www.propublica.org/.../rape-and-other-sexual-violence-prevalent-in-juv...
Jun 6,
2013 - The greatest rates of sexual assaults in the country's juvenile
... that the rates of staff-on-inmate abuse among juveniles
are "about three times ...
www.takepart.com/article/2013/.../doj-study-juvenile-justice-sexual-assau...
Jun 10,
2013 - The primary predators are adult staff at correctional facilities,
not ... in juvenile facilities in America report being sexually abused
in the past year ...
www.psmag.com/.../hundreds-of-teens-raped-and-assaulted-by-staff-in-j...
Jun 14,
2013 - Hundreds of Teens Raped and Assaulted by Staff in Juvenile
... that the rates of staff-on-inmate abuse among juveniles
are "about three times ...
www.salon.com/.../sexual_abuse_on_the_rise_at_us_juvenile_detention_...
Jul 4,
2013 - In all, the facilities house more than 18,000 juveniles,
representing about one ... Nine out of 10 victims were males abused
by female staff.
www.rawstory.com/.../rape-and-sexual-assault-run-rampant-in-juvenile-j...
Jun 6,
2013 - The teens are most often assaulted by staff members
working at the facilities, ... said that the rates of staff-on-inmate
abuse among juveniles are ...
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/21225_displayArticle.aspx
Sexual Abuse
by Prison and Jail Staff Proves Persistent, Pandemic .... “She's
been assaulted in ways that are so inhumane and so offensive we can't
talk .... In January 2009, a manager at the Marion County Juvenile
Detention Center was ...
thinkprogress.org/.../teenagers-in-adult-prisons-more-likely-to-b...
May
16, 2013 - ... being assaulted by another inmate, 3.2 percent
were abused by staff. ... One former juvenile inmate who
was raped and abused in prison ...
www.presstv.com/detail/2013/.../sexual-abuse-rampant-at-us-juvenile-jail...
Jun 7,
2013 - This is while Allen Beck, the author of the report, underlined that the
rates of staff-on-inmate abuse among juveniles are
"about three times ...
www.movetoendviolence.org/.../sexual-abuse-and-juvenile-justice-syste...
Jul 18,
2013 - Sexual Abuse and the Juvenile Justice System ...
most alarming finding is the percentage of assaults committed by juvenile
corrections staff.
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../disturbing-doj-report-fin_n_3397309.html
Jun 6,
2013 - Interestingly, the rate of staff sexual misconduct is nearly
twice as high .... abuse, but we had kids transferred from Juvie
who'd been assaulted ...
|
1
|
About 16,600,000 results (0.45 seconds)
Search Results
1. NICIC.gov: Searching nicic.gov for: inmate sexual assault juveniles
nicic.gov/?q=inmate+sexual+assault+juveniles
"Your Role: Responding to Sexual Abuse ... BLOG. 14. Juveniles in Residential Placement,
2010 ... Home > Library > Inmate sexual assault > Juveniles in ...
2. PREA Posters and Inmate Brochures : NIC Information Center
https://nic.zendesk.com/.../21589798-PREA-Posters-and-Inmate-Brochur...
Jun 14, 2012 - ...
requires agencies to educate inmates and residents about their zero ... Arizona Dept. of Juvenile
Corrections. ... Assault and Sexual Abuse of Juveniles,” “Reception Screening for ... Inmate sexual assault shared files
on the NIC Corrections Community website ... PREA in the Juvenile Justice
System
3. In Texas' Juvenile Correctional Facilities, Assaults Among Inmates ...
www.nytimes.com/.../in-texas-juvenile-correctional-facilities-assaults-am...
Feb 11, 2012 - The
overhauling of the juvenile justice system in 2007 has had some ... physically and
sexually abusing minors under
their supervision. ... Overall, confirmed youth-on-youth assaults have more
than tripled at the secure juvenile offender ... At the Corsicana Residential Treatment Center, where the state ...
[PDF]
Sexual Assault in Jail and Juvenile Facilities - DCJ Home
dcj.state.co.us/.../FINAL%20PREA%20REPORT%20June%2028%20201...
by K English - 2010 - Cited
by 1 - Related
articles
Jun 7, 2010 - increased
rates of substance abuse, suicide attempts, depression and post ... on-inmate sexual assault in jails and
resident-on-resident
sexual ...
5. Juvenile Delinquency - Page 385 - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=074254706X
Donald
J. Shoemaker - 2009 - Education
National data suggest that the per-resident annual
costs of institutions are very high. ... numerous accounts of violence
and assaults on residents by other inmates ...
of abuse and neglect
within institutions as well as in other parts of the juvenile ...
6. Child-on-child sex abuse poses challenges – USATODAY.com
www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-01-07/child-sex-abuse/.../1
Jan 7, 2012 - Some states
have balked at complying with the juvenile registration ... "By 14, he was so sophisticated that he
could sexually assault a child sitting ... recently assessed 37 youths in a residential sex-offender unit and
found that ...
Dealing with child-on-child sex abuse not one size fits all
Updated 1/7/2012 1:51 PM
NEW YORK (AP) – Recent high-profile cases of child sex
abuse have roused national revulsion against the adults who perpetrated them.
Rarely mentioned is the sobering statistic that more than one-third of the sexual abuse of America's children is committed by
other minors.
For many of the therapists and attorneys who deal with them, these juvenile offenders pose a profoundly complicated challenge
for the child-protection and criminal justice systems. It's a diverse group that defies stereotypes, encompassing a
minority of youths who represent a threat of long-term danger to others and a
majority who are responsive to treatment and unlikely to reoffend.
"There's a long continuum, from kids who will never
do it again to a kid who probably will be an adult rapist/pedophile," said
Steve Bengis, executive director of the New England Adolescent Research Institute in Holyoke, Mass. "It's not a 'one
size fits all' yet we end out with public policy that's geared toward the worst
5%."
That public policy includes a federal law, the Adam Walsh Act, with a
requirement that states include certain juvenile offenders as young as 14 on
their sex-offender registries. Many professionals who deal with young offenders object to the requirement, saying it can
wreak lifelong harm on adolescents who might otherwise get back on the track
toward law-abiding, productive lives.
Some states have balked at complying with the juvenile registration requirement, even at the price of losing some
federal criminal-justice funding. Other states have provisions tougher than the
federal act, subjecting children younger than 14 to the possibility of 25-year
or lifetime listings on publicly accessible registries that include photos of
the offenders.
Delaware recently had a 9-year-old child on its registry.
Several other states have registered 12- and 13-year-olds.
"We're bringing down a very heavy hammer on the head
of kids, with significant life-altering consequences," said Marsha Levick,
deputy director and chief counsel of the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia.
"It's a knee-jerk reaction that's foolhardy beyond imagination."
Nicole Pittman, a Human Rights Watch
researcher, has been analyzing the impact of registration on the children who get listed, and says states
should halt the practice. But she knows it's a longshot quest.
"Most legislators do not believe children should be
on the registry — yet it's the kiss of death for most politicians to vote
against any sex offender law," she said.
Basic data about child-on-child sex abuse is detailed in
an authoritative, Justice Department-sponsored analysis of crime data from 29
states. Conducted by three prominent researchers, the 2009 analysis found that
juveniles accounted for 35.6% of the people identified by police as having
committed sex offenses against minors.
Of these young offenders, 93% were male, and the peak ages
for offending were 12 through 14, the researchers found. Of the victims, 59%
were younger than 12 and 75% were female.
The report referred to a popular misconception that
juvenile sex offenders are likely to reoffend, and said numerous
studies over the years have shown the opposite — that 85 to 95% of offending
youth are never again arrested for sex crimes.
University of Oklahoma
pediatrics professor Mark Chaffin, a co-author of the 2009 report, says efforts
to deal constructively with juvenile sex offenders are complicated by the tendency of some
legislators and others to lump them together with adult sexual predators.
"That used to be the message — that we should apply the template from what we know about adult
pedophilia," Chaffin said. "Now that the data has shown most of those
assumptions were wrong, it's difficult to undo those messages that people in
the advocacy and treatment fields were putting out a generation ago."
Experts say the young offenders differ from adult sex offenders not only in their lower recidivism rates, but
in the diversity of their motives and abusive behavior.
While some youths commit violent, premeditated acts of
sexual assault and rape, others get in trouble for behavior arising from
curiosity, naivete, peer pressure, momentary irresponsibility, misinterpretation
of what they believed was mutual interest, and a host of other reasons. Some cases involve sibling incest; sometimes the
offenders have autism or other developmental disorders that lessen their
ability to self-police inappropriate conduct.
"There needs to be a highly discriminative response
system," said sociologist David Finkelhor, director
of the University of New Hampshire's Crimes Against Children Research Center.
"It needs to differentiate between the kids we should stigmatize as little
as possible, who are probably going to be fine with some kind of education, and
others who need a lot of intervention, including maybe incarceration, because
they pose a tremendous risk."
"We run a big risk if we get it wrong," he
added. "We fail to protect the public on one hand, or we ruin the lives of
young people who might otherwise be headed in a healthy direction."
In most cases of child-on-child sex abuse, the public
never hears about it. Experts say many incidents are never reported in the
first place, due to the shame or embarrassment of victims and their parents,
and most of the cases that are reported are handled confidentially through the
juvenile justice system.
Robert Edelman, who has worked with many abused children
as a mental health counselor in Gainesville, Fla., is well aware of the ripple
effects of abuse. In one case, a man now in his 20s was molested at age 8 by an
older boy. Later — at 15 — the boy was charged with molesting his half-sister.
During a counseling session after that arrest, Edelman
noticed slashes on the youth's arm — he'd tried to kill himself out of remorse
for abusing the sister.
In his early 20s, the man was arrested for a domestic
violence incident involving his wife, Edelman said, and at one stage faced the
possibility of having his children removed from the home because he'd been
labeled a juvenile sex offender.
"Something that happened to him when he was 8 was
still being carried around 15 years later," Edelman said.
Veronique Valliere, a psychologist with a counseling
practice in Fogelsville, Pa., has worked with numerous youths implicated in sex
offenses, ranging from those she deemed highly unlikely to reoffend to others
who posed a clear long-term menace. One such case, she said, involved a youth
who began molesting younger children when he was 12 or 13 and was showing signs
of developing pedophilia.
"By 14, he was so sophisticated that he could
sexually assault a child sitting next to him in church — or in the backseat of
a car," Valliere said.
Despite extensive attempts to treat the young man, the
abuse continued, and Valliere said he is now serving a 30-to-60-year prison
sentence for child sex abuse he committed as a 22-year-old.
"He was a rare case," she said. "He had
every opportunity to get better. We did everything we could do, but he just
wasn't willing to manage himself."
Looking nationwide, experts differ as to whether sex abuse
by juveniles is proliferating or abating.
The latest juvenile crime data from the Bureau of Justice
Statistics indicates that arrests of juvenile sex offenders declined by
about 25% from 2000 through 2009. That would mesh with a decline in child sex
abuse committed by adults, as well as a decline in the overall juvenile crime
rate.
But data from New York City, Florida and
elsewhere indicates that the prevalence of child-on-child sex hasn't dropped
noticeably.
In any case, forms of abuse evolve with the times as
sexting becomes a common youth activity and easily accessible online
pornography affects some children.
"There's a fear of technology — parents don't think
they can control it," said Marsha Levick, who has been working with
colleagues to dissuade prosecutors from criminalizing commonplace teen sexting
activities.
For parents, it's often hard to discern warning signs
about potentially dangerous sexual activity or to identify youths who might
pose a threat to their own children.
"It would be less scary if we could come up with a
stereotype … so as a parent we could say, 'Stay away from this type of
child,'" said Nancy Arnow of Safe Horizon, a New York-based victim
services agency. "There is no typical youthful offender. They come from all
backgrounds."
