By Alliance for Youth Justice, et al.

The establishment of a distinct secure estate for children has been government policy for nearly 25 years. This endeavor began with the transfer of commissioning and oversight of children’s custodial institutions to the Youth Justice Board (YJB) in 2000, and the coming into force of the prison service policy ‘Regimes for prisoners under 18 years old’ in the summer 1999.[1] In September 2017, the Youth Custody Service in the Ministry of Justice was established “as a distinct part of HM Prison and Probation Service” and YJB’s responsibility for child prisons was duly moved across.[2] Over the past 25 years, the number of children in custody at any one time has decreased significantly – from 3,000 at its high point in the early 2000s to under 450 today.[3] However the majority of children are still detained in institutions whose history, culture, and practices originate and in many respects replicate the confinement and punishment of adults. Only 19% of children in custody today are living in secure childcare establishments; the remainder are in prisons.[vii] Moreover, despite successive promises of transformation, children in prison continue to experience significant harm and neglect.[4] Within the overarching, recurring policy goal of transformation, there have been consistent, discrete government and YJB pledges focused on individual aspects of children’s safety and welfare. We have selected 10 pledges for review and analysis: Children will be kept safe Children’s relationships with their loved ones will be supported Looked after children will have their needs met, and their rights fulfilled Solitary confinement will not be used for children Restraint will only ever be used on children as a last resort. Pain-inducing techniques will be reserved for extremely grave incidents Children will have at least 30 hours of education and purposeful activity a week Meals will meet the needs of growing children, and mealtimes will be a social activity All staff will be properly vetted, trained, and supported to enable them to carry out skilled work with children who have multiple needs Children will receive the help and support they need whilst in custody, so they can thrive once they return to the community YOIs and STCs will be permanently closed  

London: Alliance for Youth Justice, 2024. 40p.

By Karen Freeman and Neil Donnelly

The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) has released a new paper examining interactions between young people aged 10 to 13 years and the NSW criminal justice system. The study finds that most 10- to 13-year-old children who appear in court are from a disadvantaged background, have been a victim of violence, have had significant contact with the child protection system, and have a parent with a history of offending. Aboriginal children and children living in regional and remote NSW are disproportionately affected.

In terms of their criminal justice pathway, the study found that:

• Most young people aged 10 to 13 years are dealt with under the Young Offenders Act which aims to divert young people from the court system were possible. In 2023, NSW Police commenced 4,662 legal proceedings against young people aged 10 to 13 years; two-thirds (63) were formal court diversions.

• Of the 719 criminal court appearances finalised in 2023 involving defendants aged 10 to 13 years, only 20% resulted in a proven outcome; half (53%) had all charges withdrawn and a quarter (25%) had a not-guilty finding. Even where an offence was proven, half (50%) resulted in a court ordered caution or youth justice conference. 

• There were 171 distinct young people aged 10 to 13 years who had an episode of youth detention in 2023. These young people all entered detention on remand, and three quarters (74%) of detention episodes were for 24 hours or less.

PARRAMATTA NSW, The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) , 2024. 23p.

By Angela M. Collins and Maisha Cooper

This paper discusses how juvenile waiver policies may be leading to a reduction in the rehabilitative nature of the juvenile justice system. The first section discusses the value of the juvenile justice system. Here, the beginning of the juvenile justice system and why the juvenile justice system is important will be summarized. The second section explains the movement that is being made toward a more punitive approach in regard to juvenile delinquents and how this could lead to the erosion of the juvenile justice system. Next is a discussion of how waivers play a part in the erosion and how their continued use could prove very dangerous for the juvenile justice system. The next section will look at the implications of the erosion and what could potentially happen if we lost the juvenile system. Last, there will be a glance at possibilities for the future, along with suggestions on how to improve the use of waivers. Overall, this paper will show that the use of juvenile waivers may be leading the United States away from a rehabilitative system for juveniles to a smaller version of an adult criminal court. 

• July 2024

• Social Sciences 13(7):367

 By Sarah Anderson, Lisel Petis and Jillian Snider

Over the past few decades, juvenile crime (i.e., “delinquency”), arrests and confinement have begun to decline—a trend that directly correlates with states and localities moving away from overly punitive, “tough on crime” juvenile policies and toward diversion initiatives aimed at limiting juvenile interaction with the justice system. Between 1996 and 2019, juvenile arrests declined by 74 percent, and between 1995 and 2019, juvenile incarceration dropped by 70 percent with no corresponding uptick in overall or violent juvenile crime.

