the (2) the in further participate to declines process; (3) the juvenile or his parents/ the of jurisdiction the denies guardian court to act ; (4) the juvenile or his par be facts the that requests ents/guardian evidentiary an at court the by determined hearing; (5) the juvenile or his parents/ excuse reasonable without fails guardian to attend a scheduled informal adjust determines JO the (6) conference; ment parents/guardian his or juvenile the that the from benefit to unable/unwilling is JO the (7) process; adjustment informal determines based on new or addi at efforts further that information tional best the in not are adjustment informal interests of the juvenile, his parents/ other (8) or community; the or guardian terminating for exist reasons sufficient the informal adjustment process. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Missouri Supreme Court Rules 112.01-112.04 Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions counsel by represented be may each that and voluntary is conference adjustment to right informal the the of at attendance commencement the their at that them informed inform be shall shall ofﬁcer custodian or juvenile the guardian counsel, parents, without conference juvenile’s the and adjustment juvenile informal The b. initial the at Information: appear Additional parents/guardian juvenile’s and juvenile the If a. 112.02; Rule conference. the at parents/guardian requests to be represented by counsel, the juvenile ofﬁcer shall adjourn informal adjustment confer counsel under Rule 115.01 and the right of juvenile to remain silent. If or juvenile’s ence to afford an opportunity consult counsel. Rule 112.03

113 Performance Measurement Services Provided dispositions following The (1) consent by imposed be may probation;(b) adjustment:(a) substitute in youth the of placement facility;(c) care youth a in care agency private a with placement and care the for responsible (d) youth; the of rehabilitation under placement (e) restitution; of confiscation (f) arrest; home by license driver’s youth’s the for officer probation juvenile the to not time, of period specified a counseling (g) days; 90 exceed youth a in placement services;(h) 10 to up for center assessment detention in placement days;(i) for up to 3 days on a space- community (j) basis; available service; (k)participation in victim- other any (n) mediation; offender court the by ordered condition the of goals the accomplish to but including adjustment, consent youth or mediation to limited not assessment MCA 41-5-1304 Discretion & Oversight inquiry, preliminary a After officer probation juvenile the upon officer assessment or is action further that determining the to referral that and required required not is attorney county refer counseling, provide may:(1) family youth’s the and youth the providing agency another to any take or services, appropriate informal any make or action other involve not does that adjustment probation or detention MCA 41- 5-1301 Incentives & Outcomes relating statement incriminating An constituting omission or act any to intervention of need or delinquency person the to participant the by made the in advice or counsel giving incident conferences or discussions the against used be not may thereto under proceeding any in declarant incriminating the may nor chapter, this criminal any in admissible be statement This declarant. the against proceeding of use the to apply not does section that statements reliable and voluntary purposes. impeachment for offered are a violates youth the If (2) 41-5-1303. in for provided as agreement parole returned be must youth the 52-5-126, A disposition. further for court the to youth state a in placed be not may youth consent a under facility correctional adjustment. 41-5-1304 continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Montana Informal Proceeding MCA §§ 41-5-1301 - 41-5-1304 Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions consent a into enter may officer probation juvenile the (1) would petition filing without advice and counsel (b) if: adjustment the (c) and public; the and family, child, of interests best the in be probation juvenile the and intervention of need in be may youth reasonable all exerted guardian or parents the believes officer youth the and behavior youth’s the control or mediate to efforts parents. the of control the beyond behavior exhibit to continues of dispose to used be not may adjustment consent A 41-5-1301 youth the (a) if: offense subsequent or second alleged youth’s a that offense prior a for adjudicated been has or to admitted has subsequent the (b) adult; an by committed if felony a be would was and adult an by committed if felony a be would offense subsequent the (c) or offense; prior a of yrs 3 within committed and adult an by committed if misdemeanor a be would offense felony, a than other offense, prior a of yrs 3 within committed was 41-5-1302 Additional Information:

114 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement diversion pretrial juvenile A goals Establish may:(2) program offenders juvenile diverted for of performance monitor and chemical Perform goals;(3) the of assessments dependency when offenders juvenile diverted appropriate make indicated, monitor and treatment, for referrals Provide aftercare;(8) and treatment how on information accurate perform offenders juvenile diverted juvenile the to program the in city attorneys, county courts, and attorneys, defense attorneys, probation officers. 43-260.05 Services Provided diversion pretrial juvenile A screening Provide may:(1) program services to the court and county/ likely identify help to attorney city program;(3) the for candidates dependency chemical Perform juvenile diverted of assessments make indicated, when offenders treatment, for referrals appropriate and treatment monitor and individual, Provide aftercare;(4) counseling family and group, juvenile diverted Assist services;(6) and identifying in offenders community appropriate contacting educational Provide resources;(7) juvenile diverted to services earn to them enable to offenders general or diploma school high a diploma development education ecision to participate in the program; 43-260.04 Discretion & Oversight shall attorney city or county The specific a whether determine based diverted be should offender of nature the age; juvenile’s the on: previous juvenile’s the offense; the the by posed threat the offenses; property; or persons to juvenile the of recommendations the or and victim, agency, referring advocates for the juvenile Neb.Rev. St §43-260.04 Incentives & Outcomes diversion successfully, completed If (5) juvenile the of dismissal in result will (7) charges criminal or petition program the by received information to required is juvenile the regarding of release a unless confidential remain to admission upon signed is information authorized otherwise is or program the §43-260.04 Neb.Rev.St by law. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Nebraska §§ 43-260.02 - .07 Neb.Rev.St §43-260.03 provide an alternative to adjudication; reduce recidivism among diverted offenders; costs and caseloads of juvenile court; promote collection victim restitution. Neb.Rev.St Policy Goals: To Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions only, basis voluntary a on participate to permitted is juvenile A decision a to prior counsel with consult to allowed is juvenile the juvenile the to offered is diversion program; the in participate to citation. a of issuance or arrest after but adjudication to prior §43-260.04 Neb.Rev.St Additional Information: A juvenile pretrial diversion program shall:(3) Allow the to consult with counsel prior a d

115 Performance Measurement juvenile the of request the Upon file shall officer probation a court, of: report a court juvenile the with placed children of number The 1. during supervision informal under conditions The 2. year; previous the 3. and case; each in imposed were that cases of number The the without completed successfully filing of a petition. N.R.S. 62C.220 Services Provided informal for agreement An 1. child the require may supervision service community Perform to:(a) victim any to restitution provide or child the which for acts the of a in Participate (b) referred; was Complete (c) restitution; of program training cognitive of program a pursuant development human and in Engage (d) and 62E.220; NRS to activities the of combination any N.R.S. subsection. this in forth set 62C.210 Discretion & Oversight a files attorney district the If 1. the court, juvenile the with petition the Dismiss may:(a) court juvenile refer and prejudice without petition officer probation the to child the pursuant supervision informal for the Place (b) or 62C.200; NRS to of supervision the under child a to pursuant court juvenile the decree, consent and supervision of adjudication formal a without court juvenile the if delinquency, recommendation The receives:(1) The (2) officer; probation the of district the of approval written written The (3) and attorney; child the of approval and consent the of guardian or parent the and child. N.R.S. 62C.230 Incentives & Outcomes based petition a file not may DA The 6. placed was child a which for acts on unless supervision informal under later not petition the files DA the entered child the after days 180 than a files DA the If supervision. informal child the period, that within petition made admission the withdraw may successfully child a 7.If 1. S. to pursuant conditions and terms the completes agreement, supervision informal an of filed petition any dismiss may court the child the which for acts any on based supervision. informal under placed was the under placed is child a If 2. 62C.200 to pursuant supervision court’s juvenile the decree, consent and supervision a child the if petition the dismiss may court and terms the completes successfully petition the 3.If decree. the of conditions respond may child (a)The dismissed: is events the concerning inquiry any to proceedings the about brought which as if they had not occurred; and (b) The records concerning a supervision/ a in considered be may decree consent proceeding court juvenile subsequent 62C.230 child. that regarding continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Nevada Informal Supervision; Supervision and Consent Decree: N.R.S. 62C.200 - 62C.230 Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions delinquent is child a that alleging made is complaint a When 1. a of supervision informal the under placed be may child the ... participation admits voluntarily child (a)The if: ofﬁcer probation an into enters child The 3. … complaint the in alleged acts the in (a) intelligently and voluntarily supervision informal for agreement is child the If (b) or child; the for attorney the of advice the With or parent the of consent the with attorney, an by represented not guardian of the child. N.R.S. 62C.200 Additional Information:

