room away

pushes urges length active aware limit televisions

threats kids Fights anger take around guys confused involved pushed downs charge prepare world intimidate high try

physical never hard ities power l especially

vocational respect confined negativity fighting happen health tougher

aci free groups trainings f TYC weak listen weakling horticulture PlayStations system-involved

mployees reentry home punishment times motivated helped lace care Without

Visitations build fair locked

teacher support hit safe often

violence show perso ant many fight learning mak

going make medications neighborhood much go

cope almost empathy ups money changes treatment

ing mentor far hope

control one GED er lost stay changes staff getting

lessenough job ng minimum see youth

everything campus know Tell feel trying

ished secure everyone waive put visits succeed keeps gangs family hours think resources afraid better Now Staying woodshop credits riots trauma problems harder done school

YOUTH EXPERIENCES AT

2012 SURVEY FINDINGS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

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

Report Editor Molly Totman, J.D.

Report Designer Kim Wilks

Executive Director Ana Yáñez-Correa, Ph.D.

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

We also extend our sincerest appreciati on to the youth who provided us feedback about their experiences with the system. Their perspecti ve is criti cal to making real improvements in youth justi ce.

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

MARCH 2012

The Texas Criminal Justi ce Coaliti on identi fi es and advances real soluti ons to the problems facing Texas’ juvenile and criminal justi ce systems. We conduct policy research and analysis, form eff ecti ve partnerships, and educate key stakeholders to promote eff ecti ve management, accountability, and best practi ces that increase public safety and preserve human and civil rights.

© 2012 Texas Criminal Justi ce Coaliti on. All rights reserved. Any reproducti on of the material herein must credit the Texas Criminal Justi ce Coaliti on. Message from the Executive Director

Dear practi ti oners, families, and advocates,

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

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

The picture that emerges from our interviews off ers both encouragement – the youth largely reported feeling safe and hopeful in the Texas juvenile justi ce system – as well as opportuniti es for improvement – for example, in family involvement, staff training, and youth violence against other youth. We have included specifi c fi ndings and recommendati ons in this report, and the Texas Criminal Justi ce Coaliti on looks forward to working with advocates, practi ti oners, and others to build on those strengths and to address areas in need of improvement.

The responses of these youth also challenge some conventi onal wisdom. The youth identi fi ed educati on, treatment programs, and vocati onal training as the most helpful part of the juvenile justi ce system, suggesti ng these youth are highly moti vated to succeed at school and are eager for the opportunity. They also reported frequent family visits at county faciliti es, suggesti ng these families want to be involved, and that the lack of family involvement at state secure faciliti es is a result of distance more than apathy.

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

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

Sincerely,

Ana Yáñez-Correa, Ph.D. Executi ve Director, Texas Criminal Justi ce Coaliti on

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Survey Methodology ...... 1

Need For Further Research ...... 1

Key Findings ...... 3

Recommendati ons for Texas Juvenile Justi ce Department (TJJD) . . . . 4

Safety: Survey Responses ...... 6

Safety: Recommendati ons...... 9

Hope: Survey Responses ...... 10

Hope: Recommendati ons ...... 12

Top Issues for Youth...... 13

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

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

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

References ...... 17

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NEED FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

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

Additi onally, surveys of staff at both state and county faciliti es will be essenti al as TJJD moves forward with its reforms. Our informal conversati ons with staff for this report provided important insight on the issues facing the juvenile justi ce system.

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

Texas Criminal Justice Coalition 1 www.CriminalJusticeCoalition.org

Y OUTH E XPERIENCES AT G IDDINGS S TATE S CHOOL

KEY FINDINGS

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

The youth identifi ed education, treatment, interactions with staff, youth-on-youth violence, and family involvement as the most important issues facing them in the juvenile justice system. Youth identi fi ed educati on, treatment programs, and vocati onal training as the most helpful in preparing them for their future aft er the juvenile justi ce system. These responses suggest that these youth appreciate the value of educati on and treatment, and they are moti vated to succeed when given the opportunity. Youth identi fi ed negati ve interacti ons with staff as the biggest barrier to their future success. Youth similarly identi fi ed more staff training as the number one thing they would change about the juvenile system. Negati ve staff interacti ons increase misbehavior, hinder treatment, and create a percepti on of favoriti sm and unfair rule enforcement, youth report. Youth-on-youth violence is the most important issue to the surveyed youth. This strong response was likely infl uenced by the large race/gang fi ght at the Giddings facility a month before the survey. Youth directly referenced that fi ght in several interviews; a month aft er the fi ght, the youth were sti ll acti vely processing the traumati c event. Barriers to family involvement are a major issue for the surveyed youth. Barriers to family involvement was second only to youth-on-youth violence when youth were asked about the importance of various issues, and second only to staff training when youth were asked what should be changed about the juvenile system.

