By Jasmine J. Jackson, Amber Nogelmeier, and Erica Bower, with assistance from Valerie Meade and Amanda Coscia

The intended purpose of the youth justice system is to maintain public safety by balancing accountability with rehabilitation and provide youth with opportunities that foster positive development and long-lasting behavior change. Over the past two decades, youth justice systems across the country have shifted their approach, embracing community-based alternatives to more costly, harmful, and unavailing carceral responses to youth behavior. Increasingly, leaders recognize effective, evidence-based approaches to minimize justice system exposure by diverting young people from formal system involvement when possible, limiting out-of-home placement to only the most serious cases, and connecting young people

with resources, services, and supports in their own communities. To enhance staff-client interactions and reduce a youth’s likelihood to re-offend, youth-serving systems are leveraging research to incorporate evidence-based and data-driven practices into every aspect of the system. When used effectively, these practices establish the foundation for improving long-term success for the youth they serve. Using individualized approaches informed by research on adolescent development, tailored to a youth’s identified needs, emphasizing strengths, and holistically involving their family and community, as well as holding youth accountable in developmentally appropriate manners fosters a young person’s growth, and creates opportunities for positive behavior change. To effectively make this shift, youth justice systems are taking a comprehensive look at their policies, practices, and data to gain a better understanding of the youth being served and the impact of the various system responses. That information is then utilized to inform policy changes, training needs, and strategies for system improvement. Shelby County is Tennessee’s largest county in population and size. Its county seat, the City of Memphis, is the second most populated city, behind Nashville. According to the 2022 Census figures, the population estimate of Shelby County is 926,440 people,8 while Memphis makes up approximately 68 percent of the County’s population.9 The largest racial group, representing just over half of the population in Shelby County, is Black or African Introduction Background American (54%), followed by white (37%).10 Almost 25 percent of the population in Shelby County is under 18 years of age,11 with nearly 24 percent of the children in this age group living in households with incomes below the poverty level, higher than the percentage of children in poverty overall in Tennessee.12 During the last decade (2012 to 2022), Shelby County was among Tennessee’s 10 counties that saw the largest declines in the overall crime rate for youth under age 18, but the current rate is still higher than the Tennessee crime rate for the same group.13 In 2022, 3,301 Shelby County children ages 10 to 17 were referred to court for delinquent, status, and / or unruly offenses.14 According to the most up-to-date figures, the rate at which Black or African American children under the age of 18 were brought into court for the same offenses was significantly higher than the rate for white youth.15 It should be noted that the 2020 rate for Black or African American youth brought into court in JCMSC was 19.1 per 1,000 youth, while the rate for white youth was 6.1 from the same population. The mission of the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County (JCMSC) is to provide interventions that result in positive outcomes for families and children, by addressing family matters with dignity and respect, and when necessary, holding youth accountable in developmentally appropriate ways.16 In August 2022, after nearly a decade of his predecessor’s leadership, the Honorable Judge Tarik B. Sugarmon was elected to serve as the new juvenile court judge. A transition team was established to support Judge Sugarmon, his leadership staff, and their goals of having a more data-driven, trauma-informed court. To further support this transition, JCMSC established an implementation team (a subgroup of the transition team) and solicited the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) for assistance. In October 2023, JCMSC requested CJI to conduct a comprehensive system assessment of their Court Services Division which encompasses the following Bureaus: Children’s Services, Youth Services, Evaluation and Referral, and Detention Services as well as the Youth Court Program. The Court Services Division serves the community by working with children under the age of 18 who are court-involved and alleged to be delinquent, unruly, and/or dependent and neglected. The purpose of this system assessment is to understand the Court Services Division’s current

practices, the impact of those practices, and inform recommendations for court improvement, as well as implementation strategies for meeting JCMSC’s mission and improving outcomes for justice-involved youth in Memphis and Shelby County. At the time of the system assessment, Shelby County Sheriff’s Office provided oversight to Detention Services; therefore, limited analysis was completed as it pertains to the interworking of this Bureau. System Assessment To better determine where the Court Services Division should focus its improvement efforts, CJI used a systematic, multi-pronged approach to perform a system assessment, including a qualitative assessment and quantitative data analysis. This process allowed CJI to thoroughly evaluate the Court Services Division’s policies and practices and their impact on outcomes relevant to the youth justice population, thus helping inform research-based considerations for system improvement in court processes, data collection practices, and supervision practices. The following sections describe CJI’s system assessment methodology.

