Comprehensive Program Plan for Fiscal Year 2000
Federal RegisterDec 20, 1999
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
SUMMARY: The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is
publishing this notice of its Final Program Plan for fiscal year (FY)
2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eileen M. Garry, Director, Information
Dissemination Unit, at 202-307-5911. [This is not a toll-free number.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs in the U.S. Department of Justice. Pursuant to the provisions
of Section 204 (b)(5)(A) of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 5601 et seq. (JJDP
Act), the Administrator of OJJDP published for public comment a
Proposed Comprehensive Plan describing the program activities that
OJJDP proposed to carry out during fiscal year (FY) 2000 under Parts C
and D of Title II of the JJDP Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. 5651-5665a,
5667, 5667a. The public was invited to comment on the Proposed Plan
(published on October 15, 1999, at 64 FR 56084) by November 29, 1999.
The OJJDP Administrator analyzed the public comments received, and the
comments and OJJDP's responses are provided below. The Administrator
took these comments into consideration in developing this Final
Comprehensive Plan describing the particular program activities that
OJJDP intends to fund during FY 2000, using in whole or in part funds
appropriated under Parts C and D of Title II of the JJDP Act.
OJJDP acknowledged in the Proposed Plan that at the time of
publication its reauthorization legislation was still in conference and
its FY 2000 appropriation was not yet final. OJJDP indicated that,
depending on the outcome of those legislative actions, it might alter
how its programs are structured and make any necessary modifications in
the Final Plan following the public comment period. This Final Plan is
consistent with OJJDP's FY 2000 appropriation and reflects its response
to the public comments on the Proposed Plan.
Notice of the official solicitation of grant or cooperative
agreement applications for competitive programs to be funded under the
Final Comprehensive Plan will be published at a later date in the
Federal Register. No proposals, concept papers, or other forms of
application should be submitted at this time.
Background
In developing its program plan for Parts C and D each year, OJJDP
takes into consideration the latest available data on juvenile crime
and victimization in the United States and views these statistics in
relation to those of recent years. To know where the Nation's juveniles
are headed, it is necessary to know where they are and where they have
been. OJJDP has two primary source materials that provide a
comprehensive picture of the nature of juvenile crime and violence
across the Nation: Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report
(National Report) which assembles the latest data available on juvenile
crime, victimization, and risk behavior; and Juvenile Arrests 1998, an
OJJDP Bulletin that highlights just-released data from the Federal
Bureau of Investigation regarding juvenile arrests and violence.
1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Copies of the National Report or Juvenile Arrests 1998 can
be obtained by calling OJJDP's Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at
800-638-8736 or by visiting OJJDP's Web site at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org
and clicking on ``Publications.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the end of the 1990's, juvenile crime and violence are
continuing a downward trend that began in 1994, bringing a halt to the
dramatic annual increases that had alarmed the Nation since 1988.
Juvenile Arrests 1998 indicates that for the fourth consecutive year,
the total number of juvenile arrests for violent crimes--murder,
forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault--declined (p. 1).
Specifically, serious violence by juveniles dropped 19 percent between
1994 and 1998, compared with a reduction of 6 percent in violence by
adults in the same period (Juvenile Arrests, p.1). Between 1993 and
1998, juvenile arrests for murder declined about half, with the number
of arrests in 1998 (2,100) about 15 percent above the 1987 level
(Juvenile Arrests, p. 1). Despite well-publicized instances of shocking
school violence, students are safer at school than elsewhere, and
school crime declined from 1993 through 1996 (National Report, p. 31).
On the other hand, gang problems now affect more jurisdictions than
ever before--including rural and suburban areas (p. 77). Illicit drug
use by juveniles, which had declined during the 1980's, has increased
since 1992 (p. 74), although the National Household Survey on Drug
Abuse reported that the percentage of 12- to 17-year-olds who reported
using illegal drugs in the preceding month dropped from 11.4 percent in
1997 to 9.9 percent in 1998. Looking at arrest data, while drug arrests
continued to increase for both juveniles and adults between 1993 and
1997, arrests for most serious violent offenses and property offenses
declined--with violent crime arrests down 6 percent for juveniles and
property crime arrests down 3 percent (p. 117). In 1997, the juvenile
violent crime arrest rate, which had increased 62 percent from 1988 to
1994, was at its lowest level in this decade: just 7 percent above the
1989 rate, but still 25 percent above the 1988 rate (p. 120).
Even in the area of violent behaviors that do not reach the
attention of the justice system, positive trends are seen. A recent
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) biennial survey of
16,000 9th through 12th graders found sharp decreases in certain
categories of violent activity by teenagers between 1991 and 1997. For
example, 18.3 percent of the students surveyed in 1997 reported having
carried a gun, knife, or club in the previous month, compared with 26.1
percent of those surveyed in 1991, and the percentage carrying such
weapons on school property decreased from 11.8 percent in 1993 to 8.5
percent in 1997. The frequency of fighting also declined, with 37
percent of the 1997 surveyed youth reporting involvement in a physical
fight in the previous year, compared with nearly 43 percent of those
surveyed in 1991.
This mixture of some reassuring and some still troubling statistics
serves as a reminder that while great progress has been made in
reducing juvenile delinquency, violence, and victimization, much more
needs to be done. Although it is impossible to definitively identify
the reasons for the downward trend in juvenile violence, factors cited
by the authors of the CDC study include community policing and an
expansion of violence prevention programs. As research and evaluation,
much of it supported by OJJDP funding, continue to provide information
about what works in the areas of prevention and intervention,
policymakers, practitioners, and citizens can make informed decisions
as to what programs and approaches will best serve to reinforce and
continue existing trends away from juvenile delinquency, violence, and
victimization.
In this Final Comprehensive Plan, OJJDP describes its funding
activities
[[Page 71195]]
authorized under Part C (National Programs) and Part D (Gang-Free
Schools and Communities; Community-Based Gang Intervention) of Title II
of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act. The
activities authorized under Parts C and D constitute part, but not all,
of OJJDP's overall responsibilities, which are outlined briefly below.
In 1974, the JJDP Act established OJJDP as the Federal agency
responsible for providing national leadership, coordination, and
resources to develop and implement effective methods to prevent and
reduce juvenile delinquency and improve the quality of juvenile justice
in the United States. OJJDP administers State Formula Grants under Part
B of Title II, State Challenge Grants under Part E of Title II, and
Community Prevention Grants under Title V of the JJDP Act to assist
States and territories to fund a range of delinquency prevention,
control, and juvenile justice system improvement activities. OJJDP
provides support activities for these and other programs under
statutory set-asides that are used to provide related research,
evaluation, statistics, demonstration, and training and technical
assistance services.
Under Part C of Title II of the JJDP Act, OJJDP funds Special
Emphasis programs and--through its National Institute for Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention--numerous research, evaluation,
statistics, demonstration, training and technical assistance, and
information dissemination activities. OJJDP funds school and community-
based gang prevention, intervention, and suppression programs under
Part D and mentoring programs under Part G of Title II of the JJDP Act.
OJJDP also coordinates Federal activities related to juvenile justice
and delinquency prevention through the Concentration of Federal Efforts
Program and serves as the staff agency for the Coordinating Council on
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; both of these activities
are authorized in Part A of Title II of the JJDP Act. Another OJJDP
responsibility under the JJDP Act is to administer the Title IV Missing
and Exploited Children's Program.
Other programs administered by OJJDP include the Drug Prevention
Program, the Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws Program, the Safe Schools
Initiative, the Tribal Youth Program, the Safe Start: Children Exposed
to Violence Initiative, and the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block
Grants program. OJJDP also administers programs under the Victims of
Child Abuse Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 13001 et seq.
OJJDP focuses its assistance funding and support activities on the
development and implementation of programs with the greatest potential
for reducing juvenile delinquency and improving the juvenile justice
system by establishing partnerships with State and local governments,
American Indian and Alaska Native jurisdictions, and public and private
agencies and organizations. OJJDP performs its role of national
leadership in juvenile justice and delinquency prevention through a
cycle of activities. These include collecting data and statistics to
determine the extent and nature of issues affecting juveniles; funding
research and studies that can lead to demonstrations funded by
discretionary grants; evaluating demonstration projects; sharing
lessons learned from the field with practitioners through a range of
information dissemination vehicles; providing seed money to States and
local governments through formula and block grants to implement
programs, projects, or reform efforts; and providing training and
technical assistance to assist States and local governments to
implement programs effectively and to maintain the integrity of model
programs as they are being replicated.
