Download Youth_Justice_Grant 86.0 KB

Youth Justice/Juvenile Justice
Grant Application
Youth Court, Teen Court, Peer Court,
Student Court, Peer Jury and Youth Panel
Diversion Programs
FYI – Youth Court is utilized for discussion purposes.
General Application
I. VISION STATEMENT
The Youth Court Diversion Program envisions the deterrence of negative
juvenile behavior by redirecting our youth to behave in a positive manner and
therefore becoming an asset to our community. Youth Court strives to promote
feelings of self-esteem and desire for self-improvement, and foster a healthy
attitude toward rules and authority. By intervening in early anti-social,
delinquent and criminal behavior and reducing the incidence and preventing
escalation of such behavior at the onset of these actions, youth will be deterred.
Youth Court provides guidance, rehabilitative placements, mentoring and close
supervision of juvenile offenders and, in turn, will develop youth to become
positive contributing citizens of their community. The program also envisions
educating and personally enriching many volunteer members and jurors of the
program in law-related education, which also fosters their development by
encouraging them to participate in extra-curricular activities.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE TARGET POPULATION
1. Offender: The Youth who has committed an offense: Any youth
who has committed an eligible crime, offense and/or violation in the
(village, town, city, county, etc.) and is offered the opportunity to proceed
in Youth Court and who voluntarily agrees to proceed may participate. By
agreeing to proceed before Youth Court, the youth obtains certain benefits,
and waives certain rights that otherwise would be attached in connection
with the traditional criminal justice processing. These youth are typically
10 to 16 years of age with older and younger exceptional circumstances.
2. Members: Youth Court members consist of young people of high school
age who have completed a multi-week course of law-related instruction.
Areas of instruction include an overview of the criminal justice system
from arrest through appeal, the organization of youth court, including
jurisdiction operation procedure and rules, the penal law, the
consequences of crime to victims, the courts, the police, the probation
office, and the community at large, the role of sentencing in rehabilitation
of offenders, the range and effectiveness of rehabilitative actions and
programs that are available, and sentencing issues, including aggravating
and mitigating circumstances, and the nature and type of evidence that is
admissible and probative in sentencing.
Once prospective members have acquired a basic understanding of
the criminal justice system through this course of instruction, the
will be provided with the opportunity to apply that knowledge in
mock sentencing hearings, preparatory to their participation in
actual cases in Youth Court. Prospective members will also take a
written examination to demonstrate proficiency in the subject
matter. Upon graduation, Youth Court members will serve in the
roles of judge, prosecutor, defender, clerk/bailiff, and jury
foreperson. The members apply their knowledge directly in the
cases assigned to them, and, in the process, will develop a variety of
skills relating to analysis or information, determination of its
relevance and importance, and articulating and advocating
positions.
Literature, videos, lectures, guest speakers and actual participation
in mock and actual cases are the primary tools used to provide
knowledge to the prospective Youth Court members. Youth Court
members in turn will provide instruction and guidance to volunteer
jurors and offenders.
3. Volunteer Jurors: Jurors are drawn from young people in grades seven
through twelve who wish to volunteer their time. Volunteer jurors may
serve without the need to take a course of instruction. In addition, each
jury will include a Jury Foreperson, who is a member of Youth Court, and
each jury may include offenders whose cases have been adjudicated
previously in Youth Court. Jurors will be given instructions by the student
judge on their role in determining an appropriate sentence, and the
factors, which they should take into consideration. Jurors will then apply
the knowledge they have obtained in the decision of cases. Jurors will be
led in their deliberations and discussion by a Jury Foreperson who is a
member of the program, to ensure full and complete discussion and
development of appropriate factors in deliberations. The Jury Foreperson
will ensure that each juror’s views are solicited, thereby facilitating the
development of skills of analysis and articulation among jurors.
