DOCSLIB.ORG

Texas Juvenile Justice Department Strategic Plan for 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Texas Juvenile Justice Department Strategic Plan for 2013 STRATEGIC PLAN 2013-2017 Protecting Texas by positively changing the lives of youth. This plan was prepared under the direction of the Legislative Budget Board and the Governor's Office of Budget, Policy, and Planning to comply with Texas Government Code Section 2056. “There is no greater insight into the future than recognizing... when we save our children, we save ourselves.” —Margaret Mead AGENCY STRATEGIC PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2013-2017 B Y Board Member Term Expires Hometown SCOTT W. FISHER, Chairman 02/01/2013 EULESS ROB KYKER, Vice Chairman 02/01/2017 RICHARDSON JOHN BRIEDEN III 02/01/2017 BRENHAM JOSEPH BROWN 02/01/2017 SHERMAN CAROL BUSH 02/01/2013 WAXAHACHIE JANE ANDERSON KING 02/01/2017 CANYON MICHAEL MEADE 02/01/2013 SIMONTON MARY LOU MENDOZA 02/01/2013 SAN ANTONIO RENE OLVERA 02/01/2017 SAN ANTONIO LAURA PARKER 02/01/2015 SAN ANTONIO JIMMY SMITH 02/01/2015 MIDLAND CALVIN STEPHENS 02/01/2015 DALLAS MELISSA WEISS 02/01/2015 BELLVILLE July 6, 2012 SIGNED: Scott W. Fisher, TJJD Board Chairman APPROVED: June 22, 2012 This page intentionally left blank. TEXAS JUVENILE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) was created Collaboration and teamwork that builds on December 1, 2011, combining the functions of the Texas partnerships with youth, families and local Youth Commission (TYC) and the Texas Juvenile communities; and Probation Commission (TJPC). The following public purposes of the new agency include: Innovation and technology that results in efficient systems and services. Creating a unified state juvenile justice agency that works in partnership with local county governments, The way in which the agency accomplishes this mission the courts, and communities to promote public has changed dramatically. This strategic plan covering safety by providing a full continuum of effective the 2013 through 2017 time period presents the supports and services to youth from initial contact framework of services and strategies to ensure individual through termination of supervision; and treatment, public protection, and stronger Texas communities. Building on new youth programming, Creating a juvenile justice system that produces recent issues and past achievements, TJJD is rebuilding positive outcomes for youth, families, and its services to focus on safety and security, facilitate communities by: collaborative partnerships with local juvenile justice professionals, and improve rehabilitation opportunities - Assuring accountability, quality, consistency, for Texas’ most serious and violent youth offenders and and transparency through effective monitoring to increase their success upon re-entry. and the use of system wide performance measures; The core of the new TJJD is a unified state juvenile justice system that works in partnership with stakeholders to - Promoting the use of program and service build an effective and efficient continuum of services for designs and interventions proven to be most youth in Texas. This collaboration is nowhere more effective in rehabilitating youth; important than in the establishment of the agency’s strategic initiatives for the future. The foundation of the - Prioritizing the use of community-based or TJJD programs and services includes the following family-based programs and services for youth strategic priorities which were developed jointly over the placement or commitment of youth to between agency staff and stakeholders statewide: a secure facility; Strengthen and enhance the safety and security - Operating the state facilities to effectively house protocols, procedures, training, equipment and and rehabilitate the youthful offenders that technology in all state-operated secure institutions cannot be safely served in another setting; and and half-way houses to ensure the safety of youth, staff and the public. - Protecting and enhancing the cooperative agreements between state and local county Strengthen and enhance the continuum of effective governments. youth services provided by local juvenile probation departments and community-based juvenile justice The primary mission of the new Texas Juvenile Justice partners to address core services and specialty Department is to create a safer Texas through the population’s needs (mental and behavioral health, establishment of a continuum of services that promotes prevention and intervention). Identify gaps in positive youth outcomes through: services along the continuum and focus efforts to address the needs of juveniles and their families in Organizational excellence and integrity that earns the community. and promotes public trust; Strengthen and enhance the provision of effective Evidence-based performance and accountability that mental and behavioral health programs, services and produces results; treatment for youth being served in the community- based juvenile justice system through a collaborative project funded by TJJD in cooperation with STRATEGIC PLAN 2013 – 2017 i community partners including juvenile probation Training®, and positive behavior have provided more departments, mental health