As noted previously, OJJDP is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs (OJP). This Department of Justice agency emphasizes the
importance of coordination among its components and with other Federal
agencies whenever possible in order to obtain maximum results from OJP
programs and initiatives. OJJDP's coordination efforts include joint
funding, interagency agreements, and partnerships to develop,
implement, and evaluate projects. This Final Plan reflects OJJDP's
coordination efforts. For a more complete picture of OJP program
activities that affect the field of juvenile justice, readers are
encouraged to review the Office of Justice Programs Fiscal Year 2000
Program Plan when it becomes available. (Readers should check the OJP
Web site at www.ojp.usdoj.gov periodically for an announcement of the
availability of the OJP Program Plan.)
Fiscal Year 2000 Program Planning Activities
The OJJDP program planning process for FY 2000 was coordinated with
the Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice Programs, and all OJP
components. The program planning process involved the following steps:
Internal review of existing programs by OJJDP staff.
Internal review of proposed programs by OJP bureaus and
Department of Justice components.
Review of information and data from OJJDP grantees and
contractors.
Review of information contained in State comprehensive
plans.
Review of comments from youth service providers, juvenile
justice practitioners, and researchers who provide input in proposed
new program areas.
Consideration of suggestions made by juvenile justice
policymakers concerning State and local needs.
Consideration of all comments received during the period
of public comment on the Proposed Comprehensive Plan.
Discretionary Grant Continuation Policy
OJJDP has listed on the following pages continuation projects
currently funded in whole or in part with Part C and Part D funds and
eligible for continuation funding in FY 2000, either within an existing
project period or through an extension for an additional project or
budget period. A grantee's eligibility for continued funding for an
additional budget period within an existing project period depends on
the grantee's compliance with funding eligibility requirements and
achievement of the prior year's objectives. The amount of award is
based on prior projections, demonstrated need, and fund availability.
The only projects described in this Final Program Plan are those
that will receive Part C or Part D FY 2000 continuation funding under
project period or discretionary continuation assistance awards. The
Final Program Plan also references new program areas that OJJDP is
considering for awards under Part C or D in FY 2000. This plan does not
include descriptions of other OJJDP programs, including mentoring
programs under Part G of Title II of the JJDP Act, the Drug Prevention
Program, the Drug-Free Communities Support Program, the Enforcing
Underage Drinking Laws Program, the Safe Schools Initiative, the Tribal
Youth Program, the Safe Start: Children Exposed to Violence Initiative,
and the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants program. When
appropriate, OJJDP issues separate solicitations for applications for
funding for these or other programs that are not authorized under Parts
C and D. Readers interested in learning about all OJJDP funding
opportunities are encouraged to call
[[Page 71196]]
OJJDP's Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 or visit OJJDP's
Web site at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org and click on ``Grants & Funding.''
Consideration for continuation funding for an additional project
period for previously funded discretionary grant programs was based on
several factors, including the following:
The extent to which the project responds to the applicable
requirements of the JJDP Act.
Responsiveness to OJJDP and Department of Justice FY 2000
program priorities.
Compliance with performance requirements of prior grant
years.
Compliance with fiscal and regulatory requirements.
Compliance with any special conditions of the award.
Availability of funds (based on appropriations and program
priority determinations).
In accordance with Section 262 (d)(1)(B) of the JJDP Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 5665a, the competitive process for the award of Part
C funds is not required if the Administrator makes a written
determination waiving the competitive process:
1. With respect to programs to be carried out in areas in which the
President declares under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act codified at 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. that a
major disaster or emergency exists, or
2. With respect to a particular program described in Part C that is
uniquely qualified.
Summary of Public Comments on the Proposed Comprehensive Plan for
Fiscal Year 2000
OJJDP published its Proposed Comprehensive Plan for FY 2000 in the
Federal Register (Vol. 64 , No. 199) on October 15, 1999, for a 45-day
public comment period. OJJDP received 42 letters commenting on the
Proposed Plan. Forty-one letters had one signature (although one of the
single-signature letters provided comments from three law enforcement
units). One letter was signed by two officials of an organization. All
comments have been considered in the development of OJJDP's Final
Comprehensive Plan for Fiscal Year 1999.
Thirteen law enforcement officers, including police chiefs,
deputies, and lieutenants, commented. (One of the law enforcement
letters was from an individual with a tribal police department, and one
was the director of research and development for the police
department.) In related fields, OJJDP heard from one individual in
corrections, one in probation, one in court evaluation, and one in a
domestic violence agency. A psychologist wrote, as did the director of
a psychiatric clinic and a professor of nursing. An associate school
superintendent also wrote. Comments were received from an Assistant
Commonwealth Attorney and from two individuals in State juvenile
justice agencies. Thirteen persons who commented were associated with a
variety of organizations, associations, agencies, and programs, and one
vice president of a private firm provided comments. Four commenters did
not mention any profession or affiliation.
The writers expressed support for one or more of the 10 proposed
priority areas, and several writers praised the list of 10 priority
areas as a whole. Many of the commenters also wrote in support of
prevention programming, and others expressed appreciation for OJJDP's
publications and Web site. One or two writers supported one of several
general programming areas, including truancy, teen courts, learning
disabled youth in the juvenile justice system, capacity building,
overrepresentation of minorities in the juvenile justice system,
cooperation between police and the juvenile justice system, and mental
health needs. Several writers expressed support for demonstration
programs and training and technical assistance. Some writers indicated
their interest in obtaining funding for their programs.
All comments received are summarized below together with OJJDP's
responses. Those writers who supported various new program areas were
all told that their comments will be considered in the planning process
for FY 2000 and beyond, but that the funding available for this fiscal
year limits OJJDP's ability to support new programming. In other
instances where more than one writer commented on a particular program
or area of programming, to avoid needless repetition in this summary,
after an initial response below, subsequent responses refer the reader
to the first response on that topic.
Comment: One writer, a law enforcement planner with a tribal police
department, expressed concern that only one program in the Proposed
Plan (the Tribal Youth Program) targeted American Indians. The writer
noted that Indian Reservations are in rural areas and that most
programs and services are located in cities and therefore not available
to American Indian youth, who face a variety of problems, such as
exposure to violence and child abuse, drugs, underage drinking, and
violence in the schools and on the streets. ``Tribal resources to fund
prevention and intervention activities,'' the writer indicated, ``are
limited.'' The writer also stated that many tribes do not have the
staff needed to prepare competitive grant applications and pointed out
that, although the Proposed Plan mentions funds for technical
assistance to tribes, no information was given as to how to contact the
grantee, the American Indian Development Associates. Finally, the
commenter asked if funds spent on ``numerous research, evaluation and
data collection projects'' would not ``be better used in actual program
implementation?''
Response: OJJDP recognizes the severity of the issues facing Native
American youth. A recent Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
publication, American Indians and Crime, provides some statistics that
demonstrate the growing problem of violence and crime in Indian
country, including the following:
American Indians experience per capita rates of violence
that are more than twice those of the U.S. resident population.
Nearly a third of all American Indian victims of violence
are between the ages of 18 and 24.
The 1997 arrest rate among American Indians for alcohol-
related offenses (driving under the influence, liquor law violations,
and public drunkenness) was more than double that found among all
races.
These and other data provided in the BJS report show the need for
increased funding, resource enhancement, and infrastructure/capacity
building within Indian country. Research is a critical factor in
documenting the need for increased funding to tribes. By funding and
conducting research and evaluation programs, we obtain valuable
information about what works and about best practices in the areas of
program development and effective approaches for working with tribes.
OJJDP has had several funding opportunities for which all
communities could apply, and, depending on the availability of funding,
we expect to offer such opportunities again in the future. Examples of
these programs include the Juvenile Mentoring Program, the SafeFutures
initiative, Safe Start, Healthy Students/Safe Schools, and the Drug-
Free Communities Support Program, to name a few. Indian communities
have applied for and been selected to participate in some of these
programs. However, with the Tribal Youth Program, Congress for the
first time appropriated funds to OJJDP solely for the American Indian
community. This program is part of the joint U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) and U.S.
[[Page 71197]]
Department of the Interior Indian Country Law Enforcement Initiative,
which addresses the compelling need to improve law enforcement and the
administration of criminal and juvenile justice in Indian country. It
should be noted that no more than 10 percent of the Tribal Youth
Program funds may be used for research.