4. Targeted Needs, Conditions and Behaviors (what the program
seeks to impact, build upon or change): Youth Court will operate
year round. Offenders who are involved in the youth court program are
referred by the police department, county probation department, and the
justice courts. Types of offenses committed are generally first time,
misdemeanor and/or violations. Typical cases referred to Youth Court are
shoplifting, larcenies, criminal mischief, vandalism, harassment, unlawful
possession of marijuana, etc. The youth court members are recruited from
within the public and private high schools and jurors are young people in
grades seven through twelve who wish to volunteer to participate.
5. Typical Program Participant Profile – Describe a typical
individual/family for whom the program is targeted and for
whom success will be most likely: Talk about a case or cases the court
has heard and the adjudication of the courts decision.
6. Evidence that the proposed program would attract the participants can be
summed up in two words – “Peer Justice.” Offenders participate
because they are able to be judged by their peers rather than adults and be
diverted from the traditional criminal justice system. They are also able to
have their case handled in a swift timely manner. Youth Court allows the
offender to express him/her self and explain the circumstances of the
offense. It also allows for the youth to clearly understand what is expected
and how they can make up for their mistake and be looked at in a positive
way. The offender is then able, when the obligations are completed, to
become a positive member of the community. Offenders also are able to
avoid a criminal record. Members are motivated to participate because
they are able to learn about and become involved in the criminal justice
system in a positive forum. Members are able to develop relationships
with various people in the community, such as police, U.S. Attorney’s
Office, Judges, community agencies, local and state government officials,
as well as have an important impact on issues relating to young people.
Members are able to become part of the system and impart positive
change. Jurors are young people who, not having gone through the multiweek training for membership, can still participate in an important way.
Many times jurors are young people who are not sure if they want to
commit to the time and obligations of being a member. Often they lack the
confidence to actually present a case in Youth Court. By being a juror they
are able to participate and many jurors then decide to become members of
Youth Court.
III. OUTCOMES
The Youth Court will address the problem of anti-social, delinquent and
criminal behavior engaged in by youth people, with the particular goal of
reducing the incidence and preventing the escalation of such behavior. To the
extent that peer judgments are influential, a sentence impose by a jury of
peers will shape positive behavior. Sentencing, in youth courts, is designed to
hold youth accountable according the idea that peer pressure exerts a
powerful influence over adolescent behavior. If peer pressure leads juveniles
into law breaking, it can be redirected to become a force leading juveniles into
law-abiding behavior. Service on another jury will enable young people who
have committed an offense to participate in the criminal justice system rather
than being the object of that system, thereby causing and reinforcing positive
behavior. The diversion of cases to Youth Court will reduce the caseload of
the courts and the probation office, resulting in saving in time and resources.
The program also will benefit young people who participate in Youth Court
as members and volunteer juror, by increasing their knowledge of the
criminal justice system and facilitating development of important skills
relating to the analysis of information, determination of its relevance and
importance, and articulating and advocating positions. Members will serve in
the roles of judge, prosecutor, defender, clerk/bailiff and jury foreperson, and
will be required to complete successfully a multi-week law-related educational
program. Volunteer jurors will consist of any young person who wishes to
participate. This system will promote awareness of the rule of law and the
functioning of the legal system among all young people. It potentially will
reach the entire spectrum of young people, from youth who have committed
an offense, to youth who wish to invest only a small amount of their time as
jurors, to youth who are will to invest substantial time, effort, study and
energy in the program and to serve in the member functions of Youth Court:
judge, prosecutor, defender, clerk/bailiff and jury foreperson.
Specific areas in which benefits are anticipated include the areas of
knowledge, attitude, skill, satisfaction and economy.
A. KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge is defined as “the aggregate of facts,
information, and principles that an individual has acquired through
learning and experience.” (Hawes & Hawes, 1982). The Youth Court
program has been constructed to focus directly on identifiable areas in
need of increased law-related education, including areas of substantive
criminal law, criminal procedure and rehabilitation.