Boston: Crime and Justice Institute, 2024. 52p.

By The Juvenile Law Center

The United States incarcerates youth at more than double the rate of any other country in the world. On any given day, almost 50,000 young people are locked up in juvenile facilities across the country. Although overall juvenile incarceration rates have been falling, Black youth are still over five times more likely than their white peers to be detained or committed to an institution.

We know these institutions—many of which are over 100 years old—are part of a punitive corrections-oriented approach that does not work for youth. Research shows that institutional settings harm young people developmentally, psychologically, and—far too often—physically. Yet our country continues to rely on this outdated model as the backbone of its juvenile justice system.

Philadelphia: Juvenile Law Center, 2018. 31p.

By Karen U. Lindell and Katrina L. Goodjoint

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Roper v. Simmons banning the death penalty for young people under the age of 18, the principle that “kids are different” has come to permeate the justice system’s approach to young people. The developmental differences between adolescents and adults are now codified in numerous state statutes, have been cited in countless court decisions, and are foundational concepts in juvenile defense. And, while there is much work still to be done, the shift toward a developmental approach to youth justice has contributed to dramatic reductions in youth incarceration rates over the last decade.1 Yet even the Supreme Court has acknowledged, “[t]he qualities that distinguish juveniles from adults do not disappear when an individual turns 18.”2 People do not transform from children into adults on their 18th birthdays; instead the transition to adulthood is gradual and highly individualized.

The report begins by describing the defining characteristics of emerging adulthood and laying out the case for reforming the justice system’s approach to emerging adults. The report then examines examples and lessons from around the country where reforms are underway, including raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction, reforming criminal justice procedures and practices, and using support from systems outside of the justice field. Finally, the report presents an in-depth look at the legal provisions and programs impacting emerging adults in the six states of the Great Lakes region—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Our hope is that this report provides policymakers and advocates in each of those states, as well as elsewhere, greater tools to reshape justice for emerging adults in their jurisdictions.

Philadelphia, PA: Juvenile Law Center, 2020. 96p.

By Géraldine Bugnon

"This book analyses the non-custodial government of young offenders in two major cities in Brazil. In doing so, it delves into the paradox of an institution exerting control over youths while at the same time promoting their autonomy and responsibility. The study sheds light on the specific logics of power, control, and inequality produced by such institutional settings. The book’s analysis is based on an ethnographic study of ‘Assisted Freedom’ (Liberdade Assistida) – a form of probation – in the Brazilian cities of Rio de Janeiro and Belo Horizonte. This particular context – which is characterized by endemic violent crime, on the one hand, and a highly protective juvenile justice system, on the other – sheds productive light on the contradictions of juvenile justice systems and other public policies based on the values of citizenship, autonomy, and responsibilization. The analysis takes the form of an inverted zoom structure: it begins by looking at cognitive and interactional processes at the level of interpersonal relationships between youths and professionals, and then works its way up to examine ties outside the institution itself, with schools, the labour market, and juvenile courts. Written in a clear and direct style, this book will appeal to students and scholars in criminology, sociology, cultural studies, and social theory and those interested in learning about non-custodial measures and the regulation of juvenile delinquency."

London; New York: Routledge, 2021. 270p.

By Gupte, J.; Tranchant, J.-P. and Mitchell, B.