In addition to the Tribal Youth Program, there are several
initiatives either in development or being implemented to address some
of the issues that the writer raised. Three such initiatives are
described briefly below:
Native American Mental Health Initiative. A project of the
White House's Domestic Policy Council designed to bring together
several agencies within DOJ and the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) in an effort to provide services to American Indian
country.
Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law
Enforcement (CIRCLE). A project of the U.S. Attorney General that
brings together several DOJ agencies to provide funding and resources
to three pilot sites in Indian country.
Substance Abuse. OJJDP and other Office of Justice
Programs agencies are beginning discussions with the Center for
Substance Abuse Treatment and the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
(within the HHS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration) on working together to provide services, programs, and
funding to Native Americans. These discussions are expected to lead to
interagency collaboration and possibly result in joint funding
opportunities.
In addition to recognizing the obvious need in Indian country,
OJJDP is also committed to providing training and technical assistance
to tribes that have juvenile justice issues and programs. An OJJDP Fact
Sheet (Training and Technical Assistance for Indian Nation Juvenile
Justice Systems, FS 99105) provides information about the technical
assistance available via OJJDP's grant with American Indian Development
Associates. Copies of the Fact Sheet can be obtained by calling OJJDP's
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 or by sending an e-mail
request to [email protected]. The Fact Sheet is also available online
at www.ncjrs.org/jjfact.htm#99105.
OJJDP's response suggested that the writer might want to be put on
the mailing list for OJJDP's program announcements by calling the
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 or send an e-mail
request to [email protected]. Program announcements are also posted
online at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org (click on ``Grants & Funding'').
Most of OJJDP's funding is not provided under Parts C and D but is
distributed to the States and territories through our Formula Grants,
Challenge, and Title V (Community Prevention) programs. One example is
the Native American Pass-Through Program. The Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention Act specifies that a portion of each State's
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Formula Grant program
funding be made available to fund programs for Indian tribes. This
allocation, known as the Native American Pass-Through Program, provides
funds to Indian tribes to perform law enforcement functions pertaining
to the custody of children and youth. Areas receiving funding include
police efforts to prevent, control, and reduce crime and delinquency;
apprehension of criminal and delinquent offenders; and activities of
juvenile corrections, probation, or parole authorities. The minimum
pass-through for FY 1998 was $358,842. This amount was allocated to
Indian tribes in 36 States. Historically, in many States, the actual
amount awarded to tribes by States far exceeds the statutorily required
amount. The name, address, and telephone number of the Juvenile Justice
Specialist for the writer's State were provided, so that the writer
could pursue these possible sources of funding.
Comment: A psychologist who works with juvenile offenders
recommended that the plan include provisions for ``direct job placement
services to help older juvenile offenders obtain and maintain
employment.'' The writer suggested funding for either demonstration
projects or research studies that could lead to more effective ways at
helping this population find work.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's interest in job readiness
training, placement, and retention for older juvenile offenders and
shares his views that such activities are important in deterring
delinquent activity and providing meaningful career opportunities for
youth. Over the past 2 years, OJJDP has partnered with the U.S.
Department of Labor's Employment and Training Administration in the
development of a comprehensive strategy to create education, training,
and employment opportunities for at-risk and delinquent youth.
Recently, the Department of Labor funded three sites to develop a model
school-to-work education and job training curriculum in a correctional
setting that emphasizes the importance of developing competency and
life skills in a multitude of professions and providing the necessary
support, advocacy, and followup upon a youth's return to the community.
These sites are located in Florida, Ohio, and Indiana. OJJDP is
providing the funding for a 12-month process evaluation and impact
feasibility assessment at two of the three sites. It is intended that
the comprehensive services developed under these grants will serve as
models for other juvenile correctional facilities across the country.
OJJDP is also collaborating with the Department of Labor's
Employment and Training Administration across several other program
areas:
OJJDP and the Department of Labor have provided funding
support to the Boys & Girls Clubs of America to implement the
TeenSupreme Career Preparation Initiative. This program provides
employment training and other related services to at-risk youth through
41 local Boys and Girls Clubs.
In order to encourage local communities to adapt best
practices to improve the employability of at-risk and delinquent youth,
the two departments are working toward having juvenile justice agencies
represented on local youth councils. The Workforce Investment Act of
1998 established local youth councils to guide the development and
operation of programs for youth at the local level. Youth councils are
composed of members of the local workforce investment boards and
representatives of youth service agencies, local public housing
authorities, parents of youth seeking assistance, youth, the Job Corps
and others as deemed appropriate.
The two departments are providing collaborative technical
assistance to both youth employment programs and OJJDP programs that
involve juvenile offenders and high-risk youth.
A live satellite videoconference is planned for the coming
year to disseminate information concerning the programs available
throughout the country that address employment issues and court-
involved youth.
OJJDP is committed to developing model programs that address these
issues and is equally concerned with supporting evaluations of these
efforts that will measure both process and outcome variables.
Comment: An Assistant Commonwealth Attorney wrote in support of
programming for three categories of offenders: female offenders, sex
offenders, and status offenders, singling out programming for female
offenders as the area he thought to be of primary concern in his
[[Page 71198]]
community. He also called for more emphasis on prevention. He indicated
that before funding programs in Native American and Alaskan Native
communities, OJJDP should ``strongly consider whether or not your
programs are working in the rest of the country.'' The writer found the
field-initiated research and evaluation programs ``too vague for
comment'' and was unaware of ``many cases in our area involving lead or
environmental hazards for children, although it is always important to
do everything possible to protect children.'' Finally, the letter
stated that OJJDP's focus should not be on research but on applying
``some of the knowledge from research to treatment and prevention.''
Response: OJJDP appreciates knowing the writer's view that, of the
10 areas proposed for consideration for new programming, the need for
programs for female offenders is the area of most concern to his
community.
In regard to the development of more programs and treatment for sex
offenders, in FY 1998, OJJDP funded two projects designed to assess the
feasibility of creating a juvenile sex offender typology based on
national-level data. The researchers, one with the University of
Baltimore, the other with the University of Virginia, each used a
different method for typology construction. The University of Baltimore
project relied on archival (information from official records) data,
while the University of Virginia project used a combination of archival
and prospective (interviews and questionnaire completed by juvenile sex
offenders themselves) data.
As a result of their feasibility studies, both researchers
concluded that it would be possible to create a juvenile sex offender
typology based on a large, national sample of juvenile sex offenders.
Each researcher has therefore submitted a new proposal to create this
typology, and these proposals are currently under peer review. The goal
of creating such a typology is to identify different subgroups of
juvenile sex offenders who may present different levels of risk and
need. Some juvenile offenders, for example, may safely be placed in
community-based programs, while others will require institutional
placement. At present, the tools are not available to make these
distinctions easily or well. Additionally, a comprehensive typology may
facilitate better decisionmaking about which youth will benefit from
which type(s) of treatment.
OJJDP agrees with the writer's comment on the importance of
prevention and treatment programs for status offenders. As noted in the
Proposed Plan, prevention and treatment efforts at the early stages of
delinquency are ``less expensive and more effective than efforts to
change subsequent delinquent behavior.''
In regard to the writer's statement that OJJDP's focus ``should not
be on research,'' OJJDP responded that the Office is continually
striving to attain the appropriate balance among three vital and
interrelated elements of OJJDP's mission: research, demonstration
projects, and training and technical assistance. OJJDP believes that
the Proposed Plan achieved a reasonable apportioning of resources among
these three elements.
Comment: A chief of police wrote in support of prevention
initiatives, such as programs to keep young people in school. The chief
commented that parents who are ``victims of the social welfare system''
are likely to have children who will repeat their experience, and he
offered specific suggestions for shoring up the welfare system. The
chief also labeled the juvenile justice system ``inept'' and ``the
major contributor to juvenile delinquency.''
Response: OJJDP agrees that it is imperative to focus strongly on
prevention, and believes that the Proposed Plan does reflect such an
emphasis. From mentoring programs to programs that seek to prevent the
use and abuse of alcohol and other drugs'and from violence prevention
to early intervention programs, OJJDP is committed to supporting a
comprehensive, communitywide approach as an effective way to promote
healthy childhood development and address the problems affecting our
youth. For example, collaborative efforts among OJJDP, the U.S.
Department of Education, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services are under way to address some of the very issues raised in the
writer's letter regarding school attendance, societal influences, and
family issues that contribute to the delinquency of our youth.