B. ATTITUDE. An attitude is defined as “a state of readiness, a tendency
to act or react in a certain manner when confronted with certain
stimuli.” (Howards, 1990). Youth Court is designed to promote
positive attitudes toward and respect for the law and the criminal
justice system.
C. SKILL. Skill is defined as “the ability required performing a specific
task.” (Straub, 1992). Youth Court will promote development of skills
in the analysis of information, determination of its relevance and
importance, articulation of facts, inference and conclusions, advocacy
and decision making.
D. SATISFACTION. Satisfaction refers to an individual’s “positive
evaluations or assessments of a give situation.” (Gochman, 1988).
Youth Court aims to achieve among participants a sense of satisfaction
with the criminal justice system process through their direct
participation in cases and influence over outcomes.
E. ECONOMY. Economy is the “prudent and efficient use of resources
and material.” (Brownstone, Frank & Garrath, 1980). A goal of Youth
Court is to utilize volunteer and community resources to address
problems of inappropriate youth behavior before that behavior
escalates to the point of imposing costs on the traditional criminal
justice system.
IV. PERFORMANCE TARGETS
A. Performance targets are the measurable improvement in the condition
or behavior of the target population that the program intends to achieve
during a designated period of time. Targets are quantifiable and
verifiable indicators of the program performance. Attainment of several
performance targets may be needed to indicate the achievement of a single
outcome. Performance targets can either increase in positive behavior or
condition or a reduction in negative or destructive behavior or condition. A
program’s success is measured by how well it achieves its performance
targets. On a local level youth court have achieved their performance targets
and are becoming more readily accepted as juvenile diversion program that
works. In the absence of a Youth Court program, it is believed that significant
fraction of the target population would continue in criminal behavior and
escalate to more serious criminal activity.
Performance targets should be ambitious, but realistic using the baseline as
the starting point.
B. Verification of Target Achievement – the following are examples of
performance measures to help assess Youth Court program. For these you
need to determine such things as: 85% of Youthful Offenders Sentenced will
successfully complete their peer imposed community service.
Measure for performance target #1: A pre-test and a post-test will be
administered containing a series of law related questions during the annual
law related educational training program. Scores of the pre-test/posttest will
be calculated.
Measure for performance target #2: The Youth Court Coordinator will
tabulate the numbers of persons who are offered the opportunity to appear in
Youth Court, those who sign an agreement to proceed in Youth Court.
Measure for performance target #3: The Youth Court Coordinator will
tabulate those who successfully complete Youth Court (including the
community service and service on youth court jury components).
Measure for performance target #4: The Youth Court Coordinator will
tabulate how many days until each offender starts community service projects
from the date of his/her sentencing hearing.
Measure for performance target #5: Each fall, the Youth Court will
accept new members in addition to the already existing continuing members
of the Youth Court. At the end of each training session, the total number of
members is simply counted.
V. MILESTONES
Milestones are the measurable interim changes in the condition or
behavior of the target population used to track whether the program is “on
course” to achieve its performance targets. These are the critical points of
change or achievement that must occur to progress towards the defined
targets.
Milestones’ tracking is especially important where performance target
attainment takes a period of months and therefore cannot be measured until
near the end of the designated program period. It provides a valuable
management tool that can be used to verify that the program is likely to meet
its targets. Ideally milestones are time specific. If milestones are not being
reached, it provides the opportunity to redirect program strategies/ resources
as necessary. It is important to keep in mind that milestones are observable
changes in the behavior, condition, status of the program participant, not the
program activities that contribute to these changes.
Milestones:
A. Recruit youth to become members of the Youth Court program.
B. Director/Coordinator meets with referral agency, i.e. police probation,
or justice court, and develop process to accept referral of youth.
C. Conduct eight (8) week training program required for membership, by
organizing guest speakers to instruct this law related training session.