authorities, TCOOMI, balance to the safety continuum. schools and community based providers as appropriate. The vast majority of youth committed to TJJD have had multiple previous encounters with the juvenile justice Strengthen and enhance the positive outcomes system. Often, the youth have been failed by their expected from the continuum of juvenile justice parents, the education system, their peers, and their programs and services statewide through effective communities. For many, TJJD is the last opportunity at partnerships with local juvenile probation rehabilitation before entering the adult correctional departments and community providers. system. TJJD’s challenge is to re-engage youth, inspire them, restore their hope, and teach them to believe in Develop and implement a collaborative border themselves – a monumental task for youth who have counties initiative to effectively address the grown accustomed to failure. provision of programs and services in counties bordering Mexico that are facing unique problems Rehabilitating youth at this level is a costly and time- and financial difficulties serving Mexican national consuming effort. Nationally recognized best practices youth engaged in drug trafficking, human trafficking indicate that best results are realized when youth are and weapons offenses in border communities. treated in small-group settings close to their homes. However, given the variety of intensive and specialized Develop a state/local formalized collaboration and service needs of TJJD youth, this type of approach quickly communication plan that promotes effective becomes cost prohibitive. collaboration and communication between local juvenile probation departments, juvenile justice To maximize quality and cost of services, TJJD has practitioners and TJJD. developed a regionalized approach to youth placement, putting youth as close to their home and family as State facility youth today are far different from those possible. At the same time, the most specialized services committed three years ago. TJJD has a smaller youth are delivered at selected facilities in an effort to control population now but it represents a higher percentage of cost. The tension between best practices and cost violent offenders. In the first half of FY 2012, 95% of new effectiveness will continue into the foreseeable future as commitments were assessed as needing treatment by a the agency balances the delivery of treatment and licensed or specially trained provider (capital or serious programming in the most cost-effective manner. violent offense, chemical dependency, mental health related issue, or sexual offense). Emphasis on community based programs and services, a focus on safety and security, and specialized services and It is critical that the agency take into consideration the juvenile rehabilitation programs will continue to evolve characteristics of TJJD youth, since a key to effective as funding opportunities and best practices change. treatment and rehabilitation programs is a shared feeling Despite external factors, TJJD’s mission will continue to of safety among youth and staff. The agency’s ability to be focused on youth outcomes. With focused and monitor and maintain a safe environment for youth has consistent leadership and skilled professional staff, the greatly improved in recent years. Enhancements in agency is positioned to anticipate and respond to the dormitory configurations, video monitoring and challenges and opportunities that may occur during this recording systems, and the presence of law enforcement FY 2013-2017 strategic plan timeframe. officers provides greater safeguards for youth and staff than in previous years. Upgrades to training requirements for newly hired staff, coupled with an experienced and professional workforce, also contribute to an environment conducive to treatment and rehabilitation. Finally, professional development and the implementation of evidence-based programs that focus on trauma-informed care, Aggression Replacement TEXAS JUVENILE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ii TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION ONE: SECTION TWO continued GUIDING PRINCIPLES ........................................ 1 C. Geographic Location and Locations of Service Statewide Vision, Mission and Philosophy ....................... 1 Populations .......................................................... 72 Relevant Statewide Goals and Benchmarks ..................... 2 D. Human Resources Strengths and Challenges
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SAP Crystal Reports