Without directly responding to the writer's negative view of the
juvenile justice system, OJJDP sent him information about current
levels of juvenile crime and violence and the juvenile justice system
response and about OJJDP's comprehensive approach to preventing and
intervening with juvenile delinquency. One document was the recently
released Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report, which
includes up-to-date data and offers an indispensable resource for
informed policy decisions that will shape the juvenile justice system
in the 21st century. A brochure on OJJDP's Comprehensive Strategy for
Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders was also provided.
This brochure outlines a strategy that, when implemented, can provide
appropriate prevention methods to children, families, and communities
and intervene in the lives of first-time offenders with structured
programs and services.
Comment: An individual who works in State law enforcement training
as a curriculum specialist suggested the need for more emphasis on
interactive dialog and cooperation between police and juvenile justice
agencies. He also indicated that OJJDP publications are valuable in his
work.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's suggestion about the need
for interactive dialog between police and juvenile justice agencies.
The Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS) and OJJDP are sponsoring the Community Policing and
Youth Study as part of our Youth Focused Community Policing program.
This project is designed to assist the Department of Justice in
planning youth and law enforcement issues. The project will provide
communities across the country with current information on the
innovative and promising practices of law enforcement agencies in
addressing youth issues through community policing. Through this
project, information will be developed and shared with the field
through product dissemination, training and technical assistance, and a
national conference in 2001.
In addition to this study, OJJDP has sponsored the replication of a
unique collaborative effort between the New Haven Department of Police
Services and the Child Study Center at Yale University that addresses
the psychological impact of chronic exposure to violence on children
and families. The Child Development-Community Policing Program brings
police and mental health professionals together to provide each other
with training, consultation and support and to provide direct
interdisciplinary interventions to children who are victims of or
witnesses to violent crimes.
Comment: A police chief wrote in support of teen courts, which he
reports have been extremely successful in his county.
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning of the success of teen courts
in the writer's jurisdiction. In 1999, the National Youth Court Center
was created by OJJDP and funded by the
[[Page 71199]]
Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants program, in
collaboration with the U.S. Departments of Education, Health and Human
Services, and Transportation. The National Youth Court Center at the
American Probation and Parole Association and four affiliated agencies
will offer training and technical assistance; develop products such as
volunteer youth membership training materials, national guidelines on
youth courts, and regional training programs; and provide a wide range
of other services.
Youth courts are the fastest growing crime prevention program in
the country, with more than 650 youth court programs in 49 States at
this time. Youth court programs provide swift and immediate sanctions
for youth experiencing their first contact with the juvenile justice
system.
Most of OJJDP's funding is not provided under Parts C and D but is
distributed to the States and territories through OJJDP's Formula
Grants, Challenge, and Title V (Community Prevention) programs. OJJDP
encouraged the writer to explore these possible sources of funding and
referred him to the Juvenile Justice Specialist for his State.
Comment: A police lieutenant wrote that OJJDP's 10 areas being
considered for funding priorities are ``appropriate and worthy'' but
suggested that another priority area be added: information exchange
among a wide variety of human service providers. He also indicated that
he found OJJDP's Web site and publications ``helpful and informative.''
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's support of the 10 program
areas presented for consideration in the Proposed Plan and positive
feedback about OJJDP's Web site and publications. OJJDP recognizes the
importance of information exchange among a wide variety of human
service providers.
In regard to the need for additional emphasis on confidentiality in
the Proposed Program plan, for several years the issue of information
sharing and confidentiality has been at the foundation of many of the
programs and activities supported by the Missing and Exploited
Children's Program (MECP) and other components within OJJDP. As such,
issues relating to confidentiality and information sharing are
addressed throughout the many programs, activities, training, and
technical assistance activities supported by OJJDP.
MECP supports a number of training programs that focus on improving
the systems response to missing and exploited children's issues.
Several of these training programs are multidisciplinary in nature,
requiring the participation of various agencies within a community. In
addition to providing information on ways to improve the system's
response to child sexual abuse and exploitation issues, topics relating
to cooperation, interagency collaboration, information sharing, and
confidentiality of juvenile records are addressed in these training
sessions.
Recognizing the complexity of this issue and its broad implications
for the various components of the juvenile justice system, in June
1997, OJJDP, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Education,
published Sharing Information: A Guide to the Family Educational Rights
and Privacy Act and Participation in Juvenile Justice Programs. This
publication, which is available at no cost from OJJDP's Juvenile
Justice Clearinghouse (800-638-8736), provides educators, law
enforcement personnel, juvenile justice professionals, and community
leaders with information to help them forge partnerships, improve
information sharing, and enhance the operation and functioning of the
juvenile justice system.
In addition to these activities, OJJDP's Youth Focused Community
Policing initiative is working with communities to help them tackle
difficult issues relating to information sharing and confidentiality.
OJJDP is preparing a Bulletin on information sharing, which should be
ready early next year. In addition, OJJDP, in cooperation with the
Department of Education, is currently developing a solicitation for an
information-sharing training and technical assistance program. OJJDP
provided the writer with information on how to be put on the mailing
list for program announcements and how to access them online.
Comment: An individual commented that behavior must have ``sure and
swift'' consequences and that sanctions must be appropriate and timely.
Response: To address these concerns, OJJDP described the
comprehensive approach to juvenile delinquency that it has been
pursuing for the past several years. Since OJJDP published the
Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile
Offenders in 1993, it has advocated that States, local governments, and
communities adopt a research-based comprehensive strategy approach to
address the problems of juvenile crime and victimization. OJJDP has
synthesized decades of research and practice from practitioners and
established a framework for implementing an effective juvenile justice
system. Through support of research, demonstration programs, and
training and technical assistance, OJJDP encourages States, local
governments, and communities to use the Comprehensive Strategy to
develop coordinated, community-wide approaches to preventing and
intervening with juvenile delinquency and victimization. OJJDP focuses
its support on programs and initiatives that further one or more of the
basic principles of the Comprehensive Strategy:
Strengthen families in their role of guiding,
disciplining, and instilling sound values in their children.
Support core social institutions and their role in
supporting families and helping children develop to their maximum
potential.
Promote prevention strategies and activities that reduce
the impact of negative (risk) factors and enhance the influence of
positive (protective) factors in the lives of youth at greatest risk of
delinquency.
Intervene immediately and appropriately at the first signs
of trouble in a child's life.
Establish a system of graduated sanctions and a continuum
of services, including aftercare, to respond appropriately to the needs
of each juvenile offender.
Protect the public from the most serious, violent, and
chronic juvenile offenders by providing for their incapacitation while
at the same time addressing their treatment needs.
OJJDP believes that, as the Comprehensive Strategy and its
principles are implemented in communities throughout the country, we
will see a continued decline in juvenile violent crime, which has been
decreasing for each of the past 4 years, and an increase in public
safety and in the well-being of the Nation's youth.
Comment: A deputy chief of police expressed concern that OJJDP's
support for assessment centers focused exclusively on what he called
``the Florida model.'' He urged OJJDP to look at other programs that
may be as effective and that are designed for the local community.
Response: OJJDP has supported the concept of assessment centers
through its Community Assessment Center (CAC) demonstration effort.
CAC's provide a 24-hour centralized point of intake and assessment for
juveniles who have or are likely to come into contact with the juvenile
justice system. The main purpose of a CAC is to facilitate earlier and
more efficient prevention
[[Page 71200]]
and intervention service delivery at the ``front end'' of the juvenile
justice system. OJJDP's CAC concept was not based on the Florida
Juvenile Assessment Centers; it was developed from the Office's
Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile
Offenders.
In FY 1997, two communities (Denver, CO, and Lee County, FL) began
or enhanced their ongoing CAC planning process. Two additional
communities with existing assessment centers (Jefferson County, CO, and
Orlando, FL) also began enhancing their operations to become more
consistent with OJJDP's CAC concept. The selection of the sites for
this demonstration effort was not related to the implementation of the
``Florida model'' but was directly related to the implementation of the
CAC concept as outlined in OJJDP's concept paper Community Assessment
Centers: A Discussion of the Concept's Efficacy. In addition, a 2-year
independent evaluation of the funded projects was initiated, and a
separate grantee began providing training and technical assistance to
the project sites. OJJDP believed this program provided the opportunity
to examine OJJDP's CAC concept, while allowing communities to customize
it to their local needs.
During the second year of the demonstration effort, a limited
competition was held among the four CAC sites for increased funding to
two sites to develop a fully operational CAC, including all four CAC
conceptual elements. Although the Jefferson Center for Mental Health
did not choose to apply for the increased funding to implement all four
elements of OJJDP's concept, OJJDP provided funding for another 12
months to further enhance the Jefferson County Assessment Center by
conducting an intensive review of existing assessment tools and
enhancing the case management process. The two sites that received
increased funding to develop a fully operational CAC were Denver and
Orlando.