D. Administer a pre-test and a post-test to prospective youth court
members and record rates of change in knowledge acquired in law
related education.
E. Cases are assigned to the members and cases are mailed to members
approximately one week before the date of hearing.
F. Continue to locate and secure appropriate agencies for community
service placements.
G. Supervise and monitor weekly community service placements.
H. Collect and analyze data regarding the program participants.
I. Director sends a disposition to the agency of referral regarding the
progress of the offender upon successful completion.
J. Prepare proper case records and financial reports.
Corresponding Milestones:
A. Potential youth court members identified at the training session fall.
B. Potential cases identified, intake meetings completed, court date set,
sentencing hearing, completes community service, and successfully
finishes program.
C. Potential Members attend the training classes of approximately 25
hours of training.
D. Youth Court members take the pre-test t the first night of training and
the post-test is given at the last night of training.
E. Members receive schedule in the mail, member call their mentor if
needed, and starts case preparation for the hearing.
F. Community Service placement sites are confirmed at least 2 months
ahead of schedule.
G. Program offenders appear twice a week to complete hours assigned to
them.
H. Program updates prepared on an on-going basis throughout the year.
I. Agency of referral (police, probation, and/or justice court) receive
disposition of youth of his/her successful completion of the program.
J. Maintain case records consisting of detailed information of the youth
and crime committed and submit financial reports to board of directors
and appropriate agencies.
VI. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
In the Youth Court program, a youth who has admitted culpability appears for
a sentencing hearing before a jury of peers. The jury is drawn from any young
people who wish to participate, and may include offenders whose cases have been
adjudicated Youth Court previously. The jury is presented with evidence relevant
to sentencing, deliberates, and passes sentence. Sentences typically include
community service and counseling, and stress rehabilitative goals.
The membership functions of Youth Court, judge, prosecutor, defender,
jury foreperson and clerk/bailiff, are filled by young people who have completed a
multi-week course of law related education. The prosecutor and defender present
evidence of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and suggest appropriate
sentences to the jury. The judge presides over the proceedings and instructs the
jury as to factors which should be considered in determining a sentence. The jury
foreperson leads the jury in its deliberations, solicits each juror’s views, and
insures discussion of appropriate factors. The clerk/bailiff maintains the records
of the proceeding, and generally insures that order is maintained.
Youth Court cases are actual cases in which a youth who has committed an
offence has consented to proceed in Youth Court. As part of the rehabilitative
action, the youth who has committed an offense will serve on a jury in a
subsequent case, and thus will participate in determining an appropriate
sentence for another person who has committed an offense.
Intervention will be prompt, with the sentencing hearing being held within
one to three weeks of the commission of the offense. To the extent that peer
judgments are influential, a sentence imposed by a jury of peers will shape
positive behavior. The Youth Court Community Service Program requires the
offender to complete community service hours through educational classes held
one evening a week and work projects that are conducted every Saturday. The
staff of the Youth Court program supervises all the community service work and
use the interaction to identify other needs of the young people and refer for
services as necessary as well as providing structure, guidelines and role modeling.
Narrative and Executive Summary
Background
Youth court, also called teen court, is a rapidly expanding voluntary alternative to the
juvenile justice system for young people who have committed a crime or an offense. The
goal of youth court is to intervene in early anti-social, delinquent, and criminal behavior,
and to reduce the incidence and prevent the escalation of such behavior. Youth court strives
to promote feelings of self esteem and a desire for self improvement, and to foster a healthy
attitude toward rules and authority. Youth court also offers volunteer civic opportunities for
young people who seek to become volunteer members of the court.