116 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight court-approved a to Referral II. made be may program diversion prosecuting or arresting the by and probation juvenile or agency referral court without officer parole the with petition a filing to prior such by filing the after or court, any or court the by or agency administrative The ... motion party’s have shall court district the of judge diversion approve to authority the all in use for procedures referral the throughout matters juvenile state. Incentives & Outcomes program diversion a to Referral II. following or to prior made be may the When … petition a of filing the or agency, prosecuting or arresting officer parole and probation juvenile an disability, a has minor a that suspects school responsible the at administrator Referral IV. notified. be shall district for proceedings the stay shall filing after from months 3 exceed to not period a by extended unless referral, of date the to not period additional an for court the authorize not does and months 3 exceed the detention of minor. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart New Hampshire Stat. § 169-B:10 Juvenile Diversion N.H. Rev. Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions of conditions further require may court the referral, During V. III. parents minor’s the and minor the of part the on conduct is ﬁling after resource community other or diversion to Referral jurisdiction the within case the bring facts The if:(a) appropriate of interest best the in is case the of Referral (b) court; the of parent/ the public and minor; (c) The minor minor’s not is consent that knowledge the with consent guardian obligatory. Additional Information:

117 Performance Measurement Services Provided May Adjustment: House Station (1) a or service community include essay. written “The Conference: Service Intake (2) conference the from resolution be not shall but include may restitution, counseling, to limited community appropriate to referral community other any or agencies, conditions other or programs work aids that diversion with consistent to attention balanced providing in community, the of protection the accountability of imposition the fostering committed, offenses for dialogue and interaction and victim offender, the between development the and community the enable to competencies of become to offender juvenile productive and responsible a § .” . . community. the of member 2A:4A-74(d). Conference Juvenile (3) shall committee “The Committee: the of resolution the for provide and supervise shall and matter its with compliance up follow same the in recommendations same the under and manner same the with and limitations intake court the as sanctions service conference.” § 2A:4A-75(e). Discretion & Oversight - - - Incentives & Outcomes the After Adjustment: House Station (1) of completion possible and adjustment over. is case the service, community court or record criminal no is There proceedings. the “At Conference: Service Intake (2) second a period diversion the of end be may conference services intake court held with all parties to the written agree terms the if ascertain to present ment If fulﬁlled. been have agreement the of intake the met, been have conditions all presiding the inform so shall worker the order shall who writing in judge order the of copy A dismissed. complaint sent be shall complaint the dismissing the of conditions the If juvenile. the to met, been not have agreement written to matter the refer may worker intake the determine shall who judge presiding the court in heard be will complaint the if for services intake court to returned or evaluations the on Based action. further intake the paragraph, this under required extended be may agreement conference all if maximum six-month the beyond intake an shall case no In agree. parties nine exceed agreement conference months.” § 2A:4A-74(e). “The Committee: Conference Juvenile (3) committee shall provide for the resolu and supervise shall and matter the of tion recommen its with compliance up follow under and manner same the in dations same the with and limitations same the service intake court the as sanctions conference.” § 2A:4A-75(e). continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart New Jersey 2A:4A-75 - 2A:4A-72 §§ N.J.S.A. Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions New Jersey has three different juvenile diversion programs. minor resolve officers police local Adjustment: House Station (1) required be may juvenile The complaint. a filing without disputes to not promise and property damaged for restitution make to commit future offenses. worker service intake court A Conference: Service Intake (2) the all the assess will Officer) Probation Court (Family appropriate the determine to crime alleged the of circumstances court a as submitted be will imposed Obligations sanction. a last can Sanctions judge. presiding the by approved an order maximum of six months. § 2A:4A-74 by created committees local Committee: Conference Juvenile (3) resolution a reach will committee The Court. Supreme state the Conference Juvenile compliance. supervise and matter the to Service Intake as authority same the have Committees Conferences to impose sanctions. § 2A:4A-75. Additional Information:

118 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart New Mexico N.M.S.A. § 32A-2-7 Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions complaint, delinquency a into inquiry preliminary the “During and agency appropriate another to referred be may matter the effecting of purpose the for conducted be may conferences for necessity the obviate will that agreements or adjustments ﬁling a petition.” N.M.S.A. § 32A-2-7(B) Additional Information:

119 Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight gives Act Court Family The the departments probation eligibility determine to authority at services adjustment for criteria intake. ------

continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart New York agencies other to referred or intervention, court for petition for referred immediately either are others all and 9 NYCRR § 354.1-354.9 non-judicially resolved are cases suitable that order in services intake of provision the regulate To Goals: Policy 354.2 § appropriate. where Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions A suitable case shall meet all the following conditions: apparent the in is case the that determines intake probation i. jurisdiction of the Family Court; the originate to seeking persons the advises intake probation ii. or to prior time any filed be may petition a that proceeding court a have to seeking persons the and period Adjustment the during prevented be not may they that filed petition delinquency juvenile from access to the presentment agency for this request; juvenile a have to seeking person the petitioner, potential the iii. other and respondent potential the filed, petition delinquency if person, injured or victim the including persons, interested such that understand all process, adjustment the of part a made voluntary entirely is therein derived agreement any and process and such persons agree to proceed with the adjustment process; adjusted be can case the that intake probation to appears it iv. the and Act Court Family The by required periods time the within uniform Family Court rules; is ease the not or whether determining in circumstances all v. Court Family The of provisions the under adjustment for suitable considered; been have rules Court Family uniform the and Act and court a rules, Court Family Uniform the Act, Court Family The vi. § adjustment. an from case the exclude not do Part this or order, 354.5(a) Additional Information:

120 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Performance Measurement the after days 60 than later No (e) a diverts counselor court juvenile shall counselor court the juvenile, and juvenile the whether determine complied have parent juvenile’s the In contract. diversion the with the determination, this making referral any contact shall counselor whether determine to resources parent/guardian his and juvenile the recommendations with complied made services or treatment for juvenile the If resource. the by have parent/guardian his and shall counselor the complied, not divert to decision the reconsider a of filing the authorize may and making after days 10 within petition court the If determination. the petition, a file not does counselor to continue may counselor the months 6 to up for case the monitor At contract. diversion the from the if period that during point any parent/guardian his and juvenile shall counselor the comply, to fail the authorize may and reconsider petition. a as complaint the of filing court juvenile the months, 6 After diversion the close shall counselor file. Services Provided Services Provided sufficiency legal of finding a Upon may counselor court juvenile the a to pursuant juvenile the divert include may which plan, diversion resources:(1) following the of any private or public appropriate An (3) Restitution; (2) resource; Community service;(4) Victim- Regimented mediation;(5) offender or Counseling; training;(6) physical (7) A teen court program Discretion & Oversight gives Act Court Family The the departments probation eligibility determine to authority at services adjustment for criteria intake. Discretion & Oversight sufficiency, legal of finding a Upon shall counselor court juvenile the complaint a whether determine the petition, a as filed be should case the or diverted, juvenile action. further no with resolved the after days 20 than later No the notified, is complainant juvenile the review shall prosecutor determination counselor’s court not should petition juvenile a that the of conclusion the At filed. be affirm shall prosecutor the review, court juvenile the of decision the a of filing the direct or counselor petition and notify the complainant. ------

Incentives & Outcomes adjustment the where case A 1. which and commenced not was process for opportunity any from excluded was shall petition, for referred and adjustment “referred designation the with closed be for petition immediately”. 2. A case in which a potential peti or complaint the pursue to failed tioner reason, any for complaint, the withdrew the of commencement the before either adjustment process or during such pro cess, shall be closed with the designa and pursued not matter “terminated tion de juvenile All petition”... for referred not pursued not are which cases linquency shall be referred to the appropriate pre “referred closed and agency sentment for petition immediately”. satisfactory the which in case A 3. derived was complaint the of resolution closed be shall intervention court without with the designation “adjusted”. the of resolution the which in case A 4. after because, occur not did complaint adjustment the of commencement the a filed petitioner potential the process, was process adjustment the or petition, the and unsuccessful or incomplete a that notified was petitioner potential with closed be shall filed, be may petition the designation “terminated without ad This petition”. for referred and justment delinquency juvenile includes category process adjustment the where cases and unsuccessful or incomplete is person the because terminated cases the to access insists filing sought who the cases, these In agency. presentment be shall agency presentment appropriate notified of the termination. Incentives & Outcomes the of term the during time any At (b) counselor court juvenile the if contract failed has juvenile the that determines terms the with substantially comply to file may counselor the contract, the of the Unless petition. a as complaint the the filed has counselor court juvenile court juvenile the petition, a as complaint file juvenile’s the close shall counselor within matter diverted the to regard in contract. the of date the after months six completion successful juvenile’s The filing the preclude shall contract the of and plans Diversion (d) petition a of the when destroyed be shall contracts or years 18 of age the reaches juvenile the under longer no is juvenile the when is whichever court, the of jurisdiction longer.