Safe Horizon serves adult victims of rape and sex
trafficking, but Arnow said the child-on-child sex abuse cases are among the
most difficult.
"We have to distinguish between sexualized behavior
that might be pretty normal — experimenting, touching each other — versus
molesting, subjecting another child to harm," she said. She recalled
investigations of children as young as 7, and the arrest of an 8-year-old.
In New York City, sex offenders aged 7 through 15 usually
end up in family court, where the main goal is rehabilitation, not punishment.
"We're supposed to consider needs of juveniles and
the need for public safety, so it's balancing act," said Thea Davis, chief
of the family court's Sex Crimes Prosecution Unit. Cases often end with plea
bargaining and probation. The most severe outcome is an 18-month placement in a
secure state-run facility for juvenile offenders.
The hardest cases, Davis said, are intra-family cases
where a cousin or brother abuses a younger cousin or sibling.
"Immediately you have to separate the perpetrator
from the victim and make sure the victim is safe," she said. "But you
also have to think that in the long run you're dealing with a family, and
you're not going to keep them separated forever."
Virginia White, a family counselor with Pittsburgh Action
Against Rape, deals with young victims of sex abuse, including those targeted
by siblings.
"The parents are in a tough place — they feel guilty
a lot," she said. "And the victim is often torn, because the other
sibling may be removed from home."
Ideally, parents as well as the offending child should be
involved in treatment, according to Jay Deppeler, president of an agency called
Edison Court in Doylestown, Pa., that runs a residential treatment program for
adolescent male sex offenders.
However, Deppeler said stigma and fear of consequences
probably deter some families from telling authorities about cases of
intra-family abuse.
"The family may circle the wagons, and the abuse may
persist," he said.
Another challenging type of abuse cases involves youths
who are autistic.
Lawrence Sutton, a psychologist from Pittsburgh, recently
assessed 37 youths in a residential sex-offender unit and found that 60% were
autistic. He said these youths, many of them past victims of sexual abuse, can
be treated successfully if the reasons for their behavior problems are
understood.
Many don't know who to form relationships, "how to
make friends," Sutton said. "Most of them have done to others what
was done to them at some point."
Deppeler recalled one autistic young man who came through
Edison Court as an outpatient. He had committed a sex offense as a 14-year-old
and later — after turning 18 — committed a property-related offense that sent
him to the adult criminal justice system. As a result, the young man became
obligated to apprise prospective employers of his full record, including the
juvenile sex offense — making him "virtually unemployable."
"Long term, I fear his prospects are quite
bleak," Deppeler said. "What do we end up doing with a guy like
that?"
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights
reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.
7. DOJ Report Finds Sexual Abuse At Juvenile Detention Facilities Is ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../disturbing-doj-report-fin_n_3397309.html
Jun 6, 2013 - The report
indicates that about 3.5 percent of inmates reported sexual ... percent), Corsicana Residential
Treatment Center in Texas (10.5 percent), .... any abuse, but we had
kids transferred from Juvie who'd been assaulted ...
www.topjuveniledefender.com/juvenile_rights.html
At the
time Arizona law did not permit any appeals in a juvenile case. ....
of age at the Department of Juvenile Justice (formerly the California
Youth Authority.) ..... or they have physically restrained
you by handcufs or pointing a weapon at you, ...
www.projectcensored.org/18-cruelty-and-death-in-juvenile-detention-ce...
The worst physical
confrontations have ended in death. At least five juveniles died after
being forcibly placed in restraints in facilities run by state ...
successful landmark litigation against the California Youth Authority
(CYA) in April 2006.
ellabakercenter.org/.../Ella-Baker-Center-Testimony-for-Congress-solitar...
Jun 19,
2012 - the Ella Baker Center has pursued juvenile justice reforms in
California ... Then known as the California Youth Authority, DJJ .....
Because she was on suicide watch, staff put her in a strait jacket that restrained
her physical.
www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=9466
27 posts -
2 authors
Juvenile Institution. Case Summary. A taxpayer whose juvenile
nephew was a ward of the court filed a lawsuit on January 16, 2003, ....
Restraints : physical.
cdm16254.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p178601ccp2/id/29
Formal
systems of classification are less common in juvenile corrections. .....
of 2003, HGS used chemicals restraints a total of 535 times, physical
restraints were ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/.../Stanford%20Mental%20Health%20Report%20Jan0...
Dec 31,
2001 - B.4 Suggested improvement of mental health services in the CYA:
Integrating .... evaluation of the California Youth Authority's
mental health system. ... Psychiatry Department of the Stanford
University School of Medicine.
www.cdcr.ca.gov/Juvenile_Justice/
... sex offender behavior, and substance abuse and mental
health problems, and medical care, while maintaining a safe and
secure environment conducive to ...
[PDF]
www.prisonlaw.com/pdfs/CYA1.pdf
by EW
Trupin - 2003 - Cited
by 1 - Related
articles
In
addition, we interviewed key administrative, medical, mental health,
... on a review of documents provided by the California Youth
Authority (CYA), including.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Division_of_Juvenile_Justice
"The California
Youth Authority will contribute to the protection of society from the ....
offense criteria, medical or mental health needs or length of
confinement".
www.americanbar.org
› ... › Spring
2003 - Body Rights and Body Ethics
In the
best of circumstances, youthful offenders with mental health issues face
... States, and specifically in the cases handled by the California
Youth Authority (CYA). ... context on issues related to provision of
medical and mental health care.
www.topjuveniledefender.com/california_youth_authority.html
The California
Youth Authority southern reception center in Norwalk ..... Questions
on immunization, medical, mental health, substance abuse patient
Records -
[PDF]
www.ylc.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/wilberpetitionwrit.pdf
capacity,
Petitioner Morris has become aware of the medical and mental health
problems of youth incarcerated in the California Youth Authority. 7.
Respondent ...
www.ylc.org
› Our Work › Archive › Past Litigation
... challenging the failure of the California Youth
Authority (now the Division of Juvenile Justice) to license its inpatient medical
and mental health services as ...
cdm16254.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p178601ccp2/id/69
The
assessment of the mental health system of the California Youth
Authority ..... mental health treatment programs best on
evidence based medical practice.
www.topjuveniledefender.com/california_youth_authority.html
The California
Youth Authority southern reception center ... months for enhanced
robbery, felony assault 63.6 months, 59.5 months for forcible rape. ...
to DJJ thanks to the efforts of San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi and
his staff. .... 58% are in need of substance abuse
treatment services, 22% are in need of sexual ...
www.nospank.net/cya.htm
Jan 9,
2000 - HARDER TIME: California Youth Authority Shifts from Rehab to
Brutality ... left to sit in urine-soaked clothing, wards and former staff
members said. ... Officials at the prison deny they use the gym sessions
to punish or abuse prisoners. .... murder and assault,
compared with the 47 percent who were violent ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqlhZdab1cg
Jun
10, 2007 - Uploaded by rosaryfilms
Violence,
Abuse & Neglect in the California Youth Authority ...
of violence, sexual assault, guard abuse ...
articles.latimes.com
› Collections
October
10, 1986 | PHILIP HAGER, Times Staff Writer ... In echoing
earlier criticism of the California Youth Authority, the audit ...
allegations of abuse against wards, announced her resignation Wednesday.
.... California Youth Authority officials revealed Thursday that
they were pushing prosecutors to file criminal assault ...
www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=9466
27 posts -
2 authors
Assault/abuse by staff. Confinement/ ... Sex w/ staff;
sexual harassment by staff ... Review of Health Care Services in California
Youth Authority (CYA) 08/23/2003.
[PDF]
www.sagepub.com/upm-data/2791_Juvenile_Justice_samples.pdf
The California
Youth Authority (CYA), the largest youth correctional system ...
substance abuse treatment, specialized counseling, and intensive mental
health .... CYA research staff such as Carl Jesness and Ted
Palmer, nevertheless, .... gruesome details and harsh realities of life
behind bars including the assaults, murders ...
www2.witness.org/index.php?option=com_rightsalert...178...
Violence, Abuse
and Neglect in the California Youth Authority, Print E-mail ...
levels of violence, sexual assault, guard abuse, and medical,
educational, and mental health care neglect. ... "They tried to
drown me and the staff just looked on.
[PDF]
www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/ngos/usa/USHRN19.pdf
experience
rape, sexual assault and abuse by both correctional officers and
other inmates and often receive punitive ... particularly as punishment
for reporting cases of assault or abuse by correctional staff.
.... The California Youth Authority.
www.scanthenews.org/violence-abuse-neglect-in-the-california-youth-au...
Jun 17,
2012 - Violence, Abuse & Neglect in the California Youth
Authority ... sexual assault, guard abuse, and
medical, educational, and mental health care neglect. ... was a free for
all, staff did what they wanted. lied and denied everything.
.
www.topjuveniledefender.com/california_youth_authority.html
Many violent gang members, sexual
offenders, and other violent and repeat offenders ... rape 53.8
months,felony assault 51.7 months, other sex offenses 46.3
months. ... to the efforts of San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi
and his staff. ... In 1996, one inmate murdered a prison
guard at the California Youth Authority.
·
[PDF]
nicic.gov/library/prea/Investigating%20Allegations.pdf
by SW McCampbell - 2000 - Cited
by 3 - Related
articles
Summary. Section III – Institutional
Culture and Staff/Inmate Dynamics .... abuse, sexual
harassment, sexual contact, conduct of a sexual nature or ....
administrators of a California Youth Authority school for their ...
sex with juveniles under their charge. Two ...... per 100,000 residents
has risen from 292 to 476. Louisiana has ...
·
[PDF]
·
[PDF]
www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/injviosaf/.../SVinventory-EPIC.pdf
state government and conducted 34
interviews with staff in those ... Criminal Justice Planning
(OCJP); California Youth Authority; and Victim Compensation ...
inventory to include all possible victims of SV, regardless of age, sex,
or relationship ... Under ICD-10, the code Y05 indicates a sexual
assault using bodily force,.
More results for sex
w staff sexual harassment by staff sexual
abuse by residents inmates california youth
authority
·
[PDF]
www.law.berkeley.edu/img/Gender_Responsiveness_and_Equity.pdf
likely to fight with same sex
friends or acquaintances than any other type of victim, girls' ... sexual
exploitation and abuse by family members and boyfriends, as well as ...
A study of girls in the California Youth Authority (now the Division of
Juvenile ... Detention and residential facilities, as well as the
staff that work in them, are ...
More results for
  |
|
By Paul Demuro, Anne Demuro, and Steve Lerner / $5.95
The CYA Report, Part II: Bodily Harm-The Pattern Of Fear And Violence At The California Youth Authority
By Paul Demuro, Anne Demuro, and Steve Lerner / $4.95
The CYA Report, Part III: Reforming The California Youth Authority—How To End Crowding, Diversify Treatment And Protect The Public Without Spending More Money
By Paul Demuro, Anne Demuro, and Steve Lerner / $5.95
The Good News About Juvenile Justice: The Movement Away From Large Institutions and Toward Community-Based Services
$5.95
About 310,000 results (0.43 seconds)
Search Results
1. CDCR DRP - Office of Offender Services, In-Prison Programs Unit
www.cdcr.ca.gov/rehabilitation/ofs/in-prison-programs.html
The Office of Offender Services (OS),
In-Prison Programs Unit provides comprehensive ... and works closely with
Community and Reentry Services to ensure a continuum
of care. ... are vital components of California's ongoing
efforts to assist offenders in their successful ... In-Custody Sex Offender
Treatment Pilot Program.
2. Mental Health Services Continuum Program - California Department ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/.../Mental-Health-Services-Continuum-Program.html
All registered sex offenders are
also required to attend POC upon release from ... Program is a
comprehensive model which provides varied levels of care, ...