    Texas PK-16 Public Education Information Resource Texas Public Prekindergarten Programs and Enrollment Ages 3 and 4 Public Prekindergarten Enrollment for 2015-16 School Year Public Prekindergarten Enrollment by Student Instruction Type and ADA Eligibility for 2015-16 School Year 220,640 190,848 (86%) 88,295 (40%) 2015-16 Student Total Students Enrolled Economically Limited English Total Enrolled ADA Eligible Not Eligible for ADA Instruction Ages 3 and 4 Disadvantaged Proficiency Type Students Percent Students Percent Students Percent Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled Enrolled 8,594 (4%) 6,611 (3%) 5,471 (2%) Age 3 Full-day 12,206 47% 11,616 47% 590 50% Special Education Military Children Homeless Half-day 13,573 53% 12,974 53% 599 50% Total 25,779 100% 24,590 100% 1,189 100% Age 4 Full-day 103,380 53% 96,791 53% 6,589 60% 1,695 (0.8%) 109,816 (50%) 110,824 (50%) Half-day 91,481 47% 87,071 47% 4,410 40% In Foster Care Females Males Total 194,861 100% 183,862 100% 10,999 100% Total Total 220,640 100% 208,452 100% 12,188 100% Public Prekindergarten Enrollment by Ethnicity for 2015-16 School Year Districts Providing Public Districts Providing Public Prekindergarten Prekindergarten for 2015-16 School Year for 2015-16 School Year by Instruction Type 64% 13% Hispanic/Latino Districts 30% White Not Full & Providing Half-day 40% Black or African PK Full-Day American Only Asian Two or more races Districts American Indian or Providing 15% 15% Alaska Nat Half-Day PK Native Hawaiian/Other Only Percentage of Students Enrolled Students of
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Youth Commission (TYC) and Transferred All Functions, Duties and Responsibilities of These Former Agencies to TJJD
    Comprehensive Report Youth Reentry and Reintegration December 1, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................... 1 ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................................................ 1 PROGRAMS ................................................................................................................................ 2 NETWORK OF TRANSITION PROGRAMS .................................................................................... 5 IDENTIFICATION OF LOCAL PROVIDERS AND TRANSITIONAL SERVICES .................................... 7 Children’s Aftercare Reentry Experience (CARE) ................................................................ 9 Gang Intervention Treatment: Reentry Development for Youth (GitRedy) ....................... 9 SHARING OF INFORMATION .................................................................................................... 10 OUTCOMES ................................................................................................................................. 10 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 14 APPENDICES ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Texas Youth Commission
    JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE TEXAS YOUTH COMMISSION PRELIMINARY REPORT OF INITIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A REPORT TO THE LT. GOVERNOR AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE 80TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE JOHN WHITMIRE JERRY MADDEN SENATE CO-CHAIRMAN HOUSE CO-CHAIRMAN Joint Select Committee on the Operation and Management of the Texas Youth Commission Preliminary Report of Initial Findings and Recommendations Table of Contents I. Executive Summary II. Preliminary Report III. Proclamation IV. Attachment One - Recommended Action Plan by Committee V. Attachment Two - Statistical Breakdown by TDCJ-OIG VI. Attachment Three - Filed Legislation VII. Attachment Four - State Auditor's Report 07-022 VIII. Attachment Five - McLennan County State Juvenile Correctional Facility - Case File Review EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background The Texas Youth Commission (TYC) is the state agency responsible for the care, custody and rehabilitation of the juvenile offenders who have been committed by the court. The ages of youth committed to TYC ranges from 10 to 17. The TYC can maintain custody of the youth until the age of twenty-one (21). Allegations of mistreatment, disturbances and abuse began to surface and the TYC came under federal scrutiny due to the riot at the Evins Regional Juvenile Center in Edinburg, Texas. The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, began an investigation at the Evins facility in September 2006 and issued their report on March 15, 2007, stating "certain conditions at Evins violate the constitutional rights of the youth". The Senate Criminal Justice Committee, the House Corrections Committee and the Juvenile Justice and Family Issues Committee conducted separate public hearings allowing staff, youth, family members, child advocacy groups, the ACLU and other concerned citizens to be heard.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Education Agency Overview
    Texas Education Agency Overview 100 - Office of the Commissioner; Senior Policy Advisor The Commissioner's Office provides leadership to schools, manages the Texas Education Agency (TEA), and provides coordination with the state legislature and other branches of state government as well as the U. S. Department of Education. SBOE activities and rules, commissioner rules and regulations, commissioner hearing decisions, coordinates with state legislature, Commissioner’s Correspondence and Complaints Management. Number of FTEs: 6 Correspondence Management Function Description: This function serves to oversee, coordinate, and conduct activities associated with managing and responding to correspondence received by members of the public, local education agencies (LEAs), legislature, and other state agencies. This function operates under the authority of Agency OP 03-01, for which the Office of the Commissioner is the Primary Office