A youth, who has admitted guilt to a crime or an offense, in most cases, appears for a
sentencing hearing before a jury of peers. The jury is presented with evidence relevant to
sentencing, deliberates, and passes sentence. Sentences typically include community
service, restitution, and stress rehabilitative goals. Youth court proceedings involve a
youthful offender, youth jurors, and youth members often in the roles of judge, prosecutor,
defender, clerk/bailiff, and jury foreperson. Sentencing is designed to hold youth
accountable within the context of the recognition that peer pressure exerts a powerful
influence over adolescent behavior. Cases are generally referred by judges, police,
probation, and schools to the adult coordinator who oversees the program. Typical cases
that may be heard in youth court include larceny, criminal mischief, vandalism, minor
assault, possession of alcohol, minor drug offenses, and truancy.
There is a substantial need in the juvenile justice system to provide alternative sentencing
options which sanction the juvenile offender while allowing for that young person to be held
accountable in a positive manner to them self and the community for their delinquent and
criminal behavior.
A model graduated sanctions system combines treatment and
rehabilitation with reasonable, fair, humane, and appropriate sanctions, and offers a
continuum of care consisting of diverse programs. The continuum includes immediate
sanctions within the community for first time, nonviolent offenders. Youth courts provide
communities with an opportunity to provide immediate consequences for first time youthful
offenders, while providing a peer operated sentencing mechanism that constructively allows
young people to take responsibility, be held accountable, and make restitution for
committing a crime or violation of law.
Additionally, while providing constructive consequences for juvenile offenders, youth courts
offer a civic opportunity for other young people in the community. This civic opportunity
allows these young people to actively participate in the community decision making
processes for dealing with juvenile delinquency, as they gain “hands-on” knowledge of the
juvenile and criminal justice systems. Youth Court utilizes peers to determine the
appropriate sentence of other youth, a critical aspect of the program. If peer pressure
contributes to juvenile delinquency, some experts have taken the view that it can be
redirected to become a force leading juveniles into law-abiding behavior (Federal
Probation, “Youth Court-Juvenile Justice for the 21st Century”, Williamson, Chalk &
Knepper, 1993).
The lack of consistent intervention with juvenile offenders soon after their initial contact
with the police or other authority has long been recognized as perhaps the largest single gap
in services for troubled youth. Youth court offers law enforcement officers an avenue for
referral that provides direct contact between youth court staff and the youthful offender
from the initial referral intake meeting, during the youth court hearing, and through the
completion of sanctions assigned. Youth courts can provide feedback to the referring police
officer regarding the outcome of each youth court case referred, which can strengthen law
enforcement involvement and satisfaction with the processing of juvenile crimes. A police
force that manages routine crime and processes criminals efficiently helps to prevent crime
by enforcing laws and bolstering norms against criminal behavior.
Youth court programs have been in existence for over twenty-five years, but it is not until
recently that they have increasingly become a fixture in many communities. Moreover, it is
only in the past few years that there has been support on a national level for youth court
programs. Currently, there are over 1,200 jurisdictions operating youth court programs in
the United States and approximately one hundred additional youth court programs that are
now in the developmental stages. In 1994, there were only 78 youth court programs
operating in the U.S. Most of these youth court programs are “grass roots” community
efforts, which reflect the fact that youth court is increasingly seen as an effective means for
holding youth accountable for delinquent and criminal behavior within the community by
local officials, parents and citizens.
Other clear indicators that youth courts are gaining increasing levels of acceptance and
attracting growing support include recent youth court legislation approved in over seventeen
states for development and operation of youth courts, and policy and legislation to support
youth courts through revenues from traffic tickets at local levels of government. Five
additional states have pending youth court legislation. It is also recognized at state and local
levels that, as a result of strong volunteer support, youth court programs are among the
least expensive community youth sanctions programs to operate.
Youth courts differ from other juvenile justice programs because they involve other young
people in the process, especially in determining the offender’s sanction. For example, a
peer jury may assign an offender to a combination of community service, conflict
resolution training, restitution, jury duty, and/or educational workshops. Depending on
the model used, young people may serve as jurors, prosecuting attorneys, defense
attorneys, bailiffs, clerks, and even judges.