[PDF]
Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Remedial Plan - California ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/Juvenile_Justice/docs/SexOffenderPlan.pdf
Adequacy of DJJ Sex Offender Programs (including number of treatment beds). 2. .... The Sexual
Behavior Treatment Program uses a continuum of care.
4. California Division of Juvenile Justice - Wikipedia, the free ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Division_of_Juvenile_Justice
... that provide a continuum of care
and assist with the reintegration of youthful offenders into society." ...
Wards committed for sexual offenses were allowed to challenge sex offender
treatment programs in which they were placed. ... to direct the CYA to obtain
licenses for all eleven of its health care facilities within two years.
[PDF]
Aftercare as Afterthought: Reentry and the California Youth Authority.
www.ncmhjj.com/resource_kit/pdfs/Re-entry/.../AfterAsAfter.pdf
by D Macallair - 2002 - Related
articles
Aug 9, 2002 - at
[theformalized Continuum of Care Sex
Offender Program]. The CYA operates two formal sex offender programs, one in Northern California ...
6. Juvenile Justice Commission - Introduction to the JJC
www.nj.gov/oag/jjc/info_intro.htm
Juvenile Gang Intervention and Prevention Program | Special
Needs Services ... The Juvenile Justice Commission provides a continuum of care
for juveniles ... to allow private providers to designate a total of 12
beds for juvenile sex offenders.
7. Sex Offender Treatment Service - National Youth Advocate Program
www.nyap.org/sex-offender-treatment-service/4576110432
Sex Offender Treatment Services (PASS) ... treatment strategies for youth
living at home or in a therapeutic foster care setting. ... NYAP's Continuum of Care.
>.
References
- Barth RP. Residential care: From here to eternity. International Journal of Social Welfare. 2005;14:158–162.
- Barth RP, Greeson JKP, Guo S, Green RL, Hurley S. Outcomes for youth receiving intensive in-home therapy or residential care: A comparison using propensity scores. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 2007;77(4):497–505. [PubMed]
- Bean P, White L, Lake P. Is residential care an effective approach for treating adolescents with co-occurring substance abuse and mental health diagnoses? Best Practices in Mental Health. 2005;1(2):50–60.
- Bedlington MM, Braukmann CJ, Ramp KA, Wolf MM. A comparison of treatment environments in community-based group homes for adolescent offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 1988;15(30):349–363.
- Bettmann JE, Jasperson RA. Adolescents in residential and inpatient treatment: A review of the outcome literature. Child and Youth Care Forum. 2009;38(4):161–183.
- Blasé KA, Fixsen DL, Freeborn K, Jaeger D. The behavioral model. In: Lyman RD, Prentice-Dunn S, Stewart G, editors. Residential and inpatient treatment of children and adolescents. New York, NY: Plenum Press; 1989. pp. 43–59.
- Bloom SL. Creating sanctuary for kids: helping children to heal from violence. Therapeutic Community: The International Journal for Therapeutic and Supportive Organizations. 2005;26(1):57–63.
- Bloom SL. Creating sanctuary: Toward the evolution of sane societies. New York: Routledge; 1997.
- Breland-Noble AM, Elbogen EB, Farmer EMZ, Dubs MS, Wagner HR, Burns BJ. Use of psychotropic medications by youths in therapeutic foster care and group homes. Psychiatric Services. 2004;55(6):706–708. [PubMed]
- Breland-Noble AM, Farmer EMZ, Dubs MS, Potter E, Burns BJ. Mental health and other service use by youth in therapeutic foster care and group homes. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2005;14(2):167–180.
- Brendtro L, Shahbazian M. Troubled children and youth: turning problems into opportunities. Champaign, IL: Research Press; 2004.
- Burns BJ, Hoagwood K, Mrazek PJ. Effective treatment for mental disorders in children and adolescents. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review. 1999;2(4):199–254. [PubMed]
- Burns BJ, Phillips SD, Wagner HR, Barth RP, Kolko DJ, Campbell Y, Landsverk J. Mental health need and access to mental health services by youths involved with child welfare: A national survey. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2004;43(8):960–970. [PubMed]
- Butler LS, McPherson PM. Is residential treatment misunderstood? Journal of Child Family Studies. 2007;16:465–472.
- The California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare Practice. n.d www.cebc4cw.org/
- Cantrell R, Cantrell M, editors. Helping troubled children and youth: Continuing evidence for the Re-ED approach. Memphis, TN: American Re-Education Association; 2007.
- Chamberlain . Treatment foster care. In: Burns BJ, Hoagwood K, editors. Community treatment for youth: evidence based interventions for severe emotional and behavioral disorders. New York: Oxford University Press; 2002. pp. 117–138.
- Chamberlain P, Reid JB. Comparison of two community alternatives to incarceration for chronic juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1998;66(4):624–633. [PubMed]
- Chamberlain P, Ray J, Moore KJ. Characteristics of residential care for Adolescent offenders: A comparison of assumption and practices in two models. Journal of Child & Family Studies. 1996;5(3):285–297.
- Curtis PA, Alexander G, Lunghofer LA. A literature review comparing the outcomes of residential group care and therapeutic foster care. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal. 2001;18(5):377–392.
- Daly DL, Dowd TP. Characteristics of effective, harm-free environments for children in out-of-home care. Child Welfare. 1992;71(6):487–496. [PubMed]
- Davis GL, Hoffman RG, Quigley R. Self-concept change and Positive Peer Culture in adjudicated delinquents. Child and Youth Care Quarterly. 1988;17(3):137–143.
- Dishion TJ, McCord J, Poulin F. When interventions harm: peer groups and problem behavior. American Psychologist. 1999;54:755–764. [PubMed]
- Dowden C, Andrews DA. Effective correctional treatment and violent reoffending: A meta-analysis. Journal of Criminology. 2000;42(4):449–468.
- Duffy K, McCorkle D, Ryan R. Unpublished manual. 2002. Sanctuary psychoeducation group: Leader’s manual.
- Farragher B, Yanosy S. Creating a trauma-sensitive culture in residential treatment. Therapeutic Communities: The International Journal for Therapeutic and Supportive Organizations. 2005;26(1):97–113.
- Fields E, Farmer EMZ, Apperson J, Mustillo S, Simmers D. Treatment and posttreatment effects of a residential treatment using a Re-education model. Behavioral Disorders. 2006;31(3):312–322.
- Fixsen DL, Blasé KA. Publications regarding the Teaching-Family Model. Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, University of South Florida; 2002. [On-line]. Available: http://www.teaching-family.org/bibliography.html.
- Garland A, Hough RL, Landsverk JA, Brown S. Multi-sector of systems of care for youth with mental health needs. Children's Services: Social Policy, Research, & Practice. 2001;4(3):123–140.
- Gibbs JC, Potter GB, Barriga AQ, Liau AK. Developing the helping skills and prosocial motivation of aggressive adolescents in peer group programs. Aggression and Violent Behaviour. 1996;1:283–305.
- Gustavsson N, MacEachron AE. Research on foster children. A role for social work. Social Work. 2007;52(1):85–87. [PubMed]
- Hair HJ. Outcomes for children and adolescents after residential treatment: A review of research from 1993 to 2003. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2005;14(4):551– 575.
- Hoagwood K, Cunningham M. Outcomes of children with emotional disturbance in residential treatment for educational purposes. Journal of Child & Family Studies. 1993;1:129–140.
- Hobbs N. Helping disturbed children: Psychological and ecological strategies. American Psychologist. 1966;21:1105–1115. [PubMed]
- Hooper SR, Murphy J, Devaney A, Hultman T. Ecological outcomes of adolescents in a psychoeducational residential treatment facility. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 2000;70(4):491–500. [PubMed]
- James S, Roesch S, Zhang J. Characteristics and behavioral outcomes for youth in group care and family-based care – a propensity score matching approach using national data under review.
- James S, Leslie LK, Hurlbert MS, Slymen DJ, Landsverk J, Davis I, Mathiesen SG, Zhang J. Children in out-of-home care: Entry into intensive or restrictive mental health and residential care placements. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 2006;14(4):196–208.
- Jones RJ, Timbers GD. Minimizing the need for physical restraint and seclusion in residential youth care through skill-based treatment programming. Families in Society. 2003;84(1):21–29.
- Kapp SA. Positive Peer Culture: The viewpoint of former clients. Journal of Child and Adolescent Group Therapy. 2000;10:175–189.
- Kirigin KA. Teaching-Family Model of group home treatment of children with severe behavior problems. In: Roberts MC, editor. Model programs in child and family mental health. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1996. pp. 231–247.
- Kirigin KA, Braukmann CJ, Atwater JD, Wolf MM. An evaluation of Teaching- Family (Achievement Place) group homes for juvenile offenders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 1982;15:1–16. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- Landsman MJ, Groza V, Tyler M, Malone K. Outcomes of family-centered residential treatment. Child Welfare. 2001;80:351–379. [PubMed]
- Larzelere RE, Dinges K, Schmidt MD, Spellman DF, Criste TR, Connell P. Outcomes of residential treatment: A study of the adolescent clients of girls and boys town. Child and Youth Care Forum. 2001;30(3):175–185.
- Larzelere RE, Daly EL, Davis JL, Chmelka MB, Handwerk ML. Outcome evaluation of Girls and Boys Town s Family Home Program. Education and Treatment of Children. 2004;27(2):130–149.
- Laursen EK. Rather than fixing kids – build positive peer cultures. Reclaiming Children and Youth. 2005;4(3):137–142.
- Lee BR. Defining residential treatment. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2008;17(5):689–692.
- Lee BR, Thompson R. Comparing outcomes for youth in treatment foster care and family-style group care. Children and Youth Services Review. 2008;30(7):746–757. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- Lee BR, McMillen JC. Measuring quality in residential treatment for children and Youth. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth. 2007;24(1/2):1–17.
- Leeman LW, Gibbs JC, Fuller D. Evaluation of a multi-component group treatment program for juvenile delinquents. Aggressive Behavior. 1993;19:281–292.
- Leichtman M. Residential treatment of children and adolescents: Past, present, and future. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 2006;76(3):285–294. [PubMed]
- Leichtman M, Leichtman ML, Barber CC, Neese DT. Effectiveness of intensive short-term residential treatment with severely disturbed adolescents. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 2001;71:227–235. [PubMed]
- Lewis RE. The effectiveness of Families First services: An experimental study. Children and Youth Services Review. 2005;27:499–509.
- Lyons JS, Schaefer K. Mental health and dangerousness: Characteristics and outcomes of children and adolescents in residential placements. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2000;9(1):67–73.
- Lyons JS, Terry P, Martinovich Z, Peterson J, Bouska B. Outcome trajectories Adolescents in residential treatment: A statewide evaluation. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2001;10(3):333–345.
- Mann-Feder VR. Adolescents in therapeutic communities. Adolescence. 1996;31(121):17–29. [PubMed]
- McCurdy BL, McIntyre EK. And what about residential …? Re-conceptualizing residential treatment as a stop-gap service for youth with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Interventions. 2004;19:137–158.
- McMillen JC, Scott LD, Zima BT, Ollie MT, Munson MR, Spitznagel E. Use of mental health services among older youths in foster care. Psychiatric Services. 2004;55(7):811–817. [PubMed]
- McMillen JC, Zima BT, Scott LD, Auslander WF, Munson MR, Ollie MT, Spitznagel E. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among older youths in the foster care system. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2005;44:88–95. [PubMed]
- Moody EE, Lupton-Smith HS. Interventions with juvenile offenders: Strategies to prevent acting out behavior. Journal of Addictions & Offender Counseling. 1999;20(1):2–15.
- Nas CN, Brugman D, Koops W. Effects of the EQUIP programme on the moral judgement, cognitive distortions, and social skills of juvenile delinquents. Psychology, Crime and Law. 2005;11(4):421–434.
