County of Santa Barbara
Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act
Comprehensive
Multiagency
Juvenile Justice Plan
2007-2008
Table of Contents
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................3
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................4
I. Background Summary of Santa Barbara County’s Juvenile Justice System............................11
II. Review of Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan (Local Action Plan)
A. Local Action Plan Update Committee........................................................................13
B. Geographic and Demographic Overview....................................................................13
C. Overall Santa Barbara County Crime Trends..............................................................14
D. Santa Barbara County Juvenile Justice Data...............................................................15
E. Analysis of Crime Risks by Region............................................................................19
F. Continuum of Responses to Juvenile Crime in Santa Barbara County.......................22
G. Trends and Issues Impacting the Juvenile Justice System..........................................24
H. Gaps in Services..........................................................................................................29
I. JJCPA Programs and Outcomes....................................................................................33
1. Truancy Mediation...........................................................................................33
2. Initial Assessment/First Offender Intervention................................................34
3. Aftercare Services............................................................................................36
III. Recommended Strategies for JJCPA Funding.......................................................................38
A. Truancy Mediation (Expanded Description) . ............................................................39
B. Initial Assessment/First Offender Intervention (Expanded Description) ...................41
C. Aftercare Services (Expanded Description)................................................................42
IV. Additional Recommendations for Long Term Strategies.......................................................44
V. Concluding Remarks...............................................................................................................44
Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan
Introduction
The Schiff-Cardenas Crime Prevention Act of 2000, currently referred to as the Juvenile Justice
Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA), allocates funds to California counties to upgrade services and
programs within the local juvenile justice system. Funds are allocated on the basis of county
population with the requirement that applicants annually review and approve an updated
Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan (CMJJP) and develop a JJCPA Local Action
Plan that responds to gaps identified in a continuum of services “that have been demonstrated to
be effective in reducing delinquency and addressing juvenile crime.”
Santa Barbara County was allocated $1.46 million in Fiscal Year 2001-02; $1.36 million in Fiscal
Year 2002-03; $1.35 million in Fiscal Year 2003-04; $1.15 million in 2004-05; $1.15 million in
2005-06; and 1.30 million in 2006-07. In 2007-08, the County will receive $1.35 million.
From 1996 to 2002, the Probation Department was able to provide an innovative, collaborative
and rich array of services to juvenile offenders with funding from federal and state grants. The
philosophical shift that occurred during these years was toward investing more resources earlier
to prevent the development of delinquent behavior. This trend prompted a renewed interest in
stronger early intervention strategies. Several large, multiyear, multiagency projects were launched
with grant funding that focused primarily on prevention and treatment, including: Partnership for
Families Project in Lompoc, Multi-agency Integrated System of Care, Challenge I, Challenge II/
NEW VISTAS, and Juvenile Drug Court.
When the last of these grants ended in 2002-03, it left a funding gap of several million dollars.
Increases in County General Funds and federal funding streams have not been able to keep up
with the loss in grant funds. Filling gaps in the juvenile justice system has become much more
challenging, given that the budget of the Probation Department has continued to decline. Since
2001-02, Juvenile Field Services Division expenditures have dropped 21%.
We are now seeing the impact of this decrease in services and supervision staff. Almost all indicators
of juvenile crime have been increasing over the past three years. Most alarming is the increase in
violent crime. Within the past five years, the rate of juvenile violent crime, measured by sustained
petitions for violent offenses, rose to it highest level in the past 14 years. The challenge the juvenile
justice system must face at this juncture is that there are more juvenile offenders, committing
increasingly violent offenses, under reduced intensity of supervision, within an environment of
shrinking resources to meet their needs.
The JJCPA strategies and priorities are crafted to be the most effective to the most minors. The
challenge we now face is how to prioritize our future resources to address the more serious and
violent offender, without abandoning our prevention and early intervention strategies.
This document represents Santa Barbara County’s 2007 updated Comprehensive Multiagency
Juvenile Justice Plan, its Local Action Plan of responses to juvenile crime and delinquency, and
the funding plan for Fiscal Year 2007-2008.
Executive Summary
Process
A sub-committee of Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council (JJCC) representatives was formed
to reevaluate and update the Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan and recommend
changes, if necessary, to the Local Action Plan based on identified treatment service gaps and the
factors below.
The 2007-2008 JJCPA Local Action Plan Work Group’s research and analysis considered:
• Changing demographics of Santa Barbara County;
• Santa Barbara County juvenile justice data;
• Analysis of crime risks by region;
• Review of the current continuum of responses to juvenile crime;
• Trends and issues impacting the juvenile justice system;
• Gaps in services; and
• Review of the outcomes of current JJCPA strategies.
Analysis of Trends
Changing Demographics: The juvenile population (aged 10 –17) in Santa Barbara County
peaked in 2005 and is now on a declining trend. It is expected that this trend will continue in the
foreseeable future.
Juvenile Justice Data: The overall crime rate for Santa Barbara County is increasing from the
all time lows seen in 1999-2000. Both reported violent crime and property crime rates dropped
slightly in 2005, yet they are still approximately 25% higher than they were six years ago. The
overall juvenile arrest rate, which has been steadily declining since 1996, began increasing in 2005.
Misdemeanor arrests have continued to decline, however felony arrests are driving the arrest rate
up. Of serious concern is the 17% increase in felony arrest rates in 2005. Sustained felony petitions
have increased 75% from 2001, with a sharp increase of 44% in 2006. In 2006 the violent crime
rate for juveniles reached its highest point in the last fourteen years. Sustained petitions for violent
offenses have increased by 225% since 2001 and by 46% in the past year alone. Misdemeanor
assaults, which represent 80% of all violent offenses, increased by 53% in the past year. Assuming
there have been no extraordinary increases in enforcement, this data appears to indicate a trend
toward juveniles becoming involved in more serious and violent crimes.
Probation Referrals: Juvenile Probation referrals reached an all time high in 2006, with a 9%
increase in the past year alone. Another significant trend is a 52% growth in female referrals since
1994.
Juvenile Supervision Caseloads: With increasing referrals and no increase in staffing, the intensity
of supervision/offender has unfortunately been decreasing. On January 1, 2006 there were 16%
more juveniles on supervision status than there were a year earlier. The number of 602 wards
increased by 20% in the same time period.
Foster and Group Home Placements: In the past year the average number of juveniles in group
or foster homes rose by 14%. However by February 2007, the number of youth in placement had
dropped to 2002 levels. Foster and group home placements appear to cycle over time. There are
many issues that affect these cycles and we do not yet understand them well enough to accurately
predict future trends.
Juvenile Hall Utilization: In 2006, countywide admissions to Juvenile Hall increased by 7%
over the previous year, with substantially more admissions (a 25% increase) to the Santa Barbara
Juvenile Hall than were anticipated. The combined average daily population at both juvenile halls
increased by 22% from the prior year.
Counseling and Education Center (CEC) Commitments: The average number of youth under
commitment to the CECs in the county has consistently been above 75 over the past several years.
With a countywide enrollment limit of 66, this means that youth committed to these programs are
often placed on a waiting list.
Los Prietos Boys Camp and Boys Academy: The average daily population at Los Prietos Boys
Camp was 39 in 2006, up from 32 in 2005. At the Boys Academy, the average daily population
was 34, up from 28 in 2005. Waiting lists for these programs range from two to six weeks. This not
only has an impact on the length of stay in juvenile halls for offenders awaiting camp placement,
but it also impacts the quality of the aftercare we are able to provide to youth leaving the camp.
Our aftercare program is designed such that a juvenile offender who relapses while under aftercare
supervision can be returned to the camp for a brief behavioral intervention lasting two to five
weeks. With the current waiting lists, there is often no hope of returning an offender to the camp
within five weeks of their violation, greatly reducing the impact of what was designed to be a swift
intervention.
Analysis of Crime Risks by Region: Regional trends have taken a surprising turn in the past
three years, with unforeseen problems in the Santa Barbara area, including an increase in overall
referrals, a 70% increase in felony referrals, a 46% increase in probation violations, and increased
utilization of juvenile hall. Juvenile arrests for violent crimes in the city of Santa Barbara increased
by 238% over the past four years.
The largest increase in referrals in 2006 was in Lompoc Valley (13%). Referrals for status offenses
and infractions increased over the past two years while felony referrals remained fairly stable. It
must be noted, however, that while the Lompoc Valley has only 20% of the countywide juvenile
population, 35% of felony referrals and 30% of sustained petitions for violent crimes in 2006
were from the Lompoc Valley.
In the Santa Maria Valley, referrals for status offenses and infractions have decreased and felony
referrals remained fairly stable. While the situation seems to have stabilized somewhat in the Santa
Maria Valley, notable incidences of gang violence and homicides in the region during the first
quarter of 2007 may indicate an escalation of juvenile crime.
Continuum of Responses to Juvenile Crime in Santa Barbara County: There have been
significant changes to the continuum over the past ten years.
• Overall referrals have increased by 3.1%.
• More females are entering the juvenile justice system. Females now represent 36% of all referrals
• Fewer cases are now being closed at intake.
• More offenders are being diverted from the juvenile justice system.
• Fewer offenders are being sent to out of home placements.
• More offenders returning from placements are receiving aftercare services.
• Fewer offenders are being committed to DJJ.
• The continuum of responses has changed over the past ten years with the addition of the
Truancy and Early Intervention Programs, Juvenile Drug Court, and Los Prietos Boys
Academy and the loss of Challenge I and Challenge II/New Vistas programs.
Trends and Issues Impacting the Juvenile Justice System: In considering what trends and
emerging issues will impact Santa Barbara County’s ability to effectively manage juvenile crime
over the next five years, the Local Action Plan Work Group identified the following concerns.
Increased Felonies and Violent Crimes: In 2006, the violent crime rate for juveniles reached its
highest point in the last fourteen years. Sustained petitions for violent offenses have increased by
225% since 2001 and by 46% in the past year alone. Sustained juvenile petitions for felony offenses
have increased 75% from 2001; and in one year (2005), felony arrests rates rose 17%. Assuming
there have been no extraordinary increases in enforcement, this appears to indicate a trend toward
juveniles becoming involved in more serious crimes. These are not all repeat offenders, escalating
their criminal activity from misdemeanors to felonies. One in three felony referrals in the past year
were for first time offenders.
Increased Gang Activity: The various law enforcement jurisdictions in the county have documented
at least 1,940 gang members and associates (550 by the Santa Barbara Police Dept.; 400 by the
Sheriff; 450 by the Lompoc Police Dept.; and 540 by the Santa Maria Police Department). However,
actual estimates of gang members exceed these numbers, as these represent only those with whom
law enforcement has had contact.