Since youth courts are developed in local communities, and by local communities, there is
no “cookie-cutter” approach to the structure of youth court programs. There are,
however, some common models that youth courts employ. The most common of the
youth court models is the Adult Judge Model. The Adult Judge Model employs an adult
judge to rule on courtroom procedure and clarify legal terminology. Youth volunteers
serve as defense and prosecuting attorneys and as jurors. Young people may also serve as
bailiff and clerk. The Youth Judge Model is similar to the Adult Judge Model, except that
a juvenile serves as judge, usually after a length of service as a youth court attorney. The
Peer Jury Model employs a panel of teen jurors who question the youth offender directly.
No defense or prosecuting attorney is employed. The judge is usually an adult volunteer.
Finally, the Tribunal Model has no peer jury. Instead, the prosecuting and defense
attorneys present cases to a juvenile judge who determines the sentence.
Regardless of the model employed, most youth courts are based in the juvenile justice
system or in a community setting. The most common agencies operating or
administering youth court programs are juvenile courts and private nonprofit
organizations (29% each). The next most common agencies are law enforcement agencies
and juvenile probation departments (17 % each). Schools are the operating agencies for
about 10 percent of youth courts while a variety of other agencies (e.g. city government,
the administrative office of the court) are less commonly the operating agency.
Why Do We Need Youth Courts?
Over the past two decades, hundreds of communities have determined that they needed a
youth court because youth courts offer a positive alternative to traditional juvenile justice
and school disciplinary procedures. Additionally, youth courts:
Serve as a prevention and early intervention program;
Hold juvenile offenders accountable for their actions;
Provide another option on the continuum of services available to youth;
Promote restorative justice principles;
Educate youth about the legal system;
Offer an opportunity for young people to connect positively with adults and y outh from
their community; and
Encourage youth to take ownership in their own health and well-being and that of their
communities.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
In the wake of current data showing a decline in reported crime, a simultaneous increase in
the level of violent crime committed by young people is causing concern among criminal
justice professionals, policy makers and community leaders alike. Coupled with the current
growth in the nation’s juvenile age population, many observers are forecasting a virtual
explosion in crime perpetrated by juveniles. While the extent of this anticipated juvenile
crime wave is the subject of much debate, there is little questions that crimes committed by
juvenile in our communities today are more likely than ever to be of a more serious and
more violent nature.
Juvenile crime statistics can often be skewed because much of this criminal activity is
committed by groups. Nevertheless, there is a clear and growing propensity for criminal
activity by juveniles which demands the attention and direct response of Policy leaders from
all levels of government. This effort is now being followed by the formulation of bold policy
decisions that will strategically direct resources to support innovative programming where it
can be most effective. This policy review has resulted in the State continuing to recognize
the need to support a comprehensive approach to addressing juvenile crime. While part of
this comprehensive approach includes a well-supported effort by law enforcement to arrest
and fully prosecute juvenile offenders, another part of this approach must include an effort
to orchestrate a systemic response to young, first-time offenders. This is necessary for
several inter-related reasons.
Firstly, the increase in violent youthful offenders entering the justice system is taxing the
time and service resources of that system. The increased attention that must be afforded
these more complicated cases has generally resulted in a redistribution of court resources
and a concomitant decrease in the attention that the justice system can give to lesser
offenders. For some of these youth, this form of “systemic neglect” becomes an open
invitation to continue, if not accelerate, the progression to bolder and more violent crimes.
Secondly, legislatures are responding to the increased societal demand for a wider variety of
young offenders to experience more punitively-oriented judicial sanctioning (as opposed to
the primarily rehabilitative approaches practiced in recent years) by enacting laws that
provide for such and which curtail police discretion at arrest. However, in the absence of
increased court resources, these tactics further increase the caseloads of the courts. Thus,
the “systemic neglect” is perpetuated by legislation. Finally, the judicial systems’ inability to
respond in what the public perceives to be an appropriate and timely fashion has created a
growing lack of confidence in the justice system.