OJJDP sent the writer copies of the original concept paper,
Community Assessment Centers: A Discussion of the Concept's Efficacy,
the Fact-Finding Report on Community Assessment Centers, and a recent
OJJDP Fact Sheet on CAC. As mentioned in the CAC Fact Sheet, OJJDP
anticipates the publication of a CAC Bulletin in a few months. OJJDP
referred the writer to the appropriate Program Manager for specific
questions regarding OJJDP's CAC demonstration effort.
Comment: One individual wrote in support of prevention programming
such as teen centers and Neighborhood Watch.
Response: OJJDP agrees with the writer's position on the importance
of focusing on prevention and provided a brief summary of its
Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile
Offenders. (See detailed response: to the comment: on ``sure and
swift'' consequences, above.)
Comment: An official with the American Psychological Association
expressed support for OJJDP's comprehensive and empirically based plan
and its efforts to address critical concerns related to juvenile
justice, delinquency prevention, and child maltreatment. The writer
especially praised the emphasis on prevention and early intervention
and lauded the 10 areas being considered for new programming. In regard
to research needs, the writer suggested continued efforts in the areas
of mental health, educational services for children within the juvenile
justice system (including those with disabilities and those who are
gifted and talented), and minority overrepresentation in the system.
The letter also included specific recommendations for additional text
to be added to the plan, generally consisting of references to cultural
competence and mental health needs.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's expression of strong
support for the Comprehensive Plan and shares his concern about the
need to address issues of cultural competence. OJJDP explained how
several of the writer's specific suggestions for changes will be
incorporated into the Final Program Plan. These changes are reflected
in the following paragraphs.
Introduction to Fiscal Year 2000 Program Plan (64 FR 56086, Nov.
29, 1999)
Goals three and four:
OJJDP supports efforts in the area of corrections,
detention, and community-based alternatives to preserve the public
safety in a manner that serves the appropriate development and best use
of secure detention and corrections options, while at the same time
fostering the use of community-based programs for juvenile offenders
that provide developmentally appropriate, culturally competent mental
health and other critical services.
OJJDP seeks to support law enforcement, public safety, and
other justice agency efforts to prevent juvenile delinquency, intervene
in the development of chronic delinquent careers, and collaborate with
the juvenile justice system to meet the needs of dependent, neglected,
and abused children, children who need mental health interventions, and
children with disabilities.
Sentence 3 Under ``Public Safety and Law Enforcement'' (64 FR
56086, Nov. 29, 1999)
Funds would also be provided to a partnership between youth and
health and mental health agencies to continue school-based activities
and efforts to address the effects on children of exposure to domestic
violence.
OJJDP did not include the writer's recommended changes for new
program areas because funding restraints have limited the Office's
ability to consider new programming and thus it would serve no purpose
to modify the areas of interest this year. OJJDP assured the writer
that his concerns will be given serious consideration in the planning
process for FY 2001.
Comment: A lieutenant in a sheriff's office commented that he would
like to see more sex offender programs, more burglary reduction
efforts, and more violence prevention programs for the juvenile
population. He also called for strengthening public education efforts
with all juveniles.
Response: OJJDP described its programming efforts that focus on
preventing and intervening with serious violent offending, particularly
those that further one or more of the principles outlined in the
Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile
Offenders. (See earlier, detailed response to the comment on ``sure and
swift'' consequences.)
Comment: An officer with a private nonprofit agency working in the
area of substance abuse assessments and treatment found all 10 broad
programming areas relevant to her agency but singled out 5 top
priorities (listed in order): status offender programs; female offender
programs; ``blueprint'' program development, replication, and
evaluation; improvements in sanctioning; and sex offender programs.
While recognizing the usefulness of research and development, the
writer would give higher priority to demonstrations and training and
technical assistance. The commenter described OJJDP's Web site as a
useful resource but noted that materials mailed by OJJDP did not always
arrive in a timely fashion.
Response: In the area of research and development versus
demonstrations and training and technical assistance, OJJDP is
continually striving to attain the appropriate balance among these
three vital and interrelated elements of OJJDP's mission and believes
that the Proposed Plan did achieve a reasonable
[[Page 71201]]
apportioning of resources among research, demonstrations, and training
and technical assistance.
OJJDP appreciates the writer's positive feedback on the usefulness
of the Office's Web site as well as her concern about the mailing
delays she has experienced in receiving information from OJJDP. The
Office will try to identify any possible problem that may be causing
the delays she has encountered in receiving OJJDP mailings.
Comment: The vice president of a private firm strongly supported
one of OJJDP's 10 broad areas being considered for new program funding.
The ninth area (prevention and treatment programs for status
offenders), according to the writer, is one that should be reviewed to
see what progress has been made and to identify best practices that
help divert status offenders from the juvenile corrections system. The
commenter also approved of OJJDP's renewed emphasis on school truancy,
which ``can influence a child's path toward delinquency.''
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning of the writer's support for
developing prevention and treatment programs for status offenders.
OJJDP agrees that this is an important area of work and has been
pleased by both the positive response from the field and the work
already under way in this area as part of the Office's ongoing
programs.
With regard to school truancy and its effect on children, OJJDP is
in the process of evaluating truancy reduction projects in eight
demonstration sites: Athens, GA; Contra Costa, CA; Honolulu, HI;
Houston, TX; Jacksonville, FL; King County, WA; Suffolk County, NY; and
Tacoma, WA. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine how community
collaboration can impact truancy reduction and lead to systemic reform
and assist OJJDP in the development of a community collaborative
truancy reduction program model.
Comment: A manager of a gender-specific program in juvenile
correctional services encouraged OJJDP to take a leadership role on
programs for female juvenile offenders, particularly in locating and
funding a model program, with guidelines for staffing and training. The
individual expressed appreciation for OJJDP grants, site evaluations,
training opportunities, and publications.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's comments on the proposed
priority area of programming for female juvenile offenders and is
pleased to learn that OJJDP funding has been beneficial to the youth
served at the Rhode Island Training School.
OJJDP noted that at the present time it is addressing some of the
important issues raised in the letter through its training and
technical assistance co-agreement with Greene, Peters, and Associates
and Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. For example, OJJDP plans
include the following:
Developing and piloting training curriculums for
decisionmakers and entry- to mid-level staff.
Offering ``training of trainers'' courses to staff with
training responsibilities in their jurisdictions to ensure quality and
consistency of the training approach and design. (Selection will be
made through a competitive application process.)
Developing and piloting an advanced training series on
emerging topic-specific gender issues affecting adolescent girls.
Establishing a Web site with a capacity for delivering
timely information on trends and challenges in juvenile justice to aid
policymakers and program staff in improving gender programming in their
jurisdictions.
Recruiting, orienting, and managing a diverse cadre of
consultants able to address the training and technical assistance needs
of those who work with girls.
Developing an educational media package for use by
community leaders, agency staff, and decisionmakers to build awareness
of gender-specific issues.
Comment: The director of a psychiatric institute and clinic wrote
that there is a need to enhance the quality of research and program
evaluations in the area of juvenile sex offending. The writer
encouraged OJJDP to make considerable funding available to conduct
field-initiated research and evaluation programs in this field.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's thoughtful comments on the
importance of addressing the problem of juvenile sex offending and
support for more programs and treatment in this area. For a detailed
description of OJJDP's work in this area, readers should refer to the
earlier response to the comment from the Assistant Commonwealth
Attorney.
While OJJDP agreed that field-initiated research and evaluation
programs offer the potential to expand knowledge of juvenile offending
and develop methods to assess and treat these types of problems,
funding available for this fiscal year will impact the Office's ability
to support new programming under Parts C and D.
Comment: The director of public policy in an organization that
provides comprehensive youth development programming to school-age
girls wrote that the ``increased general level of domestic violence,
violence in the media, and the apparent increasing tolerance for
violence in society'' should be addressed in the new program area
focusing on female offenders. The writer proposed that in the program
description ``unique needs'' of female offenders be changed to
``additional needs'' of female offenders and suggested that when
specifying these needs OJJDP should include ``sexual abuse, teen
pregnancy, and responsibility for their children.'' Because a high
proportion of status offenders are females, this individual suggested
that OJJDP develop prevention and early intervention programs in a
gender-sensitive manner, with recognition of the additional needs of
young women. Lastly, the writer expressed surprise that OJJDP is
planning to fund capacity building to help a program ``establish itself
in an already crowded field.''