Throughout the county, law enforcement reports increased female gang recruitment, recruitment
of younger youth, increased aggression, and increased drug dealing. Police detectives partially
attribute the increase in gang-related violence to the recent release of several older gang veterans
from state prison. Fear of reprisals and violent retribution for providing information to law
enforcement makes it ever more challenging for officers to solve gang related crimes.
From 2003 to 2006, police report a 151% increase in gang-related offenses in the city of Santa
Barbara. In the past six months, ongoing feuds between rival juvenile gangs have resulted in several
large brawls in downtown Santa Barbara, resulting in several serious injuries and one death.
Over the past five years, gang-related arrests in the Lompoc Valley have increased by 250%.
Following a string of violent incidents in the Spring and Summer of 2005, law enforcement sought
a gang injunction against the city’s two primary rival gangs. The gang injunction was finalized in
February, 2006, establishing a safety zone that encompasses two square miles in the city’s core
area. While the injunction has helped somewhat to quell the violence, there were two gang-related
homicides in October and November, 2006, one of which occurred in the “safe zone” across from
Lompoc High School.
Dashing hopes that violence was stabilizing in Santa Maria, the Santa Maria Police Department’s
gang suppression unit reports a spike in gang activity since the beginning of 2007. Police believe
influential gang members who recently have come out of prison may be responsible for these spikes.
In February, 2007 Santa Maria witnessed the worst two weeks the city had ever experienced in
terms of gang-related crime. There were nine violent crimes - including two homicides - within the
space of two weeks. Gang activity in Santa Maria, as distinct from other regions, is also typified by
street robberies of random individuals, often migrant workers.
Use and Abuse of Illegal Substances: Substance abuse among juveniles is increasing throughout
Santa Barbara County, evidenced in part by increased juvenile admissions to county-funded
treatment services. While substance abuse has always been a factor in juvenile crime, there are
several disturbing new trends connected with drug use and sales. More females are involved in
drug transactions than ever before. There is more gang involvement in drug trafficking, including
recruitment of minors to assist in dealing. Drug dealers are more likely to be armed, and there
has been increased violence over drug deals. Part of the reason for these trends is the increase
in methamphetamine use and sales, which has overshadowed cocaine and heroin as the drug of
choice throughout the Central Coast. This highly addictive, inexpensive, and readily available
drug increases the addict’s potential for violence and can exacerbate or trigger mental illness.
Methamphetamine abuse is particularly evident among youth committed to our juvenile instituions.
In 2005-06, there was a 68.5% increase in meth-related juvenile hall bookings over the previous year.
Thirty percent of the boys committed to Los Prietos Boys Camp had a history of methamphetamine
use/abuse and 10% were committed directly due to methamphetamine. Although Los Prietos Boys
Academy had no commitments directly related to methamphetamine offenses, 25% of those wards
claimed meth as their drug of choice on an assessment or had a prior disposition related to the use
of methamphetamine.
These trends are clearly indicative of the escalating physical, emotional and behavioral impacts
that substance abuse in general, and especially methamphetamine abuse, has on the youthful
population served and the number of potential undetected abusers who will enter the system in the
future with significant needs for treatment and intervention.
Gaps in Services: Having identified these three primary trends impacting the juvenile justice
system, the Local Action Plan Work Group looked at existing services that addressed these urgent
issues and the service gaps that need to be filled in order to be responsive to these emerging
trends. They concluded that strategic planning for the juvenile justice system needs to take into
consideration the following gaps in services to address critical trends:
• Increasing the capacity of the Probation Department to provide appropriate levels of
supervision to offenders who do not qualify for specialized caseloads.
• Increasing coordination between Probation and law enforcement in gang suppression
activities and intelligence;
• Violence and gang prevention education for younger children and adolescents;
• Intervention services that focus on values clarification, aggression reduction, and other risk
factors for violence and gang involvement;
• Family focused interventions, including prevention services for siblings of gang
members;
• Increased individual and family counseling as a component of juvenile substance abuse
treatment; and
• Increasing the capacity of the juvenile justice system to respond early and appropriately to
the mental health needs of offenders.
JJCPA Programs and Outcomes: In order to determine whether to continue to recommend
currently funded strategies, the work group reviewed the outcomes of the JJCPA strategies over
the past four years. Their analysis also took into consideration programmatic changes within
these strategies which might improve outcomes despite declining resources, and better respond to
emerging needs, such as increased violence and gang involvement.
The overall outcomes for youth participating in the Truancy Mediation Program in 2005-06
were similar to results for the previous year, however there appears to be improvements in the
effectiveness of the initial warning letter and a reduction in the percentage of truants who go on to
the School Attendance Review Board. Ninety-two percent of youth entering Step 3 of the Truancy
Mediation Program had no new felony or misdemeanor arrests within six months.
Youth participating in the First Offender Intervention Program demonstrated an increase in
completion rates for probation in 2005-2006 as compared to prior years. However, we are seeing
some decline in rates of restitution and community service completion for program participants.
The First Offender Program continues to produce good results compared to other interventions
at the front-end of the continuum. Of those who successfully graduated from the First Offender
Program in 2005-06, 84% were not referred for a new felony or misdemeanor offense within
six months (16% recidivism). Unfortunately, less than half of those who start the First Offender
program graduate because they are exited from the program due to new offenses or probation
violations. Because the program is so successful for those who remain involved, the JJCC is
recommending changes in the exit criteria for the program to permit longer early intervention
program participation.
Rates of completion of probation and restitution for youth receiving Aftercare Services declined
somewhat in 2005-06 as compared to the first three years of the JJCPA-funded program. This could
be in part due to the decrease in per participant expenditures. The rate of completion of community
service for Aftercare Program participants is comparable to prior years. For youth successfully
completing aftercare in 2005-06, only 17 % were referred for a new felony or misdemeanor offense
within six months of program completion. (The rate of recidivism may be slightly underestimated,
however, since it does not include law referrals for aftercare participants that occurred after their
18th birthday.)
Recommended Strategies for JJCPA Funding
After reviewing all available information, the JJCC continues to recommend funding the three
current strategies. The JJCC is cognizant of and concerned about the data trends that indicate an
increase in more serious and violent juvenile crime. However, we are reluctant to eliminate any
one of the three JJCPA funded strategies (Truancy, Assessment/Early Intervention, and Aftercare)
which effectively distribute JJCPA resources across the continuum of responses to juvenile crime
from prevention to intervention and aftercare. Rather than eroding this foundation and thereby
creating additional problems in the future for any one of these populations, the JJCC supports
sustaining these three strategies, with the program improvements outlined below.
The JJCC recommends that these strategies continue targeting the same populations with the same
level of supervision, with the exception of the Early Intervention Program. Regional crime trends
support the need for increasing the staffing for this program in Santa Barbara and Lompoc from
a half-time to a full-time Deputy Probation Officer, providing the same level of supervision for
program participants in all regions of the county.
Because of the increase in violent crime and gang activity, the JJCC recommends that the services
delivered within the three strategies be primarily focused on services to reduce risk factors for gang
involvement and violence. It was recommended that basic services remain the same within the
Truancy Mediation Program, i.e., individual and family counseling, with a countywide emphasis
on providing home-based services that address the stress factors within the family. However,
Truancy Mediation Program clients would be eligible for JJCPA-funded violence prevention and
gang intervention services according to individual need.
Substance abuse services will be linked through the three regional Youth and Family Treatment
Centers established by ADMHS through existing Medi-Cal funded group substance abuse services.
The target populations for all three strategies will be served by the Youth and Family Treatment
Centers based on their identified needs and individual case plan.
Individual and family therapy, utilizing a cognitive/behavioral approach when working with
juveniles, will be contracted by JJCPA regionally and available for juvenile offenders referred
through all three of the JJCPA strategies (Truancy Mediation, First Offender Intervention and
Aftercare Services).
Services to intervene with gang-involved or at-risk youth will focus on addressing risk factors such
as aggression and negative peer associations, as well as protective factors such as positive cultural
values. Community based organizations contracted to provide JJCPA-funded services will utilize
research-based intervention programs, including Aggression Replacement Training, and the Los
Compadres Program’s El Joven Nobles curriculum.
Additional Long-Term Strategies
In addition to the JJCPA strategies the JJCC adopted the following recommendations, which focus
on addressing the increase in violent and more serious juvenile crimes. Some of these strategies
can be implemented without additional funding; others need to be further developed in readiness
to respond to future funding opportunities.
1. Using data collected through the Santa Barbara Asset Risk Assessment tool, establish a more
detailed profile of minors entering the juvenile justice system and at different levels in the
continuum, especially the risk level for violence, to better impact program design.
2. Target the most intensive services toward youth who are likely to be the most violent
offenders.
3. Increase the level of supervision and case management of probation minors that have
committed a violent crime or are identified as most likely to become violent offenders.
4. Increase collaboration among law enforcement agencies, probation, and DJJ parole across
the county to ensure proactive enforcement.
5. Develop a county wide, evidenced based gang prevention strategy.
The following strategies were identified to maximize the resources available to accomplish the
above recommendations.
1. Maximize the use of existing services/programming and strengthen public-private
partnerships. Explore innovative strategies for linking juvenile justice clients to existing
community-based services and ensuring their participation in those services.
2. Establish an interagency, public/private work group that meets regularly to explore funding
opportunities and develop joint funding proposals in order to be able to respond to grant
opportunities in a timely and coordinated manner.
The Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council and the Local Action Plan Update Committee have
prepared a document that articulates gaps in services, strategies, and resources: our 2007-2008
Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan (Local Action Plan). As we face new challenges
in the coming years, this Plan will provide a blueprint for an effective multiagency response to the
needs of at-risk youth who find themselves involved in the juvenile justice system.
10
I. Background Summary of Santa Barbara County’s Juvenile Justice System
Under careful oversight by the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council (JJCC) since 1996, the
juvenile justice system has evolved as the result of purposeful innovation. Assessments and
reassessments of our programs, service delivery and population trends have resulted in significant
strides in collaborative service delivery and innovative research demonstration programs.
Historically, services were mostly offense-driven; the minor who committed the most serious
offense received the most attention and the most services. In 1993, a philosophical shift occurred
toward investing more resources earlier to prevent the development of delinquent behavior. This
trend prompted a renewed interest in stronger early intervention strategies. Several large, multiyear,
multiagency projects were launched with grant funding that focused primarily on prevention and
treatment. Each project sought to assess, identify, and provide early interventions to juvenile
offenders prior to the commission of a serious offense. These innovative projects accelerated
the growth of collaborative relationships and produced invaluable research data. These projects
included: Multiagency Integrated System of Care (MISC), Challenge I, Truancy Prevention and
Parent Accountability Program, OCAP/Partnership for Families, Challenge II/NEW VISTAS,
Juvenile Drug Court, Tri-Counties Boot Camp and JJCPA.