The public perceives the court systems as being unresponsive to the communities needs for
safety and the visible sanctioning of those who violate its standards and laws. As a result,
policies and supporting resources which will decrease the courts caseloads and facilitate a
collaborative effort between the local criminal justice systems and their respective
communities are necessary to respond to the variety of needs demonstrated by these
troubled youth. Many states believe that this support must empower localities to reinforce
their own standards and provide them with viable options for addressing local problems.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This Youth Court grant proposal addresses early anti-social, delinquent and criminal
behavior. Youth Courts support local efforts to sanction first-time, young offenders who
have admitted culpability in low-level, illegal activity (Petit Larceny, Disorderly Conduct,
Criminal Mischief, etc.). Referrals are made by police, probation and/or family court. The
youth appears for a sentencing hearing before a judge and jury of peers for the purpose of
receiving various community-based sanctions. Youth Court members in the role of
prosecutor and defender present evidence relevant to aggravation and mitigation of offense
conduct. The jury deliberates, and passes sentence. Sentences stress rehabilitative and
restorative goals - - typically including: the performance of community service; victim
restitution; and service on a future youth court jury.
Providing this voluntary option for the offending juveniles will also provide them with the
venue by which to demonstrate their willingness to pay-back the community and turn
towards more law-abiding behaviors. For many of the youth participating in Youth Court,
the application of an effective, timely, and peer-based response to illegal behavior, in
combination with the education about the criminal justice system, will provide the impetus
to curtail the escalation towards more serious criminal activities.
SAMPLE OBJECTIVES
To increase the number of identified juvenile and youthful offenders participating in
structured and restorative alternative community sanctions programming.
To involve youth in the adjudication/sanctioning processes at the decision-making level:
thereby enhancing their knowledge of the functioning of the Criminal Justice system and the
impacts of crime on the individual and the community.
To establish partnerships/linkages with local police, probation and Family Court for referral
of youth suitable for sentencing by Youth Court.
To insure that all eligible juvenile offenders are subject to a form of sanction, commensurate
to their offense, that reflects the local community’s resolve to hold young offenders
accountable for their actions.
To develop a system of screening juveniles or young offenders to determine their suitability
for participation in community sanctions programming.
To develop project plans in coordination with other local agencies or community-based
service providers to provide community sanctions and other, alternative supervision and
treatment services to clients.
To encourage the development and adoption of local policies that enhance project
objectives.
To involve local youth from schools and community organizations as participants (court
officers and jurors) in Youth Court process and to increase their knowledge and appreciation
for the criminal justice process.
Performance Measures to select from (you insert the quantitative or qualitative
measure based on your local community (fill in your percentages and
numbers):
Number youth involved as participants (court officers and jurors) in youth court process.
Number of youth screened for participation.
Number of youth sentenced by Youth Court.
Number of youth placed in sanctions.
Number of local agencies and community-based organizations providing programming for
Youth Court clients.
Policies and procedures developed to support Youth Court Objectives.
Number of clients successfully completing sanctions.
Number of clients removed from the Youth Court program.
Percentage increase in juvenile and youthful offenders participating in community
sanctions-based
programming as defined within this program outline.
Percentage of Youth Court participants arrested for juvenile activity within one year of
completing
the community sanctions-based programming.
Percentage of Youth Court participants not subject to arrest for one year after completion of
the community sanctions-based programming.
Recidivism
The National Institute of Justice at the Office of Justice Programs within the U.S.
Department of Justice states that recidivism is three years post adjudication. There are
three (3) standard measures of recidivism. They are re-arrest, conviction and incarceration.
Programs should not state they are going to track recidivism unless they know how to do
this. It is a long term project. You may report on one year or two years. A professional
research should track this and\/or consult closely with the adults who are knowledgeable
about this type of research. Many programs have failed in obtaining future funding and/or
had funding reduced in a current grant as they were unable to track recidivism as they
formally and contractually agreed to in the application.