of Responsibility (OPR). This function serves as a review and distribution center for correspondence assigned to other offices in coordination with Complaints Management and the Public Information Coordination Office. Complaints Management Function Description: This function serves to oversee, coordinate, and conduct activities associated with managing and responding to complaints received by members of the public. Through various activities, this function ensures that the operations of the Agency’s complaint system is compliant with applicable regulations and policy and effectively meets identified needs of the Agency. This function operates under the authority of Agency OP 04-01, for which the Office of the Commissioner is the Primary Office of Responsibility (OPR). This function mainly serves as a review and distribution center for complaints assigned to other offices in coordination with Correspondence Management and the Public Information Coordination Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Jerry Patterson, Commissioner Texas General Land Office General Land Office Texas STATE AGENCY PROPERTY RECOMMENDED TRANSACTIONS
    STATE AGENCY PROPERTY RECOMMENDED TRANSACTIONS Report to the Governor October 2009 Jerry Patterson, Commissioner Texas General Land Office General Land Office Texas STATE AGENCY PROPERTY RECOMMENDED TRANSACTIONS REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR OCTOBER 2009 TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE JERRY PATTERSON, COMMISSIONER INTRODUCTION SB 1262 Summary Texas Natural Resources Code, Chapter 31, Subchapter E, [Senate Bill 1262, 74th Texas Legislature, 1995] amended two years of previous law related to the reporting and disposition of state agency land. The amendments established a more streamlined process for disposing of unused or underused agency land by defining a reporting and review sequence between the Land Commissioner and the Governor. Under this process, the Asset Management Division of the General Land Office provides the Governor with a list of state agency properties that have been identified as unused or underused and a set of recommended real estate transactions. The Governor has 90 days to approve or disapprove the recommendations, after which time the Land Commissioner is authorized to conduct the approved transactions. The statute freezes the ability of land-owning state agencies to change the use or dispose of properties that have recommended transactions, from the time the list is provided to the Governor to a date two years after the recommendation is approved by the Governor. Agencies have the opportunity to submit to the Governor development plans for the future use of the property within 60 days of the listing date, for the purpose of providing information on which to base a decision regarding the recommendations. The General Land Office may deduct expenses from transaction proceeds.
    [Show full text]
  • 20-21 Proposed Budget Narrative
    FISCAL YEAR 2021 (2020-2021) PROPOSED BUDGET & PLAN OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES JULY 30, 2020 Declarations required by the State of Texas: This budget will raise more revenue from property taxes than last year’s budget by $84,818.16 (3.5 percent) and of that amount $28,997.08 is tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year. The City of Gatesville proposes to use the increase in the total tax revenue for the purpose of equipment for the additional School Resource Officers and new equipment for the Street Department. This notification statement complies with Texas Local Government Code § 102.005 This budget raises more property tax revenue compared to the previous year’s budget. The Gatesville City Council adopted the budget with the following voting record: City Council Ward 1, Place 1: Vacant City Council Ward 1, Place 2: Randy Hitt City Council Ward 1, Place 3/Mayor Pro-Tem: Meredith Rainer City Council Ward 2, Place 4: William Robinette City Council Ward 2, Place 5: Greg Casey City Council Ward 2, Place 6: Jack Doyle Ordinance 2020-___, dated September __, 2020 This notification statement complies with Texas Local Government Code § 102.007 Information regarding the City’s property tax rate follows: Fiscal Year 2020 (preceding): $0.5600/$100 valuation Fiscal Year 2021 (current): TBD/$100 valuation Fiscal Year 2021: Adopted Rate: $0.TBD/$100 valuation No-New-Revenue Tax Rate: $0.5509/$100 valuation No-New-Revenue Maintenance and Operations Tax Rate: $0.583/$100 valuation Voter Approval Tax Rate: $0.6588/$100 valuation Debt Tax Rate: $0.2399/$100 valuation De Minimis Rate: $0.7602/$100 valuation Total Debt Obligations Secured by Property Taxes: $961,017 CITY MANAGER July 30, 2020 The Honorable Mayor Gary Chumley, Mayor Pro Tem Rainer, and Members of the City Council, I am pleased to submit the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2021 which begins on October 1, 2020 and ends on September 30, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Colorado, Texas and Missouri Juvenile Rehabilitation