As a result, leaders in juvenile justice, education and family services areas have promoted a
vast expansion of collaborative, interagency partnerships. For example, the MISC grant led to
the creation of cross-agency assessment and service planning teams in each region of the county
with a network of mental health service providers and case managers working together, under the
same roof, using a single case treatment plan for minors and their families. A Placement Review
Committee (PRC) was established to screen prospective group home and Division of Juvenile
Justice (DJJ, formerly California Youth Authority) placements, thus reducing the use of group
home placements and commitments to DJJ. Additionally, the concept of “wraparound” services
was embraced and implemented through the combined, coordinated efforts of staff from county
departments and community-based agencies.
There has also been an increased emphasis on reaching more juveniles with family-focused
services, multiagency strength-based assessments, restorative justice, and a neighborhood approach
to administering juvenile justice. Strength-based philosophies are reinforced yearly through the
Corrections Standards Authority, Standards of Training in Corrections (STC) training curriculum
and presented to new staff via the Department’s Orientation Program. By seeking out and building
upon individual, family, and community strengths, while also confronting and dealing with problem
areas, the Probation Department and its collaborative partners are helping to facilitate a family’s
self-fulfilling prophecy of success and positive change.
Another important factor affecting Santa Barbara County’s approach to Juvenile Justice is
recognition of the relationship of alcohol and drug abuse to juvenile crime. Santa Barbara County
Alcohol, Drug, and Mental Health Services (ADMHS) has established Youth and Family Treatment
Centers to serve as “hubs” for alcohol and drug prevention and treatment services in the three
largest population centers—Lompoc, Santa Maria and Santa Barbara. These centers, which feature
services by community-based organizations, receive referrals from schools, Juvenile Drug Court,
11
Teen Court, the Child Welfare Services Division of the County Department of Social Services,
local police departments, Probation Officers, and individuals seeking services. The establishment
of these centers is an important component in the effort to prevent juvenile crime, both by reaching
minors before they become involved in the juvenile justice system and by providing a focal point
in the community for ongoing aftercare services to minors with alcohol and drug problems.
Another very significant trend has been the collaborative approach to addressing the issue of
truancy countywide, and its relationship to juvenile crime. In 1997, the Truancy Prevention &
Parent Accountability Program was established in the Santa Maria Valley via the Challenge I grant
in collaboration with the District Attorney, schools, and community-based organizations. Goals
were achieved through a series of graduated sanctions and interventions with the student and their
family. In 2001, the program became one of the JJCPA-funded strategies and was implemented
countywide.
Santa Barbara County has taken a pro-active approach to early assessment of minors referred
to Probation, in order to identify those minors considered to be a high risk to reoffend. Initial
Assessment/First Offender Intervention, a JJCPA-funded strategy, has allowed the Department to
develop a strength-based assessment tool, in collaboration with UCSB. In 2005, the Department
began implementing the recently validated Santa Barbara Asset and Risk Assessment (SB ARA).
This tool provides greater predictability for determining risk of reoffending. The assessment
identifies assets as well as risks across 12 domains and assists in identifying levels of supervision
and creating service plans focusing on both needs and strengths.
In addition to front-end, prevention-oriented interventions for first-time offenders, aftercare
services are being provided to capitalize on the gains made during out-of-home placements, as well
as at Los Prietos Boys Camp and Boys Academy, and to sustain those gains through a structured
transition back to the home and community. Aftercare services are provided countywide by virtue
of the Department’s third JJCPA-funded strategy.
Many of these programmatic shifts were accomplished with the aid of time-limited grant funding.
With the exception of JJCPA funding, state and federal funding for many of the projects described
above ended in 2002-2003. JJCPA has been and continues to be an extremely precious resource to
fill gaps in the juvenile justice system.
This decline in resources has had a negative impact on the Probation Department’s ability to maintain
the levels of supervision required to support these comprehensive strategies. The challenge before
Santa Barbara County at this time is to find long-term funding for programs that have demonstrated
themselves to be effective, and to consider new strategies to address the increase in felonies and
violent crimes among juveniles. We must consider how to prioritize our future resources to address
the more serious and violent offender, without abandoning our prevention and early intervention
strategies that serve youth at the “front end” of the juvenile justice system.
12
II. Review of Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan (Local Action Plan)
A. Local Action Plan Update Committee
JJCPA applicants are required to annually review, update and approve the County’s
Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan. The 33 members of the 2007-2008 JJCPA
Local Action Plan Work Group met monthly from September to March, 2007 to review
performance measures for JJCPA funded programs, crime data, and gaps in services. The group
developed and adopted the following principles to focus their work:
• The key to success is focusing on what we know works.
• A successful plan will include juveniles receiving the appropriate treatment and
supervision, with an emphasis on family oriented service delivery.
• The greatest success can be achieved by maximizing existing services/programming and
the strength of our public-private partnerships.
B. Demographic Trend Data
The population of Santa Barbara County was 421,656 as of July 1, 2006, up .72% from 2005.
The net growth in the county is taking place in the Santa Maria Valley and in Buellton. While
as a whole the county’s population continues growing slowly, the juvenile population peaked in
2005 and is now on a declining trend.
Santa Barbara County Population Projections Ages 10 – 17
As the chart on the next page indicates, the school population dropped .5% county wide in the
2005-06 school year. The only school district with a significant increase (5.4%) was the Santa
Maria Joint Unified High School District. Preliminary 2006-07 school year data show that this
downward enrollment trend is continuing in South County and Lompoc, with enrollment in the
Santa Maria Valley only slightly increased. It is expected that this trend will continue in the
foreseeable future.
13
C. Santa Barbara County Overall Crime Trends
The overall crime rate for Santa Barbara County is increasing from the all time lows seen in 19992000. Both reported violent crime and property crime rates dropped slightly in 2005, yet they are
still approximately 25% higher than they were six years ago.
Historically, crime rates in our county have been considerably lower than those in the state and the
nation; however that gap is beginning to close, especially with respect to violent crime.
14
D. Santa Barbara County Juvenile Crime Trends
The overall juvenile arrest rate, which has been steadily declining since 1996, began increasing
in 2005. Misdemeanor arrests have continued to decline, however felony arrests are driving the
crime rate up.
Felony Arrests and Sustained Petitions: Of serious concern is the 17% increase in felony arrest
rates in 2005. Preliminary data does not show a significant increase in felony referrals to the
Probation Department for 2006, however this trend bears watching. Sustained felony petitions
have increased 75% from 2001, with a sharp increase of 44% in 2006. Assuming there have
been no extraordinary increases in enforcement, this appears to indicate a trend toward juveniles
becoming involved in more serious crimes. One in three felony referrals in the past year were for
first time offenders.
Juvenile Violent Crime Rate: In 2006 the violent crime rate for juveniles reached its highest
point in the last fourteen years. Sustained petitions for violent offenses have increased by 225%
since 2001 and by 46% in the past year alone. Misdemeanor assaults, which represent 80% of all
violent offenses, increased by 53% in the past year.
15
Juvenile Probation Referrals: Juvenile Probation referrals reached an all time high in 2006,
with a 9% increase in the past year alone.
number of referrals
Another significant trend is a 52% growth in female referrals since 1994.
16
Juvenile Supervision Caseloads: With increasing referrals and no increase in staffing, the
intensity of supervision/offender has unfortunately been decreasing. On January 1, 2006 there
were 16% more juveniles on supervision status than there were a year earlier. The number of 602
wards increased by 20% in the same time period.
Foster and Group Home Placements: In the past year the average number of juveniles in
group or foster homes rose by 14%. Total bed days utilized in foster and group home placements
were up by 9% last year and the highest since 1999. In spite of the overall increase in 2006,
placements started dropping in mid year and by February 2007, we had dropped back to the
lowest number of youth we had in placement since April of 2002. As seen in the chart below,
foster home placements appear to cycle over time. There are many issues that affect these cycles
and we do not yet understand them well enough to completely predict future trends.
3500
Santa Barbara Co Probation Juvenile Group/Foster Home Placements
PRC started
3000
2500
Boot Camp opened
MISC started
OCAP started
2000
1500
Challenge 1 started
OCAP ended
ROPP started
NEW VISTAS started
1000
monthly bed days used
500
Challenge I ended
JJCPA started
ROPP ended
NEW VISTAS ended
0
Jul-95
Jul-96
Jul-97
Jul-98
Jul-99
Jul-00
Jul-01
Jul-02
Jul-03
Jul-04
Jul-05
Jan-95
Jan-96
Jan-97
Jan-98
Jan-99
Jan-00
Jan-01
Jan-02
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Feb-06
Feb-07
Aug-06
17
Juvenile Hall Utilization: In 2006, countywide admissions to Juvenile Hall increased by 7%
over the previous year, with substantially more admissions to the Santa Barbara Juvenile Hall
than were anticipated. The combined average daily population at both juvenile halls was 111 in
2006, a 22% increase from the prior year. This increase was primarily attributable to a longer
average stay per admission at the Santa Maria Juvenile Hall, due to the lack of appropriate
placements for high risk offenders with mental health needs, as well as several juveniles that are
being prosecuted in adult court for serious offenses. There was also a 25% increase in admissions
to the Santa Barbara Juvenile Hall, due in part to increased probation violations related to gang
activity.
The fact that there are waiting lists for commitments to CEC and to Los Prietos Boy’s Camp and
Boy’s Academy also increases that average daily population of the juvenile halls, as youth who are
assigned to these placements spend time in juvenile hall until they become available.
Counseling and Education Center (CEC) Commitments: The combined enrollment capacity
of the three Counseling and Education Centers in the County is 66. The average number of youth
under commitment to the CECs in the county has consistently been above 75 over the past several
years and youth committed to these programs are placed on a waiting list until a place opens up
at the CEC. If they commit a probation violation during this waiting period, they can be placed in
juvenile hall. CEC waiting lists are highest in Santa Maria.
For offenders who might otherwise require out of home placements, the Counseling and Education
Centers are often used proactively to provide daily supervision while maintaining them in their
home. The high numbers of youth committed to the CECs over the past several years is indicative
of the reduction of alternatives that the Probation Department has to utilize for youth requiring a
high level of structure and supervision.
Los Prietos Boys Camp and Boys Academy: Los Prietos Boys Camp has a 56-bed capacity
and the Boys Academy has a 40-bed capacity. However, due to fiscal restrictions, the Probation
Department is only able to provide enough staff to achieve a 75-bed combined capacity for these
18
programs. The average daily population at Los Prietos Boys Camp was 39 in 2006, up from 32 in
2005. At the Boys Academy, the average daily population was 34, up from 28 in 2005. Waiting
lists for these programs range from two to six weeks. This phenomenon not only has an impact
on the length of stay in juvenile halls for offenders awaiting camp placement, but it also impacts
the quality of the aftercare we are able to provide to youth leaving the camp. A juvenile offender
who relapses while under aftercare supervision can be returned to the camp for a brief behavioral
intervention lasting two to five weeks. With the current waiting lists, there is often no hope of
returning an offender to the camp within five weeks of their violation, greatly reducing the impact
of what was designed to be a swift intervention.