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's specific comments and
suggestions on 2 of the 10 programming areas presented for
consideration in the Program Plan: those dealing with female offenders
and prevention and treatment programs for status offenders. In regard
to using ``additional'' instead of ``unique'' to describe the needs of
female juvenile offenders in the description of the proposed new
program area, the descriptions of the 10 program areas included for
consideration for new funding in the Proposed Plan are not being
repeated in the Final Plan. However, in future documents addressing
this issue, OJJDP will reword the phrase to read ``additional and
unique needs'' of female juvenile offenders. The writer also
recommended that OJJDP acknowledge the responsibility of single
parenthood many female offenders are faced with. OJJDP believes this is
important and provided the writer with copies of two OJJDP Fact Sheets
that discuss adolescent motherhood and responsible fatherhood.
OJJDP agreed with the writer's position that prevention and early
intervention programs should be developed in a gender-sensitive manner,
with full recognition of the additional needs that young women often
carry. OJJDP is funding a program in Cook County, IL, that is directed
at juvenile female offenders. The county has developed gender-specific
needs, strengths, and risk assessments for juvenile female offenders;
provided training in implementing gender-appropriate programming; and
designed a pilot program with a community-
[[Page 71202]]
based continuum of care and a unique case management system. OJJDP
hopes to see this approach replicated across the country.
OJJDP noted the writer's disagreement with its plans to fund
America's Promise. It is true that there are many such organizations in
existence, but OJJDP believes that, when possible, it is worth
supporting organizations that are in a unique position to mobilize and
energize communities and provide role models for young people. As part
of its commitment to this effort, OJJDP chairs the Public/Private
Mentoring Alliance, which is composed of Federal and private
organizations involved in mentoring. OJJDP looks forward to working
with a number of alliances and groups in the coming year in an effort
to help young people develop into healthy, productive adults.
Comment: The assistant coordinator of a project that addresses the
need for gender-specific programs for female juveniles wrote about the
program's goals and stated that OJJDP's support will assist the program
to continue their work with female juvenile offenders.
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning about the writer's Girls
Advocacy Project and support for the Office's continued work in the
area of developing and studying programs addressing female offenders.
OJJDP is supporting several projects that address the unique needs of
female offenders. In 1996, OJJDP awarded a grant to design pilot
training and technical assistance resources for entry-level staff in
detention and correctional facilities, social service agencies, and
youth-serving organizations responsible for working with female
juvenile offenders or those at high risk of offending. This training
will help improve gender programming services in many jurisdictions.
Most of OJJDP's funding is not provided under Parts C and D, but is
distributed to the States and territories through the Formula Grants,
Challenge, and Title V (Community Prevention) programs. OJJDP provided
the writer with contact information for the Juvenile Justice Specialist
in his State to explore these possible sources of funding.
Comment: The commissioner for a State juvenile justice agency wrote
that OJJDP should perhaps focus on the target age population most at
risk for offending, rather than early childhood prevention programs
(citing the OJJDP priority to reduce lead and environmental hazards)
that could be served by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. The writer also stated that there is a need for opportunities
for major Federal agencies to partner for children and that it would be
extremely helpful to have Federal assistance and support for efforts to
build community mobilization efforts. The writer considers status
offenders to be an ongoing priority area in his State and asked that
OJJDP take a leadership role in this area. Lastly, this individual
wrote that OJJDP could be far more effective in providing technical
assistance and suggested an alternative approach for responding to such
requests.
Response: OJJDP agrees that Federal assistance can be helpful to
communities seeking to ``grow capacity.'' OJJDP is involved in
extensive capacity-building efforts, particularly through its training
and technical assistance programs, projects, and activities.
Including the reduction of lead and environmental hazards as one
OJJDP's program priorities for consideration fits within the Office's
strong emphasis on prevention activities. This Administration has
aggressively pursued interagency partnerships in crossover areas of
interest, and it is clear that the effects of elevated levels of lead
in the bloodstream can cause children to suffer from physical,
neurobiological, and cognitive problems that may lead to aberrant
behavior, including aggression and delinquency.
With respect to the writer's concern regarding the provision of
technical assistance, OJJDP has recently awarded a contract to operate
the Formula Grants Training and Technical Assistance Program to
Developmental Associates, Inc. (DA). The transition from the previous
technical assistance provider, Community Research Associates, is now
complete. The mission of OJJDP's partnership with DA continues to be
the effective and expedient delivery of technical assistance to States
and local agencies for implementing the provisions of the comprehensive
State Plan. OJJDP will continue to explore the most efficient manner to
provide States and local agencies technical assistance in a wide
variety of policy and program areas dealing with planning and
evaluation, delinquency prevention, diversion and early intervention,
secure detention and alternatives to it use, corrections, graduated
sanctions, and other specialized priorities delineated in the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act.
Comment: A deputy director of public safety wrote that the programs
most worthy of funding are those that ``demonstrate success upon which
other financially assisted departments could build.'' He also
acknowledged three areas of OJJDP's focus that would provide the most
benefits to his community: Developing Blueprint Programs Through
Replication and Evaluation, Developing Prevention and Treatment
Programs for Status Offenders, and Supporting Field-Initiated Research
and Evaluation Programs.
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning which programming areas
presented for consideration in the Program Plan would, in the writer's
view, be most beneficial to the his community. OJJDP agreed that these
are particularly important areas of work and has been pleased by both
the positive response from the field and the work already under way in
these areas as part of the Office's ongoing programs.
Comment: The associate executive director of a child-and family-
focused agency expressed appreciation for OJJDP publications. Although
agreeing that the program priorities in the Proposed Plan were
appropriate, the writer identified the following additional areas for
more OJJDP attention: family violence--focus on family prevention
strategies; early childhood violence and primary prevention alcohol/
drug prevention models; violence prevention in schools--alternatives to
suspension for ``zero tolerance'' policies; and models for early
identification of troubled youth. This individual supported funding
demonstration projects and program evaluations and encouraged OJJDP to
sponsor training events. Lastly, the writer indicated that direct
Federal discretionary grants to community programs is a better
opportunity than block grant funding.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's positive feedback on its
priority areas and its publications program and noted that information
dissemination will remain a priority for the Office. During FY 1999,
OJJDP produced more than 90 documents and distributed almost 4 million
publications. During FY 1999, the OJJDP home page received almost
750,000 ``hits.'' The site is continually updated with ``subpages''
highlighting specific OJJDP programs to provide users with the most
current information.
With regard to the writer's comment on block grant funding, both
the Congress and OJJDP seek to establish a balance between State and
local block and formula grant funding and categorical discretionary
grants. Block and formula grants allow States and local communities to
meet priority problems and needs identified through planning efforts
that are suggested through Federal research, evaluation, training and
technical assistance, and
[[Page 71203]]
information resources. Innovation and expansion of services are
hallmarks of these programs. Discretionary grants provide an
opportunity to meet national needs through demonstration and
replication programs. Demonstration programs are based on research and
seek to determine whether program models are effective in a variety of
settings. Replications establish proven effective programs in
communities across the country. OJJDP believes that this is currently
an appropriate balance of these program types.
Comment: A chief of police wrote in support of OJJDP's funding
priority areas and expressed the need for more programs that assist law
enforcement officers who must process juvenile offenders and more
information for those officers processing juvenile offenders who commit
serious offenses. The writer stated that enhanced training and
technical assistance from OJJDP would be of greater benefit to the law
enforcement community than research and development. He also indicated
that his department made use of OJJDP's Web site.
Response: OJJDP is pleased to learn that each of the 10 programming
areas listed as priorities in the Program Plan were relevant to the
writer's agency. OJJDP noted the writer's comment on the importance of
enhanced training and technical assistance for the law enforcement
community, especially in the area of interagency computer network
access.
OJJDP also appreciated hearing that the Crime Analysis/Planning and
Research Division in the writer's department uses the Office's Web site
to stay informed about grants and publications. The OJJDP home page is
an important dissemination tool, and it is continually updated with
``subpages'' on specific programs to provide users with the most
current information.