Research on crime, adolescent brain development and behavior has demonstrated that arrest, detention and juvenile court adjudication and incarceration tend to increase delinquent youths’ risk of recidivism, negatively impacting psychosocial development and maturation into healthy, productive adulthood. In response, many communities are using diversion for low-risk juvenile offenders in place of formally processing youth through the juvenile court system. This allows juveniles to avoid the trauma and stigma of juvenile proceedings; avoid the burden of delinquency records that impede future educational and employment opportunities; and benefit from rehabilitation and accountability.

Of the many juvenile diversion models in use, pre-arrest diversion led by law enforcement—often referred to as deflection—has received comparatively little attention. This study works to fill that gap by assessing juvenile arrest rates and deflection efforts for all 50 states and providing a state-by-state overview and comparison of deflection programs

R Street Policy Study No. 263

Washington, DC: R Street, 2022. 23p.

By Marc Hyden and Steven Greenhut 

During periods of surging crime or intense public concern about crime, politicians ramp up their tough-on-crime rhetoric—often focusing their ire on young offenders whom they depict as receiving unreasonably light sentences. Crime-related fears are understandable, but America is at risk of embracing policies—especially regarding juveniles—that may only worsen the problem.

Since the 1990s, the nation has shifted from an incarceration-heavy approach toward juvenile offenders to one that tries to keep them out of the criminal justice system and provide counseling, training and rehabilitation services instead. These innovative programs are yielding positive results in terms of public safety and fiscal policy.

There are two main types of programs: diversion and deflection. Diversion is generally considered to be a formalized effort to divert someone who is already in the criminal justice system. Deflection is a police-led type of pre-arrest diversion. For the purposes of this paper, it includes civil citations; formal pre-arrest diversion to case management or restorative justice; and co-responder or community programs that apply to juveniles. The terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but the goal of each approach is to find service-based alternatives to the traditional justice system.

A recent R Street Institute study surveyed these varying programs nationwide, which now are rightly a standard part of the criminal justice system. Given their documented success, rather than abandoning these programs amid currently heightened crime fears, policymakers should expand them. In this paper, we outline a path forward by exploring the value of deflection programs; reviewing the public safety and fiscal benefits they offer; and highlighting a case from one jurisdiction that underscores the benefits of the approach.

Washington, DC: R Street, 2022. 7p.

By Sarah Hockenberry; Charles Puzzanchera

Data submitted to the National Juvenile Court Data Archive project (Archive) provide unique insight into the impact of COVID-19 on juvenile court caseloads. The Archive collects juvenile court data from around the nation to create national estimates detailing demographic and case processing characteristics of delinquency and petitioned status offense cases handled in U.S. juvenile courts. The uniqueness of the data collected by the Archive allows for a monthly analysis of court case volume and processing, which provides insight into any changes in case processing characteristics both at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and over time. This bulletin focuses primarily on patterns in case processing activities which occurred in 2020, compared with an average of the case processing characteristics for the prior 3 years (2017-2019), but also displays data through 2021.

  Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice. 2024. 8p.  

By Garner Clancey, Cecilia Drumore and Laura Metcalfe

The University of Sydney and Youth Justice New South Wales signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in July 2021. This MoU builds on various prior collaborative activities between the two organisations and related work in other jurisdictions. This paper reflects on the progress and challenges of collaboration of this kind. Specifically, there has been tentative progress in engaging non-traditional parts of the university in youth justice projects.

The initial stage of the collaboration highlighted challenges, including structures within the university which can frustrate interdisciplinary work. Time lines, staff turnover and resources also impacted this collaboration. We conclude with an outline of what might be achieved through ongoing collaboration and signal the importance of ongoing research to capture data and insights regarding the nature of this relationship as it develops.

Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 691. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2024.

By David B. Wilson, Mark W. Lipsey

Research summary

The primary outcome desired for juvenile delinquency programs is the cessation of delinquent and related problematic behaviors. However, this outcome is almost always pursued by attempting to change intermediate outcomes, such as family functioning, improved mental health, or peer relations. We can conceptualize intermediate outcomes that are related to reduced delinquency as change levers for effective intervention. A large meta-analysis identified several school-related change levers, including school engagement (i.e., improved attendance and reduced truancy), nondelinquent problem behaviors, and attitudes about school and teachers. In addition, family functioning and reducing substance use were also effective change levers. In contrast, effects on youth getting/keeping a job, peer relationships, and academic achievement were not associated with reduced delinquency.

