Addressing the Needs of Youth in Juvenile Justice
Systems
October 26, 2004
Dr. Bill East, Executive Director
National Association of State Directors of Special Education bill.east@nasdse.org
www.nasdse.org

• Congressional investigators report 15,000 children with psychiatric conditions were improperly incarcerated when mental health services were not available.
• These children were as young as 7 years old.
Source: New York Times (2004)

• More than 340 detention centers reported that children with mental illness were being housed there as there was nowhere else for them to go.
• 71 centers in 33 states were holding children with psychiatric conditions with no charges.
Source: New York Times (2004)

• Research suggests the prevalence of special education disabilities is about 4 to 5 times greater in the juvenile justice system than the rate of special education disabilities in the general population.
• Approximately 30-50% of youth in the correctional system have a disability.
Source: Rutherford, Bullis, Anderson and Griller-Clark (2002)

Source: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

• Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP)
– www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org
• National Center on Education, Disability and Juvenile Justice (EDJJ)
– www.edjj.org
• National Center for Mental Health and
Juvenile Justice (NCMHJJ)
– www.ncmhjj.com

October 26, 2004
Marcia Harding, Director
Special Education Unit
Arkansas Department of Education
1401 West Capitol, Suite 450
Little Rock, AR 72201-2936
501-682-4221/mharding@arkedu.k12.ar.us

“Research and best practices initiatives are contributing to improved practices in juvenile justice. As we continue to learn more about the causes and correlations of delinquency, we are developing a better understanding of how programs and services can help youth. Education is one of these critical services and can assist a troubled youth to return to a law abiding lifestyle.”
(Shay Bilchek, former administrator,
OJJDP)

Detention Education vs. Corrections Education
 Different purpose
 Short lengths of stay vs. long term stay
 Short term stays are difficult to measure effectiveness
 No standard system of delivery
Carol Cramer Brooks, President,
Council for the Education of At Risk and Delinquent Youth, 2003

Detention Education Goals
 Maximize learning and remedial opportunities for incarcerated youth
 Provide wrap-around, holistic services through collaborative programs
Carol Crammer Brooks,
2003

Detention Education - General Beliefs
 Education is the cornerstone of institutional programs
 The public school design and instructional strategies are not compatible with the needs of the typical juvenile justice populations
 Detention Education programs are largely understaffed and under funded.
 The public schools have generally abdicated their responsibility to fund and deliver effective education to youth who represent few redeeming qualities.
Carol Crammer
Brooks, 2003

Detention Education – A National Problem
 Unregulated
 Lack of consensus regarding purpose
 Identity Crisis
 Inappropriate model
 Untrained and inappropriate staff
Carol Crammer
Brooks, 2003

Purpose of this Presentation
 To briefly explain the history, regulations, and governance of educational programs in Juvenile Detention
Centers in Arkansas
 To explain the purpose of JEdI and show results of our studies

Arkansas Juvenile Detention Facilities Education
 1991- Juvenile Detention Facilities
Review Commission set standards for programs.
 Educational programs were originally the responsibility of Juvenile Justice.
 1995-Arkansas Department of Education became legally responsible for the reimbursement of educational services provided in juvenile detention facilities.

2000 – IDEA - Section 18.03.3 defines Juvenile Detention
Facility (JDF) Any facility operated by a political subdivision of the State for the temporary care of juveniles alleged to be delinquent, or adjudicated delinquent, who require secure custody in a physically restricting facility. Under Ark. Code Ann. 9-27-
330(a)(11), such facility must provide educational and other rehabilitative services to adjudicated delinquents who may be ordered by the court to remain in the juvenile detention facility for an indeterminate period not to exceed Ninety (90) days.

2001- Memorandum of Understanding
Annual Program Approval
Annual Budget Requests
Attendance Reporting

Shareholders
Juvenile Judges (45)
And Juvenile Justice Programs
County Governments,
Quorum Courts, County
Judges, County Sheriffs
Special Education Unit, DOE
School Districts where
JDFs are located

JDF Classrooms / Educational Programs
 45 educators work with Arkansas’ incarcerated youth
 Educational facilities range in size, number of classrooms, and resources
 A variety of programs have been used to delivery services through the years: PACE, Plato, Nova Net, teacher made lesson plans, individual school lessons

The number of youth incarcerated in Arkansas JDFs
August 2002 – July 2003
August 2003 – July 2004
6,812
8,213

Arkansas youth who attended class while incarcerated within the 15
Juvenile Detention Facilities
August 2002 – July 2003
August 2003 – July 2004
5,457
6,340

Juveniles of the JDF Classrooms
Gender
28%
72%
Female
Male
Race/Ethnicity
37% African American
56% Caucasian
5% Hispanic
1% Asian
1% Native
American/Other

FINS or Delinquents
• Between 10-18 years of age
• 19% are Special Education students
• Attend school 3-6 hours Monday – Friday
• May attend school 9.5 to 12 months a year
• Stay in the JDC an average of
17 days
• 29% are repeat offenders

Arkansas’ aggressive approach to providing a statewide quality educational program for its incarcerated and “at-risk” youth.