continued continued

121 Performance Measurement Services Provided nsel is entitled to counsel at public expense at custodial, post-petition, and informal adjustment adjustment informal and post-petition, custodial, at expense public at counsel to entitled is nsel Discretion & Oversight the filed, is petition a Before 1. other or court juvenile of director designated court the of officer may direction, its to subject it, by the to advice and counsel give for conditions impose and parties the of control and conduct the informal an to view a with child are criteria statutory if adjustment met Incentives & Outcomes advice and counsel of giving The 2. the for imposed conditions any and child the of control and conduct from months 9 beyond extend cannot extended unless commenced day the period additional an for court the by not does and months 6 exceed to not if child the of detention the authorize chapter. this by permitted otherwise not being or driving to admits child the If vehicle a of control physical actual in the 39-08-01, section of violation in a as fine a pay to required be may child 3. section. this under imposed condition a by made statement incriminating An counsel giving person the to participant thereto incident discussions the in and declarant the against used be not may a in except hearing any in objection over court juvenile a in disposition on hearing proceeding criminal a in or proceeding conviction after declarant the against presentence a of purpose the for investigation continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart North Dakota NDCC § 27-20-10 Informal Adjustment Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions may designated ofﬁcer other or court juvenile of director The 1. The a. IF adjustment informal an to view a with parties counsel court; the of jurisdiction the within case the bring facts admitted and conduct the for any, if conditions, and advice, Counsel, b. best the in be would adjudication an without child the of control child’s the and child The c. and child; the and public the of interest is consent that knowledge with thereto consent parents/guardian obligatory. not Additional Information: 1. Except as otherwise provided in this section, a party who is indigent and unable to employ legal cou During the informal adjustment stage of a proceeding only child, if determined to be indigent, is entitled counsel at public expense. NDCC § 27-20-26 stages of proceedings under this chapter.

122 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided court the deferral, During B. or in Participation require:1 may period a counseling, to referral or drug service, community of treatment, or education alcohol other any or training vocational be would which activity legal 2 family; and child the to beneﬁcial behavioral a undergo to child the warranted, if and, evaluation health or care appropriate undergo An 4 Restitution; 3 treatment; 5. or program; diversion alternative services and programs other Any through provided be may that as and agencies private or public approved by the court. Discretion & Oversight Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes Incentives & Outcomes case the dismiss shall court The C. conclusion the at prejudice with child the if period deferral the of the that evidence satisfactory presents been have court the of requirements successfully completed continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Ohio Ohio Rules of Juvenile Procedure, Rule 9 Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions formal cases appropriate all In avoided. be to action Court “(A) resources community other and avoided be should action court the of attention the to brought situations ameliorate to utilized court.” Specific eligibility criteria and programs are established locally. Additional Information: Oklahoma 10A Okl.St.Ann. § 2-2-404 Order of adjudication Deferral delinquency proceedings Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions for proceedings adjudication delinquency defer may court A A. offense an committed have to alleged is (1) child: the if days 180 waives (2) adult; an by committed if misdemeanor a be would that the that testifies and self-incrimination against privilege the adjudicated been previously not has (3) and true; are allegations delinquent need a indicate do which but adjudication, warrant to enough serious not acts committed having as court the or attorney, district the personnel, enforcement law by identified juveniles for program A D. Information: Additional for intervention to prevent further development toward juvenile delinquency

123

Performance Measurement been has youth the When (i) or possession with charged first the for marijuana of delivery accountability formal the time, the unless shall, agreement determines department juvenile in inappropriate be would it that Require (A) case: particular the a in participate to youth the and assessment diagnostic treatment or information an the by recommended as program youth’s the Monitor (B) assessment. which program the in progress the of responsibility the be shall or agency assessment diagnostic report a make shall It organization. stating department juvenile the to completion successful youth’s the part any or all complete to failure or the by specified program the of diagnostic assessment. 419C.239 Services Provided diversion authorized An (2) youth a include may program crime program, mediation court, substance chemical or prevention or program education abuse the for established program other consequences providing of purpose preventing and reformation and (1) 419C.225; acts. delinquent future agreement accountability formal A or in participation require may period a counseling, to referral or drug service, community of treatment, or education alcohol legal other any training, vocational the of opinion the in which activity to beneficial be would counselor restitution.419C.236; or youth, the for provide may agreement the psychiatric, undergo to youth the health mental or psychological by warranted if and, evaluation youth, the of condition mental the or care appropriate undergo treatment. 419C.237 ht to counsel shall attach prior to the youth’s entering into a formal accountability agreement. agreement. accountability formal a into entering youth’s the to prior attach shall counsel to ht Discretion & Oversight a of review a Following (1) relevant other and report police juvenile county a information, to youth a refer may department if program diversion authorized an a into enter to eligible is youth the agreement accountability formal under ORS 419C.230. Incentives & Outcomes youth a for program diversion A (3) ORS violated have to alleged is who agreement an include must 813.010 intoxicants use not will youth the that diversion the in participating while formal A (1) program.419C.225; Be (d) shall: agreement accountability department juvenile the by revocable to cause reasonable has dept the if out carry to failed has youth the believe accountability formal the of terms the a committed has or agreement used be Not (e) offense; subsequent any at youth the against evidence as part Become (h) hearing; adjudicatory record dept juvenile youth’s the of accountability formal a If (1) 419C.239; dept juvenile the revoked, is agreement file or agreement the extend either shall an and court, juvenile the with petition a (2)in held. be may hearing adjudicatory the modify may dept the revoking, of lieu an for period the extend and agreement of consent the with months 6 additional any. if counsel, youth’s the and youth the 419C.242 continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Oregon Diversion Programs + Formal Accountability Agreements O.R.S §§ 419C.225 - 419C.245 Policy Goals: Programs are meant to provide consequences and reformation prevent future delinquent acts 419C.225 Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions the if program diversion in participate to eligible not is youth A ORS in enumerated offenses committed have to alleged is youth: department juvenile county the to referred being Is 419C.230; if that act an of commission for time subsequent or second a for ORS 419C.230 committed by an adult would constitute a felony. be to determined is youth the if expense, state at counsel appointed to and counsel to right youth’s the of guardian or parents youth’s the and youth a inform shall counselor department juvenile The Information: Additional ﬁnancially eligible under the policies, procedures, standards and guidelines of Public Defense Services Commission. The rig 419C.245

124 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook - Performance Measurement Performance Measurement petition a on hearing a to Prior (c) or wayward offense first a alleging above, defined as act disobedient that ensure shall court family the the to made been has referral a diversion youth local appropriate program that by report A program. court the to submitted be shall the to prior week one least at report The hearing. adjudication the in problems the identify shall progress, provided, services family, and services, the of outcomes and recommendations for future inter a become shall report The vention. by used be and record the of part the of disposing in court family the petition. - - Services Provided Services Provided (a) Referrals to the youth diversion a for served be shall program ary include, and days 90 of maximum but are not limited to: (1) An assess and child the of needs the of ment plan a of Development (2) family; include to services of provision and support vocational and educational linkages; employment and services mediation; Family (4) Counseling; (3) Advocacy (6) intervention; Crisis (5) schools, with behalf child’s the on resources employment police, agencies; community other and 3 to limited respite Short-term (7) (8) and periods; crisis during days services after-care and Follow-up as needed. committing wayward or disobedient acts Discretion & Oversight the filed, is petition a Before (2) of case the in may officer probation dependent a or child, delinquent a of jurisdiction the where child refer permitted, is court the an to parents his and child the matter. the in assisting for agency the return may agency The (3) or officer probation the to referral informal further for officer other best the in is it if adjustment child. the of interests Discretion & Oversight is Program Diversion Youth The Children, of Department the of part a to Prior (c) Families; and Youth, first a alleging petition a on hearing disobedient or wayward offense family the above, defined as act referral a that ensure shall court appropriate the to made been has local youth diversion program. - Incentives & Outcomes shall advice and counsel of giving (c)The the from months 6 beyond extend not an by extended unless commenced day period additional an for court of order not to exceed 3 months; (d)Nothing con the authorize shall section this in tained incriminating (e)An child; the of detention the to participant a by made statement in and advice or counsel giving person shall thereto incident discussions the over declarant the against used be not or proceeding criminal any in objection hearing under this chapter Incentives & Outcomes diversion a from reports regular Upon and progress of court the to program the services, the of outcomes positive record the of part a become shall reports disposing in court family the by used and of the petition - continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Pennsylvania 42 Pa.C.S.A § 6323 Informal Adjustment Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions of officer other or officer probation the and agencies Social (b) view a with parties the to advice and counsel give may court the advice and counsel appears:(1) it if adjustment informal an to public the of interest best the in be would adjudication an without consent parents/guardian his and child the (2) child; the and the (3) and obligatory; not is consent that knowledge with thereto court. the of jurisdiction the within case the bring facts admitted Additional Information: Rhode Island diversion program RI ST § 42-72-33 Youth Policy Goals: (a) A Community based program providing outreach and advocacy services to youth ages 9-17 who may be at risk for Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions (c) Prior to a hearing on petition alleging first offense way shall court family the above, defined as act disobedient or ward local appropriate the to made been has referral a that ensure youth diversion program. Additional Information:

125 Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided Discretion & Oversight Discretion & Oversight Incentives & Outcomes Juvenile the to diverted is juvenile the If punishment the Program, Arbitration arbitrator an by determined be will the victims, the juvenile, the with working and enforcement, law parents, juvenile’s other community members. Court, Drug a to diverted is juvenile the If complete to required be may juvenile the drug treatment and education programs. Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart South Carolina Code 1976 § 63-19-350 Community Services Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions of Department the to referred or arrested is juvenile a After recommendation a makes Department the Justice, Juvenile be should case the how to as Office Solicitor’s Circuit the to a to juvenile the send to choose may Solicitor The pursued. arbitration juvenile the or court drug a as such program diversion restitution make to juvenile the require programs These program. repairing apologies, written damages, for payment of form the in damage, or community service. Additional Information: South Dakota attorney--Authorized procedure on basis of investigation; 26-7A-11 Prerequisites to referral for informal action SDCL §§ 26-7A-10 Preliminary investigation by state’s Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions and investigation preliminary a make must attorney state’s The The required. is action further any, if what, determine then will officer services court a to matter the “refer may attorney states that court the of supervision the to adjustment informal any for is practicable without a petition or refer the matter to court- action informal any for program diversion juvenile approved a of filing the without practicable is that system court the outside petition. . .” SDCL § 26-7A-10(1). informal the to agree must parents his and juvenile The adjustment. The program may last no longer than six months. Additional Information:

126 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided Discretion & Oversight is petition a after or Before (a) other or officer probation the filed, designated court the of officer may direction, its to subject it, by the to advice and counsel give informal an to view a with parties are criteria statutory if adjustment met Discretion & Oversight officer court designated a If (a) or unruly an in determines does child the that case delinquent allegations the contest to wish not court a that and petition, the of the necessary, not is hearing of advisement following parties, child’s the and child the to rights pretrial to agree may parent, the suspend would that diversion child the continue and proceedings supervision under Incentives & Outcomes Incentives & Outcomes court the by discharge to prior If (c) diversion pretrial the of expiration or unruly or delinquent new a period, the or child, the against filed is petition express fulfill to fails otherwise child pretrial the of conditions and terms under petition the agreement, diversion under continued was child the which the and reinstated be may supervision just adjudication to proceed may case been never had agreement the if as the with comply to failure If entered. alleged, is agreement diversion pretrial of notice written given be shall child the opportunity an and violation alleged the the to prior issue, that on heard be to the under proceedings of reinstatement child a of petition The (d) charge. original a completes who or discharged is who supervision under continuance of period original the of reinstatement without child the and dismissed be shall petition in against proceeded be again not shall based offense same the for court any conduct. same the upon continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Tennessee T.C.A. § 37-1-110 InformalPolicy Goals: Adjustment Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions other or officer probation the filed, is petition a after or Before (a) and counsel give may court the by designated court the of officer if:(1) adjustment informal an to view a with parties the to advice the of jurisdiction the within case the bring facts admitted The in be would adjudication an without advice and Counsel court;(2) and child The (3) and child; the and public the of interest best the that knowledge with thereto consent parents/guardian child’s the consent is not obligatory. TN Rules of Juvenile Procedure Rule 23 Pretrial Diversion in Delinquent and Unruly Cases Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions not does child a that determines officer court designated a If (a) court a that and petition, the of allegations the contest to wish of advisement following parties, the necessary, not is hearing pretrial to agree may parent, child’s the and child the to rights the continue and proceedings the suspend would that diversion negotiated conditions and terms under supervision under child court. the by approved and officer court designated the with Additional Information:

127 Performance Measurement number the indicating Statistics (d) by made dispositions of kind and under agency law-enforcement a shall section this of authority the to annually least at reported be designated official or office the ordered as board, juvenile the by Disposition (h) 52.03; board. the by may program offender first a under the by reporting periodic include:(4) officer enforcement law the to child has child the which to agency or been referred. 52.031 Services Provided this by authorized disposition A (c) referral involve:(1) may section other agency an to child the of brief a (2) court; juvenile the than his and child the with conference custodian; or guardian, parent, and child the of referral (3) or for parent/guardian child’s the which 264.302, § under services intervention; family crisis include: residential short-term emergency or age of years 10 children for care parenting counseling; family older; skills coping youth training; skills and training; advocacy training; Disposition (h) 52.03; mentoring. may program offender first a under by restitution voluntary include:(1) to parent/guardian the or child the community voluntary (2) victim; the (3) child; the by restitution service training, vocational educational, rehabilitative other or counseling, reporting periodic (4) and services; enforcement law the to child the by child the which to agency or officer has been referred. 52.031 Discretion & Oversight officer law-enforcement A a) into child a take to authorized of case the of dispose may custody without custody into taken child a if:(1) court, juvenile to referral disposition such for guidelines juvenile the by adopted been have which in county the of board the (2) made; is disposition the the by authorized is disposition officer the (3) and guidelines; his of report written a makes law-enforcement the to disposition and child the identifying agency, believing for grounds the specifying was custody into taking the that juvenile A (a) 52.03; authorized. offender first a establish may board (b) section this under program county the in board juvenile Each program offender first a which in one designate shall established is officers enforcement law more or law be may which agencies, and process to agencies, enforcement offender first the under child a program. 52.031 Incentives & Outcomes this by authorized disposition No (b) the keeping (1) involve: may section or custody; law-enforcement in child the of reporting periodic requiring (2) officer, law-enforcement a to child other or agency, law-enforcement child a of case The (i) 52.03; agency. first the completes successfully who may and closed is program offender (j)The court, juvenile to referred be not if:(1) court juvenile to referred be shall program; the complete to fails child the parent/guardian the or child the (2) the in participation child’s the terminates the (3) or completion; before program taken is but program the completes child the after day 90th the before custody into other conduct for completion program’s was child the which for conduct the than statement A (k) program. the to referred advice giving person a to child a by made the in participating or supervision or used be not may program offender first under proceeding any in child the against proceeding. criminal any or title this 52.031

continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Texas V.T.C.A. Family Code §§ 52.03Policy Goals: Disposition Without ReferralCriteria for Eligibility / Conditions to Court; 52.031 First Offender under program offender Program ﬁrst a establish may board juvenile A (a) into taken children of disposition and referral the for section this (2) or supervision; for need a indicating conduct (1) for: custody delinquent conduct other than felonious conduct. 52.031 Additional Information:

128 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided Discretion & Oversight may attorney prosecuting A (e) child. any for prosecution defer other or ofﬁcer probation A (1) court: the of ofﬁcer designated a for prosecution defer not may to required is that case a for child prosecuting the to forwarded be 53.01(d); Section under attorney prosecution defer may (2) and previously has who child a for that conduct for adjudicated been the if only felony a constitutes in consents attorney prosecuting writing. Incentives & Outcomes by made statement incriminating An (c) advice giving person the to participant a conferences or discussions the in and against used be not may thereto incident the declarant in any court hearing. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart V.T.C.A. Family Code § 53.03Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions Deferred that Prosecution determination a in results investigation preliminary the If (a) probation the authorized, are case the in proceedings further the to subject court, the of ofﬁcer designated other or ofﬁcer a for parties the advise may court, juvenile the of direction concerning months six exceed to not time of period reasonable deferred (1) if: child a of rehabilitation and prosecution deferred child; the and public the of interest the in be would prosecution with consent custodian or guardian, parent, his and child the (2) and child the (3) and obligatory; not is consent that knowledge may they that informed are custodian or guardian, parent, his the petition and point any at prosecution deferred the terminate not may Prosecution (g) case. the in hearing court a for court that: conduct in engaged have to alleged child a for deferred be 49.08, or 49.07, 49.06, 49.05, 49.04, Sec under offense an is (1) 106.04 under offense subsequent or third a is (2) or Code; Penal alleged is child the If (h) Code. Beverage Alcoholic 106.041, or indicating conduct or conduct delinquent in engaged have to Code, Penal 28.08, Section violates that supervision for need a voluntary include:(1) may section this under prosecution deferred and self-responsibility in instruction with class a in attendance juvenile local a by conducted offense an of victim a for empathy voluntary (2) and available; is class the if department, probation child the by damaged property the of restoration Additional Information:

129 Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided which youth participants may serve in various capacities the courtroom Discretion & Oversight to youth refer may person Any (2) offenses. minor for Court Youth a case the made, is referral a Once adult an by screened be shall whether determine to coordinator case. Court Youth a as qualiﬁes it to decline may Courts Youth (7) Court Youth for youth a accept may and reason any for disposition Court Youth from youth a terminate Participation at any time. Discretion & Oversight court the discretion, its In ... (c) probation its through may, written a into enter department, the with agreement consent child, a is minor the if and, minor guardian, parent, minor’s the nonjudicial the for custodian or facts the if case the of adjustment prima establish and admitted are effect to Efforts jurisdiction. facie not may adjustment nonjudicial a 90 than more of period a for extend the of judge a of leave without days period the extend may who court, for an additional 90 days. Incentives & Outcomes a transfer may Court Youth The (9) for source referring the to back case (10) time. any at handling alternative not may Court Youth of case a of Referral the of referral subsequent the prohibit case to any court Incentives & Outcomes continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Utah Court-Authorization-Referral U.C.A. 1953, § 18A-6-1203 Youth Policy Goals: (1) A diversion program which should provide an alternative disposition for cases involving juvenile offenders in Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions identified been have courts youth before appear who Youth (1)(a) intervention for need a indicate which acts committed having as but delinquency, juvenile toward development further prevent to addressed appropriately be can that acts be to appear which authority have Courts Youth (3) process court juvenile the outside parent/guardian, a with along who, (b) referred youth:(a) over (c) involvement; Court Youth request writing, in and voluntarily who, (d) offense; referred the committed having admit who along with a parent/guardian waive any privilege against self- with along who, (e) and trial; speedy a to right and incrimination the follow to agree custodian, legal or guardian, parent, their case. the of disposition Court Youth Additional Information: U.C.A. 1953, § 78A-6-602 Petition--Preliminary inquiry--Nonjudicial adjustments--Formal referral--Citation--Failure to appear Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions probation its through may, court the discretion, its In ... (c) the with agreement consent written a into enter department, guardian, parent, minor’s the child, a is minor the if and, minor the if case the of adjustment nonjudicial the for custodian or The (d) jurisdiction. facie prima establish and admitted are facts agreed conditions include may case a of adjustment nonjudicial financial a of payment (i) closure: nonjudicial the of part as upon payment (ii) Court; Juvenile the to $250 than more not of penalty compensatory of completion satisfactory (iii) restitution; victim of counseling for provider appropriate an to referral (iv) service; or programs abuse substance at attendance (v) treatment; or restrictions specified with compliance (vi) programs; counseling actions reasonable other (vii) and associations; and activities on that are in the interest of child or minor and community. Additional Information:

130 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided lar projects in local communities through grants of financial assistance to municipalities, private private municipalities, to assistance financial of grants through communities local in projects lar or the public defender at all stages of the diversion process, including the initial decision to participate, participate, to decision initial the including process, diversion the of stages all at defender public the or Discretion & Oversight in attorney, state’s The (4) diversion the with cooperation for criteria develop shall project, offenses of types what deciding for eligible be will offenders and attorney state’s the and diversion, the over discretion final retain shall referral of each case for diversion

Incentives & Outcomes course the in gathered information All (5) held be shall process diversion the of be not shall and conﬁdential strictly prior participant’s the without released and research that (except consent establish or require not do that reports are participants individual of identity the allowed). present the to related Information (6) the during divulged is that offense in used be not shall program diversion the However, case. prosecutor’s the or success, and participation of fact of part become may failure for reasons (9)(e)Within records. prosecutor’s the of anniversary year 2 the of days 30 juvenile of completion successful a the order shall court the diversion, applicable records court all of sealing proceeding diversion court juvenile a to ﬁnds: court the motion, upon unless, convicted been has participant the (1) or charged of a subsequent felony/ period, year 2 the during misdemeanor the of rehabilitation (2) or proceeding; or the to attained been not has participant court. the of satisfaction continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Vermont § 163 Juvenile court diversion project 3 V.S.A Policy Goals: The diversion project is meant to assist juveniles charged with delinquent acts and encourage development of simi groups or local organizations Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions whom against juveniles accept only will project diversion The cause, probable found has court the and ﬁled been have charges but are not yet adjudicated. consent. informed his counsel private of assistance and advice the to right their of informed be shall offenders Alleged (2) Information: Additional give may candidate the that so contract, diversion the accept to decision the and

131 Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided shall agreement diversion A (2) the of more or one to limited be restitution Community (a) following: fifty hundred one exceed to not during performed be to not hours, is juvenile the if hours school Restitution school;(b) attending actual of amount the to limited (c) victim; any by incurred loss of hours 10 to up at Attendance hours 20 to up and/or counseling informational or educational of agency, community a at sessions sessions include may which others, self, for respect to relating awareness; victim authority; and self-worth; accountability; good ethics; work responsibility; life and literacy; citizenship; one exceed to not fine, A skills;(d) Requirements dollars;(e) hundred hours specified during remain to and work, or school, home, at entering or leaving on restrictions specified geographical areas. refer may unit diversion The (10) community-based to juvenile a counseling or treatment programs. d due process in all contacts with a diversion unit regardless of whether they are accepted for for accepted are they whether of regardless unit diversion a with contacts all in process due d juvenile shall be fully advised at intake of her right to an attorney. For purposes of this section, intake intake section, this of purposes For attorney. an to right her of intake at advised fully be shall juvenile she desires to participate in the diversion process or to appear in juvenile court. A juvenile may be be may juvenile A court. juvenile in appear to or process diversion the in participate to desires she Discretion & Oversight Discretion & Oversight may agreement diversion A (1) the after only into entered be counselor probation or prosecutor, has chapter, this to pursuant cause probable that determined crime a that believe to exists that and committed been has Such it. committed juvenile the into entered be shall agreements possible. as expeditiously as Incentives & Outcomes Incentives & Outcomes a constitute shall agreement diversion A as history criminal juvenile’s the of part 13.40.020(7). RCW by defined continued

132 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Performance Measurement Services Provided Services Provided shall agreement diversion A (2) the of more or one to limited be restitution Community (a) following: fifty hundred one exceed to not during performed be to not hours, is juvenile the if hours school Restitution school;(b) attending actual of amount the to limited (c) victim; any by incurred loss of hours 10 to up at Attendance hours 20 to up and/or counseling informational or educational of agency, community a at sessions sessions include may which others, self, for respect to relating awareness; victim authority; and self-worth; accountability; good ethics; work responsibility; life and literacy; citizenship; one exceed to not fine, A skills;(d) Requirements dollars;(e) hundred hours specified during remain to and work, or school, home, at entering or leaving on restrictions specified geographical areas. refer may unit diversion The (10) community-based to juvenile a counseling or treatment programs. Services Provided d due process in all contacts with a diversion unit regardless of whether they are accepted for for accepted are they whether of regardless unit diversion a with contacts all in process due d juvenile shall be fully advised at intake of her right to an attorney. For purposes of this section, intake intake section, this of purposes For attorney. an to right her of intake at advised fully be shall juvenile she desires to participate in the diversion process or to appear in juvenile court. A juvenile may be be may juvenile A court. juvenile in appear to or process diversion the in participate to desires she Discretion & Oversight Discretion & Oversight may agreement diversion A (1) the after only into entered be counselor probation or prosecutor, has chapter, this to pursuant cause probable that determined crime a that believe to exists that and committed been has Such it. committed juvenile the into entered be shall agreements possible. as expeditiously as Discretion & Oversight formally is petition juvenile a Before court the court, the with filed state a to matter the refer may probation or worker department to inquiry preliminary for officer can matter the whether determine the without informally resolved be the with petition a of filing formal court. 49-5-2a Incentives & Outcomes Incentives & Outcomes a constitute shall agreement diversion A as history criminal juvenile’s the of part 13.40.020(7). RCW by defined Incentives & Outcomes advice and counsel of giving The (b) continue not may section this to pursuant it day the from months six than longer the by extended unless commenced is to not period additional an for court exceed six months. 49-5-3a continued continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Virginia 35-150-335 Informal Supervision 6 VAC Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions a without juvenile a supervise may personnel unit service Court court order for a maximum term of 90 days. Washington powers and duties--Interpreters--Modification--Fines rights--Diversion unit’s RCW § 13.40.080 Diversion agreement--Scope--Limitations--Restitution orders--Divertee’s Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions or misdemeanor a be must offense alleged the case, a divert To first offender’s the be must and violation or misdemeanor gross offense Additional Information: (11) The right to counsel shall inure prior the initial interview advise a juvenile as whether represented by counsel at any critical stage of the diversion process, including intake interviews and termination hearings. A interviews mean all regarding the diversion agreement process.(7) Divertees and potential divertees shall be afforde diversion or whether the program is successfully completed. Comprehensive Statutory Chart West Virginia W.Va. Code § 49-5-2a Prepetition DiversionPolicy Goals: to Informal Resolution; 49-5-3aCriteria for Eligibility / Conditions Informal Adjustment probation the Counselingcourt, the with filed formally is petition by a Before Probation(a) its to subject it, Officerby designated court the of officer other or officer view a with parties the to advice and counsel give may direction, facts admitted The (1) appears: it if adjustment informal an to and Counsel court;(2) the of jurisdiction the within case the bring of interest best the in be would adjudication an without advice parents, his and juvenile The (3) and juvenile; the and public the that knowledge with thereto consent custodian other or guardian 49-5-3a consent is not obligatory. Additional Information:

133 Performance Measurement Services Provided the alleges petition the If (1g) or alcohol an committed juvenile the if and violation abuse drug conducted screen multidisciplinary of risk at is juvenile the that shows related problems and needs having or beverages alcohol of use the to court the substances controlled juvenile the That establish:(a) may treatment outpatient in participate facility treatment approved an from abuse, drug other and alcohol for abuse drug other and alcohol an if (b) completed was assessment a in participate juvenile the That assistance pupil court-approved juvenile’s the by provided program court-approved a or board school abuse drug other or alcohol the to program,subject education school juvenile’s the of approval establish may court The (1p) board. a to report juvenile the that (1) in school, after center report youth other on weekends, on evening, the other any at or days, nonschool under not is juvenile the that time supervision(1t) adult immediate (b) required be also may restitution juvenile the require may court The supervised a in participate to community other or program work petition the If (1x) work service committed juvenile the that alleges 10 attained has and crimes graffiti require may court the age, of years not for participate juvenile the that than more nor hours 10 than less work supervised a in hours 100 program Discretion & Oversight a of filing the after time any At (a) relating proceeding a for petition the before and 938.13 or 938.12 s. to may court the judgment, of entry place and proceedings the suspend in supervision under juvenile the present or home own juvenile’s the placement. Incentives & Outcomes in remain shall decree consent A (2)(a) juvenile, the unless year 1 to up for effect by sooner discharged is parent/guardian the by discharge to prior If, (3) court the consent the of expiration the to or court juvenile the that finds court the decree, fulfill to failed has parent/guardian or of conditions and terms express the juvenile the that or decree consent the the of continuation the to objects which under hearing the decree, consent supervision on placed was juvenile the if as conclusion to continued be may been never had decree consent the discharged is who juvenile A entered.(4) successfully who or court the by supervision of period the completes any in against proceeded be not may in alleged offense same the for court the on based offense an or petition the petition original the and conduct, same A (5) prejudice. with dismissed be shall a about information elicits which court inadmissible be would which juvenile the of allegations the on hearing a in of objections over not, may petition any in participate parties, the of one court The if:(a) proceedings subsequent decree, consent a into enter to refuses remain petition the in allegations the denies juvenile the and decided, be to (b) or delinquency; of allegations the the but granted is decree consent A petition is subsequently reinstated. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Wisconsin W.S.A. 938.32 Consent Decree Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions

134 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Performance Measurement Services Provided prosecution deferred A (2) 1 for: provide may agreement and juvenile the for ‘Counseling’ an on parent/guardian his/her basis. group or family individual, obligations.’ with ‘Compliance 2 and curfews, supervision, including requirements. attendance school abuse drug other and ‘Alcohol 3 an by conducted assessment.’ an for facility treatment approved use juvenile’s the of examination controlled or beverages alcohol of medical, any and substances, effects social or family, personal, ‘Alcohol 4 use. its by caused treatment abuse drug other and 6 ‘Restitution.’ 5 education. and or program.’ work ‘Supervised 7 work. service community other under probation.’ in ‘Volunteers worker intake the conditions reasonable are determines juvenile the if appropriate, and committed have to alleged is a constitute would that act an an by committed if misdemeanor 9 program.’ court ‘Teen 8 adult. school, after center.’ report ‘Youth on weekends, on evening, the in any at or days, nonschool other not is juvenile the that time other under immediate adult supervision. Discretion & Oversight enter may worker intake An (1) prosecution deferred written a into as parties all with agreement the all if section this in provided met are eligibility for criteria to alleged is juvenile a If (1m) worker intake an delinquent, be but practicable as soon as shall, deferred a into entering before all offer agreement, prosecution juvenile’s the of victims the of requested so have who act alleged the with confer to opportunity an the concerning worker intake prosecution deferred proposed agreement. Incentives & Outcomes agreement prosecution deferred A (6) act delinquent alleged an of out arising files attorney district the if terminated is days 20 within petition delinquency a deferred the of notice of receipt after s. under agreement prosecution statements filed, is petition a If 938.24(5). the during worker intake the to made intake inquiry are inadmissible.(7) of period the during time any at If (a) agreement prosecution deferred a the that determines worker intake the not are it under imposed obligations cancel may worker intake the met, being after days 10 Within agreement. the intake the cancelled, is agreement the attorney, district the notify shall worker of official other or counsel, corporation a that request may and cancellation the cases, delinquency In filed. be petition petition a initiate may attorney district the notice the of date the after days 20 within worker intake the whether of regardless filed. be petition a that requested has the under imposed obligations the If (8) are agreement prosecution deferred the inform so shall worker intake the met, writing. in parent/guardian a and juvenile issued citation or filed be may petition No the about brought that charges the on be not may charges the and agreement petition a for basis sole the continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart W.S.A. 938.245 Deferred Prosecution Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions deferred written a into enter may worker intake An (1) following the of all if parties all with agreement prosecution the neither that determined has worker intake The apply:(a) a of ﬁling require public the of nor juvenile the of interests the that worker intake the persuade facts The (b) petition; juvenile, The (c) exist; would sought, if court, the of jurisdiction parent, guardian and legal custodian consent. Additional Information:

135 Performance Measurement Services Provided

Discretion & Oversight shall jury court teen The (vii) in any, if restitution, impose the by established amount the court; supervising in court, supervisory The (viii) and rules the with accordance the by promulgated regulations shall court, supreme Wyoming sentencing of range a establish referred case any for alternatives Sentencing court. teen to not but include, shall alternatives be limited to: as service Community (A) authorized by the supervising court; in participation Mandatory (B) classes, education related law treatment counseling, appropriate or other education programs; defendant teen the Require (C) other or juror a as participate to proceedings in member court teen involving teen defendants; the exceed to not Fines, (D) statutory amount. not shall jury court teen The (ix) of term a impose to power the have imprisonment.

Incentives & Outcomes determines court supervising the If “(d) successfully has defendant teen the that the program, court teen the completed the discharge may court supervising proceedings the dismiss and defendant against him. successfully to fails defendant the If (e) court teen prescribed the complete shall court supervising the program, and guilt of adjudication an enter impose to proceed and conviction the for defendant the upon sentence offense originally charged. this under dismissal and Discharge (f) adjudication without be shall section any for conviction a not is and guilt of purpose.” §7-13-1203. continued

Comprehensive Statutory Chart Wyoming WY ST §§ 7-13-1201 -- 7-13-1205 Policy Goals: Criteria for Eligibility / Conditions a by offense minor a of commission the involving case any “In a entering without may, court supervising the defendant, teen and proceedings further defer conviction, or guilt of judgment program, court teen a in participate to defendant the order consent with court open in guilty pleads teen the (1) provided:” amount the determined has court supervising the (2) parents, of in participate to requests defendant the (3) owed, restitution of will juvenile the that determines court (4) program, court teen the beneﬁt from the program. §7-13-1203(c). Additional Information:

136 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Juvenile Diversion Workbook Prepared by the Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Workgroup

ModelsforChange Systems Reform in Juvenile Justice

137 Acknowledgements

Center for Juvenile Justice Reform: Susan Broderick Project Director, Models for Change Initiative Lauren Pomeroy Research Assistant

National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice: Joseph J. Cocozza, Ph.D. Executive Director Erin M. Hillery, M.A. Project Assistant National Juvenile Defender Center: Patricia Puritz Executive Director Mary Ann Scali Deputy Director Sarah Bergen Staff Attorney

National Youth Screening and Assessment Project: Dr. Thomas Grisso, Ph.D. Director Samantha Fusco, M.A. Research Coordinator II

138 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Quick Reference: 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program A. Purpose 1) Objectives: The main purpose(s) for developing a diversion program will need to be identiﬁed. What will be the primary objectives of the diversion program? In your community, what stakeholders from the juvenile justice public/private youth services systems will be involved to provide input and support in shaping the development of your diversion program? 2) Referral Decision Points: There are various points within the juvenile justice processing continuum where youth can be targeted for diversion. At what point or points will referral decisions be made? Who, within the processing spectrum, will be responsible for making the decision to divert youth? 3) Extent of Intervention: The diversion program must consider the kind and degree of intervention it will have in the youth's life. What degree of intervention(s) will the program utilize? Will the program provide the youth with a written contract (either formal or informal)? B. Oversight 4) Operations: It is necessary to determine who will have primary responsibility for implementing and operating the diversion program and what the level of community oversight will be. What agency or entity will establish and maintain the program policies, provide stafﬁng, and take responsibility for program outcomes? Will an advisory board or panel be developed to oversee the development of policies and procedures for the diversion program? How will the engagement and buy-in of stakeholders be obtained? 5) Funding: Jurisdictions developing or implementing a diversion program must determine how the program will be funded and sustained for both the short and the long run. How will the diversion program be funded? Are secure funding streams currently in place that can help to sustain the program in the future? Has the possibility of using other local, state, or federal resources to help support the diversion program or key aspects of the program been explored? C. Intake Criteria 6) Referral and Eligibility: A diversion program will need to establish criteria that specify who is eligible for entry into the diversion program. What youth will be eligible for diversion? What offenses will be accepted for diversion? Are there any offenses that might make a youth ineligible and will there be options for discretion?