- NREPP. SAMSHA’s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices. 2010 http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/
- Overcamp-Martini MA, Nutton J. CAPTA and the residential placement: A survey of state policy and practice. Child and Youth Care Forum. 2009;38(2):55–68.
- Peterson M, Scanlan M. Diagnosis and placement variables affecting the outcome of adolescents with behavioral disorders. Residential Treatment for Children and Youth. 2002;20:15–23.
- Phillips EL, Phillips EA, Fixsen DL, Wolf MM. The Teaching-Family handbook. 2. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas; 1974.
- Quigley R. The colorful evolution of a strength-based treatment model. Reclaiming Children & Youth. 2003;12(1):28–32.
- Rivard JC. Initial findings of an evaluation of a trauma recovery framework in residential treatment. Residential Group Quarterly. 2004;5(1):3–5.
- Rivard JC, Bloom SL, McCorkle D, Abramovitz R. Preliminary results of a study examining the implementation and effects of a trauma recovery framework for youths in residential treatment. Therapeutic Community. 2005;26(1):83–96.
- Ryan JP. Dependent youth in juvenile justice: Do Positive Peer Culture programs work for victims of child maltreatment? Research on Social Work Practice. 2006;16(5):511–519.
- Sherer M. Effects of group intervention on moral development of distressed youth in Israel. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 1985;14(6):513–526.
- Slot NW, Jagers HD, Dangel RF. Cross-cultural replication and evaluation of the Teaching Family Model of community-based residential treatment. Behavioral Residential Treatment. 1992;7(5):341–354.
- Thompson RW, Smith GL, Osgood DW, Dowd TP, Friman PC, Daly DL. Residential care: A study of short- and long-term educational effects. Children and Youth Services Review. 1996;18(3):221–242.
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [USDHHS], Administration for Children, Youth and Families. The AFCARS report. Washington DC: Author; 2008. www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb.
- Valore T, Cantrell R, Cantrell ML. Competency building in the context of groups. Reclaiming Children and Youth. 2006;14(4):228–235.
- Vorrath H, Brendtro L. Positive Peer Culture. 2. New York: Aldine; 1985.
- Walker B, Fecser F. Elements of an effective Re-Education program for the 21 century. Reclaiming Children and Youth. 2002;11(2):110–115.
- Wasmund WC, Tate TF. Partners in empowerment: a peer group primer. Albion, MI: Starr Commonwealth; 1996.
- Weinstein L. Project Re-Ed for schools for emotionally disturbed children: Effectiveness as viewed by referring agencies, parents and teachers. Exceptional Children. 1969;35(9):703–711. [PubMed]
- Weis R, Whitemarsh SM, Wilson N. Military style residential treatment for disruptive adolescents: Effective for some girls, all girls, when, and why? Psychological Services. 2005;2(2):105–122.
- Whittaker JK. The re-invention of residential treatment: An agenda for research and practice. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America. 2004;13(2):267–278. [PubMed]
- Wilmshurst LA. Treatment programs for youth with emotional and behavioral disorders: An outcome study of two alternate approaches. Mental Health Services Research. 2002;4(2):85–96. [PubMed]
- Wolf MM, Kirigin KA, Fixsen DL, Blasé KA, Braukmann CJ. The Teaching- Family Model: A case study in data-based program development and refinement (and dragon wrestling) Journal of Organizational Behavior Management. 1995;15:11–68.
- Wulczyn F, Kogan J, Harden BJ. Placement stability and movement trajectories. Social Science Review. 2003;77(2):212–236.
- Zakriski AL, Wright JC, Parad HW. Intensive short-term residential treatment: A contextual evaluation of the “stop-gap” model. The Brown University Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter. 2006;22(6):1–6.
spsf.senate.ca.gov/jointinformationalhearingonthecaliforniayouthauthorit...
May 16, 2000 - California needs a
youthful offender corrections program. ..... a 1,200-bed youth
training school, the O.H. Close School, the Karl Holton School, ...
·
www.prisontalk.com › ... › FOR FAMILY &
FRIENDS › Juvenile
Jul 22, 2005 - ... law school
graduation, the state Bar exam (finished yesterday! ... I wonder why you
went to California youth authority, and what happened ... I am
currently writing a book to expose the lack of efforts and proper programs
to help those ... Hi? i wanted to kno some information about O.h.
close because my bf ...
·
[PDF]
www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/410529_cayouthcorrections.pdf
by D Steinhart - 2002 - Cited
by 1 - Related
articles
ducted by the Program on
Youth Justice within the Urban. Institute's ..... 98. Sources: California
Youth Authority (2001b) and California Board of Corrections (2001b).
..... school-based programs, and new juvenile hall .....
O.H. Close Youth.
·
[PDF]
www.law.berkeley.edu/.../Long_and_Winding_Road_Publication-final.p...
by B Krisberg - Cited
by 1 - Related
articles
1960's and early 1970's the California
Youth Authority (CYA), now known at the .... several remaining DJJ
facilities such as OH Close, the Chadjerian facility and the ...
Youth Corrections Facility and the Camp program for females at
Ventura. .... were not attending the regular school at Ventura do
to staff and youth concerns ...
www.oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf1j49n4h9/entire_text/
California State Archives; 1020
"O" Street; Sacramento, California 95814; Phone: (916)
653-2246; Fax: (916) 653-7363 ... Creator: >California Youth
Authority ... The State Reform School at Marysville,
established in 1860 ( Stats. ... 690) in an attempt to emphasize
prevention as well as correction in the Authority's program.
cdcrtoday.blogspot.com/2010/10/cdcr-to-close-preston-youth.html
Oct 21, 2010 - ... the O.H.
Close and N.A. Chaderjian youth correctional facilities in ...
Prior to the construction of those two schools, juvenile offenders had
been housed in adult prisons. ... previously known as the California
Youth Authority, accepted youth for ... Since 2006, the DJJ has been
reforming its programs to meet ...
Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program Remedial Plan
April 2010
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A.
Background
B.
Plan Organization
1.
Adequacy of DJJ Sex Offender Programs
2. Organization and Staffing
3. Training
4. Appropriateness of Policies and Procedures
5. Sex Offender Assessment
C. Relationship to Previously Filed Plans
D. Resources Needed for Plan Implementation
II. Program Statement
A. The Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Description
B. Mission
Statement
C. Vision Statement
III. Organizational
Structure
A. Central Office Organization
B. Facility Organization
C. Treatment Team Organization
IV. Staff Training
A. Qualifications and License
B. Training
V. Program Adequacy
A.
Assessment
B.
Types of Units, Programs, and Interventions
C.
Exit Criteria
D. Suspension/Refusal
Criteria
E. Case Planning
F. SBTP Program Components
G. Re-entry
VI. Quality Management
I. Introduction
A. Background
On
November 19, 2004, a Consent Decree was entered into in the case of Farrell
v. Allen by the plaintiff, Margaret Farrell, a taxpayer in the State of
California, and the defendant Walter Allen III, director of the California
Youth Authority, now the Division of Juvenile Justice (“DJJ”) of the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). The Consent Decree
required the defendant to file remedial plans that addressed all areas of
deficiency identified by experts for the court by January 31, 2005. In January
2005, based on a new direction to reform California’s juvenile system to
evidence based rehabilitative model, the parties stipulated to extend the dates
for the filing of remedial plans.
Pursuant to the agreed upon time extension, DJJ filed its proposed
Sexual Behavior Treatment Program (SBTP) Remedial Plan on May 16, 2005.
By agreement of the parties and the court-appointed sexual
behavior treatment expert, Dr. Barbara Schwartz, this revised Plan is being
filed.
B. Plan Organization
This modified Remedial Plan is organized to address the
deficiencies identified by the sex offender treatment report in the following
areas and is guided by Dr. Schwartz’s recommendations:
1.
Adequacy of DJJ
Sex Offender Programs (including number of treatment beds)
2.
Organization and
Staffing
3.
Training
4.
Appropriateness
of Policies and Procedures
5.
Sex Offender
Assessment
Each section of this plan addresses one of these major elements.
In all cases, each section begins with a brief description of the issue. This
is followed by a discussion section wherein details concerning deficiencies and
required changes are presented. Each section concludes with an Action Plan and
plan for monitoring for compliance, including standards and criteria and
identification of actions necessary to achieve compliance.
Page 1
C. Relationship to Previously Filed Plans
DJJ will
work with the Farrell Court Experts in the areas of safety and welfare,
mental health, education, health care and wards with disabilities in order to
reconcile the previously filed plans in those areas with this revised Sexual
Behavior Treatment Program Remedial Plan. In the interim, as inconsistencies
between these plans are identified, DJJ will notify the Office of the Special
Master (OSM), Plaintiff’s counsel, and the appropriate court experts to convene
a discussion to resolve the discrepancy. If discrepancies are not resolved by
agreement, either party may invoke the dispute resolution procedure under
paragraphs 48 and 49 of the Consent Decree.
DJJ will
inform Plaintiff’s counsel, the SBTP court expert and the OSM of any planned
changes to the SBTP Program Guide. Plaintiff’s counsel, the OSM, and the SBTP
court expert can request a meeting to discuss the changes proposed before any
modifications are made to the SBTP Program Guide.
D.
Resources Needed for Plan Implementation
Reference
throughout this plan to numbers and classification of staff reflect DJJ’s and
the experts’ judgment at the time the plan was filed as to the numbers and
classification of staff necessary for successful implementation. References to
positions are working titles rather than specific job classifications. DJJ will
adjust staffing levels when such changes are necessary to achieve program
compliance, defined as adherence to the SBTP Program Guide.
The
staffing resources for SBTP are as follows:
Headquarters
�.
Senior
Psychologist Supervisor/Sexual Behavior Treatment Coordinator
�.
Research
Program Specialist exclusive to SBTP
�.
Office
Technician exclusive to SBTP
�.
SBTP
Administrative Task Force
Page 2
Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program Team Positions
�.
Program
Administrator
�.
Senior
Psychologist Supervisor
�.
Clinical
Psychologist
�.
Treatment
Team Supervisor
�.
Senior
Youth Correctional Counselor
�.
Casework
Specialist
�.
Re-Entry
Parole Agent
�.
Youth
Correctional Counselor
�.
Youth
Correctional Officer
�.
Office
Technician
�.
Compliance
Team
The Sexual Behavior Treatment Program will have the following staff
assigned with a maximum of 36 youth per living unit:
�.
Two
Clinical Psychologists
�.
One
Treatment Team Supervisor or equivalent
�.
One
Casework Specialist
�.
One
Senior Youth Correctional Counselor
�.
Two
Youth Correctional Counselors on the second watch
�.
Three
Youth Correctional Counselors on the third watch
�.
One
Youth Correctional Officer on the first watch
�.
Re-Entry
Parole Agent (assigned to each facility at a 1:100 staff to youth ratio)
Before
DJJ makes modifications to the staffing model as defined above and in the
Safety and Welfare Remedial Plan, DJJ shall consult with the court appointed
SBTP expert and provide at least sixty days notice to plaintiff’s counsel and
the Office of the Special Master.
This
notice will demonstrate that the proposed reduction will not hamper DJJ’s
progress towards programmatic compliance in any area
Page 3
covered by this Plan.
Changes in types or classes of staff that result in reducing qualifications of
significant numbers of staff is deemed a “reduction” in staff for the purposes
of this paragraph. Any dispute between the parties over reductions, whether
reductions are substantial, or whether reductions are likely to hamper DJJ’s
progress towards programmatic compliance, will be resolved pursuant to
paragraphs 48 and 49 of the Consent Decree.
II.
Program Statement
A. The
Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Description
The
DJJ’s Sexual Behavior Treatment Program is designed to treat youth who have
been adjudicated or convicted of a sexual offense, have a history of sexual
offending behavior or have displayed high risk, inappropriate sexual
behavior(s) within DJJ facilities. The SBTP is a comprehensive program focused
on a continuum of care which standardizes the process for assessment and
treatment planning through reentry.