Comment: An adult probation and parole supervisor wrote in support
of partnerships between juvenile justice and the Department of
Education and discussed the necessity for both departments to adopt
prevention efforts for students with learning disabilities.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's comments about the need
for juvenile justice and education agencies to work together to address
the needs of learning disabled youth. OJJDP and the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
recently awarded a grant to the University of Maryland to establish a
new Center for Students with Disabilities in the Juvenile Justice
System. The Secretary of Education and the Attorney General expect this
project to have a significant impact on the improvement of services for
students with disabilities in the justice system. Improvements in the
areas of prevention, educational services, and reintegration based on a
combination of research, training, and technical assistance will lead
to improved results for children and youth with disabilities. The
Center will provide guidance and assistance to States, schools, justice
programs, families, and communities on designing, implementing, and
evaluating comprehensive education programs. These programs will be
based on research-validated practices for students with disabilities in
the juvenile justice system. OJJDP referred the writer to the
appropriate contacts for more information about the Center.
Comment: A professor of nursing wrote to support the priorities for
funding, particularly field-initiated research. The writer described an
interdisciplinary, university-based research and service program that
features home visitation and support group intervention. She also
stated that it is imperative for university-based programs developed in
collaboration with communities to have the ability to compete for OJJDP
funding.
Response: OJJDP appreciates hearing the writer's support for the 10
broad priority areas for new funding in the Proposed Plan and of her
particular interest in funding for field-initiated research. OJJDP
thanked the writer for providing articles describing the success of the
Project Healthy Grandparents program that supports positive development
in children. OJJDP suggested that the writer watch for program
announcements on OJJDP's Web site during the coming months for possible
funding opportunities from funding streams other than those that
support programs under Parts C and D of the JJDP Act.
Comment: The director of a youth services organization wrote in
support of funding prevention programs for youth and commented on the
usefulness of OJJDP services, publications, and national statistics.
Response: OJJDP appreciates hearing that its publications with
national statistics and information on juvenile justice issues help the
writer to shape programs on a local level. One of OJJDP's most recent
publications, Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report,
provides a comprehensive overview of juvenile crime, violence, and
victimization and the response of the juvenile justice system. It
illustrates OJJDP's efforts to make critical information available to
local and national juvenile justice policymakers and community leaders.
Disseminating information about research, statistics, and programs
that work has been, and remains, a priority at OJJDP. During FY 1999,
OJJDP produced more than 90 documents and distributed almost 4 million
publications. OJJDP referred the writer to its Web site
(www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org) for more information about the National Report
and other OJJDP publications.
Comment: A mental health advocate wrote to support OJJDP's
publications, its Web site, and particularly its ``fax on demand''
service.
Response: OJJDP appreciates hearing that its publications program
is helpful. As noted above, disseminating quality information continues
to be a priority and several OJJDP publications have won national
awards. OJJDP encouraged the writer to access other electronic
resources besides the ``fax-on-demand'' service, including OJJDP's
electronic mailing list, JUVJUST, and the Office's recently redesigned
Web site (www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org). JUVJUST alerts subscribers to new
documents, funding opportunities, and other OJJDP news.
Comment: An individual suggested that OJJDP develop a set of
``value-screens'' and provided mathematical instructions on how
decisions should be made. The writer provided a list of priorities in
order of importance based on his intuition and another list based on a
matrix of values, using the value-screen method.
Response: OJJDP is intrigued by the writer's idea about using
value-screens for decisionmaking and noted that the information would
be passed along to the program planning team for their consideration.
Comment: An individual wrote to share his personal priorities,
including getting parents-- especially fathers--involved with their
children, extending services for children from childhood to young
adulthood, sharing news/information about children in other States with
children across the country, providing summer activities for students,
and developing community centers/sports for youth.
Response: OJJDP believes that its proposed program priorities for
FY 2000 reflect a commitment to prevention activities similar to the
personal priorities shared in the comment letter. OJJDP provided the
writer with a recent OJJDP Fact Sheet on the topic of responsible
fatherhood.
Comment: A police sergeant identified five areas that he believes
would have the most direct impact on his jurisdiction, including
improvement of the juvenile sanctioning system;
[[Page 71204]]
programs for female offenders; developing, evaluating, and replicating
blueprint programs; juvenile sex offending; and prevention and
treatment programs for status offenders. The writer indicated that it
is important to fund new and innovative programs, but provision of
enhanced training and technical assistance should not be overlooked.
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning of the five program areas that
would have the most impact in the writer's jurisdiction. OJJDP agreed
that these are important areas of work and has been pleased by both the
positive response to them from the field and the work already under way
in these areas as part of the Office's ongoing programs.
OJJDP appreciates the positive feedback about the Office's training
seminars and agrees with the writer's statement that providing enhanced
training and technical assistance to juvenile justice practitioners is
essential. OJJDP will continue to keep this activity a priority.
Comment: The executive director for an agency that provides support
to families of incarcerated persons wrote about the need for attention
to youth who have an immediate family member in prison. The writer
indicated that mentoring programs are not reaching this population of
youth and that they are particularly at high risk for incarceration
themselves as juveniles.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's sharing information about
her program and agrees with the need for prevention programs that
address the issues she raises. In all of OJJDP's efforts, consistent
with the OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic
Juvenile Offenders, emphasis is placed on risk-focused prevention. The
youth referenced in the letter, assuming that there are other
community, individual, peer and/or family-related risk factors present,
are definitely considered at risk and are recommended for priority
targeting in any OJJDP-supported program.
OJJDP advised the writer that most of OJJDP's funding is not
provided under Parts C and D, but is distributed to the States and
territories through our Formula Grants, Challenge, and Title V
(Community Prevention) programs. OJJDP provided the writer with contact
information for the Juvenile Justice Specialist in her State to explore
these possible sources of funding.
With regard to funding for mentoring programs, Part G of the
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974, as
amended, authorizes OJJDP to fund a Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP).
In fiscal year 2000, Congress appropriated $12 million to support this
program, including demonstration projects, technical assistance,
evaluation, and support for other specific programs such as the Big
Brothers Big Sisters program. The goal of the JUMP program is to reduce
juvenile delinquency and gang participation by at-risk youth, to
improve academic performance of at-risk youth, and to reduce the
dropout rate for at-risk youth through the establishment of one-to-one
mentoring between an adult and a juvenile. OJJDP encouraged the writer
to consider submitting an application for a forthcoming competitive
solicitation the Office will issue in early 2000 to fund additional
mentoring sites around the country.
Comment: The executive director of the agency designated to
administer a State's OJJDP funds wrote in support of the OJJDP Plan's
broad view and its programs tailored to specific needs of special
populations, including status offenders, female offenders, and Native
American young people, with an emphasis on research and evaluation. The
writer expressed the need for programs that address the mental health
needs of young people and aftercare programs for juveniles leaving the
system.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's positive comments about
the work of the Office. With regard to meeting the mental health needs
of youth in the juvenile justice system, the writer was provided with a
copy of an OJJDP Fact Sheet entitled Mental Health Disorders and
Substance Abuse Problems Among Juveniles. OJJDP intends to keep mental
health needs of juveniles at the forefront as new programs are
developed within the juvenile justice system. In the near future, OJJDP
will release a new competitive solicitation for a multiyear research
and development effort to examine current research and theoretical
literature on mental health and related substance abuse issues among
juvenile offenders.
OJJDP has committed extensive resources in the area of aftercare/
reintegration services for juvenile offenders. Since 1987, OJJDP has
supported a long-term research, demonstration, and testing project
focused on aftercare. The Intensive Aftercare Program (IAP) model has
evolved from this research. The goal of the IAP model is to reduce
recidivism among high-risk parolees. The model assumes that effective
intervention requires not only intensive supervision and services
following institutional release, but also a focus on reintegration
during incarceration. In addition, the IAP proposes a highly structured
and gradual transitional process that serves as a bridge between
institutionalization and aftercare. An independent outcome evaluation
will examine recidivism using a followup period of 1 year after release
from the institution and multiple measures of reoffending behavior.
These measures will include arrest, arrest with adjudication, and days
to recidivism. OJJDP is sharing its interim findings with the Attorney
General's ``reentry court'' project team. The writer was provided
copies of relevant OJJDP publications on the topic of aftercare.
In addition to the IAP, OJJDP has been collaborating with the Boys
& Girls Clubs of America to implement a pilot project known as
``Targeted Reintegration.'' This project is an effort to provide Boys &
Girls Club services to youth in residential placement and, upon their
reentry to the community, to encourage youth to become involved in
activities sponsored by the Boys & Girls Clubs. Once released, youth
are provided a mentor through the Boys & Girls Club, are seen by their
parole officer, and are expected to attend a Boys & Girls Club at least
three times a week.