139 Quick Reference: 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program continued 7) Screening and Assessment: Diversion programs may utilize evidence-based screening and assessment tools to assess risk, needs, and behavioral or mental health problems. Will any screening and/or assessment methods/tools be used to determine a youth’s eligibility, and if so, how will these tools be chosen and who will administer them? For what purposes will screening and assessment be used?? Are there any protocols in place to deal with the sensitive nature of information collected and how, if at all, it can be shared among child-serving agencies? D. Operation Policies 8) Participant Requirements: It is important to determine the conditions and responsibilities youth will have to follow in order to ensure meaningful program participation. What obligations and conditions will the program require for the youth’s participation and successful completion? How will requirements focus on youths’ strengths, address behavioral health needs, satisfy victim concerns, and involve community efforts? 9) Services: The diversion program will need to consider what services, if any, will be provided to the youth by the program or through referral to community-based services, as well as how those services will be administered. What services will be provided for the youth while participating in the diversion program? Will the diversion program need to perform an inventory of community services, and if so, who will be responsible for this effort? Will the diversion program encourage or require the youth’s family to participate in services? Are there any agreements in place or Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) among the program and community service providers that will better facilitate services to the youth? 10) Incentives: Incentives should be employed by a diversion program in order to motivate youth and caretakers to meet the terms of the diversion program and to ensure successful program completion. Will the diversion program use any incentives to motivate youth and/or caretakers throughout the diversion process? If so, what forms of incentives will be used? Is the use of incentives economically feasible for the diversion program and what funding source will support incentives? Will the court agree to dropping charges against the youth or expunging records once the youth successfully completes the terms of diversion? 11) Consequences of Failure to Comply: Consequences must be speciﬁed for youth since some may have trouble fulﬁlling the terms of their diversion, either by failing to comply with the program’s requirements or by declining to participate altogether. Will there be any negative consequences for youth who fail to comply with the diversion program’s requirements? If so, what will these sanctions be? Will the youth ultimately be formally processed for failing to comply with diversion

140 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Quick Reference: 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program continued 12) Program Completion/Exit Criteria: Criteria must be established that will define when a youth has successfully completed the terms of their diversion and is ready to exit the program. How will the diversion program monitor a youth’s success or failure during program participation? How will successful program completion be defined, and will there be established exit criteria? E. Legal Protections 13) Information Use: The diversion program will need to consider what procedures and protocols should be in place that will establish how sensitive information is collected and will be kept confidential. What will be the conditions/guidelines for the use of information obtained during the youth’s participation in the diversion program? How will policies concerning the collection and use of information be clearly established and conveyed to youth and caretakers prior to participation in diversion? 14) Legal Counsel: In the absence of a state statute or local policies, the program should have established guidelines for the role of counsel. What role will defense counsel play? Are there local policy provisions in place or statutory guidelines that establish the role of counsel? Will the diversion program make counsel available to youth and family? F. Quality 15) Program Integrity: It is important to carefully attend to the diversion program’s development and maintenance to ensure continued quality and program fidelity. Are there clear policies and procedures that will be put into manual form for program personnel to maintain program quality and fidelity? How will training be developed and delivered for diversion program personnel? How will information be collected and in what formats? Will the program conduct a process evaluation? 16) Outcome Evaluation: To ensure the diversion program is meeting its objectives and goals, a record- keeping and data collection system should be in place to assist in providing periodic evaluations. What kind of record keeping and data collection will be used to provide periodic evaluations of the diversion program and monitor achievement of goals and objectives? What youth and program outcomes will be used to measure success?

141 Introduction to the Juvenile Diversion Workbook The Juvenile Diversion Workbook was developed to accompany the Juvenile Diversion Guidebook, prepared by the Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Workgroup. The Workbook’s intent is to provide a strategic planning tool to assist jurisdictions in their efforts to implement or improve a juvenile diversion program. The Workbook is divided into sections based on the Guidebook’s 16 Steps for Planning a Diversion Program.

A. Purpose Having an effective diversion program in place is dependent upon a clear statement of the recognition of the purpose of the program and the program’s goals.

Step 1) Objectives: The main purpose(s) for developing a diversion program will need to be identiﬁed.

What will be the primary objectives of the diversion program? Potential objectives that various diversion programs have identiﬁed include:

decreasing recidivism improving system efﬁciency reducing the level of system involvement lowering costs reducing the unnecessary restriction of freedom of youth helping youth and families access needed services and programs, reducing the burden on the juvenile justice system using available research and best practices early identiﬁcation of needs to prevent youth from becoming repeat offenders ______

142 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Some diversion programs are operated by single entities such as a district attorney’s ofﬁce. However, planners consisting of local juvenile justice administrators and program directors may also prove vital when developing a diversion program. In your community, what stakeholders from the juvenile justice public/private child services system would you be able to bring to the table to provide input and support in the development of your diversion program? ______

Step 2) Referral Decision Points: There are various points within the juvenile justice processing continuum where youth can be targeted for diversion.

At what point or points in the juvenile justice processing continuum will referral decisions be made? The Diversion Guidebook provides some examples of pre-adjudicatory diversion, including: at arrest or apprehension intake petitioning pretrial probation contact ______

143 ______

Who within the processing continuum will be responsible for making the decision to divert youth? ______

Step 3) The Extent of Intervention: The diversion program must consider what kind and degree of intervention the program will have in the youth's life.

What degree of intervention(s) will the program utilize? The Diversion Guidebook identiﬁes various interventions, including: warn and release no conditions conditions and/or services ______

144 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook ______

Will the program provide the youth with a written contract (either formal or informal) outlining any or all of the following: the program objectives duration what constitutes successful program completion possible incentives and/or sanctions ______

145 B. Oversight It is important to establish what agency or entity will be overseeing the diversion program, as well as how the program will be funded and sustained.

Step 4) Operations: It is necessary to determine the ofﬁce or agency that will have primary responsibility for implementing and operating the diversion program and what the level of community oversight will be. Collaborations among multiple agencies may be necessary.

What agency or entity will establish and maintain the program policies, provide staffing, and take responsibility for the program’s outcomes? Some examples identified by diversion programs include: local law enforcement agency county/state court county juvenile corrections or probation agency prosecutor or public defender’s office private/community-based service agency ______

Will an advisory board or panel be developed to oversee the development of policies and procedures for the diversion program? Consider legal, social service, and consumer representatives. ______

146 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook ______

How will the engagement and buy-in of the above mentioned stakeholders be obtained? ______

Step 5) Funding: Jurisdictions developing or implementing a diversion program must determine how the program will be funded and sustained for both the short and long run. Some of the more popular sources of funding identiﬁed by diversion program survey responders include:

county juvenile corrections or probation agency municipal/state/county court prosecutor’s ofﬁce

How will your diversion program be funded (both for program start-up and sustainability)? Consider local, state, and federal sources. ______

147 ______

Are secure funding stream(s) currently in place that can help to sustain the program in the future? ______

Has the possibility of using other local, state or federal resources (Medicaid, local business/community agencies, county/community grants, etc.) to help support the program or key aspects of the program been explored? If not, is there a plan to have this reviewed? Who will take the lead? ______

148 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook C. Intake Criteria A diversion program will generally have established criteria for youth who may be accepted into the program.

Step 6) Referral and Eligibility: A diversion program will need to establish criteria that specify who is eligible for entry into the diversion program. It may also be necessary in your community for your diversion program to include a determination of what constitutes legal sufﬁciency.