    COMPARISON OF COLODARO TEXAS AND MISSOURI JUVENILE REHABILITATION PROGRAMS SUMMER 2004 Colorado, Texas and Missouri all claim to have exemplary youth correctional facilities in regards to the successful rehabilitation of severe youth offenders. A comparison of the three systems shows that there are similarities between the facilities, but there are also key differences. These key differences help define the different programs from each other, as well as their performance and success rates. This report looks at how the facilities operate, the operating costs, how the youth get placed there, who the youth typically are, and the recidivism rates of the different programs in comparison to the costs. FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS] To understand the difference in performance among the three states one must understand the different ways the state facilities operate. One of the main differences between the three states’ programs, deals with the specific department jurisdiction of the rehabilitation program. COLORADO YOUTH OFFENDER SERVICES In Colorado the YOS program is operated by the adult correctional commission know as the Colorado Department of Corrections. The YOS program is only open to those youth who are adjudicated as adults and then meet the offense standards. Currently if a juvenile commits a class one felony or specific class two felonies, they are not eligible for the Colorado YOS program, and carry out their sentence in the adult prison system. Kids who do enter the YOS system go through 4 phases. First, offenders are admitted to the IDO or the Intake, Diagnostic and Orientation Program where they spend the first 30 days learning how the entire program works, and developing certain behavioral skills similar to a basic training regiment of the armed services.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Justice Uniform Cost Report (January 2011)
    Criminal Justice Uniform Cost Report Fiscal Years 2008 – 2010 SUBMITTED TO THE 82ND TEXAS LEGISLATURE JANUARY 2011 LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF CRIMINAL JUSTICE UNIFORM COST REPORT FISCAL YEARS 2008–2010 LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD JANUARY 2011 COVER PHOTO COURTESY OF HOUSE PHOTOGRAPHY CRIMINAL JUSTICE DATA ANALYSIS TEAM Michele Connolly, Manager Jamie Gardner, Analyst Adriana Marin, Analyst Laurie Molina, Analyst Ed Sinclair, Analyst PUBLIC SAFETY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE TEAM John Newton, Manager Angela Isaack, Analyst David Repp, Analyst Melissa Wurzer, Analyst CRIMINAL JUSTICE UNIFORM COST REpORT FISCAL YEARS 2008-2010 January 2011 One responsibility of the Criminal Justice Data Analysis Team of the Legislative Budget Board is to calculate cost per day information for various adult and juvenile correctional populations for use in funding determinations and to provide a basis of comparison between correctional programs and previously published cost figures. This report summarizes uniform cost information for programs, services, and facilities operated or contracted by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), the Texas Youth Commission (TYC), and the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission (JPC). The appendices detail the methodology used for data collection and cost per day calculations, provide an overview of each agency's operations and programs, and provide comparisons to other cost per Director Legislative Budget Board ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The LBB staff would like to thank the adult and juvenile criminal justice agencies and their staff
    [Show full text]
  • Juveniles in the Adult Criminal Justice System in Texas
    JuvenilesJuveniles inin thethe AdultAdult CriminalCriminal JusticeJustice SystemSystem inin TexasTexas by Michele Deitch Special Project Report Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs The University of Texas at Austin Juveniles in the Adult Criminal Justice System in Texas By Project Director Michele Deitch, J.D., M.Sc., Senior Lecturer LBJ School of Public Affairs Student Participants Emily Ling, LBJ School of Public Affairs Emma Quintero, University of Texas School of Law Suggested citation for this report: Michele Deitch (2011). Juveniles in the Adult Criminal Justice System in Texas, Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs A Special Project Report from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs The University of Texas at Austin Applied Research in Juvenile and Criminal Justice—Fall Semester 2010 March 2011 © 2011 by The University of Texas at Austin All rights reserved. Cover design by Doug Marshall, LBJ School Communications Office Cover photo by Steve Liss/The AmericanPoverty.org Campaign TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures v Acknowledgements vii Executive Summary x Part I: Introduction 1 A. Purpose of Report 1 B. Methodology 2 C. Structure of Report 2 Part II: Overview 3 A. Historical Background 3 B. Sentencing and Transfer Options for Serious Juvenile Offenders Under Texas Law 4 C. Problems with Confining Juveniles in Adult Prisons and Jails 6 Part III: Findings 9 A. Numbers of adult certification cases vs. juvenile determinate sentencing 9 B. Characteristics of certified and determinate sentence populations 10 (1) Demographics 10 Age 10 Gender 11 Ethnicity 12 County of Conviction 12 (2) Criminal Offense 13 (3) Criminal History 16 Prior Referrals to Juvenile Court 17 Prior Referrals to Juvenile Court for Violent Offenses 17 Prior TYC Commitments 18 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Committee on Criminal Justice Interim Report To