The SBTP
utilizes a collaborative treatment approach between youth and staff to develop
objective Individual Treatment Plans targeting dynamic risk factors that
contribute to sexual offending behavior and re-offense. Dynamic risk factors
include: sexual deviance, contributory attitudes, interpersonal/socio-affective
functioning, self-management, and influential others (Prescott, 2007). Standardized
treatment programming agreed upon by mental health professionals will then be
tailored to the needs of the individual assigned to the SBTP. The program will
adopt an interdisciplinary approach which consists of psychosexual education,
individual therapy, group therapy, family integration, psycho-educational
groups, educational/vocational services, substance abuse treatment, mental
health/health care services, and recreational/leisure activities.
B.
Mission
The
Sexual Behavior Treatment Program is dedicated to rehabilitating youth
exhibiting sexually abusive behavior, which is in direct support of the DJJ’s
mission to protect the public.
Page 4
Youth in the SBTP will
learn to:
1.
Reduce and
eliminate occurrence of all forms of sexually inappropriate behaviors as
identified in the youth’s treatment plan.
2.
Acquire
skills and knowledge to assist them in becoming responsible, healthy
individuals capable of forming positive relationships.
3.
Develop the
ability to understand the impact of their crimes on victims, families, and the
community.
4.
Develop the
thinking and behavioral skills to establish a pro-social, rewarding lifestyle
through participation in strength-based individualized treatment.
C.
Program Description
The
Sexual Behavior Treatment Program uses a continuum of care where treatment
occurs from intake to discharge. It is a holistic approach to treatment which
incorporates the involvement of the family and community, understanding
victims’ rights, and simultaneously recognizing the individualized needs of
every youth. The SBTP establishes a therapeutic community with an
attachment-informed environment to provide youth with skills and tools to learn
how to develop healthy social relationships and lead successful lives.
(Understanding that early attachment experiences have an enduring and stable
quality through the lifespan, and affect the way individuals interact with
their world. Rich, 2009) The program utilizes a case management approach, which
promotes interdisciplinary treatment, team cooperation, and collaboration and
provides for continuous service between facilities. Respect and dignity for
each individual is fundamental in this team-focused, youth-centered therapeutic
milieu.
III.
Organizational Structure
A. The
Issue
DJJ has
not established a sufficiently integrated organizational structure at the
facility or at the central office level. In addition, DJJ has not established a
sufficient Dispute Resolution procedure to address conflicts between treatment
team members with different chains of command. The Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program is under the auspices of Mental Health Services. It is noted that a
majority of the staff assigned to the SBTP do not fall under the direct
supervision
Page 5
of mental health
administration, but mental health staff will provide clinical direction.
B.
Expectation
DJJ will
develop or modify central office and facility organizational charts consistent
with the principles and concepts discussed above and summarized below. See
Facility Organizational Chart on Page 7. The intent of this section is to
provide a guide for central office, facility and treatment team organization
that will allow for the implementation of the SBTP, not to prescribe a specific
and immutable organizational model. DJJ will develop an organizational model
that depicts the reporting relationships among all SBTP personnel and that
defines the extent and role of clinical direction. It will set an expectation
that staff will collaborate and cooperate to ensure maximum treatment and
constructive activity in a safe environment. All SBTP unit staff and
supervisors are responsible for achievement of the treatment goals of the SBTP
in a safe and secure setting, which will require collaboration among clinical
and non-clinical staff. SBTP will also be required to operate within DJJ’s
Integrated Behavior Treatment Model (IBTM).
The SBTP
offers a specialized treatment approach for youth with a history of problematic
sexual behavior and operates within the theoretical principles and philosophical
orientation of DJJ’s IBTM. The youth participating in the SBTP receive a
variety of therapeutic experiences and interventions based on the assessment of
their individual needs. These experiences and interventions may be part of the
overall IBTM as well as groups, experiential exercises, and psycho-educational
activities directed specifically towards the remediation of sexually
inappropriate conduct. Assessment(s) may identify specific treatment needs and
treatment modalities that will be offered within the framework of the
individual treatment needs of each SBTP participant. These complimentary
treatments may be offered within a group setting or as part of individual
therapy but will be compatible with the IBTM’s overall principle(s). Whenever possible,
treatment experiences and modalities will utilize the same vocabulary and basic
principles of the IBTM. The SBTP will develop protocols for offering these
specialized treatment experiences and interventions so that all SBTP units are
consistent with each other and with the IBTM. Individual therapy shall be
oriented towards needs identified in the treatment plan and will supplement but
remain complementary with the overall philosophy of the IBTM and the SBTP.
Page 6 Director,
Division of Juvenile Programs Chief of Mental Health Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program Coordinator Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Task Force - consisting
of - Senior Psychologist Program Administrator Psychologists - coequals on the
Task Force - Supervising Case Work Specialist/ Treatment Team Supervisor Case
Manager/ Case Work Specialist/ Parole Agent I Senior Youth Correctional
Counselor Youth Correctional Counselor Division
of Juvenile Justice Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Organizational Chart March 16, 2010 Key — Direct Supervision —
Functional Supervision Page 7
1. Central Office
A
permanent Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Coordinator (SBTP
Coordinator) position will be established and housed in Central Office in the
Health Care Division, Mental Health Unit. The SBTP Coordinator will manage the
work of the DJJ Research Program Specialist and Office Technician. The duties
of this position will include overseeing the implementation and standardization
of the Division’s Sexual Behavior Treatment Program. The coordinator will
monitor and be responsible for all aspects of the SBTP in regards to program
integrity and, therefore, the coordinator’s clinical and programmatic decisions
will be binding within the SBTP.
The SBTP
Coordinator will monitor the integrity of the SBTP in the DJJ, oversee
implementation of standardized programming components, and coordinate the
training of Sexual Behavior Treatment Program staff. The SBTP Coordinator will
oversee movement into, within, and out of the sexual behavior programs, as well
as monitor the populations of SBTPs to ensure that identified youth are
appropriately distributed among the programs available. The SBTP Coordinator
will attempt to keep youth in programs geographically closest to their families
and/or county of commitment.
The SBTP
Coordinator will remain knowledgeable of upcoming sex offender training
opportunities, trends and treatment techniques for juveniles with inappropriate
sexual behaviors. The SBTP Coordinator will work closely with program
management to ensure that appropriate training is provided to staff in each
program, including attendance at national conferences. The SBTP training budget
will be centralized at DJJ Headquarters as a part of the Health Care Services
Budget. The SBTP Coordinator will administer the SBTP training budget. The SBTP
Coordinator will monitor the treatment staff training records as they relate to
SBTP training ensuring that the staff receives the mandated annual training.
Training requirements will also be reviewed during the performance standards
auditing process. The SBTP Coordinator will also maintain a resource library
for use by DJJ treatment staff.
The SBTP
Coordinator will supervise the Sexual Behavior Administrative Task Force
(Task Force). The Task Force will consist of the Program Administrators and
Senior Psychologists who supervise the SBTP unit at each facility as well as
representatives from Education Services (who may be from central office); the
Policy, Procedures, Programs, & Regulations Unit; and north and south field
parole. The SBTP Coordinator will convene task force meetings and
Page 8
make assignments to
task force members as necessary for the timely implementation of this Remedial
Plan and continuing compliance with this Plan and the Program Guide. Task Force
members will be responsible to the coordinator for their task force work. The
Task Force will meet, at a minimum, on a quarterly basis.
A DJJ Research
Program Specialist will collect and evaluate data pertaining to
program effectiveness, compare national trends in sex offender treatment, etc.
The initial placement of participants in treatment programs will be evaluated
through the assessment process; individual participants will be reviewed
periodically to determine if their placement is appropriate given their level
of need. It is understood that DJJ will have research and evaluation
requirements for its entire treatment program, and SBTP research and evaluation
will be accomplished in a way that is consistent with those requirements and
avoids redundancy.
An Office
Technician will provide clerical support for the Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program Coordinator and the Research Program Specialist.
2.
Facility Organization
The
Superintendent is responsible for the operation of his/her facility. His/her
responsibility is to carry out division policy to ensure the safe and orderly
operation of the facility, and ensure programs and services are provided to
youth. The Superintendent will ensure all staff complies with the Program
Service Day (PSD) schedule, unless there are safety/security reasons that
preclude specific programming. SBTP related clinical decisions will be made by
the top level mental health clinician at the facility or his/her designee, with
consultation of the SBTP coordinator.
The
Senior Psychologist (or highest-ranking mental health clinician), and school
principal are members of the Superintendent’s executive team and participate in
regular briefings, facility committees and other administrative meetings as
appropriate. These meetings will address, among other issues, any disputes
between clinical and non-clinical staff that affect the delivery of the program
that cannot be resolved at the case-planning level.
The
Superintendent or his/her designee may, at the Superintendent’s discretion,
provide input to persons completing performance evaluations of all health care
services/mental health and educational
Page 9
services staff. If the
Superintendent believes that the top level administrators are not performing
appropriately and/or in accordance with agency policy, he or she will take the
concern up his/her direct chain of authority.
3.
Treatment Team Organization
Treatment
Teams will be organized around the concept that the treatment team as a whole
is responsible for addressing the behaviors and needs of the youth assigned to
the SBTP. All DJJ staff will work together to make the best decisions for the
collective youth in DJJ’s care, while attending to the best interests of the
individual youth. Teams should be inter-disciplinary and at a minimum consist
of the youth’s case manager, Youth Correctional Counselor, education
representative, health care professional and re-entry specialist.
A
Program Administrator and Senior Mental Health Clinician have overall
responsibility for unit operations and outcomes for the SBTP Program Guide and
will consult the SBTP coordinator on treatment related issues.
A
Program Administrator will oversee the management and operations of the Sexual
Behavior Treatment Programs. The Program Administrator will work closely with
the Treatment Team Supervisor/ Supervising Casework Specialist to ensure
consistency and standardization in the operation and service delivery of the
SBTPs. The Program Administrator will supervise the Treatment Team
Supervisor/Supervising Casework Specialist and will consult with the Senior
Psychologist.
The
Treatment Team Supervisor and/or Supervising Casework Specialist will be
responsible for compliance of the SBTP unit with the Program Guide. This person
provides oversight of the daily operations of the living unit, including staff
supervision, scheduling, discipline, grievances, casework, etc. This person is
the primary liaison between the living units and upper-level facility
management. The Treatment Team Supervisor and/or Supervising Casework
Specialist will supervise the Casework Specialists (CWS) and the Senior Youth
Correctional Counselors. The Treatment Team Supervisor will be the second-line
supervisor to the YCCs.
Clinical
Psychologists provide sexual behavior treatment services for youth in the SBTP
unit. The psychologist provides training, coaching and consultation in
treatment and interventions to direct care and
Page 10
other staff in these
units. Additionally, psychologists will provide direct services to youth
including assessment, individual and group therapy. Psychologists are part of
Mental Health Services and report to the facility’s Senior Psychologist. The
psychologist will provide the clinical expertise which will guide the treatment
resources that will be implemented in each youth’s Individual Treatment Plan.
The Casework Specialist (CWS) is
responsible for facilitation of case conferences of the multi-disciplinary
team, conducting the majority of the risk/needs assessment, developing an
Individual Change Plan (ICP) tailored to the risks and needs of each youth,
coordinating and prioritizing interventions, documenting progress in the ICP,
communication with parents, guardians, parole officers, and others and
providing weekly individual and/or group counseling.
The Senior Youth Correctional
Counselor (SYCC) will manage the living unit’s daily operations. The SYCC will
have direct supervision of the Youth Correctional Counselors. The SYCC is
accountable for the cleanliness, security, and order of the living unit. The SYCC
is responsible for scheduling/conducting community groups and activities.