What youth will be eligible for diversion? Common eligibility criteria for diversion programs may include: age prior history type of current alleged offense youth’s character, conduct, and behavior (including in school, family, and group settings) youth’s prior diversion history willingness of the youth and caretakers to participate ______

What offenses will be accepted for diversion? Are there any offenses that might make the youth ineligible to be diverted (i.e. violent offenses, sex offenses, etc.)? Will there be options for discretion? ______

149 ______

Step 7) Screening and Assessment: Diversion programs may utilize evidence-based screening and assessment tools in order to assess a youth’s risk, needs, and to determine any behavioral or mental health problems. A tool that is evidence-based is standardized, relevant, reliable, and valid.

Will any screening and/or assessment methods/tools be used to determine the youth’s eligibility? If so, how will the screening and/or assessment tool be chosen and who will administer the tool(s)? ______

For what purposes will screening and assessment be used? Screening and assessment tools may be important for: risk, mental health, and substance abuse screenings. ______

150 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook ______

Are there any protocols in place to deal with the sensitive nature of the information collected and how if at all it can be shared among other child-serving agencies? Conﬁdentiality of the information obtained through screening and assessment is an important consideration. ______

151 D. Operation Policies A diversion program will want to clearly convey to the youth their expectations for the youth’s participation in the diversion program, what, if any services will be provided during diversion, and what will ultimately determine the youth’s successful completion of the program. In addition, programs may outline what incentives and sanctions will be employed for successful and unsuccessful program participation.

Step 8) Participant Requirements: It is important to determine the conditions and responsibilities youth will have to follow in order to ensure meaningful program participation.

What obligations and conditions will the program require for the youth’s participation and successful completion of the diversion program? Some examples of participation requirements identiﬁed in the Diversion Guidebook include: participation in screening and assessment participation in community service programs attendance at scheduled diversion program appointments continued participation for speciﬁed length of time restitution absence of new arrests while participating ______

152 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook How will requirements focus on the youth’s strengths, address any behavioral needs, satisfy victim concerns, and involve the community in an effort to bring about positive change? ______

Step 9) Services: The diversion program will need to consider what services, if any, will be provided to the youth by the program or through referral to community-based services, as well as how those services will be administered.

What services will be provided for the youth while in the diversion program? Some services identiﬁed by diversion programs include: family interventions substance use intervention mental health treatment life-skills training educational assistance programs job placement services ______

153 ______

Will the program need to perform an inventory of community services? If so, who will be responsible for this effort? ______

Will the diversion program require the youth’s family to participate in services as a term of diversion? If so, what methods of family engagement will be employed? ______

154 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Are there any agreements in place or Memoranda of Understanding among the diversion program and community service providers that will better facilitate services to the youth? If not, what agreements or MOUs need to be in place? ______

Step 10) Incentives: Incentives should be employed by a diversion program to motivate youth and caretakers to meet the terms of the diversion program and to ensure successful program completion by the youth.

Will the diversion program use any incentives to motivate the youth and/or caretakers throughout the diversion process and help to ensure successful completion? What forms of incentives will be used? Examples of incentives referenced in the Diversion Guidebook include: no further action expungement of records reduced program requirements providing awards/gifts or verbal accolades ______

155 ______

Is the use of incentives economically feasible for your program? What funding source will support incentives? What will be the process for incentive distribution? At what point in the diversion program will incentives be provided? ______

Will the courts be agreeable to dropping charges or expunging the youth's record should they successfully complete the diversion program? ______

156 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Step 11) Consequences of Failure to Comply: Some youth may have trouble fulﬁlling the terms of their diversion, either by failing to comply with the program’s requirements or by declining to participate altogether.

Will there be any negative consequences for youth who fail to comply with the diversion program’s requirements? If so, what will these sanctions be? The Diversion Guidebook provides various options for programs to consider when a youth fails to comply, which may include: dismissal from program with formal processing dismissal from program without formal processing program adjustments such as increasing the frequency or intensity of monitoring or extending or increasing the length of program participation ______

Will the youth ultimately be formally processed for failing to comply with diversion? Does dismissal from the diversion program make them ineligible for future participation in diversion? ______

157 Step 12) Program Completion / Exit Criteria: Criteria must be established that will deﬁne when a youth has successfully completed the terms of their diversion and is ready to exit the program.

How will the diversion program monitor the youth’s success or failure during program participation? As the Diversion Guidebook identiﬁes, there are a range of monitoring methods the program may employ, including: minimal monitoring (monitoring only through contacts with the youth and caretaker) as-needed reporting (establishing an agreement between the diversion program and the service provider working with the youth that contact will be made should the youth receiving services fail to attend) formal reporting of progress (having reporting arrangements in place with the community service provider to which the youth is referred) referral monitoring (having a procedure in place to detect whether the youth has made contact with services offered within the community) ______

How will successful diversion program completion be deﬁned? Will there be exit criteria established that the youth must meet prior to exiting the diversion program? Some examples include: time-based criterion, performance-based criterion, or failure to comply criterion. ______

158 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook E. Legal Protections Diversion programs should have set guidelines in place with regard to how information collected from the youth will be used as well as the role that legal counsel will play.

Step 13) Information Use: The diversion program will need to consider what procedures and protocols should be in place that will establish how this information is collected, in what capacity it will be used, how it will be kept conﬁdential.

What will be the conditions/guidelines for the use of information obtained during the youth’s participation in the diversion program? The Guidebook lists the following to consider: confidentiality with incriminating statements confidentiality when the youth is required to admit to offense written policies and Memorandums of Understanding concerning confidentiality therapist-patient confidentiality ______

How will policies concerning the collection and use of information be clearly established in policy and conveyed to the youth and caretakers prior to participation in diversion? ______

159 ______

Step 14) Legal Counsel: In the absence of a state statute or local policies, the program should have established guidelines for the role of counsel. These may include: providing the right to counsel at all times throughout the diversion program providing the right to counsel automatically or giving the youth and caretaker the choice to be provided counsel providing the opportunity to retain counsel privately make no provision

What role will defense counsel play? Are there local policy provisions in place or statutory guidelines that establish the role of counsel? Will the diversion program make counsel available to the youth and his or her family? ______

160 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook F. Quality A diversion program must consider how it will maintain program integrity and quality for the youth it serves.

Step 15) Program Integrity: In order to maintain a high quality program, it is important to carefully attend to program development and maintenance, set out clear policies and procedures, have a training curriculum that is provided to all personnel operating the program as well as to community-based service providers, and institute data collection procedures to provide for quality assurance.

How will the diversion program maintain its quality? Are there clear policies and procedures that will be put into manual form for program personnel? What sorts of internal monitoring processes will need to be in place to ensure the program’s ﬁdelity? ______

How will training be developed and delivered for diversion program personnel? Training should cover policies and procedures and additional topics that will help program personnel understand the population they are serving. ______

161 ______

Is there a system already in place for the collection of data, or will a system need to be developed? How will information be collected and in what formats? Who will input and be the “keeper” of the data? ______

How will the diversion program monitor quality assurance and conduct a process evaluation? The Guidebook lists the following approaches to quality assurance: internal monitoring, process evaluation, and external monitoring. In addition the diversion program may consider developing a logic model that clariﬁes and depicts the logical connections between the program’s purpose and the ultimate outcomes. ______

162 Juvenile Diversion Guidebook Step 16) Outcome Evaluation: To ensure that the diversion program is meeting the objectives and goals it has set forth, a record keeping and data collection system should be in place to assist in providing periodic evaluations.

What kind of record keeping and data collection will be used to provide periodic evaluations of the diversion program and monitor how well the program has achieved its goals and objectives? ______

In what terms will program success be measured? The Diversion Guidebook provides various measurements of success such as: evaluating the reduction in recidivism evaluating the provision of services evaluating the reduction of system costs evaluating increased successful outcomes for the youth evaluating increased accountability evaluating reduction in labeling and its effects on delinquency evaluating the reduction in unnecessary social control ______

163

Acknowledgements

Center for Juvenile Justice Reform: Susan Broderick Project Director, Models for Change Initiative Lauren Pomeroy Research Assistant

National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice: Joseph J. Cocozza, Ph.D. Executive Director Erin M. Hillery, M.A. Project Assistant

National Juvenile Defender Center: Patricia Puritz Executive Director Mary Ann Scali Deputy Director Sarah Bergen Staff Attorney

National Youth Screening and Assessment Project: Dr. Thomas Grisso, Ph.D. Director Samantha Fusco, M.A. Research Coordinator II

Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps: John Tuell, M.A., B.S.W. Co-Director, Models for Change Initiative Janet K. Wiig, J.D., M.S.W. Co-Director, Models for Change Initiative Sorrel Concodora, M.A. Program Manager, Models for Change Initiative An initiative supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation www.macfound.org www.modelsforchange.net