Policy implications

Only a small percentage of rehabilitative programs provided to youth involved in the juvenile justice system have been established as evidence based. Moreover, there are constraints on what local policy makers and practitioners can do regarding the selection, adoption, and implementation of programs from the available lists of evidence-based programs. Adopting programs that focus on effective change levers and avoiding those that concentrate on ineffective ones has the potential to increase the likelihood that a local agency is engaged in effective programming. Based on our data, programs known to improve family functioning, attachment to and involvement in schooling, and reducing substance use are justified by the change lever evidence, even if these programs’ effectiveness in reducing delinquency has not been directly proven. In contrast, programs focusing on vocational skills, academic achievement, and peer relations are less likely to be beneficial. Furthermore, a change lever perspective can help frontline staff select appropriate programs for different juvenile offenders and focus their quality control efforts on those aspects of a program that are likely to be essential to maintaining effectiveness.

Criminology & Public Policy Volume23, Issue2. May 2024.

David C. Pyrooz

This final summary overview describes a research project aimed at evaluating a gang intervention program, led by the Gang Reduction Initiative of Denver (GRID), which has historically coordinated around two dozen strategies with partners emphasizing prevention, intervention, and suppression. The focus of GRID’s efforts is their use of juvenile and adult multidisciplinary teams (MDT) to facilitate coordination and individual case management of gang-involved youth who have been referred for services. A process and impact evaluation was undertaken between 2019 and 2022, and the project was pre-registered on the Open Science Framework before data collection. The evaluation was guided by two core questions: if the MDT-based approach achieves its stated purpose of providing comprehensive, coordinated services to gang members with fidelity; and if the MDT-based approach achieves its stated goals of producing disengagement from gangs and desistence from crime. The first question was the focus of the process evaluation, and the second question was the focus of the impact evaluation. This report provides details about the evaluation’s methodology and informs that evaluation findings were mixed. Findings showed: there is clear evidence, from the process evaluation, that GRID delivered a range of high-quality services with efficacy; GRID clients were nearly 70 percent less likely to engage in violence than individuals in the control group; and GRID clients were more than three times more likely to claim a current gang status than control group participants.

Boulder, CO: Institute of Behavioral Science , University of Colorado, 2023. 28p.

By Susannah N. Tapp, PhD; Alexandra Thompson; Erica L. Smith; and Lizabeth Remrey

This statistical brief presents findings on crimes involving juveniles, both as victims and as alleged or perceived offenders. It reports on (1) rates of nonfatal violent victimization of juveniles, (2) the number of deaths of juveniles due to homicide, (3) the percentage of nonfatal violent incidents in which the offender was perceived to be a juvenile, and (4) the percentage of persons arrested who were juveniles. Data are from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR), and the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). For additional information on these data collections and the similarities and differences between the BJS and FBI crime victimization data, including populations and types of crime covered, see Methodology or The Nation’s Two Crime Measures, 2011–2020 (NCJ 303385, BJS, February 2022).

Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Justice Statistical Brief Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2024, 13pg

By Jennifer Roark

This study, informed by a life course perspective, used a mixed methodological approach to identify the differences in events, motivations, and experiences related to gang affiliation and the differences across (a) system-documented, gang-involved individuals, (b) system-documented gang-involved individuals who have gang-involved family members, and (c) other high-risk youth who are suspected of involvement. The results of this study produced a nuanced understanding of these youth’s lives, especially as it relates to their fathers. As expected, when fathers were identified as having involvement in gangs themselves, youths were significantly more likely to also become members. The overall goal of this research was to identify distinct pathways to gang activity that could inform practitioners and policymakers about useful intervention strategies. This research fills a literature gap about the relationships between and amongst fathers and sons, and how those relationships transmit both criminogenic and protective factors that would encourage or discourage gang affiliation and gang activity. Father gang involvement continued to be a strong predictor of youth gang involvement even when controlling for other social relationships (e.g., peers, siblings, cousins), but not as much as same generation and peer influence. Importantly, fathers were not the sole social influence on a youth’s decision to join a gang. Peer and same generation family (siblings and cousins) gang involvement were as strong or stronger predictors of a youth’s involvement in crime and gangs as were the variables associated with fathers. The findings unexpectedly revealed that an increase in the most logged life events during a three-month timeframe reduced risk of escalation as a youth.

Portland, OR:  Research and Planning, Department of Community Justice Multnomah County Oregon. 2023, 113pg

By Christina Plerhoples Stacy

Over the summer and fall of 2021, the Urban Institute worked with the Delaware Department of Health and Social Services to recruit participants for a cash transfer study aimed at reducing rates of violence among young men in Wilmington. There are two main types of cash transfers: unconditional cash transfers, defined as money provided to people without any stipulations, and conditional cash transfers, defined as money provided to people with certain conditions, such as program attendance or work requirements. 