The distant location of the surveyed facility imposes rehabilitation challenges, especially on family involvement, mentorship, and positive interactions with staff. Although positi ve family involvement signifi cantly improves outcomes both during and aft er placement in secure faciliti es,1 the youth reported that the long distance between home and the state secure faciliti es caused family visits to drop precipitously following commitment to the state secure faciliti es. 62 percent reported receiving visits at least once per week while in county faciliti es, but only 15 percent reported receiving visits at least once per week while in a state secure facility. TJJD reports that mentored youth in its state secure faciliti es achieve signifi cantly bett er educati on and recidivism outcomes than non-mentored youth,2 but staff at the surveyed facility noted during informal conversati ons that the relati vely remote locati on of the facility hinders the recruitment and retenti on of mentors. As a result, only 7 percent of the surveyed youth reported having a mentor in state secure faciliti es, compared with 13 percent who reported having had a mentor at the county level. Some staff at the surveyed facility noted during informal conversati ons that the long commute to the facility hinders their job performance, and youth reported that staff oft en seem angry when they arrive at work. Youth identi fi ed negati ve staff interacti ons as the biggest barrier to success and the number one thing they would change about the juvenile justi ce system.

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

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TEXAS JUVENILE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT (TJJD)

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

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

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

From the perspecti ve of the surveyed youth, negati ve staff interacti ons increase misbehavior, hinder treatment, and create a percepti on of favoriti sm and unfair rule enforcement. Based on informal conversati ons with staff and administrators, those negati ve interacti ons also increase staff turnover, injuries, and job dissati sfacti on. Not surprisingly, the surveyed youth identi fi ed negati ve staff interacti ons as the greatest barrier to their rehabilitati on. Policy-makers and TJJD should support positi ve staff interacti ons by increasing funding for training programs at state and county faciliti es, such as Bexar County’s successful Restraint and Seclusion Reducti on Initi ati ve training program.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Expand reentry planning at both state and county facilities.

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

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

SAFETY: SURVEY RESPONSES

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

60 63% 50 44%

40 Responses  30 of  23% 22%

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

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

56% 50 44%

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

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

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

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

35

30

25 Responses  25%

of 24%  20 23% 20%

15 Number

10 8% 7% 5

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility NoPower ALittlePower ALotofPower AHugeAmountofPower

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

70

60

50 Responses  of  40

30 Number

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

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

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

50 45% 42% 40 Responses  30 of  27%

20 Number 14% 13%

10

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility Never 1to10times Morethan10times

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

90 97%

80 73% 70

60 Responses  50 of 

40

Number 30 27%

20

10 3%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility NoProblems DelayorRefusalofMedicalAttention

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

SAFETY: RECOMMENDATIONS

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

RECOMMENDATION 1: Build on the successful reducti on of staff violence against youth at Giddings State School by expanding staff training programs to address youth-on-youth violence. Bexar County’s Restraint and Seclusion Reducti on Initi ati ve training program successfully reduced both staff -youth and youth-youth violence in its secure faciliti es.

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

RECOMMENDATION 2: Increase trauma counseling for youth aft er fi ghts, especially following riots. Implement gang interventi on programs designed for secure faciliti es.

The survey responses suggest county programs have advantages that support higher safety outcomes for youth. Combined with the responses on family involvement, mentorship, and staff interacti ons, the youths’ perspecti ves on safety off er important guidance to TJJD as it implements the goals of SB653,7 including to “support the development of a consistent county-based conti nuum” of eff ecti ve services, and to “locate the faciliti es as geographically close” as possible to family, necessary workforce, and services.

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

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

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

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

HOPE: SURVEY RESPONSES

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

80

74% 70

60

50 Responses  40 of 

30

Number 24% 20

10 2% 0 ALotofHope ALittleHope NoHopeatAll



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

31% 31% 27% 25 25%

20 Responses  of  15 17%

Number 11% 10 10% 9% 6% 5

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility MorethanOnceaWeek OnceaWeek OnceorTwiceaMonth AFewTimes Never

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

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

80 87%

70

60 Responses  50 of 

40 Number 30

20 13% 10 7%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility Yes No

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

45

40 39% 35 36%

30 Responses  25 of 

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

5 4%

0 CountyFacility StateSecureFacility VeryHelpful ALittleHelpful NotHelpful NotSure

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

HOPE: RECOMMENDATIONS

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

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

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

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

RECOMMENDATION 2: Increase family parti cipati on in youths’ case planning. As necessary, revise visitati on policies to support greater family involvement.

