Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
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]