Washington, DC: Urban Institute. 2023, 39pg

By Ursula Kilkelly, Louise Forde, Emma Hurley, Sharon Lambert, Katharina Swirak, Deirdre Kelleher and Siobhan Buckley

This study was funded by the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (DCEDIY) through the Irish Research Council’s COALESCE Strand 1F scheme, designed to harness the resources and expertise of the Irish research system to establish a collaborative alliance between academia and policy makers and to support the successful achievement of Ireland’s policy goals. The purpose of the study was to support the development of effective and evidence-based policy and interventions for young people by combining the knowledge of academic research with the expertise of policy makers. In line with this goal, this report is intended to be a resource for policy-makers, researchers and students interested in understanding the experiences of young people in the Irish youth justice system with evidence that can be used to imagine a progressive future for Irish youth justice law and policy. Aims and Methodology Aims In setting out the scheme, the DCEDIY identified three core questions as the basis for the study: 1. What are the factors associated with involvement in anti-social behaviour, getting into trouble with the Gardaí and/or contact with the youth justice system? 2. What are the factors which may operate in a protective or a preventative way for young people who do not become involved in anti-social behaviour or contact with the Gardaí and the youth justice system? 3. What implications do these findings have for the future development of Irish youth justice policy and youth justice practice? 

Cork: University College Cork, Irish Research Council. 2021, 221pg

By Jaimee Mallion and Jane Wood

Tackling street gangs has recently been highlighted as a priority for public health. In this paper, the four components of a public health approach were reviewed: (1) surveillance, (2) identifying risk and protective factors, (3) developing and evaluating interventions at primary prevention, secondary prevention, and tertiary intervention stages, and (4) implementation of evidence-based programs. Findings regarding the effectiveness of prevention and intervention programs for street gang members were mixed, with unclear goals/objectives, limited theoretical foundation, and a lack of consistency in program implementation impeding effectiveness at reducing street gang involvement. This paper proposes that the Good Lives Model (GLM), a strengths-based framework for offender rehabilitation, provides an innovative approach to street gang intervention. Utilizing approach-goals, the GLM assumes that improving an individual’s internal skills and external opportunities will reduce the need to become involved in street gangs. Wrapping the GLM framework around current evidence-based interventions (e.g., Functional Family Therapy) increases client engagement and motivation to change, which is notably poor amongst those at risk of, or involved in, street gangs.

Soc. Sci. 2020, 24pg

Edited by Richard Rosenfeld, Mark Edberg, Xiangming Fang, and Curtis S. Florence

How do economic conditions such as poverty, unemployment, inflation, and economic growth impact youth violence? Economics and Youth Violence provides a much-needed new perspective on this crucial issue. Pinpointing the economic factors that are most important, the editors and contributors in this volume explore how different kinds of economic issues impact children, adolescents, and their families, schools, and communities. Offering new and important insights regarding the relationship between macroeconomic conditions and youth violence across a variety of times and places, chapters cover such issues as the effect of inflation on youth violence; new quantitative analysis of the connection between race, economic opportunity, and violence; and the cyclical nature of criminal backgrounds and economic disadvantage among families. Highlighting the complexities in the relationship between economic conditions, juvenile offenses, and the community and situational contexts in which their connections are forged, Economics and Youth Violence prompts important questions that will guide future research on the causes and prevention of youth violence. Contributors: Sarah Beth Barnett, Eric P. Baumer, Philippe Bourgois, Shawn Bushway, Philip J. Cook, Robert D. Crutchfield, Linda L. Dahlberg, Mark Edberg, Jeffrey Fagan, Xiangming Fang, Curtis S. Florence, Ekaterina Gorislavsky, Nancy G. Guerra, Karen Heimer, Janet L. Lauritsen, Jennifer L. Matjasko, James A. Mercy, Matthew Phillips, Richard Rosenfeld, Tim Wadsworth, Valerie West, Kevin T. Wolff Richard 

New York: London: New York University Press, 2013. 341p.

Edited by Franklin E. Zimring and David S. Tanenhaus 

This Is a hopeful but complicated era for those with ambitions to reform the juvenile courts and youth-serving public institutions in the United States. As advocates plea for major reforms, many fear the public backlash in making dramatic changes. Choosing the Future for American Juvenile Justice provides a look at the recent trends in juvenile justice as well as suggestions for reforms and policy changes in the future. Should youth be treated as adults when they break the law? How can youth be deterred from crime? What factors should be considered in how youth are punished?What role should the police have in schools?