JEdI Project Goals
1. To ensure FAPE in every JDF (Free and
Appropriate Public Education)
2. To ensure that Mathematics and Literacy
(Reading) be given priority-as mandated by
NCLB
3. To ensure that students in the JDF environment be physically tracked throughout their education
4. To ensure continuity of instruction as students pass into and out of JDF environments
One unwritten goal is to compile data about our about future programs students so that better decisions can be made

Phase 1 -
In 2001 a web based program was
Piloted in Sebastian County JDC and all
Phase 2a research project
Phase 3In 2003, JDFs began converting their system of delivering FAPE from
SkillsBank to the web based program
SkillsTutor.
Phase 4other JDFs were given software program SkillsBank4
In early 2003, all JDFs were required to submit demographic information and the results of SkillsBank interventions for
By May 2004, ten sites had become regional web sites. By November, 14 of the 15 JDFs will be regional sites. All sites are required to submit reports on www.arkjedi.com

 Juveniles currently residing in detention centers can be placed on our SkillsTutor programs and when released can continue on the program at school, home, libraries, etc.
 “At Risk” and Special Education students from surrounding schools can be placed on the SkillsTutor program before they ever come to a
JDF -- free of cost to their school

Academic Outcomes
(Feb 2003 – August 2004)
Tutorial Areas PreTest Averages
Mathematics
Reading
Language Arts
60%
56%
50%
PostTest
Averages
75%
75%
64%

Special Ed Outcomes
(Feb 2003 – August 2004)
Tutorial Areas PreTest Averages
Mathematics
Reading
Language Arts
55%
53%
39%
PostTest
Averages
71%
73%
51%

What JEdI has Accomplished
• Implemented a remediation program in every JDF assuring FAPE
• Contributed to the wrap-around service by improving the educational portion of the holistic approach- with continuity of education
• Placed emphasis statewide on reading and math instead of trying to teach everything through traditional educational settings and methods (NCLB)
• Regulated educational programs by increasing reporting requirements and adding a fulltime project coordinator to assist JDFs statewide

• Helped JDFs change their overall educational goals by emphasizing that
JDFs are short term stay facilities and different from long term correctional facilities that can offer a wide range of courses necessary for students to earn HS credit
• Created a JEdI Website ( www.arkjedi.com
) and trained staff to perform online reporting to the DOE.
• Helped to organize and network JDF teachers and provided training and the sharing of information
• Provided a standard and successful system of delivery of educational programs while each detention center maintained its uniqueness

• www.arkjedi.comto find out what is happening with JDF Education and the short cut to the educational program
• http://arksped.k12.ar.usArkansas
Department of Education / Special
Education
• http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Arkansas
Legislative Home Page
• http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/NXT/gateway
.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=blr: code – Arkansas Code 6-20-104

Juvenile Justice Education
Programs






Tropical Depression
Bonnie
Hurricane Charley
Hurricane Frances
Hurricane Ivan
Hurricane Jeanne www.volunteerflorida.org





Framework and
Governance
DJJ Population
Characteristics
Funding, Reporting, and Accountability
Mechanism
Outcomes


Florida has a law specific to DJJ educational programs (s. 1003.52, F.S.) that:
 identifies educational expectations including supporting treatment goals and leading to the receipt of a standard diploma or its equivalent


 requires annual quality assurance reviews with the Department of JJ requires an annual cooperative agreement specifies funding, reporting, and accountability mechanisms


Florida’s 67 local school districts



 are responsible for providing education services to youth in juvenile justice facilities located in their district may deliver education services directly or contract with a private provider must fund these programs at same or higher level of funding than equivalent students in the district must negotiate a cooperative agreement with
DJJ on delivery of educational services




The Department of Education (DOE) is serves as the lead agency for juvenile justice education programs.
DOE and the Department of Juvenile
Justice have developed
 cooperative agreement and plan for JJ education service enhancement

State Plan for Vocational Education for Youth in
DJJ facilities
DOE produces and annual report on DJJ educational programs.


In 2002-03, school districts provided educational services to a total of 46,322 students in juvenile justice facilities.




76% male, 24% female
73% were in grades 8-10, 41% in grade 9
70% were overage for grade placement
38% were eligible for exceptional student education programs


Funding


DJJ educational programs are funded to local school districts in the same manner as other public school students (Florida
Education Finance Program).
The funding system includes a “hold harmless” for the “high cost” DJJ students with disabilities (weighted cost factors 254 and 255).


Reporting


Student and teacher data regarding DJJ programs is submitted by local school districts on the same frequency as other public school students.
Additional data is also collected during annual quality assurance visits.


Accountability

All academic requirements for low performing students also apply to DJJ students (e.g., academic improvement plans, etc.).


Participation in the statewide assessment program (FCAT) is also required.
DJJ programs were included in the state’s calculation of AYP.
Some met AYP.


DOE administers a discretionary project
(Juvenile Justice Educational Enhancement
Program (JJEEP)) to assist in the provision of high-quality education through



 quality assurance reviews provision of technical assistance research in best practices provision of policy recommendations to ensure successful transition back into community http://www.jjeep.org/



Examines juvenile justice education programs in four areas




Transition
Service Delivery
Educational Resources
Contract Management
Standards/indicators are revised annually by facility/program type



Detention
Day treatment
Residential commitment

Numerical Score Rating
7,8,9
4,5,6
Superior Performance
Satisfactory
Performance
1,2,3
0
Partial Performance
Nonperformance

Overall Score
2003 Mean Scores by Standard and Overall (n=180)
5.65
Contract Management 5.02
Administration
Service Delivery
0
Transition
1 2 3 4 5
5.43
5.70
5.84
6 7




The DJJ QA process includes the review of some of the requirements for students with disabilities.
Records of DJJ SWD’s are included in
DOE’s system for monitoring programs for students with disabilities.
Have had a few IDEA complaints regarding services to these students filed within the past five years.




95.6% of 2002-03 juvenile justice education students taking the GED tests passed
70% of the students were promoted at the end of the school year
4.5% of students in grades 9-
12 dropped out of school


Expectations

Governance

Collaboration

Accountability