Conclusions: From 1996 to 2002, Santa Barbara County was able to devote considerable resources
to enhancing juvenile justice services. This investment paid off in reduced juvenile crime rates. As
these resources declined, it has been increasingly difficult to maintain comprehensive programs
and intensive supervision. As a result, we are seeing an upswing over the past four years in violent
crime and sustained felonies. Increasing referrals and severity of crime has created capacity issues
at virtually every level of the system from field services to institutions.
E. Analysis of Crime Risks by Region
While referrals have increased in every area office in the county, there are some significant regional
differences in specific trends, as illustrated by the charts on the following pages:
• In the past three years, the Santa Barbara area surpassed the Santa Maria Valley in total
juvenile referrals, with an increase of 10% in 2006. However, the single year largest increase
in referrals was in Lompoc (13.2%) in 2006.
• Referrals for status offenses (601’s) and infractions decreased over the past three years
in Santa Barbara and Santa Maria, reversing the previous trend. This may indicate a
reprioritization of law enforcement’s efforts in both regions toward more serious crimes. In
Lompoc, referrals for these offenses have increased over the past two years.
19
• Felony referrals in the Santa Barbara area had reached an all-time low in 2003. From 2003
to 2006, there was a 70% increase in felony referrals in South County. Over the same time
period, the numbers of felony referrals in Santa Maria and Lompoc remained fairly stable.
It must be noted, however, that a disproportionate number of the felony referrals (35%) in
the county come from the Lompoc Valley.
• Of all sustained petitions for violent offenses, 28.5% were in the Lompoc Valley, 30.5% were
in Santa Barbara, and 41% were in Santa Maria. Given that the Lompoc Valley represents
only 20% of the juvenile population in the county, there appears to be proportionately more
violent offenses in Lompoc.
annual no of referrals
• There has been a gradually increasing trendline in referrals for probation violations in
all areas of the county over the past six years. However, there was a significant increase
(46%) in referrals for probation violations in Santa Barbara in 2006. It appears to be driven
by law enforcement’s efforts to be more proactive about gang activity and consequently
uncovering more probation violations.
20
Conclusions: Regional trends have taken a surprising turn in the past three years, with unforeseen
problems in the Santa Barbara area, including an increase in overall referrals, a significant increase
in felony referrals and probation violations, and increased utilization of the South County juvenile
hall. While the situation seems to have stabilized somewhat in the Santa Maria Valley, based
on crime data through 2006, notable incidences of gang violence and homicides in the region
during the first quarter of 2007 may indicate an escalation of juvenile crime. The Lompoc Valley is
showing increased overall referrals and a disproportionately high incidence of violent crimes.
21
F. Continuum of Responses to Juvenile Crime in Santa Barbara County
The chart on the following page compares the current continuum of responses to juvenile crime
in 2006, as compared to those in 1996. Please note that the numbers on this chart represent the
disposition of referrals, not necessarily individual offenders. There have been significant changes
over the past ten years in several areas:
• Overall referrals have increased by 3.1%.
• More females are entering the juvenile justice system. Females represented 27% of all
referrals in 1996 and now represent 36%.
• Fewer cases are now being closed at intake (38% in 1996 as compared to 29% in 2006).
• More offenders are being diverted from the juvenile justice system (470 to Teen Court and
C.O.D.E. in 1996, as compared to 945 to Teen Court in 2006).
• Fewer offenders are being sent to out of home placements (84 in 1996 as compared to 64
in 2006).
• More offenders returning from placements are receiving aftercare services (60 in 1996
compared to 165 in 2006).
• Fewer offenders are being committed to DJJ (18 in 1996 compared to 3 in 2006).
• The continuum of responses has changed over the past ten years with the addition of the
Truancy and Early Intervention Programs, Juvenile Drug Court, and Los Prietos Boys
Academy.
22
23
G. Trends and Issues Impacting the Juvenile Justice System
In considering what trends and emerging issues will impact Santa Barbara County’s ability
to effectively manage juvenile crime over the next five years, the Local Action Plan Update
Committee identified three inter-related concerns: (1) an increase in felonies and violent crimes
among juveniles; (2) increased gang activity, including more violent crimes and drug trafficking;
and (3) use and abuse of illegal substances, especially methamphetamine.
Increased Felonies and Violent Crimes: Sustained juvenile petitions for felony offenses have
increased 75% from 2001; and in one year (2005), felony arrests rates rose 17%. Assuming there
have been no extraordinary increases in enforcement, this appears to indicate a trend toward
juveniles becoming involved in more serious crimes. These are not all repeat offenders, escalating
their criminal activity from misdemeanors to felonies. One in three felony referrals in the past year
were for first time offenders.
This trend appears to be more pronounced in South County. From 2003 to 2006, there was a 70%
increase in felony referrals in the Santa Barbara office. Over the same time period, the numbers of
felony referrals in Santa Maria and Lompoc remained fairly stable. It must be noted, however, that
a disproportionate number of the felony referrals (35%) in the county come from Lompoc.
In 2006, the violent crime rate for juveniles reached its highest point in the last fourteen years.
Sustained petitions for violent offenses have increased by 225% since 2001 and by 46% in the past
year alone. Law enforcement officers attribute these trends to escalating gang activity, particularly
in South County.
In the 2006-07 California Healthy Kids Survey, 6% of 7th graders and 5% of 9th and 11th graders
countywide reported that they had carried a gun to school in the past year. Thirteen percent reported
carrying other types of weapons to school. Among students at nontraditional (continuation) schools,
26% reported carrying gun to school and 50% reported carrying another type of weapon. The
rates of weapons possession at school among Santa Barbara County students is higher than the
California average, and significant for 7th graders. Since weapons possession outside of school is 3
to 4 times more likely than at school, we must consider the implications this has for street violence
as well as campus violence.
One out of three students reported having seen someone with a weapon at school. 10% of 7th
graders, 9% of 9th graders, and 8% of 11th graders reported being threatened or injured with a
weapon; among nontraditional students, this rate was 31%. When you consider the numbers these
percentages represent, this is a serious affront to student safety.
Increased Gang Activity: In the 2006-07 California Healthy Kids Survey, 10% of 7th graders and
9% of 9th and 11th graders reported that they considered themselves a member of a gang. 40%
of nontraditional students (at continuation schools) considered themselves a gang member. This
represents 1,218 students who were survey respondents. If taken as a representative sample of the
secondary school population as a whole, this would mean almost 3,200 students would consider
themselves a gang member. It is important to note that 6% of female students reported that they
currently belonged to a gang.
24
The various law enforcement jurisdictions in the county have documented at least 1,940 gang
members and associates (550 by the Santa Barbara Police Dept.; 400 by the Sheriff; 450 by the
Lompoc Police Dept.; and 540 by the Santa Maria Police Department). However, actual estimates
of gang members exceed these numbers, as these represent only those with whom law enforcement
has had contact.
The Probation Department is currently undergoing a conversion of their case management data
system and is in the process of determining how to provide Probation gang information to other law
enforcement agencies. The Probation Department has a wealth of gang intelligence that would be
beneficial to interagency gang intervention efforts. A shared database is an essential aspect of our
countywide gang intervention strategy because it allows law enforcement and probation officers to
readily identify and confirm gang intelligence information across jurisdictions and agencies.
Gang Activity in the Santa Barbara Region: The Santa Barbara Police Department’s Youth Services
Unit responds to all juvenile and gang related crimes. They estimate that gang membership in the
city has climbed from 400 to 550 over the past five years. From 2003 to 2006, police report a
151% increase in gang-related offenses in the city of Santa Barbara. From 2002 to 2006 juvenile
arrests for violent crimes in Santa Barbara increased by 238%. Police detectives partially attribute
the increase in gang-related violence to the recent release of several older gang veterans from state
prison.
Ongoing feuds between rival gangs have resulted in large brawls in downtown Santa Barbara,
such as the one that occurred in October, 2006 when police had to separate 20 armed juvenile gang
members embroiled in a fight that left two teenagers hospitalized, one with three stab wounds to
the back. Another large State Street brawl occurred in broad daylight in March, 2007 resulting in
the death of a 15-year-old boy, brutally stabbed and beaten to death by a 14-year-old. Seven other
members of the same gang, ranging in age from 13 to 16, were also arrested in this incident.
The Santa Barbara School and Law Enforcement Committee—an informal consortium of law
enforcement, Probation officers, judges, assistant principals and community based organizations—
meets monthly to discuss gang-related issues as they impact local schools. They report the following
trends in South County: adolescent females are being aggressively recruited by both male and
female adult gang members; 16% of identified juvenile gang members are now female. Local
youth are being indoctrinated into gangs at an earlier age. Eleven- and 13-year-olds have been
actively involved in acts of violence and intimidation in attempts to “control” their neighborhoods,
and have become increasingly aggressive with authority figures (adults, police officers and school
officials). Assaults on officers have increased by 50%.
Another change that has occurred in the past few years is that the “veteranos” are more involved
in narcotics. This is changing the face of what has historically been a primarily turf-driven gang
culture. Older gang members are less active in the streets, and more active in narcotics. There is
more pressure to recruit for strength in numbers and to recruit younger members as drug runners
and sellers.
25
Gang Activity in the Lompoc Valley: There are an estimated 450 gang members that have been
identified by the Lompoc Police Department. Five years ago, there were 142 gang-related arrests
in the valley. Last year, that number had grown to nearly 500 arrests.
Lompoc experienced a string of violent incidents in the Spring and Summer of 2005. A local teen
was shot as he walked on the city’s East Side. Less than two months later, a 41-year-old man on a
leisurely bicycle ride around his neighborhood was shot dead. The next day, there was what police
believe was a retaliation shooting involving three people. Another young man was stabbed twice,
on separate occasions.
In response to the increased violence, the Lompoc Police Department and the District Attorney
filed for a gang injunction against the city’s two primary rival gangs, the Southsiders and Varrio
Lamparas Primera, also known as the Westsiders. Varrio Lamparas Primera is the larger gang, with
69 adult members and 16 juvenile members, compared to Southside’s 8 adults and 13 juveniles. At
the court hearing, police officers estimated that these two gangs were responsible for 213 criminal
convictions (not all of which occurred in Lompoc), including 87 felonies and 126 misdemeanors
or infractions.
According to Senior Deputy District Attorney Gene Martinez, “These two gangs are engaged in
an ongoing ‘war’ with one another. Two gangs are claiming roughly the same area, therefore their
clashes are almost inevitable. There’s enough animosity between these two gangs, wherever they
meet up on the street there’s going to be a confrontation. One of the unfortunate consequences
is that these gang members, when they retaliate, don’t always retaliate against a specific person.