The Youth Correctional Counselors
will be required to co-facilitate the Sexual Behavior Treatment Core group. The
YCCs are responsible for report writing, filing, and individual youth casework.
YCCs are to be trained to conduct resource groups to support the Sexual
Behavior Treatment Program. Youth Correctional Counselors provide direct
supervision, documentation, behavior management, skills training and maintain a
normative culture on the unit. YCC staffing will be sufficient to ensure that
all scheduled treatment services and activities, as well as operations, can be
provided during the day or evening as needed and directed by the Program
Service Day schedule.
C.
Action Plan
1. DJJ
will produce an organizational chart for central office consistent with the
principles outlined in this section by June 1, 2010.
2. DJJ
will produce an organizational chart for each DJJ facility with a Sexual
Behavior Treatment Program consistent with the principles outlined in this
section by June 1, 2010.
Page 11
3. DJJ will produce a
dispute resolution protocol for the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program
consistent with the principles outlined in this section by June 1, 2010.
4. DJJ will ensure the appropriate
number of qualified staff is in place for program implementation and compliance
by June 1, 2010.
IV.
Staff Training
A. Issue
Because
the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program will not succeed in the absence of
qualified staff, DJJ must be able to attract and retain competent professionals
for existing staff and new hires. Initial and ongoing training is needed to
develop and maintain the skills required for implementation and maintenance of
an effective Sexual Behavior Treatment Program.
B. Expectation
Treatment
Team staff working on the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program shall attend
mandated training in working with sexually abusive youth. Training
opportunities shall include attendance at national conferences addressing sex
offender treatment for selected staff, who in turn will develop curriculum for
in-service training and complete information sharing sessions for SBTP staff.
All SBTP training materials will be approved by the SBTP Coordinator prior to
their use.
The
content and required hours of SBTP orientation and refresher training will be
based on the content of DJJ’s SBTP curriculum, in consultation with the Farrell
court expert. The orientation process for newly assigned SBTP staff will
not exceed one month.
Ancillary
staff members working with youth assigned to the SBTP shall be provided
training related to youth with sexual behavior issues within the parameters of
their employment assignment. This is accomplished through written policy,
on-site training, contract trainings, and departmental expert training.
Page 12
C. Training
DJJ will
either internally or through contract, write curriculum, develop training,
provide training for trainers, and implement training for sexual behavior
treatment staff. DJJ will develop a training plan and schedule for consistency
across all SBTP units in the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program.
Psychologists
who provide consulting and coaching to direct care staff on the Sexual Behavior
Treatment Program will receive in-depth training in the program either through
contract, or as developed by the DJJ.
As
described in the Safety and Welfare Remedial Plan, direct care staff receives
training in all aspects of the Integrated Behavior Treatment Model. Staff
assigned to the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program will also receive training in
all aspects of the SBTP, including in-depth instruction in the specific
interventions and skill sets used. Staff working on Sexual Behavior Treatment
Programs shall receive initial orientation training on the SBTP and yearly in-service
training using both the training for trainers’ model and program-wide
presentations.
1.
Orientation
Training
Upon
assignment to an SBTP unit, staff will receive the New Staff SBTP Orientation
Packet as a part of orientation training. New YCCs will shadow an experienced
SBTP YCC during core/resource groups, individual session and case conferences.
Clinical staff will shadow an experienced SBTP psychologist during
core/resource group, individual and family sessions and case conferences.
1.
SBTP
Staff Training
Staff
members involved with the SBTP shall be trained regarding all pertinent aspects
of the SBTP for their employment assignment. This is accomplished through
written policy, on-site, electronic, contract and departmental expert training.
The Sexual
Behavior Treatment Teams will conduct yearly team meetings.
Page 13
Supplemental training
will occur during individual unit weekly clinical meetings. Such training may
include a review of risk assessments, overview of new research, case management
or group facilitation.
SBTP staff assigned to the SBTP units
shall be trained in the implementation and expectations of the SBTP curriculum.
In the occurrence of a facility
re-bid where a number of new staff will be assigned to the SBTP, the SBTP
Coordinator shall provide guidance and coordinate SBTP-specific training to
occur to ensure newly assigned staff have the resources to provide appropriate
SBTP treatment.
3. Staff
Competency
The SBTP
is under the auspices of Mental Health Services, and therefore psychiatrists
and psychologists will meet the standards set forth by the Mental Health
Remedial Plan. The SBTP Coordinator shall provide guidance and consultation
regarding the placement of psychologists on the SBTP units.
Psychologists
assigned to the SBTP will follow the Peer Review Policy as described in the
Mental Health Remedial Plan. However, the items reviewed will be specific to
SBTP documentation requirements as described in the SBTP Guide.
Case
Work Specialists assigned to the SBTP will be required to meet the minimum
qualifications for their specific classification.
Non-Clinical
staff will be assigned to the SBTP through the Shift and Bid process.
Non-Clinical staff assigned to the SBTP will be required to meet the minimum
qualifications for their specific classification and be appropriately trained
for their assignment.
D.
Action Plan
1. DJJ
will ensure that all staff employed on the Sexual Behavior Treatment Programs
is qualified generally as mental health professionals, where applicable, and
specifically to work with youth with SBTP needs.
2. DJJ
will implement pertinent and appropriate training for all staff assigned or
associated with the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program, including:
Page 14
�.
Orientation
Training Program will be on-going.
�.
Ancillary
staff training will occur annually, beginning in January 2011.
�.
Curriculum
Training including: basic curriculum; clinical interpretation of curriculum;
Training for Trainers on all curriculum components (for internal
sustainability); and internal in-service training. Training shall occur within
240 days of the development of the curriculum.
3. At least two representatives from
the SBTP Administrative Task Force will attend SBTP-specific national/outside
training opportunities annually starting in 2011.
4. DJJ will provide staff of the SBTP
residential units with SBTP-specific training 20 hours or more each year.
V.
Program Adequacy
A. Issue
The DJJ
does not have a standardized Sexual Behavior Treatment Program. The department
does not have a Program Manual that describes in detail the implementation of
the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program and its components.
B.
Expectation
The
Sexual Behavior Treatment Program will be designed as a comprehensive,
department-wide model, which follows a standardized process for assessment,
classification, treatment planning, and service delivery from intake through
parole supervision. The SBTP will utilize a curriculum which is based in
current research and will be individualized to the needs of the youth. Services
shall be developed for participants with developmental disabilities, females,
Spanish speakers, and other special needs as determined by the Individualized
Treatment Plan.
Youth
will be provided with and involved in individualized treatment planning. For
example, certain participants (i.e. youth with mental health conditions, dual
diagnoses, developmental or learning disabilities, behavior treatment needs,
cases on appeal, etc.) will be provided individualized treatment planning based
on their needs. Standardized treatment programming will be tailored to meet the
Page 15
needs of the
individual, in a manner that is supported by the current research. Treatment
will be rendered through a continuum of services and treatment programs for
youth with inappropriate sexual behaviors.
The Sexual Behavior Treatment Program
will provide integrated services including psychosexual education, individual
and group psychotherapy, family therapy and integration (when appropriate), and
psycho-education resource groups. An interdisciplinary approach will be
utilized, including the involvement of education/vocational and health care
services personnel.
The Sexual Behavior Treatment Program
curriculum will be standardized and include experiential exercises; youth will
demonstrate progress by a progression through individualized goals, and their
treatment programs, interventions and services will be monitored and evaluated
on a regular basis.
Standardized treatment stages,
concepts and hours of treatment will be identified and provided to youth within
the Sexual Behavior Treatment Programs.
The Sexual Behavior Treatment Program
Guide will define and detail all components of the model. All staff and youth
will be trained on and made aware of the scope and requirements of the model as
it relates to their specific involvement in the treatment of the youth.
C.
Action Plan
1. DJJ
will produce a written description and guide for its Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program. The guide will include:
a.) Assessment:
(1) DJJ will administer appropriate
screening and assessment tools which follow all state and federal laws
governing youth with sexually abusive behaviors. DJJ will ensure that it
utilizes assessments with demonstrated reliability and validity.
(2) On
arrival to a SBTP unit, a specific SBTP evaluation will be conducted. The youth
will participate in a series of assessments to identify the high/low risk level
of the youth and other information such as past trauma, previous intervention
efforts,
Page 16
family involvement,
education and vocational history, peer associations, mental and medical issues,
and substance abuse history. Based on the assessments and information provided,
a clinical summary will be completed.
b.) Types of units, programs and interventions:
(1) DJJ will establish a protocol for those youth
whose treatment needs hierarchy supersedes sex offender treatment, such as
mental health, developmental disabilities and aggressive behavioral treatment
needs. The youth in non-residential sex offender living units will be provided
sex offender treatment through an individualized treatment plan if determined
to benefit from sexual behavior treatment.
(2) DJJ will establish a system for
the Sexual Behavior Treatment Program to include the following:
�.
SBTP Orientation/Transition
�.
Healthy
Living Treatment
�.
Residential
Sexual Behavior Treatment
�.
Individualized
Sexual Behavior Treatment
�.
Female
Sexual Behavior Treatment
(3) DJJ will develop a
transition component providing the youth with a change in their assigned
environment. This will enable them to be challenged to look at what has
previously been learned in the Residential Program from another perspective
and/or environment, while also providing support and structure to maintain
their progress.
(4) DJJ will provide a minimum
treatment hour expectation for all components of the SBTP.
�.
Two ninety
minute groups (3 hours total) of sexual behavior group
�.
1 hour
resource group
�.
1 hour of
individual counseling (one-half hour clinical, one-half hour casework)
Page 17
�.
1 hour
homework on stage, individual or journal assignments that support therapy.
�.
2 hours
Residential large group
When a youth does not require
the minimum hours of treatment this will be clearly defined in the Individual
Treatment Plan.
(5) DJJ will develop and implement a
family counseling and reunification intervention. The Sexual Behavior Treatment
Program will provide the opportunity to involve the youth’s family/guardian,
when appropriate, as prescribed in the treatment process.
a. DJJ will develop and implement a system to
document and track attempts to engage families in the youth’s treatment program
and participation in the youth’s treatment.
c.) Exit criteria:
DJJ will establish exit criteria to include cases
on appeal and youth who have successfully completed the Sexual Behavioral
Treatment Program as set forth in the Program Guide. Exit criteria will be
competency based, determined by measurable objectives reflecting goal
attainment. Youth will be assessed based on their accomplishment of specific
changes in outcome measures and behavior and their ability to apply their
knowledge to their daily functioning. This will be done via youths’ individual
treatment plans and will be monitored at each case conference.
d.) Suspension/Refusal Criteria:
DJJ will establish temporary suspension/refusal
criteria which includes monitoring for replacement/placement into the SBTP and
includes interventions used prior to suspension. The process will be under the
guidance and direction of the SBTP Coordinator.
Page 18
e.) Case Planning:
(1) A comprehensive and continuous assessment
process is an integral part of the SBTP. Success in the ability to provide
individualized treatment comes from assessing, evaluating and monitoring a
youth’s progress. Assessments at the front-end of treatment help to determine
risk levels, treatment and programming needs for the youth. Interventions,
delivered throughout the youth’s stay in the treatment program, help to prepare
each youth for reintegration into the community. The Case Planning and Review
Process provides administrative oversight for each youth’s movement through DJJ
and ensure that staff involved in parole supervision and aftercare planning has
the information they need to effectively identify the youth’s risk level and
meet their needs as they are being released into the community.
(2) Case Conferences are to be held
at least every 60 days and should include the Interdisciplinary Treatment Team.
The Case Conference team will identify and discuss progress on treatment,
parole community reentry planning, goal setting and developing a case
management plan for the next Case Conference.