The Peer Justice Philosophy
“If negative peer pressure is a primary factor in leading some young people to
commit a crime or an offense, then positive peer pressure can be harnessed and
redirected to become a positive force and lead other young people to adhere to
the rule of law and become more productive citizens. The peer justice and youth
empowerment programs harness positive peer pressure and utilize it in a peer
judgment setting to adjust the anti-social, delinquent, and criminal behavior of
young people. The peer judgment and positive peer pressure aspects of teen
courts and youth courts are the two primary programmatic elements what
separate these juvenile justice programs from all the others”.
Scott Bernard Peterson (1993 and 2013)
Research Journals and Reports for References
(funders like to see this)
Professional Journal Articles & Reports
Global Youth Justice Professional Journal Articles are on youth court, teen court,
peer court, student court, and youth peer panel programs. Mr. Scott Bernard
Peterson is regarded as the leading international authority on these programs
and has been published considerably on these programs over the past two
decades. Click titles to view and download.
Peterson, Scott. B, (2012). “Examining the Referral Stage for Mentoring
High-Risk Youth in TEEN COURT/YOUTH COURT diversion programs”
United States Department of Justice/Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention Research Study on 6 Juvenile Justice Settings and Mentoring
Download PDF File (16 Pages)
http://www.globalyouthjustice.org/uploads/Teen_Court_and_Mento
ring_TA.pdf
Peterson, Scott. B, (2012). “TEEN COURT/YOUTH COURT diversion
programs and MENTORING – Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU)” United States Department of Justice/Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention Research Study on 6 Juvenile Justice Settings and
Mentoring
Download MOU PDF File (8 Pages)
http://www.globalyouthjustice.org/uploads/Teen_Court_Mentoring_
MOU.pdf
Peterson, Scott. B. (Summer, 2009). “Made in America: The Global Youth
Justice Movement”. Reclaiming Children and Youth International Journal.
Volume 18, Number 2. Pages 48-52. www.reclaimingjournal.com
Peterson, Scott. B, Dagelman, Charlie and Pereira, Carolyn. (Summer,
2007). Introducing Community Service Learning. The Journal of the American
Probation and Parole Association. Volume 31. Number 2. Pages 22-27.
www.appa-net.org
Peterson, Scott. B. and Ritchie, Eppink. (2007) The Next Big Thing: Teen
Courts in America. Law Now: Relating Life to Law in Canada. Volume 31, Issue
5. Page 20-26.
www.lawnow.org and [email protected]
Peterson, Scott. B. (2003). “Putting the Service in Youth Court”. IN
SESSION: Spring and Summer Issue. Volume 3 and Number 2.
Peterson, Scott. B. and Elmendorf, M. J. II (2002). Youth Court: A
National Youth Justice Movement. Juvenile Justice Today: Essay on Programs
and Policies. (Pages 103-109). This is a book published by the American
Correctional Association.
Peterson, Scott.B. and Elmendorf, M. J. II (2001, December). Youth
Courts: A National Movement. Corrections Today. American Correctional
Association, Juvenile Corrections Annual Journal. Volume 63, Number 7.
Peterson, Scott. B. Pericak, W.C., and Lockart, P. (1996, Fall). Youth
Court: The Colonie, New York experience. Journal for Juvenile Justice and
Detention, National Juvenile Detention Association, Volume II, Number 2.
Peterson, Scott. B. (Fall 2001). “In Youth Courts Teens Hold Teens
Accontable”. The Safety Zone. National Resource for Safe Schools. Volume 3.
Issue 3. (5 pages)
Scott
Scott Bernard Peterson, CEO/Owner
Global Youth Justice, LLC
Cell: 202.468-3790
Www.GlobalYouthJustice.org
[email protected]