Often that person is not a gang member.”
At the injunction hearing, Arthur Diaz, the principal of Lompoc High School, testified to the
intimidation of students by gang members both on campus and on street corners immediately
adjacent to the school. He indicated that some students were afraid to leave the school at the end
of the day because of congregations of gang members around the school and that students felt they
has to make a choice to be in one gang or the other.
The gang injunction was finalized in February, 2006, establishing a safety zone that encompasses
two square miles in the city’s core area including Ryon Park, Lompoc High School and Thompson
Park. More than 100 gang members are subject to the gang injunction, which applies to anyone who
actively participates or acts in concert with one of the two named gangs now or within the past five
years. It bans gang members from associating with one another in the safety zone; fighting; using
or displaying gang symbols and wearing gang clothing; carrying dangerous weapons, firearms or
imitation firearms; graffiti and vandalism; carrying tools needed for vandalism and graffiti; and
intimidating people. Penalties for violating the injunction can be steep. An arrest for violating the
injunction can be punishable by up to six months in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000 per incident.
While the injunction has helped somewhat to quell the violence, a former Cabrillo High football
player was gunned down in October, 2006 during a chance meeting at a gas station with a high
school antagonist affiliated with a local gang. One month later, another fatal shooting occurred in
the “safe zone” across from Lompoc High School, also gang related.
26
The most challenging aspect of the battle against gang violence in Lompoc is that many gang
crimes go unreported for fear of gang retaliation. Thus, the gang members can continue their reign
of terror without any concern about punishment. Families who have tried to intervene or assist
victims of gang-related crimes have often been harassed to the point that they are forced to move
out of the area.
Gang Activity in the Santa Maria Valley: According to law enforcement agencies, there are four
known gangs in Santa Maria. Police have documented 540 members, but estimate there may be
nearly 2,000 gang members and associates in Santa Maria. While crime trend data appears to indicate
a stabilization of violent crime in 2006, the Santa Maria Police Department’s gang suppression
unit reports a spike in gang activity since the beginning of 2007. Police believe influential gang
members who recently have come out of prison may be responsible for these spikes. Police, noting
the recent increase in gang recruitment, report: “To prove their alliance to the gang, recruits often
commit crimes in the name of the gang. We’ve also seen an increase in street robberies of random
individuals, typically migrant workers.”
In February, 2007 Santa Maria witnessed the worst two weeks the city had ever experienced in
terms of gang-related crime. There were nine violent crimes - including two homicides - within the
space of two weeks. Gang members were responsible for a Saturday night shooting in which two
people were shot at point blank range at a youth dance held at a local church. Gang members were
also arrested for a vicious stabbing and the fatal shooting of a 19-year old man in the prior week.
In March, the violence has continued, including another homicide.
Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Deputies have also seen a recent spike in gang-related crimes in
Tanglewood, a small unincorporated community southwest of Santa Maria. Investigators have
identified one gang in that area with nearly 25 known members. Eleven members of the Tanglewood
gang were arrested in parole and probation sweeps in February, 2006.
Guadalupe Police Chief Jerry Tucker reports that in Guadalupe—with a population of about
6,300—his police force knows of about 20 gang members, who range in age from 14 to their late
20s. In 2006 there were several stabbings and a gang related shooting in this small town.
As in other parts of the county, Santa Maria Valley law enforcement officers report that one of
the primary obstacles to solving gang-related crimes is silence. Local gangs have reputations for
vicious reprisals, striking out—and often gunning down—those who try to deprive them of their
street-based power. Gangs are also bullying witnesses, leaving crimes like drive-by shootings and
store robberies unsolved.
Use and Abuse of Illegal Substances: Substance abuse among juveniles is increasing throughout
Santa Barbara County. From 2000 to 2004, Juvenile admissions to county-funded treatment
services increased by 202% in Santa Maria, 303% in Lompoc, and 364% in Santa Barbara.
Marijuana is the primary drug of choice for 64% of adolescents entering treatment, followed by
alcohol (22%). Methamphetamine is now the third most often reported drug of choice for youth
in treatment (10%). From 2000 to 2004 the frequency of methamphetamine as the primary drug
27
of choice for youth in treatment rose from 3% to 13% in Lompoc, and from 13% to 17% in Santa
Maria. Santa Barbara has fewer youth coming into treatment for methamphetamine addiction
(5%), although clinicians are anecdotally reporting greater prevalence of this drug. Youth are often
reluctant to admit to methamphetamine use coming into treatment, so these statistics are likely to
under-represent the problem.
Substance abuse is having a tremendous impact in all criminal activity, countywide. Over 80%
of juveniles on Probation have terms and conditions related to alcohol and drug testing. While
substance abuse has always been a factor in juvenile crime, there are several disturbing new trends
connected with drug use and sales. More females are involved in drug transactions than ever
before. There is more gang involvement in drug trafficking, including recruitment of minors to
assist in dealing. Drug dealers are more likely to be armed and there has been increased violence
over drug deals.
Part of the reason for these trends is the increase in methamphetamine use and sales, which has
overshadowed cocaine and heroin as the drug of choice throughout the Central Coast. Santa Barbara
County is listed as one of the top 15 Counties for methamphetamine use in California based upon
information reported to the Office of AIDS through local HIV/AIDS Education and Prevention
Programs. In 2000-2001 methamphetamine was reported as the primary drug of choice for 19%
of all clients (youth and adults) at admission to treatment; by 2005-2006, 31% of clients reported
meth as the primary drug of choice at admission.
Methamphetamine is inexpensive, easy to get, and widespread. It cuts across all economic and
social strata and throughout every ethnic group. Methamphetamine is considered more addicting
than heroin or cocaine with only a 6%-7% recovery rate for those in treatment. Outlaw motorcycle
gangs once dominated the methamphetamine trafficking, but Mexican nationals have taken over.
The involvement of local gangs in methamphetamine sales has brought increasing violence as the
drug becomes more popular, and puts juveniles increasingly at risk for gang recruitment as drug
runners.
The pervasiveness of methamphetamine use in Santa Barbara County is destroying families and
putting a tremendous stress on the child welfare system. Substance abuse was identified as a factor
in 68% of new Santa Barbara County child welfare cases opened in 2004-2005. Approximately
half (52%) of the 300 children in out-of-home placement on July 1, 2006 in Santa Barbara
County were removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect resulting from parental use of
methamphetamine.
School surveys also point to increasing use of methamphetamine among juveniles, particularly the
high risk population attending continuation schools. In the 2004-05 survey 5% of 9th graders and
7% of 11th graders reported using methamphetamine (lifetime use). However among students in
continuation schools, 45% reported methamphetamine use. There has been a significant increase
in the percentage of youth in treatment who use methamphetamine, increasing from 2% in 2000-01
to 7% in 2004-05.
28
The Probation Department has seen a sustantial increase in methamphetamine users in our juvenile
insitutions. In 2005-2006, 81% of the drug-related bookings in Santa Maria Juvenile Hall and 61% of
drug-related bookings in Sasnta Barbara Juvenile Hall were for methamphetamine related offenses.
This represents a 68.5% increase in meth-related juvenile hall bookings over the previous year. In
2005, 30% of the boys committed to Los Prietos Boys Camp had a history of methamphetamine
use/abuse and 10% were committed directly due to methamphetamine. Although Los Prietos Boys
Camp had no commitments directly related to methamphetamine offenses, 25% of those wards
claimed meth as their drug of choice on an assessment or had a prior disposition related to the use
of methamphetamine.
These trends are clearly indicative of the escalating physical, emotional and behavioral impacts
that substance abuse in general, and especially methamphetamine abuse, has on the youthful
population served and the number of potential undetected abusers who will enter the system in the
future with significant needs for treatment and intervention.
H. Gaps in Services
In order to effectively address these disturbing trends, the local juvenile justice system will need
to expand it’s capacity to offer appropriate levels of supervision to juvenile offenders who need
more intensive supervision than can be provided on a general caseload. Currently the only youth
who qualify for a specialized caseload are those who are in juvenile drug court, are eligible for
Children’s System of Care (CSOC), or qualify for the First Offender Early Intervention Program.
There are many others who fall outside of these requirements who need more intensive supervision
in order to be successful in the treatment services to which they are referred. The success of our
Challenge Grant, New Vistas, and MISC programs was based on the close working relationships
between probation officers and treatment providers, and the ability of probation officers to closely
supervise these youth’s participation in treatment. This is simply not possible to achieve with a
general caseload of 75 juveniles supervised by one probation officer.
Proposed State Reforms to DJJ: Other gaps in services may result from major criminal justice
reforms being proposed in the Governor’s Budget. These reforms, if approved, would confine
commitments to the Division of Juvenile Justice to male offenders involved in a violent offense.
Nonviolent and female offenders would no longer be eligible for DJJ confinement. In addition,
counties would be required to assume responsibility for parolees returning to the community from
DJJ confinement. Future juvenile justice planning in Santa Barbara County may need to take
the impact of these reforms into consideration. While Santa Barbara County’s juvenile justice
system has done everything possible to avoid confining juvenile offenders to DJJ, this option has
nonetheless been utilized when all else fails. Once the threat of DJJ confinement is removed, or
severely limited, this will undoubtedly have an impact on high risk offenders who know that they
will not be sent to DJJ.
Services to Address Increased Violence and Gang Activity: There is a need for a comprehensive,
countywide strategy to reduce violence and gang violence that begins with prevention education
for younger children (grade school) and continues through adolescence. Interventions focusing on
gang issues should concentrate on addressing the high-risk characteristics of gang involvement and
29
not label minors as gang members. For example, Aggression Replacement Training is an effective
intervention that addresses behavioral issues of gang involvement. Values clarification, such as
that delivered through the El Joven Nobles curriculum utilized by the Los Compadres program,
is also an effective form of intervention to reduce gang involvement. While both these strategies
have been utilized to some extent, there is not a coordinated system of service delivery targeting
youth at-risk for gang involvement. Family focused interventions, including providing prevention
services to the siblings of known gang members, were also seen as a promising approach.
Increased collaboration between Probation and law enforcement agencies in gang intervention and
suppression will be necessary to stem the increase in gang violence. Police departments in all three
regions of the county have gang suppression units, which communicate informally with Sheriff’s
deputies and Probation Officers regarding gang suppression. However, because the Probation
Department no longer has identified gang officers or gang caseloads, there has not been a formalized
arrangement for gang suppression intelligence and coordination between these agencies.
The Santa Barbara County Gang Intelligence Network, a collaboration of law enforcement agencies
and Probation, meets monthly to discuss a coordinated response to gang issues. The Santa Barbara
School and Law Enforcement Committee also brings together lcoal law enforcement and probation
officers with school officials to share intelligence with respect to gang activity. This localized
approach has been very productive and could be replicated in other parts of the county.