(3) DJJ will provide case planning which will include
transition planning, pre-release/parole placements, and re-entry services as
described in the Program Guide to provide a continuum of care for SBTP youth
transitioning from DJJ. Specialized attention needs to be given to SBTP cases
due to legal restrictions related to residence and job opportunities.
f.) SBTP Program Components:
(1) Resource Groups will be offered to supplement
the SBTP Core Curriculum. More than four Resource Groups will be offered to
youth based on treatment needs and treatment objectives as identified in the
Individualized Treatment Plan. DJJ
Page 19
will
establish additional Resource Groups as youth needs arise.
(2) DJJ will develop or purchase and
implement curriculum and programs based on national standards and best
practices.
(3) Treatment services in the SBTP
are based primarily on currently accepted treatment approaches for a juvenile
population, focused on skill development, state of the art approaches and
supplemented with positive reinforcement for improvements in behavior.
Curriculum components will be culturally sensitive and emphasize cognitive and
behavioral skill acquisition.
(4) On a yearly basis, the SBTP
Coordinator, in consultation with the Sexual Behavior Administrative Task
Force, will review and consider implementing any related and appropriate
interventions.
(5) DJJ will ensure that treatment is
offered in a way that respects the ethical principles of the involved
professions as well as ensuring confidentiality, informed consent and due
process. All participants will be adequately informed and sign documents
reflecting an understanding of the limits of confidentiality, informed consent
to treatment and their due process rights.
(6) DJJ will ensure that adequate and
suitable physical facilities and resources, including files, computers,
printers, materials for experiential therapy, etc., are available for treatment
programs/services and interventions.
g.) Re-entry:
(1) DJJ recognizes that re-entry is an essential part of the SBTP. In consultation with the SBTP expert, DJJ will ensure that re-entry services are provided to youth in the SBTP that are consistent with the SBTP Remedial Plan, SBTP Program Guide, and the IBTM.
Page 20
VI. Quality Management
A. Issue
DJJ
shall develop a quality management protocol. DJJ has not had a standard
internal audit tool in place for measuring the effectiveness of the Sexual
Behavior Treatment Programs or staff assigned to work these programs.
B.
Expectation
The SBTP
will adhere to current best practices of Program Evaluation and Quality Management.
The overall objective of the program monitoring and performance measurement is
to track and monitor the target population from identification through parole
performance and measure the outcome of sex offender programming. The evaluation
process shall include a review of program elements, a description of the
implementation process, and a description of data points used to assess program
success and failure. Basic principles include but are not limited to:
�.
Clear
procedures and expectations for the program
�.
Entrance
and exit criteria
�.
Appropriately
trained staff
�.
Appropriate
supervision and monitoring of staff.
C.
Action Plan
1. The
Sexual Behavior Administrative Task Force will monitor and ensure adherence to
the program guide. This will include internal program checks, including
monitoring and assessment of treatment implementation, review of youth files,
and risk/needs-oriented records that monitor treatment progress and correspond
directly to youth risk and need assessment results utilizing a standardized
audit tool consistent with the current audit tool developed for this remedial
plan. Non-conformance to the Program Guide may result in the development of a
corrective action plan. This monitoring process will begin on July 15, 2010.
2. DJJ
will conduct regular program assessment through an outcome evaluation to
determine whether the program is effective in meeting its goals. This will
begin in April 2011.
Page 21
3. DJJ, under the
direction of the SBTP Coordinator, will make appropriate alterations to its
program based on evaluations of the program’s effectiveness. This will occur on
an on-going basis.
4. DJJ will conduct routine
satisfaction surveys of youth and their families (if appropriate) while in the
program regarding their satisfaction with the services being provided. The
survey results will be summarized and shared with staff from all sections of
the facility, and will be used to make facility modifications/improvements when
appropriate. This will begin on July 15, 2010, and will occur on an on-going
basis and at least every six months.
5. Routine documented observation and
monitoring of all SBTP staff regarding delivery of treatment services and
programming in the facility, with written feedback provided to staff, will be
conducted by the Senior Psychologist assigned to provide clinical supervision
to the SBTP. This will occur on an on-going basis and at least every six
months.
6. Results of all monitoring
conducted on a local level will be sent to the SBTP Coordinator for tracking and
review. The audit tool will include documentation of, but will not be limited
to: file reviews, review of Proof of Practice Binders and interviews with staff
and youth. This will occur on an on-going basis and at least every six months.
Page 22
1. Sexual Behavior Treatment Program Remedial Plan - California ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/Juvenile_Justice/docs/SexOffenderPlan.pdf
Adequacy of DJJ
Sex Offender Programs (including number of treatment beds). 2.
Organization and Staffing. 3. Training. 4. Appropriateness of Policies
and ...
2. Juvenile Justice - California Department of Corrections and ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/Juvenile_Justice/
DJJ provides academic and vocational education, treatment programs
that address violent and criminogenic behavior, sex offender
behavior, and substance ...
[PDF]
There are 4 Residential Sex Offender Treatment Programs located ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/Victim_Services/.../ProgramInfo_FactSheet_3-08.pdf
PROGRAM INFORMATION last updated 09-11-08 ... services to victims of
juvenile offenders housed in the California Department of Corrections ... Victim Focused Offender Programs:
The CDCR DJJ authored the
original Impact of Crime on.
4. Division of Adult Parole Operations (DAPO) - California Department ...
www.cdcr.ca.gov/Parole/
Parole to Conduct Random Sex Offender Checks
During "Operation Boo" ... Learning Centers (CLLC), various
other Drug Treatment, and education programs, ...
Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) ...
[PDF]
There are 4 Residential Sex Offender Treatment Programs ... - PJDC
www.pjdc.org/.../Sex%20Behavior%20Treatment%20Programs%2012-0...
4241 Williamsbourgh Drive Suite 130,
Sacramento, CA
95823. Four facilities operate Residential Sex Behavior Treatment Programs
in the Division of Juvenile ... A statewide sex offender
database is maintained out of DJJ headquarters.
[PDF]
CDCR-DJJ Sexual Behavior Treatment Program ... - Prison Law Office
www.prisonlaw.com/pdfs/2011SBTPReports.pdf
Feb 8, 2011 - Attorney
Cathleen Beltz in Norwalk, California on February 7, 2011 in connection with the audit of ....
addressing sex offender treatment for.
Legislature confirms Mike Minor as DJJ director
By Bill Sessa, PIOIt’s been a busy month for the Division of Juvenile Justice, in which the Legislature approved its new director and the DJJ’s efforts to improve health care programs for juvenile offenders scored a significant approval by the courts.
On Feb. 21, Mike Minor was confirmed by the state Senate as Director, Division of Juvenile Justice. Minor has spent his entire 28-year career working with juveniles.
He began his career as a Youth Correctional Officer and has held many positions in the DJJ and the former California Youth Authority. The positions included Superintendent of DJJ’s Stockton complex, which houses the O.H. Close and N.A. Chaderjian youth correctional facilities, before assuming the Director’s position a year ago.
In other positive news, on Feb. 15, Attorney General Kamala Harris, representing CDCR, and the Prison Law Office agreed to end court oversight of DJJ’s Health Care Remedial plan, a portion of a six-part consent decree filed as a class-action lawsuit (Farrell) in November 2004. In a stipulation filed with the Alameda County Superior Court, the parties agreed that “a comprehensive system is now in place to ensure that DJJ youth receive adequate medical care under the California constitution, and all institutions have passed the Medical Care Court’s experts’ audits with high scores.”
CDCR Secretary Jeffrey Beard noted that the agreement to end court oversight of DJJ’s Health Care program is a sign that “California’s juvenile program has put a troubled past behind it and is on its way to restoring its reputation as a national leader in treating and rehabilitating juvenile offenders. With Mr. Minor at the helm of DJJ, I am confident we will continue to see improvements in how we prepare young offenders to succeed in our communities.”
Minor attributed the achievements under the remedial plans “to the dedication of the DJJ staff, most of whom have devoted their careers to helping troubled youth.”
Under the Farrell consent decree, DJJ upgraded its medical treatment programs and procedures with the guidance of court-appointed, independent health care experts for its three juvenile correctional facilities in Stockton and Ventura. In their most recent audit at the end of 2012, the court’s overseers found DJJ in “substantial compliance” with 89 percent of 2,058 items related to delivering health care and in “partial compliance” with the other 11 percent.
That same audit found DJJ in “substantial compliance” with 86 percent of 4,500 program and procedure changes in remedial plans covering Education, Sex Offender treatment, accommodation of Wards with Disabilities, Mental Health, and the overall Safety and Welfare environment in its facilities, in addition to Health Care.
Formerly known as the California Youth Authority, the DJJ once housed as many as 10,000 juvenile offenders in 11 correctional facilities. In the last 15 years, as policy makers encouraged that more youth be housed and treated in their home communities, the DJJ population has been reduced to 768 wards in three facilities. All of those youth, some as old as 23, have been adjudicated for crimes that the Penal Code classifies as “serious” or “violent” or sex offenses. They are considered to be the state’s most troubled juvenile offenders with the most serious violent backgrounds and the most extensive treatment needs.
All of DJJ’s treatment programs have been developed with the help of national and court-appointed experts and are supported by evidence that they are effective with California’s unique juvenile offender population.
Among DJJ’s more notable achievements through its remedial plans:
- DJJ’s Sex Offender Treatment Program has been rated as “highly effective” by a national standards group, the Correctional Programs Checklist, and is being recognized as a national model for treatment of youth sex offenders;
- Through the accredited high schools in each of DJJ’s three facilities, more than 6,000 juveniles have earned a high school diploma, GED, a vocational skills certificate, or enrolled in college courses since 2005, a more than 300 percent increase at a time of declining enrollment.
- Last November, the court lifted its supervision of DJJ’s Dental Care program, noting that it not only met all the requirements of the remedial plan, but exceeded them.
- DJJ successfully rolled out the court-ordered Integrated Behavior Treatment Model (ITBM) at O.H. Close Youth Correctional Facility and will continue to expand the program at the N.A. Chadjerian and Ventura facilities.
One Response to Legislature confirms Mike Minor as DJJ director
- Carol Wilson says:
Congratulations Mike! No one deserves this
recognition of hard work and dedication like you do. I so very much enjoyed working
with you – always so professional and positive. Best wishes. Miss you all in
DJJ!
Title: California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation CDCR
1
California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation CDCR
1
California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation CDCR
- Division of Juvenile JusticeDJJ
2
Background
- The CYA (DJJ) was created by law in 1941, but
it wasnt until 1943 that the agency began to
operate reform schools, providing institutional
training and parole supervision for juvenile and
young adult offenders. It is the largest youthful
offender agency in the nation.
3
Background (cont.)
- In a massive reorganization of California
corrections in 2005, the CYA became the Division
of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) under the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
(CDCR).
4
The Mission
- Described in Section 1700 of the Welfare and
Institutions Code - To protect the public from criminal activity
5
Mission (cont.)
- Provide a range of training and treatment
services for youthful offenders committed by
courts - Direct these offenders to participate in
community and victim restoration
6
Mission (cont.)
- Assist local justice agencies with efforts to
control crime and delinquency and - Encourage the development of state and local
programs to prevent crime and delinquency.
7
Organization
- A Division in the Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation. - Secretary reports directly to the Governor and
serves on his Cabinet.
8
Organization (cont.)
- Carries out its responsibilities through three
divisions - Division of Juvenile Facilities
- Division of Juvenile Programs
- Division of Juvenile Parole Services
9
General Information
- The DJJ receives its youthful offender population
from both juvenile and superior court referrals. - The DJJ does provide housing for juveniles under
the age of 18 who have been sentenced to the
Adult Division.
10
General Information (cont.)
- A separate administrative body, The Board of
Parole Hearings (BPH), Juvenile Justice Division,
determines their parole release.
11
Incarceration
- Determined by
- the severity of the committing offense
- the offenders progress toward parole readiness.