“I’ve never had a mentor. I want one.” – Giddings youth Mentorship programs face signifi cant challenges at both the state and county level, and few youth report having a mentor. County departments have noted that local mentor programs are oft en at capacity, and Giddings staff noted that state faciliti es face additi onal challenges in recruiti ng and retaining volunteer mentors because of the relati vely remote locati on of the faciliti es. TJJD has reported that those youth who do have mentors in state secure faciliti es achieve bett ers outcomes in educati on and recidivism than non-mentored youth.

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

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

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

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

TOP ISSUES FOR YOUTH

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

30 YYouth-on-youthouth-on-youth vviolenceiolence 28 YouthTTooooͲon ddiͲiyouthffi cultcuviolencelt fforor familiesfamilies toto bbee iinvolvednvolved 25 Toodifficultforfamiliestobeinvolved 25 RReentryeentry resourcesresources Reentryresources 21 RRehabehab pprogramsrograms ddon’ton’t wworkork Rehabprogramsdon'twork 20 19 TToooo mmuchuch ppre-adjudicare-adjudicati onon llockupockup 18 ToomuchpreͲadjudicationlockup 16 16 SSeclusioneclusion Seclusion Responses  15 RRestraintsestraints of  Restraints SStataff -on-youth-on-youth vviolenceiolence StaffͲonͲyouthviolence Number 10 9 NNotot eenoughnough mmentalental hhealthealth ttreatmentreatment Notenoughmentalhealthtreatment 7 NNotot enoughenough prevenpreventi onon pprogramsrograms Notenoughpreventionprograms 55 JJuvenileuvenile jjususti cece systemsystem isis raciallyracially 5 Juvenilebbiasediasejusticed systemisraciallybiased 2 StaffSStatadoesn'tff doesn’tdoefollowsn’tsuicide ffollowollopreventionw ssuicideuicid e policies pprevenreventi onon ppoliciesolicies 0 IssuesofTopConcern

*57 youth received this questi on. For more informati on, see Survey Methodology.

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

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

MOST HELPFUL FOR YOUTH’S FUTURE

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

30

Educati on, GED and diploma 25 24 Education,TreatmentGEDand programsdiploma 22 TreatmentVocati programsonal training and certi fi cates 20 Vocationaltrainingand certificates 18 Structure and general Structureandgeneral atmosphereatmosphereofasecure of facilitya secure facility Staffarepositiveandsupportive Responses  15 Staff are positi ve and supporti ve of  Reentryplanning Reentry planning

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

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

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

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

LEAST HELPFUL FOR YOUTH’S FUTURE

What has been the least helpful to prepare you for your future aft er you leave the juvenile justi ce system? 14 StaffͲ putyoudown,provoke you,Stahaveff - negativeput youattitude down, provoke you, have negati ve atti tude 12 Generalatmosphereofasecure 12 facility General atmosphere of a secure facility PeersͲ badinfluence Peers - bad infl uence 10 10 Treatment/ProgrammingͲ not effectiveTreatment/Programming - not eff ecti ve 9 PeersPeersͲ don't - don’tfeelsafe feel safe 8 8 StaffStaͲffinconsistent - inconsistentenforcement enforcement of rules 7

Responses ofrules 

of Treatment/Programming - not enough  Treatment/ProgrammingͲ not 6 enoughatt enattentionti on fromfrom caseworkers and counselors caseworkersandcounselors Toofarfromfamily Number Too far from family 4 Programming - not enough recreati onal 4 ProgrammingͲ notenough acti viti es 33 recreationalactivities MedicalMedicalͲ insufficient - insuffi medical cient caremedical care 2 2 Seclusion 111 Seclusion Stages system Stagessystem 0 Whathasbeentheleasthelpfultoprepareyouforyour

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

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

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

IF YOU COULD CHANGE ONE THING…

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

12 MoreMore staffstaff training trainingͲ more - morepositive posi ti ve interacti ons, 11 respectinteractions, and respect,fairer rulesandfairer enforcement rulesenforcement EasierEasier tosee seefamily familyͲ furloughs, - furloughs, phone calls, phonecalls,visits 10 visits 99 EarlierEarlier releasereleaseͲ no- nostages stagessystem, system, complete treatmentcompletetreatment communityincommunity aft er MLS afterMLS MoreMore alternativesalternati vesto tosecure secure placement 8 placement Bett er food Betterfood More acti viti es

Responses NothingMoreactivities  6 of  5 More protecti on from violent peers Nothing Less punishment for minor violati ons

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

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

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

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

REFERENCES

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

2 Texas Juvenile Justi ce Department “Annual Review of Treatment Eff ecti veness” (2011) pp. 34-5.

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

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

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

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

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

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