In Maharashtra, state-sponsored programmes that support school dropouts and young offenders in finding employment and integrating into society are severely limited by a lack of resources and capacity. While several government-sponsored schemes do exist, in reality, however, support for school dropouts is largely provided on an ad hoc basis, and predominantly by non-governmental organisations. In this context, we conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of Kherwadi Social Welfare Association’s Yuva Parivartan programme. This is one of the largest non-governmental interventions directed towards school dropouts and juvenile offenders. The overarching evaluation question adopted was ‘Can targeted preventive action and access to employment for school dropouts act as a preventive measure against delinquency and crime?’ The following five programme-specific Sub-Questions (SQ) were used for evaluation purposes: SQ1: Is the Yuva Parivartan (YP) programme effective at imparting on youth a set of prosocial values that are consistent with job-seeking and crime-avoidance behaviours? SQ2: Are the benefits of the YP programme reaching the population who self-report committing a crime? SQ3: Does the YP programme lead to pro-social behavioural changes? SQ4: Is there a relationship between attitudes towards aggressive and/or violent behaviour, entitlement, anti-social intent and employment outcomes? SQ5: Does the YP programme manage to instill a feeling of confidence among the trainees about their future prospects of finding a job?

Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies, 2015. 71p.

Read/Download

By George E. Worthington and Ruth Topping.

A Study of the Procedure in Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia and New York. Many persons interested in problems of social hygiene have felt that in the courts dealing with sex offenders serious administrative inequalities often operate against women delinquents. Some learning of the provision for trial by jury of prostitutes in Chicago, believe this to be an important safeguard against sex discriminations. Indeed, at various times it has been publicly proposed that an effort be made in New York City to secure legislation to permit trial by jury in all classes of sex offenses. The American Social Hygiene Association and the Bureau of Social Hygiene have been repeatedly appealed to for their views on this and other points connected with the courts dealing with sex delinquents. They finally decided to undertake jointly a study of the Morals Court of Chicago, with no preconceived findings to be reached and no propaganda to spread. The American Social Hygiene Association and the Bureau of Social Hygiene.

New York: Frederick H. Hitchcock. 1921, 1925. 474p.

By Arthur Macdonald.

Including stigmata of degeneration being a hearing on the bill (h. R. 16733) to establish a laboratory for the study of the criminal, pauper, and defective classes. Before A Sub-Judiciary Committee Of The United States House Of Representatives.”To find whether or not there are any physical or mental characteristics that distinguish criminal children from other children. Such knowledge would make it possible to protect children in advance and lessen the chances of contamination.”

Harrow and Heston Classic Reprint. (1908) 337 pages.

By Romania. Ministry of Internal Affairs.

This handbook has been developed within the project "Childhood without crime" carried out by the General Inspectorate of Romanian Police in cooperation with the National Authority for Child Protection and Adoption of the Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Protection and the Elderly, with the support of the Ministries of Internal Affairs of the Czech Republic and Bulgaria. The project, initiated by the Institute for Research and Prevention of Crime in the General Inspectorate of Romanian Police (G.I.R.P), has proposed increasing the efficiency steps to prevent juvenile delinquency in children under the age of 14. The pillars on which the project are represented, on the one hand, by the consolidation of institutional capacity, namely the improvement of cooperation between the police and the General Directorates for Social Assistance and Child Protection, and on the other hand, by the increasing awareness of the target groups (minors aged 14, parents, teachers, social workers, etc.) on the prevention of juvenile delinquency and services that children with delinquent and pre-delinquent behavior may benefit. Funding was provided by a grants program of the European Commission, Prevention of and fight against crime "(ISEC). The project was initiated after identifying the need to intensify crime prevention activities among children who have not attained the age of criminal responsibility, the age of 14. Both statistical data and findings in the field of police and social workers concluded that these children are a vulnerable group in terms of crime.

Romania: Ministry of Internal Affairs,2014. 99p.