12
BPH Categories and Sliding Scale
- Sliding Scale Fees were introduced in 1997 to
encourage counties to find alternatives to CYA
(DJJ) commitment for non-violent offenders.
13
Categories and Sliding Scale (cont.)
- Under this program, counties pay a flat fee of
150 per month for all commitments in YOPB
Categories 1 - 4. - Included here are most violent offenses involving
substantial injury and offenses committed while
armed.
14
Categories and Sliding Scale (cont.)
- For other offenders, (Categories 5 7)
- counties pay 50, 75 or 100 of the1997 per
capita cost of CYA (DJJ) housing.
15
Categories and Sliding Scale (cont.)
- Category 5 offenses include ADW, Battery (with
injury), Grand Theft Person, Burglary 1st and
some Arson - Category 6 offenses include Concealable Firearms,
Burglary 2nd, some Arson and all other felonies - Category 7 offenses include all other offenses
(misdemeanors, primarily)
16
Jurisdiction
- DJJ jurisdiction for the most serious
offenders ends on the offenders 25th birthday.
17
Division of Juvenile ProgramsEducation
ServicesCalifornia Education Authority(CEA)
18
CEA
- Established in the Welfare Institutions Code
1120 1125.5 - Juvenile Justice Education funding
- - Prop 98 -Career to Work
-Voc Ed/Spec. Ed - - Non-Prop 98 -Special Education
-E-Rate Grant - - Lottery -WorkAbility Grant
- -WIA/ABE - Library Grant
- -ESEA/NCLB -Criminal Offender
19
CEA (cont.)
- California Standards
- for the Teaching Profession
- Training
- Special Education
- General Education
- English Language Learner Resources
- Transition Services Resources
20
CEA Schools
- Stockton
- O.H. Close Youth Correctional Facility
- Johanna Boss High School
- N.A. Chaderjian Youth Correctional Facility
- N.A. Chaderjian High School
- DeWitt Nelson Youth Correctional Facility
- DeWitt Nelson High School
21
CEA Schools (cont.)
- Ione
- Preston Youth Correctional Facility Clinic
- -James A. Wieden High School
- -Pine Grove Youth Correctional
- Conservation Camp - Pine Grove Camp
- Campus
- -Midtown Campus Sacramento Parole
22
CEA Schools (cont.)
- Norwalk
- Southern Youth Correctional Reception Center
Clinic - Jack B. Clark High School
- Paso Robles
- El Paso de Robles Youth Correctional Facility
- Marie C. Romero High School
23
CEA Schools (cont.)
- Chino
- Herman G. Stark Youth Correctional Facility
- Lyle Egan High School
- Camarillo
- Ventura Youth Correctional Facility
- Mary B. Perry High School
24
CEA Schools (cont.)
- All CEA High Schools have been accredited through
Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
25
CEA Schools (cont.)
- Graduation requirements for Diploma
- -200 credits
- -Must include 10 credits in Character
- Education
- -Passage of CAHSEE
- -Waiver for special education students, if
needed - -Certificate of Completion available for
non- - special education students who are not
able to - pass CAHSEE
26
CEA Schools (cont.)
- School programs include
- State Board adopted, standards-based
- curriculum
- Vocational programs
- Special Education services
- English Learner program
27
For more information
- http//www.cdcr.ca.gov/DivisionsBoards/DJJ/index.h
tml
Reform Plans and Progress
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 2nd Quarter 2012
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 1st Quarter 2012
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 1st Quarter 2011
- Special Master Report; 1st Quarter, 2011
- CEA Title III Improvement Plan
- Farrell Quarterly Report- 2nd Quarter 2010
- Farrell Quarterly Report- 1st Quarter 2010
- Farrell Court Compliance 2009 Annual Report
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 1st and 2nd Quarters 2009
- DJJ Farrell Remedial Plans and L.H. Class Action Lawsuit Legislative Briefing - February 2009
- L.H. Stipulated Permanent Injunction/Remedial Plan
- L.H. Notice to Class Members of Permanent Injunction
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 4th Quarter 2008
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 3rd Quarter 2008
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 2nd Quarter 2008
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 1st Quarter 2008
- Appendices
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 4th Quarter 2007
- Farrell Quarterly Report - 3rd Quarter 2007
- DJJ Remedial Plans
- National Experts Provide Input to Strengthen Juvenile Justice System Reform
- List of Division of Juvenile Justice Audits
- List of Division of Juvenile Justice Audits - Safety and Welfare Plan
- LH Lawsuit—termination order
- LH lawsuit--- ENGLISH letter to class
- LH Lawsuit---SPANISH letter to class
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsTw4Ymj_Io
flaws with
Including 2013 spring
report
Table of
Contents
Page
Executive
Summary ..................................................................................
..............i
Section 1:
California Youth Authority
Offender
Population Projections and Characteristics .................... 1
A. Overview of the CYA
............................................................... 1
B. Population Projections
.............................................................. 2
C. Changing Characteristics of
Offender Population....................... 4
D. Factors Contributing to the
Changing Offender Population........ 7
Section 2:
Current CYA
Programs................................................................... 10
A. Programs are Classified as “Core”
and “Special and
Supplementary”......................................................................
10
B. Description of CYA Core
Programs........................................ 10
C. Special and Supplementary
Programs...................................... 16
Section 3:
Offender Needs Assessment - Current Practices
and Special
Efforts
......................................................................... 36
A. Overview of Reception Center
Process ................................... 36
B. 1996-97 Mental Health and
Substance Abuse
Treatment Needs Assessment..................................................
36
C. Summary of Critical Assessment
Tools ................................... 37
Section 4:
Preliminary Observations from Needs Assessments
and Emerging
Offender Program Needs ....................................... 43
A. Preliminary Observations of
Ward Program Needs .................. 43
B. Emerging Institutional
Program/Staff/Physical Plant Needs ..... 45
C. Emerging Parole
Program/Staff/Physical Plant Needs.............. 48
D. Emerging Education Program
Needs....................................... 49
Section 5:
Outcome Measurement in the CYA
A Focus on
Strategic Goals ........................................................... 50
A. Development of the CYA
Strategic Management Process ....... 50
B. Strategic Goals and Key
Outcome Measures ........................... 52
Section 6:
Systems Required to Evaluate Program Effectiveness ................... 57
A. Program Evaluation and
Monitoring--A Two Tier Model........ 57
B. Significant CYA Research and
Program Evaluations -
Examples of Tier 1 Efforts
.................................................... 58
C. Conditions Required for CYA to
Implement
Systematic Evaluation and Program
Monitoring Process ......... 61
D. Improved Offender Information
System Needed...................... 62
2
E. Phased Implementation of
Two-Tier Model ............................ 66
Appendix A:
Characteristics of First Admissions to the California Youth Authority
1959-1997
i
California Youth
Authority
Response to
Supplemental Budget Language Request
Item
5460-001-0001
1997-98 Budget
Act
Systems and
Measures for Evaluating Program Effectiveness with an Increasingly
Violent Youthful
Population
Executive
Summary
This report is respectfully
submitted by the California Youth Authority (CYA) to the Joint
Legislative Budget Committee and
the fiscal committees of the California State Legislature
pursuant to a request in the Supplemental
Report to the 1997-98 Budget Act. Item 5460-001-
0001 of that report requested
that the CYA report by March 1, 1998 on programs needed to
serve institution and parole
populations, measures to determine the effectiveness of those
programs and systems required to
evaluate the effectiveness of programs operated by the CYA.
The specific language contained
in the Supplemental Report is:
Item
5460-001-0001 -- Department of the Youth Authority
1. Treatment
Needs Assessment -- Institutional and Parole Populations.
The Department of the Youth Authority
shall, using existing resources, complete a
treatment needs assessment that
identifies what programs are needed for its institutional
and parole populations. In
addition, the assessment should identify the systems required
to evaluate the effectiveness of
its rehabilitation programs and what measures it will use to
determine the effectiveness of
individual programs and/or combinations of programs on
parole outcomes. The Department
shall complete the assessment and transmit copies to
the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee and the Legislature’s fiscal committees by March
1, 1998.
Overview of the
CYA
The CYA was created by law in
1941. It is the largest youthful offender agency in the nation. As
one component of the overall
California juvenile justice system, the CYA provides a secure
setting for training, treatment
and education to young offenders whose level of delinquency makes
them unsuitable for continued
handling at the local level but who, due to their age and/or
maturity, are not considered
appropriate for adult prison. Within the CYA, young offenders are
provided an opportunity to accept
responsibility for their past actions and develop the
competencies necessary to change
their delinquent behavior patterns and become responsible
citizens. In addition, the CYA
provides a focus on community restoration through public service
activities and victim services
and restitution.
Structure of
This Report
ii
In order to
CALIFORNIA YOUTH AUTHORITY
The
California Youth Authority (CYA), the largest youth correctional system
in
the United States, houses approximately six thousand juveniles and young
adults
in eleven institutions and four forestry camps. An additional four thousand
are
under parole supervision. Operating under a treatment
and training concept,
the
CYA provides an extensive array of programs that include academic
education,
vocational training and work experience, sex offender treatment,
substance
abuse treatment, specialized counseling, and intensive mental health
treatment.
Through its Office of Prevention and Victims Services, the CYA
assists
local justice agencies in delinquency prevention and intervention and
provides
services to victims of youth crime.
The Origin of the CYA
The
establishment of the California Youth Authority in 1941 through
legislative
action is often cited as a turning point in American juvenile
correctional
history. The California Youth Authority Act was the first
implementation
of the American Law Institute’s model Youth Correction
Authority
Act. Radically breaking with traditional thinking and practice in
juvenile
corrections, it proposed a model of juvenile justice based on
rehabilitation
instead of retributive punishment and called for state-level
coordination
of services. The passage of the California Youth Correction
Authority
Act of 1941 represents the first time an elected legislative body
2
declared
that the purpose of juvenile corrections was rehabilitation rather than
punishment.
During
the period leading up to the passage of the Youth Correction Authority
Act
in 1941, California’s juvenile justice system could be described as disjointed,
under
funded, and prone to brutality. The system’s most serious problems appear
to
have been the result of no overall standards. There were no guidelines for
length
of stay, for educational services, nor for the quality of correctional
treatment
and training. Three crowded, aging institutions and a total of nine parole
agents
(with caseloads sometimes as high as two hundred) served all of
California.
They operated under the direction of the Department of Institutions, an
agency
that was almost totally oriented to running mental hospitals and homes for
the
disabled.
Prior
to 1941 young offenders were committed directly by the courts to one of
the
three schools. If space was not available they were placed in overcrowded jail
facilities
along with adults. Even pre-adolescent children were sometimes placed
in
jails where they mingled with adult criminals of all types. In such settings
children
were exposed to continual criminal influences as well as to physical and
sexual
abuse. Publicized reports of children being abused in jails and in the three
juvenile
institutions were common. Over time this grew into a highly emotional
public
issue. In 1939 public attention became riveted on the Whittier State School
when
the Los Angeles Times featured stories concerning a 13-year-old boy who
died
under questionable circumstances after being placed in solitary confinement.
When
a second boy at the Whittier State School died under almost identical
circumstances
a year later, public demand for change became difficult to ignore.
3
California,
of course, was not the only state with such problems. Public
commissions
and other influential groups in state after state found that many
juveniles
coming into contact with the justice system encountered injustice and
brutality.
Juvenile justice committee members in New York City charged with
assessing
its system of juvenile justice were shocked at their findings. They
became
convinced, however, that the only reason brutal conditions were tolerated
was
that the public was generally unaware of them. To address this lack of
knowledge,
the committee sponsored a report that detailed the sorry state of
juvenile
justice in New York. This report, Youth
in the Toils, eventually drew the
attention of the
American Law Institute. I