    Senate Criminal Justice Committee Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 4 Interim Charge One ........................................................................................................ 13 Interim Charge Two ...................................................................................................... 20 Interim Charge Three..................................................................................................... 27 Interim Charge Four ...................................................................................................... 34 Interim Charge Five ....................................................................................................... 48 Interim Charge Six ......................................................................................................... 53 Interim Charge Seven ..................................................................................................... 69 Interim Charge Eight ..................................................................................................... 73 Interim Charge Nine ....................................................................................................... 81 Interim Charge Ten ........................................................................................................ 96 Interim Charge Eleven ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Representing the Juvenile Delinquent: Reform, Social Science, and Teenage Troubles in Postwar Texas
    Texas A&M University-San Antonio Digital Commons @ Texas A&M University-San Antonio History Faculty Publications College of Arts and Sciences 2004 Representing the Juvenile Delinquent: Reform, Social Science, and Teenage Troubles in Postwar Texas William S. Bush Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tamusa.edu/hist_faculty Part of the American Studies Commons, and the United States History Commons Copyright by William Sebastian Bush 2004 The Dissertation Committee for William Sebastian Bush Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Representing the Juvenile Delinquent: Reform, Social Science, and Teenage Troubles in Postwar Texas Committee: Mark C. Smith, Supervisor Janet Davis Julia Mickenberg King Davis Sheldon Ekland-Olson Representing the Juvenile Delinquent: Reform, Social Science, and Teenage Troubles in Postwar Texas by William Sebastian Bush, B.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May 2004 Dedication For Mary and Alexander Acknowledgements Researching and writing a dissertation tests the emotions as well as the intellect. The two become so closely intertwined that scholarly advice invariably doubles as a salve for personal anxieties. Whether they knew it or not, practically everyone mentioned below bolstered my ever-flagging confidence even as they talked out ideas or problems that seemed bound within the more detached constraints of a dissertation project. Others just listened patiently to barely coherent thesis ideas, anxious brainstorming outbursts, and the usual angry tirades against academia.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10. Texas Dispositional Alternatives Danny Pirtile Introduction Juvenile Judges and District Attorneys Play an Important
    Chapter 10. Texas Dispositional Alternatives Danny Pirtile Introduction Juvenile judges and district attorneys play an important role in determining appropriate and often-necessary sanctions for those youth deemed delinquent and incorrigible. In the late 1980s, there was a transitional period for the juvenile justice system, where state legislatures began to institute policies aimed at violent, serious, and chronic juvenile offenders (Snyder & Sickmund, 1995; TJPC, 2003). Texas was not immune to the dramatic policy shifts being initiated during the late 1980s and early 1990s that was due to an overwhelming increase in juvenile crime and public fear of habitual and violent youthful offenders. Cox, Conrad, Allen and Hanser (2007) present a plethora of programs and dispositional choices available to juvenile justice officials. This chapter presents dispositional programs available to Texas juvenile officials and the milieu of these dispositions. Texas lawmakers developed policies that sought to decrease the non-adversarial nature of the juvenile court and replace them with increased procedural similarities to the adult criminal justice system. These legislative changes resulted in the creation of laws that significantly altered dispositions or adjudicatory outcomes in the juvenile justice system. Juvenile judges and prosecutors received increased authority and were provided with a wide range of dispositional alternatives which included placing a youth on probation to transferring the case to the adult system. Thus, the new goal was to focus more on providing tougher, offense based sanctions, while still retaining some of the safeguards provided in the juvenile justice system, which ultimately rely on the parens patriae doctrine of rehabilitation and focus on the best interests of the child.
    [Show full text]