Services to Address the Use and Abuse of Illegal Substances: Santa Barbara County has invested
considerable resources in addressing substance abuse among juvenile offenders, including the
Juvenile Drug Court Program. ADMHS has established Youth and Family Treatment Centers in
each region, which provide consistent substance abuse treatment services throughout the county to
juvenile offenders and other youth. However, several treatment gaps still exist.
Minor Consent Medi-Cal is the primary funding source for adolescent substance abuse treatment.
Under Medi-Cal funding restrictions, only a very limited amount of individual and family counseling
is reimbursable. Therefore, most treatment providers focus primarily on juvenile treatment in a
group setting and cannot offer as much individual and family counseling as they would like to
in order to address the individualized needs of their clients. Family services, likewise, are most
often provided in a group setting. While this is effective because parents receive benefit from other
parents with common issues, families also need individual therapy because there are issues they
are not willing to bring up in a group setting. In some cases, families could also benefit from inhome treatment services that address family dynamics.
In order for substance abuse treatment to be successful, a strong partnership must exist between
the Probation Officer and the treatment provider. The role of Probation supervision is critical in an
adolescent treatment program, to ensure that the young person is held accountable for attending
treatment sessions. Juvenile treatment is very different from adult treatment in that youth do not
have the maturity to commit to a treatment protocol, nor do they have the same motivations that
an adult would have to stop their substance abuse. The good news is that youth who make it
through the first phase of treatment (usually 60 days) have a 65% success rate. Without strong
encouragement and reinforcement, however, most youth will not overcome their natural resistance
30
to treatment. Decreasing funds and increased caseload size have strained the ability of Probation
Officers to monitor juveniles in treatment as closely as is necessary to ensure the success of these
services.
Adressing Methamphetamine Abuse: In order to address the methamphetamine crisis, the Santa
Barbara County Inter-Agency Policy Council (IAPC) convened the Methamphetamine Prevention
Network Summit in December, 2006. The Summit was attended by 125 representatives from a
wide variety of stakeholders. The major themes that emerged during the Summit were:
• Need for improved collaboration,coordination and communication of all affected
individuals, businesses and agencies, both public and private.
• Every effort should be made to build upon the efforts of existing local anti-drug community
coalitions.
• Need for development of strategies for effective public outreach to communities and
citizens across the county.
• Need to increase the availability of information and coordinated data collection in order to
facilitate measurement of the actual impacts of this and other issues as they recur.
The full report from the Summit, including more detailed recommendations, may be found at
www.dontw8.info. It was agreed that a Planning Team would convene in order to define the scope,
membership and responsibilities of this Network.
Mental Health Services: There is also a gap in services for those youth who have mental health
problems or a dual diagnosis, i.e. co-occurring substance abuse and mental health problems.
Probation faces an on-going struggle to meet the needs of this growing population. To effectively
address this challenge, additional staff, specialized training, and programming are needed.
A significant percentage of the juveniles, approximately 45% of the 1,050 wards on active supervised
probation, have received services from ADMHS counselors, therapists or doctors. This percentage
goes up to 59% for Juvenile Hall detainees and 84% for Camp wards. Presently 25% of Santa Maria
Juvenile Hall (SMJH) detainees and 33% of Camp wards are receiving psychotropic medication.
As medication needs of the juveniles continue to grow, Probation estimates of this demand were
revised and budget allocations increased an additional $90,000 for a total of $150,000 to cover the
costs of psychotropic medication for FY06-07.
The majority of these juveniles have received little or no mental health support or services in the
community. Often when they are released from the juvenile facilities or placement, these minors
discontinue the psychotropic medication they were prescribed while in custody, thus losing the
stabilizing benefits as they return to the community. These mentally ill juveniles lose the support
they and their families may need at this critical point of their transition into the community.
Probation and its partners are hindered in addressing the needs of mentally ill offenders by the
absence of a clear system of early identification and continuity of care of services from the
Institutions to the community. A consistent evidence-based mental health screening process is
needed which would provide Probation with a front end picture of each juvenile’s level of mental
31
health needs and appropriate level of care. Although Probation utilizes state-of-the-art screening
tools, these tools are designed to predict the likelihood of re-offending, not the presence of serious
mental health issues, nor is Probation qualified to make such determinations. Lack of early identification/assessment often results in mentally ill offenders appearing before
the Court multiple times before a mental health assessment is completed. Mentally ill juveniles
often find themselves facing out-of-home placement or serving a Camp commitment before the
depth of their mental illness is properly diagnosed. The prevalence of co-occurring disorders such
as substance abuse can further complicate identification. Mentally ill offenders slip through the
justice system, misplaced in the level of care needed, re-offending and failing to benefit from
services offered in the community and experiencing multiple detentions in Juvenile Hall until they
are finally removed from the community to Camp or out-of-home placement.
Many services in place in Santa Barbara County are funding driven; however, over 44% of mentally
ill offenders lack Medi-CAL, the major funding source for these services. Mentally ill offenders
with Medi-CAL receive an average of 26% greater level of service. This is a significant disparity of
services between two otherwise similar groups and it does not address the mental health needs of
those mentally ill offenders currently unconnected to a continuity of care treatment system. Despite
the County’s best efforts, treatment options for those juvenile offenders diagnosed with a mental
illness are dictated by disparate funding mechanisms. These minors, and those with less severe but
immediate mental health needs, are returned to traditional supervision where they frequently reoffend and begin the cycle of recidivism and detainment again.
A limited number of severe cases are currently funneled into existing services, such as the
Children’s System of Care (CSOC), formally the Multiagency Integrated System of Care (MISC).
This CSOC option, though effective, has limited capacity countywide and extremely slow turnaround time. This option is unavailable to many mentally ill youth and their families who would
benefit from an immediate intervention and coordinated services. Increasing ADMHS budget
shortfalls and already overworked clinicians have resulted in decreasing availability of mental
health staff to provide services, case planning, and coordination with Probation, leaving juveniles
without cohesive support and continuity of care that would divert them from delinquent behavior
and limit their further immersion into the juvenile justice system.
Conclusions: Strategic planning for the juvenile justice system needs to take into consideration
the following gaps in services to address critical trends:
• Increasing the capacity of the probation department to provide appropriate levels of
supervision to offenders who do not qualify for specialized caseloads.
• Increasing coordination between probation and law enforcement in gang suppression
activities and intelligence;
• Violence and gang prevention education for younger children and adolescents;
• Intervention services that focus on values clarification, aggression reduction, and other risk
factors for violence and gang involvement;
• Family focused interventions, including prevention services for siblings of gang
members;
32
•
Increased individual and family counseling as a component of juvenile substance abuse
treatment; and
• Increasing the capacity of the juvenile justice system to respond early and appropriately to
the mental health needs of offenders.
I. JJCPA Programs and Outcomes
All JJCPA-funded programs must have “proven effective” track records. In order to determine
whether to continue to recommend currently funded strategies, the committee reviewed the
outcomes of the JJCPA strategies over the past four years. The following brief summary of results
substantiates the continued effectiveness of the currently funded strategies. However, their analysis
also took into consideration programmatic changes within these strategies which might improve
outcomes despite declining resources, and better respond to emerging needs. Recommendations
for programmatic improvements to each of the JJCPA-funded strategies, is discussed in section III
(see pages 38 - 40).
1. Truancy Mediation Program
Since July 2001, the Truancy Mediation Program has been funded by JJCPA. This five-step
intervention program has proven to be very successful in that it improves school attendance,
provides varied counseling and support services for families, effectively deters minors from further
involvement in the juvenile justice system and is a key component to reducing daytime crime.
Truancy Mediation services are provided countywide and are comprised of three regional teams
of staff with members from the District Attorney’s Office, Probation Department and local school
districts. Community-based organizations are contracted to provide an array of services. A series
of graduated sanctions and interventions with the student and their family are designed to address
the underlying causes of truancy.
The program was modeled after the Santa Barbara County Challenge I grant Truancy Prevention
and Parent Accountability Program. Effective outcomes demonstrated by this program were as
follows:
• 90% of all students who completed their six month follow-up did not have criminal
violations during the follow-up period;
• All schools directly involved with the Truancy Program had a decrease in the percentage
of students with unexcused absences;
• At exit, an increase in academic performance was reported for all students who received
services;
• During the first year of program implementation, there was a 25% decrease in the number
of “calls for service” for daytime law violations reported by the Santa Maria Police
Department as compared to the previous year.
33
The total program participants in the Truancy Mediation Program in 2005-06 was 12,218, which
included all students who were sent an initial truancy warning letter as well as participants who
were carried over from the previous year.
• 21% of students who received a warning letter (2,533 youth) had continued truancy
problems and were directed to attend an After School Meeting (Step 2). The warning letter
is proving more effective over time. In the first three years of the truancy program almost
33% of students receiving a warning letter were subsequently directed to an after school
meeting.
• 29% of these students (723 youth) had continued truancies and were referred to the Truancy
Mediation Team meeting (Step 3). It is at this stage in the process where direct services are
provided and outcome data is tracked.
• 31% of Step 3 participants (221 youth) continued to be truant and were referred to the
Student Attendance Review Board (SARB). This is also an improvement over the first
three years of the program when more than 45% of Step 3 participants were referred to
SARB.
• Of these 221 youth, 28% (62 students) were referred to Step 5 for a filing of a 601 Status
Offender Petition. Only 0.5% of those initially truant students continued their truant
behavior and became a 601 ward under Probation supervision.
The overall outcomes for youth participating in the Truancy Mediation Program in 2005-06 were
similar to results for the previous year. Ninety-two percent of youth entering Step 3 of the Truancy
Mediation Program had no new felony or misdemeanor arrests within six months.
2. Initial Assessment/First Offender Intervention Program
Initial Assessment: In 2006 the Probation Department received 6,932 probation referrals countywide
for 3,948 minors. Assessments are performed on all minors receiving probation supervision that
are not immediately diverted to Juvenile Traffic Court, Teen Court or closed without conference. In
2005, the SB ARA became the primary assessment tool used to insure a precision-of-fit for minors
to the appropriate treatment programs and services. Minors previously falling through the cracks
in the system, but truly in need of services, are now being identified and provided with available
resources.
Minors newly placed under probation supervision for the first time who are thought to be of
particularly high-risk, are referred to a mental health practitioner (not available in all regions) for
an additional assessment including but not limited to assessments of alcohol and drug dependency,
cognitive development and psychological testing. This service is currently only available in Santa
Maria, with limited access for minors in Lompoc.