New York; London: New York University Press, 2014. 257p.

By Ieke de Vriesl, Michael Baglivio, and Joan A. Reid

Despite extant literature on individual-level risk factors for sex trafficking among children and adolescents, little is known about the impact of social and ecological contexts on risk of human trafficking victimization. The purpose of this study was to examine the correlates signaling risk of human trafficking victimization at the individual, family, social, and community levels utilizing a sample of 40,531 justice-involved male and female youth, a small fraction of whom were suspected or verified victims of human trafficking between 2011 and 2015 (N = 801, including 699 female and 102 male youth). Using this sample, we examined differences across individual, family, social, and community characteristics of youth involved in the juvenile justice system who have a history of trafficking victimization and youth without such histories. Series of logistic regression analyses were conducted using varying control groups, created through exact matching and randomized matching groups to address sample imbalances. These analyses indicate that, at the individual level, youth who had experienced childhood adversities were more likely to report human trafficking victimization. Sex differences were found regarding risk factors pertaining to the family and broader socio-ecological contexts. Female youth who had witnessed family violence had an antisocial partner or antisocial friends, or resided in a community with a greater proportion of the population being foreign-born or speaking English less than very well were at heightened risk for human trafficking victimization. Little evidence was found for community-level risk factors of victimization in this specific sample of justice-involved youth. These findings encourage more research to unpack the multilevel correlates of victimizations at the individual, family, social, and community levels, recognizing potential differences between female and male youth regarding the factors that put them at heightened risk for juvenile sex trafficking victimizations. Practice and policy should direct awareness and prevention measures to social and ecological contexts.

By Michael John Cahill, Sarah Napier, Dana Thomsen, Micheala McCaig and Heather Wolbers 

This study analyses Australian Bureau of Statistics data to examine trends in the rate of juveniles being proceeded against by police for sexual offences in Australia, from 2008–09 to 2020–21. Over the 13-year period, the rate of recorded sexual offences committed by juveniles per 100,000 population was consistently higher than the rate for adults. While recorded assaultive sexual offences committed by juveniles decreased during this period, recorded non-assaultive sexual offences increased notably, and were still increasing at the end of the study period.

The study highlights the need for increased focus on early intervention (from the age of 13 onwards) and prevention efforts targeting non-assaultive sexual offending by both sexes and assaultive sexual offences by male juveniles in Australia.

Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2024, 16pg

By Richard A. Mendel

   After decades of neglect, the youth justice field is awakening to the importance of diversion in lieu of arrest and formal court processing for many or most youth accused of delinquent behavior. Even amid rising concerns over youth crime nationwide, jurisdictions across the country are heeding the evidence by taking concerted action to address more cases of alleged lawbreaking behavior outside the formal justice system. This momentum to make diversion a centerpiece of juvenile justice reform is encouraging given powerful research showing that youth who are diverted from the justice system are far less likely to be arrested for subsequent offenses and far more likely to succeed in education and employment than comparable youth who are arrested and prosecuted in juvenile court. Greater use of diversion is also essential to reduce the persistent racial and ethnic disparities that pervade youth justice systems. This brief details significant diversion reform efforts of several types.   

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2024. 22p.

By Richard A. Mendel

This brief provides recommendations for advocates on how best to understand and address the messaging challenge in order to build support for further progress expanding the use of diversion in youth justice. The recent momentum to expand the use of diversion in youth justice is long overdue. However, to reach its potential, advocates must deliver clear, consistent messages to inform the public and persuade public officials. This will require advocates to: ● Develop a clear and simple definition of diversion that makes effective community-based alternatives to the formal justice system understandable and appealing to policymakers and the public. (See Text Box on p.2 for a definition and sample elevator pitch to promote diversion.) ● Craft messages to promote youth diversion that are grounded in evidence of diversion’s benefits and are compelling to persuadable voters as well as elected officials and other policymakers. ● Tailor messages to the political sensibilities and civic culture of the local community, and target messages to specific audiences. ● Develop effective strategies to combat sensationalized, alarmist, poorly contextualized news coverage and political rhetoric that stoke public fears of youth crime and subvert constructive reform efforts. ● Augment arguments and evidence with real-world stories illustrating the benefits of diversion and the harms of formal court processing. Involve youth, families, and community members with direct experience in the youth justice system to tell their stories and highlight the importance of diversion in human terms.

Issue Brief #4

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2024. 7p.