First Offender Intervention Services: In 2005-06, one full-time Deputy Probation Officers in
Santa Maria, one half-time Deputy Probation Officer in Santa Barbara, and one half-time officer
in Lompoc, provide first offender intervention services and supervision. These services target
medium- to high-risk minors and their families with extensive treatment and active home and
34
community supervision. Community-based organizations provide a variety of services. By
providing a program of intervention, treatment and supervision, targeted minors are redirected
from the juvenile justice system.
This strategy was modeled after the Early Intervention component of Challenge I grant in the
Santa Maria Valley, which targeted minors referred to the Probation Department for the first time
or who were previously referred for a minor offense and did not receive a probation intervention.
Approximately 70% of the participants in the program were 15 years of age and younger. Because
of the successes of this early intervention approach under the Challenge I grant program, early
intervention services were replicated countywide with JJCPA funds.
Effective outcomes demonstrated by the Early Intervention Program in Challenge I, were as
follows:
• 89% of the minors completing the program did not have a new criminal violation during
the six-month follow-up period;
• 11% of the minors who completed the program were arrested for new offenses, 9% for
misdemeanors and 2% for felonies;
• Approximately two thirds of the minors had no referrals during the program (62%) and six
months after exiting from the program (68%);
•
At exit from the program, violent, property, and drug offenses accounted for 25% of the
referrals. At follow-up, however, these offenses account for only 14% of the referrals;
• 69% of the minors had Grade Point Average improvement to average or above upon exit
from the program;
• 73% of the minors had a noted increase in their self-reliance scale on the Behavior
Assessment System for Children;
• 75% of the minors reported by caregivers to have between average to high personal strengths
at exit from the program (an increase of 11%); and
• The percentage of minors who report having a drug problem decreased from 24% to 4%.
Deputy Probation Officers reported a reduction in substance abuse among minors who
completed program requirements.
Since July 1, 2001, the First Offender Intervention Program has been funded by JJCPA. Over 300
minors have participated in the First Offender Intervention Program each year. The program has a
graduation rate of 47%.
Fifty-eight percent of program participants are in the Santa Maria Valley; 22% are in the Lompoc
Valley, and 20% are in South County. The program targets minors with risk scores of 10 or above
(Orange County Risk Score), with referrals resulting in supervision for the first time. An individual
case plan is designed to meet the minor’s specific needs, which currently includes individual/
family counseling, alcohol and drug services, mentoring, and/or life skills training. Most minors
are on informal probation lasting for approximately six months before being terminated. However,
some minors ended up on formal probation due to the seriousness of their first offense or failure to
comply with the informal agreement.
35
The chart on below shows comparisons between the three-year average of program outcomes
from 2001 to 2004, the outcomes for 2004-05, and the past year outcomes. Completion rates for
Probation increased in 2005-2006 over previous years. However, we are seeing some decline in
rates of restitution and community service completion.
Completion Rates for Probation, Restitution and Community Service
for First Offender Program Participants
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Probation Completion
Restitution Completion
JJCPA 2001-2004
JJCPA 2004-05
Community Service Completion
JJCPA 2005-06
The First Offender Program continues to produce good results compared to other interventions at the
front-end of the continuum. Of those who successfully graduated from the First Offender Program
in 2005-06, 84% were not referred for a new felony or misdemeanor offense within six months
(16% recidivism). This compared very favorably to Teen Court, which also had 16% recidivism
during the same period. Unfortunately, less than half of those who start the First Offender program
graduate because they are exited from the program due to new offenses or probation violations.
Because the program is so successful for those who remain involved, the JJCC is recommending
changes in the exit criteria for the program.
3. Aftercare Services
Aftercare services are provided countywide to minors and their families in order to facilitate a
successful transition back into the community from the local Probation Department operated
camps and other out-of-home placements. By providing active home and community supervision,
and extensive wraparound services, future criminal behavior is substantially reduced. The need for
future expensive placements is reduced by building upon the treatment successes gained in camps
and out-of-home placements.
Between 125 and 160 minors each year return to the community after a commitment to Probation
Department operated camps, out-of-home placements or extended periods of time in juvenile hall.
Aftercare services conceptually begin as soon as the minor leaves home and continue for three
to six months after the minor returns to the community. Just prior to the minor’s return home, an
individual plan is developed that includes services to assist in his/her successful transition back.
36
Aftercare services typically include enrolling in the local County Education Office Community
School, individual/family counseling, substance abuse counseling, mentoring, life skills training
and probation supervision.
This strategy was modeled after the Aftercare Services component of the Challenge I project from
1997 to 2001. Effective outcomes demonstrated by this program were as follows:
•
The rate of criminal arrest during the six month follow-up period among the treatment
minors was 10% lower than for that of the historical comparison group.
• A total of 69 treatment minors (73%) that completed the six month follow-up period did not
have additional criminal violations during the follow-up period.
• The rate of felonies committed during the six month follow-up period among the treatment
minors was 50% lower than that of the historical comparison group.
• Deputy Probation Officers reported a marked reduction in substance abuse among minors
that met the Aftercare Services Program requirements.
Since July, 2001, Aftercare Services have been funded by JJCPA. In 2005-2006, 208 minors
participated in Aftercare Services, with a graduation rate of 46%. Expenditures per participant
were 22% below 2004-2005 expenditures and 60% below 2001-2002 levels.
The chart below shows comparisons between the three-year average of program outcomes from
2001 to 2004, the outcomes for 2004-05, and the past year outcomes.
Completion Rates for Probation, Restitution, and Community
Service for Aftercare Program Participants
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Probation Completion
Restitution Completion
JJCPA 2001-2004
JJCPA 2004-2005
Community Service
Completion
JJCPA 2005-2006
Rates of completion of probation and restitution declined somewhat in 2005-06 as compared to the
first three years of JJCPA-funded Aftercare Services. This could be in part due to the decrease in
per participant expenditures. The rate of completion of community service for Aftercare Program
participants is comparable to prior years.
37
The arrest rate for aftercare program participants 365 days from program entry has remained
significantly better than the historical comparison group from 1994 to 1997. Also the misdemeanor
and felony arrest rate during the six month period after exit from aftercare was slightly better in
2005-06 than the previous year. For youth successfully completing aftercare in 2005-06, only 17 %
were referred for a new felony or misdemeanor offense within six months of program completion.
(The rate of recidivism may be slightly underestimated, however, since it does not include law
referrals for aftercare participants that occurred after their 18th birthday.)
III. Recommended Strategies for JJCPA Funding
Although there has been some erosion of results as funding per youth served has declined, these
strategies have proven effective over the past eight years and have become the core programming of
our Local Action Plan. After reviewing all available information, the JJCC continues to recommend
funding the three current strategies. The JJCC is cognizant of and concerned about the data trends
that indicate an increase in more serious and violent juvenile crime. However, we are reluctant to
eliminate any one of the three JJCPA funded strategies (Truancy, Assessment/Early Intervention,
and Aftercare) which effectively distribute JJCPA resources across the continuum of responses to
juvenile crime from prevention to intervention and aftercare. Rather than eroding this foundation
and thereby creating additional problems in the future for any one of these populations, the JJCC
supports sustaining these three strategies, with the program improvements outlined below.
The JJCC recommends that these strategies continue targeting the same populations with the same
level of supervision, with the exception of the Early Intervention Program. Regional crime trends
support the need for increasing the staffing for this program in Santa Barbara and Lompoc from
a half-time to a full-time Deputy Probation Officer, providing the same level of supervision for
program participants in all regions of the county.
Because of the increase in violent crime and gang activity, the JJCC recommends that the services
delivered within the three strategies be primarily focused on services to reduce risk factors for gang
involvement and violence. It was recommended that basic services remain the same within the
Truancy Mediation Program, i.e., individual and family counseling, with a countywide emphasis
on providing home-based services that address the stress factors within the family. However,
Truancy Mediation Program clients would be eligible for JJCPA-funded violence prevention and
gang intervention services according to individual need.
Substance abuse services will be linked through the three regional Youth and Family Treatment
Centers established by ADP of ADMHS through existing Medi-Cal funded group substance abuse
services. The target populations for all three strategies will be served by the Youth and Family
Treatment Centers based on their identified needs and individual case plan.
Individual and family therapy, utilizing a cognitive/behavioral approach when working with
juveniles, will be contracted by JJCPA regionally and available for juvenile offenders referred
through all three of the JJCPA strategies (Truancy Mediation, First Offender Intervention and
Aftercare Services).
38
Services to intervene with gang-involved or at-risk youth will focus on addressing risk factors such
as aggression and negative peer associations, as well as protective factors such as positive cultural
values. Community based organizations contracted to provide JJCPA-funded services will utilize
research-based intervention programs, including Aggression Replacement Training, and the Los
Compadres Program’s El Joven Nobles curriculum.
Probation Officers have a unique opportunity to engage parents in programs that can help them
cope with their children’s behavior and offer skills-based support. Probation officers with JJCPA
caseloads will encourage parents to participate in existing parenting programs such as the Parent
Project and multi-family groups offered at the Youth and Family Treatment Centers. While they
cannot mandate that parents participate in these programs, they are in a strong position to influence
parents to become engaged in diverting their children from the juvenile justice system.
Throughout the implementation of these strategies, the JJCPA partners must take into consideration
the cultural background of their clients, whether this culture is grounded in ethnicity, or a youth
subculture such as the gang subculture, the drug subculture, or all of the above. To be effective,
these services, and those who deliver them, must be responsive to all of the influences that can
either engage or deter a young person from a life of crime.
The following is an expanded description of strategies recommended for funding by JJCPA, with
recommendations for program improvement.
A. Truancy Mediation
Program Objectives: Truancy is a known risk factor for future delinquency. An extremely high
percent of prisoners today are school dropouts. Truancy Mediation Services combine the resources
of many juvenile-serving agencies into a united truancy prevention and intervention program. The
program’s primary goals are: to improve school attendance and academic performance; to respond
to the needs of troubled minors and their families; to provide individualized intervention plans; to
coordinate community resources for families; to provide immediate graduated interventions and
sanctions; and to reduce juvenile crime.
The program targets minors countywide, who have continued to be truant despite efforts to promote
their school attendance. The program primarily targets students in local middle and high schools.
Deputy Probation Officers assist in providing “wake up” visits to probation participants, as well
as participating in School Attendance Review Board meetings, making school checks, referring
truants for specialized services, as well as providing overall case management and supervision.
Caseloads in each region are limited to 30 to 40 minors in order for Probation Officers to provide
meaningful, effective supervision and participation in appropriate intervention services.
Program Description: The Truancy Mediation Program is a multiagency, collaborative effort to
increase the attendance rate, improve school performance, reduce criminal activity during school
hours and provide support services to truant minors and their families. The program involves
collaboration between the District Attorney, the Probation Department, school districts, local law
enforcement and community-based organizations.
39
The program is comprised of Five Steps that allow truant students and their caregivers opportunities
to take corrective actions:
Step 1 - Students reach Step One by accruing 1-3 days of unexcused absences. At this
point, the school sends out a letter in both Spanish and English informing the caregiver of
the unexcused absences and about the legal consequences for the caregiver and their child
if such behavior continues.
Step 2 - If students accrue 4-6 unexcused absent days, a second letter is sent to the caregiver
is by the District Attorney’s Office. The letter reviews the main points of the previous letter
sent by the school and also mandates that the caregiver and their child attend an afterschool meeting.
Step 3 - Students reach Step 3 if they accrue one additional unexcused absent day. Step
3 requires the student and their caregiver to attend a Truancy Mediation Team (TMT)
meeting. This meeting includes representatives from the schools, District Attorney’s office
and community-based organizations. The TMT participants and the caregiver develop an
intervention plan addressing the underlying causes of their truant behavior that is put into a
contract agreement signed by the caregiver and their child. Some of the intervention services
that have been offered to the Truancy minors are tutoring, mentoring, and counseling. As
needed, they may also be referred to alcohol and drug treatment and/or gang intervention
services.
Step 4 - If the student is uncooperative, resistant, or continues to accrue unexcused absences,
the family is referred to the School Attendance Review Board (SARB) for a formal status
review. At this point, SARB conducts a joint meeting in collaboration with the agencies
previously mentioned together with the minor and their caregivers. The purpose of this
meeting is to warn the family about the punitive actions that will be taken if the student
continues to be absent from school. If qualified, the student is offered the option of informal
probation versus court action.
Step 5 - The family reaches Step Five if the youth’s truant behavior continues. This means
that a 601(b) WIC petition will be filed with the court. If the minor is found to be habitually
truant, he/she is placed on probation.
Recommendations for Program Improvement:
1. Collect more data on program participants to better assess the program’s success at each
step of the process and improve efficiency of each step where possible. Data should include
analysis of individual student attendance records.
2. Assess students attending Truancy After School Meetings in the first quarter of the school
year for criminal risk factors and prioritize them for intervention. More discussion is
required to determine the best methods for implementing this recommendation.
3. Continue to increase linkages to CBO services at an earlier stage of the program.
4. Replicate the home-based counseling model utilized in Santa Maria in the other regions of
the county. This model focuses on providing truancy counseling in the home once or twice
a week to address stress factors in the family. (80% of clients receiving truancy counseling
were still maintaining their school attendance two months after program completion.)
40
5. Engage all school superintendents and program stakeholders in periodic discussions of
program improvement, including the feasibility of establishing additional sanctions for
chronic truants (suspension of driver’s license or work permits) and/or prosecution of
parents at an earlier stage.
6. Develop plans for program sustainability and explore collaborative methods to make
program delivery more cost-effective.
B. Initial Assessment/First Offender Intervention
Program Objectives:
Initial Assessment: The growth of specialized programs within our juvenile justice system has been
a positive development in recent years. At the same time, as the network of services becomes more
complex, it has become increasingly difficult to assure that first-time offenders throughout the
county receive accurate assessments and appropriate referrals from a Senior Probation Officer who
is well-informed about all available treatment and support resources. Continued funding for this
component will enable us to use the SB ARA, a strengths-based, culturally and gender appropriate
assessment instrument, to assess first-time offenders.
First Offender Intervention: After a review of the initial assessment data, First Offender
Intervention Services will match high-risk, primarily non-ward minors and their families with an
appropriate level of intervention services. Caseloads of 30 to 40 minors allow for active Probation
involvement. Through the combination of a thorough initial assessment, community supervision,
and the delivery of individually targeted services, the following results are expected:
• The deterrence of minors from further involvement in the Juvenile Justice System;
• A decrease in the frequency of subsequent law violations; and
• An increase in the number of minors successfully completing probation terms and
conditions, grants of probation and restitution obligations.
Program Description:
Initial Assessment: To best maximize Probation Department and community resources and to
create a “precision-of-fit” between minors and services, it is necessary to perform a comprehensive
asset and risk assessment on all minors newly placed under probation supervision for the first time
based upon their level of risk to reoffend.
Minors in Initial Assessment may receive referrals for a range of diversion services, depending on
their status, the nature of the offense, the disposition of the case and the identified needs to be met.
Such services may include:
• Teen Court;
• Truancy Mediation;
• Counseling services;
• Informal probation or court wardship;
• Placement on a specialized probation caseload; and
• Placement in local probation programs.
41
First Offender Intervention: The First Offender Intervention Program serves first time juvenile
referrals ages 11-17 that are primarily on informal probation per 654 WIC. The Intake/ Assessment
Coordinator refers minors to the First Offender Intervention caseload. Accompanying the referral
is an information packet that incorporates data compiled during the initial assessment. The Deputy
Probation Officer assigned to manage the caseload meets with the minors and their families to create
an individual case plan. Depending upon the specific needs that have been identified, minors will
have access to substance abuse treatment, individual and family counseling, or violence prevention
and gang intervention services described previously in this section.
Monthly casing meetings will be held in each region to allow the Deputy Probation Office and
service providers from community based organizations to discuss the individual cases of First
Offender Intervention Program participants, to better coordinate resources and services, and
identify unmet needs.
The JJCC has decided to change the program criteria to allow minors to remain on the First
Offender Intervention caseload until their probation terminates or a higher level of service becomes
available, i.e. MISC, Juvenile Drug Court, Los Prietos Boys Camp. Currently, minors are removed
from the program if they violate their probation or commit a new offense, which most often results
in their being placed on a general caseload, with less supervision than they were receiving in
the First Offender program. This change will, of necessity, decrease the capacity of the program
because juveniles will remain on this caseload for a longer period of time. However, we feel this
policy is consistent with the goal of the program, which is to deter first offenders from further
involvement in the Juvenile Justice System. We believe that this change will increase graduation
rates and ultimately decrease recidivism.
Recommendations for Program Improvement:
1. Increase the staffing for this program to 3.0 FTE Deputy Probation Officers to ensure a
dedicated Early Intervention caseload in each region of the county.
2. As funding permits, conduct a mental health screening for all program participants to
ensure participants receive the highest level of mental health care for which they qualify at
the earliest possible time.
C. Aftercare Services
Program Objective: Aftercare is a critical component in the continuum of services provided to
minors and their families. The decision to refer a minor to out-of-home placement has significant
impacts on the minor and his/her family. While in placement, the minor receives intensive
supervision and treatment, and often makes significant changes. Aftercare services are aimed at
building upon that foundation of success and continuing its benefits once the minor returns home.
It is critical that Aftercare Services specifically identify and build upon family strengths. Ideally,
Aftercare Services begin as soon as the minor leaves home and continues until the minor returns
home. The goals of the Aftercare Services Program are:
• Curtailment of reentry into the juvenile justice system;
• Reduction of future placement costs;
42
•
Increased school attendance and performance;
• Reduction in the number of subsequent 602 W&I petitions for delinquent behavior; and
• Access to a support network of services and programs to assist minors in establishing a
different lifestyle and new peer group.
Aftercare Services are provided to all minors transitioning from group and foster home placements
and from the Probation Department’s two camps. In addition, minors who have served at least 20
days in the Juvenile Hall are eligible for Aftercare Services.
Program Description: Aftercare Services conceptually begin when minors first enter an out-ofhome placement, Camps or extended periods of time in Juvenile Hall. Meetings between designated
Placement Officers (Senior Deputy Probation Officers), the minors and their families, serve to
outline behavioral, attitudinal and school performance expectations and free time programming.
During their placement, minors work on specific problem areas while having a clear understanding
of home and community expectations. Approximately four weeks prior to their transition home,
the Deputy Probation Officer, Aftercare Juvenile Institution Officer, and any assigned clinician
begin the establishment of a specific Aftercare plan. Most minors will immediately be enrolled
in a County Education Office Community School upon their return to the community. On a caseby-case basis, some minors will be enrolled directly into a mainstream school setting. To ensure
the minor’s compliance with their Aftercare Services program, numerous field contacts are made
to the minor’s home, school and programs. Selected minors receive random drug tests and/or are
put on a call-in testing program. JJCPA contracted Aftercare Services will focus on individual and
family counseling and services to reduce aggression/gang involvement. Within a period of three to
six months of successful aftercare behavior, a minor’s case may be terminated.
Recommendations for Program Improvement:
1. While the JJCC recommends that JJCPA funding be used to staff this program at its current
level, should additional funding become available, it is a high priority to restore staffing to
the program’s original design in which three full-time Juvenile Institutions Officers were
budgeted, one in each region of the county.
2. Actively pursue funding for program improvement, including more resources for job search
or job skills development, incentives for family participation, family group resources, and
increased programming/aftercare linkages for youth in juvenile hall.
43
IV. Additional Recommendations for Long-Term Strategies
The following recommendations focus on addressing the increase in violent and more serious
juvenile crimes. Some of these strategies can be implemented without additional funding; others
need to be further developed in readiness to respond to future funding opportunities.
1. Using data collected through the Santa Barbara Asset Risk Assessment tool, establish a
more detailed profile of minors entering the juvenile justice system and at different levels
in the continuum, especially the risk level for violence, to better impact program design.
2. Target the most intensive services toward youth who are likely to be the most violent
offenders.
3. Increase the level of supervision and case management of probation minors that have
committed a violent crime or are identified as most likely to become violent offenders.
4. Increase collaboration among law enforcement agencies, probation, and DJJ parole across
the county to ensure proactive enforcement.
5. Develop a county wide, evidenced based gang prevention strategy.
The following strategies were identified to maximize the resources available to accomplish the
above recommendations.
1. Maximize the use of existing services/programming and strengthen public-private
partnerships. Explore innovative strategies for linking juvenile justice clients to existing
community-based services and ensuring their participation in those services.
2. Establish an interagency, public/private work group that meets regularly to explore funding
opportunities and develop joint funding proposals in order to be able to respond to grant
opportunities in a timely and coordinated manner.
V. Concluding Remarks
Santa Barbara County has been effective in reducing juvenile crime in our community in recent
years. This success can be largely attributed to the spirit of collaboration that has been carefully
cultivated among city and county agencies and community-based organizations. By embracing
the values and principals of collaboration, the county has been able to be responsive to emerging
issues and gaps in services within the juvenile justice system, resolve problems cooperatively, and
redirect resources as needed to address these issues.
The Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council and the Local Action Plan Update Committee
have prepared a document that articulates gaps in services, strategies, and resources: our 2007
Comprehensive Multiagency Juvenile Justice Plan (Local Action Plan). As we face new challenges
in the coming years, this Plan will provide a blueprint for an effective multiagency response to the
needs of at-risk youth who find themselves involved in the juvenile justice system.
44