Comment: The director for policy advocacy for a faith-based
organization that is part of the Boston Ten Point Coalition and that
works on gang prevention and intervention, youth crime, and delinquency
wrote that to his knowledge, only one faith-based organization (FBO) is
receiving direct funding from OJJDP. The writer provided suggestions
for how OJJDP might help ``to get more FBO's eligible for OJJDP
funding.'' This individual indicated that his organization has been
doing much work with at-risk girls and OJJDP should consider FBO's as
possible recipients of these grants. Faith-based organizations are also
providing arts programs, and the writer would like funding expanded to
include cultural education curriculums offered by such organizations to
incarcerated and at-risk youth.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's interest in seeing greater
involvement of faith-based organizations in gang prevention and
intervention and other youth delinquency programs. OJJDP further
requested the writer's assistance in enhancing the Office's current
mailing list to include a special tier of faith-based organizations and
provided the appropriate agency staff contact to start a dialog on this
matter.
As to direct funding, OJJDP informed the writer that it is
currently providing
[[Page 71205]]
funding to faith-based Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP) sites. In
addition, to be eligible for OJJDP's Drug-Free Communities program,
applicants had to ``demonstrate that a community coalition has been
established,'' containing at least one representative of several
specified groups, including ``religious or fraternal organizations.''
OJJDP supports the work being done by the Ten Point Coalition and
looks forward to joining the ongoing discussions within the U.S.
Department of Justice to help promote the good work the Coalition is
doing.
The writer's comments concerning FBO's, arts programs for
incarcerated youth, and programs for female offenders will all be
considered in OJJDP's planning process for FY 2000 and beyond.
Comment: The directors of program development and research for a
law enforcement agency wrote to suggest modification of the plan to
incorporate projects that develop the role of community policing for
the prevention and reduction of juvenile crime. The writers suggested
three projects that would further these efforts: a publication series
that would educate law enforcement personnel as to the potential of
community-oriented approaches to juvenile crime, demonstration projects
modeled after the faith-based approach initiated in Boston by the Ten
Point Coalition working in cooperation with police departments, and the
development of evaluation of efforts that expand on the school-based
problem-solving model.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writers' thoughtful and insightful
synopses of the three project areas that would further the role of
community policing in juvenile crime reduction and prevention. OJJDP is
particularly excited about the work being done by the Ten Point
Coalition and is involved in ongoing discussions about promoting work
in the juvenile justice area by faith-based organizations. OJJDP looks
forward to continuing its dialog with the Police Executive Research
Forum concerning the areas of interest they raised in their letter.
Comment: Three units within a police department reviewed OJJDP's
plan and provided comments. The commander of the investigative services
unit indicated that equal priority and emphasis should be given to
research, practical application, and training for intervening
professionals and to continuation and growth of a national resource
center for safe schools that could provide technical assistance,
research, and information. The supervisor of the sex crimes unit noted
an increase in juveniles involved in sexual offenses and would like a
focus on the impact of pornography films and VCR's on these offenses.
He also is concerned about child victims not showing up for court and
suggests that OJJDP investigate why this happens and how often. A
supervisor of a gang squad listed, in order of priority, the areas that
he thinks could be implemented by his department: juvenile crime
trends; field-initiated research and evaluation programs; developing,
replicating, and evaluating model programs; prevention and treatment
programs for status offenders; and improving the juvenile sanctions
system. This individual listed programs that he believes should be
given consideration in his community and suggested future studies and
research in the following areas: transient and migrating gangs; Asian
gang factions; skinhead/white supremacist factions of gangs;
coordination of a national strategy to identify and combat these
criminal groups, including immigration issues, teamed with State,
Federal, and local authorities; and studies and research into the
sources of firearms used in violent crimes.
Response: OJJDP appreciates hearing comments from the
representatives of the police department units and their suggestions
for directing OJJDP programming resources. OJJDP acknowledged the
concern about the nationwide incidents of school violence and the need
for training and technical assistance on the issue. OJJDP plans to
continue funding the National Resource Center for Safe Schools in
Portland, OR, which produces a number of training and technical
assistance materials to combat this issue. OJJDP also promised to look
into the questions raised about trends in the increase of Part II sex
offenses and the number of child abuse cases dropped. A representative
from the Office's Research and Program Development Division will
respond to the commenter directly on those issues. Finally, OJJDP noted
the five programming areas judged as having the most impact on the
writers' department and agreed with their importance. The Office has
been pleased by the positive response from the field about the work
already under way in these areas as part of its ongoing programs.
Finally, in response to the need for continued emphasis to combat
juvenile gangs, OJJDP reaffirmed that gang prevention, intervention,
and suppression remains one of the Office's highest priorities. OJJDP
appreciates the positive comments about its National Youth Gang Center
as well as interest in its Gang-Free Communities Initiative, which will
likely entail a replication of the OJJDP Comprehensive Gang Model in
multiple U.S. cities. Early evaluation data from the five existing
demonstration sites indicate promising preliminary evaluation results
in terms of reducing gang crime, violence, drug use, and drug sales.
OJJDP is excited about the possibility of replicating this model with
local adaptations around the country. OJJDP acknowledged the comment
that many communities lack good research on intervening with migratory
gangs of various ethnicities and on white supremacist/skinhead groups.
Comment: The program director of a military academy that works with
at-risk youth wrote to suggest the use of intervention and education to
positively impact youth's behaviors. The writer noted that there is a
lack of programs for middle and high school students and for youth who
are marginally involved in the juvenile justice system. Information
about the academy's program, which includes elements of mentoring, was
provided. The writer closed with a request that OJJDP look into this
type of program.
Response: OJJDP noted that the writer's program fulfills a need to
support youth at risk of entering the juvenile justice system or youth
who have marginally been involved with the juvenile justice system and
agreed that there is a need to address these youth. OJJDP provided a
brief summary of its comprehensive approach and sent the writer a copy
of its Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic
Juvenile Offenders, which lists a variety of model intermediate
sanctions programs that provide structure, education, and leadership
training to youth. (See the detailed response to the comment on ``sure
and swift'' consequences above for more information about the
Comprehensive Strategy.)
Most of OJJDP's funding is not provided under Parts C and D, but is
distributed to the States and territories through Formula Grants,
Challenge, and Title V (Community Prevention) programs. OJJDP provided
contact information for the writer's State Juvenile Justice Specialist
to explore these possible sources of funding and an agency contact for
more information about the Office's programs.
Comment: A law enforcement officer wrote that field-initiated
research and evaluation is most important and that there is a need for
the development, replacement, and evaluation of model ``blueprint''
programs and for model practices in delinquency and dependency courts.
The writer also expressed a need for facilities for
[[Page 71206]]
troubled youth and for appropriate sanctions for their actions.
Finally, there is a need for prevention and treatment programs for
status offenders.
Response: OJJDP is actively engaged in advancing the program areas
raised by the writer. OJJDP will pass on the writer's concerns about
the issues facing his jurisdiction to the Office's program planning
team for their consideration.
Comment: The director of a truancy center described the program's
approach, including targeting of middle school-age children and
younger, to enhance successful intervention. The program works closely
with probation, counselors, judges, law enforcement, school
administrators, social workers, and parents to provide coordinated
services and case management. The writer asks that OJJDP recognize the
center's approach as ``unique and worthy of consideration'' during
evaluation and prioritization of funding activities. He also indicated
the two programming areas that would be most useful in his work.
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning that, of the 10 programming
areas presented for consideration in the Program Plan, two--
``blueprint'' program development and prevention and treatment programs
for status offenders--would best serve the writer's needs.
In response to the writer's description of his truancy program,
OJJDP acknowledged truancy as a major problem in this country that
negatively influences the future of youth and costs taxpayers thousands
of dollars. OJJDP is in the process of evaluating truancy reduction
projects in eight demonstration sites: Athens, GA; Contra Costa, CA;
Honolulu, HI; Houston, TX; Jacksonville, FL; King County, WA; Suffolk
County, NY; and Tacoma, WA. The purpose of the evaluation is to
determine how community collaboration can impact truancy reduction and
lead to systemic reform and assist OJJDP in the development of a
community collaborative truancy reduction program model.
Most of OJJDP's funding is not provided under Parts C and D, but is
distributed to the States and territories through our Formula Grants,
Challenge, and Title V (Community Prevention) programs. OJJDP referred
the writer to his State Juvenile Justice Specialist to explore these
possible sources of funding.
Comment: The program coordinator of a court evaluation unit wrote
in support of three of the proposed priority areas: developing and
studying programs addressing female offenders, developing prevention
and treatment programs for status offenders, and developing and
evaluating model practices regarding the efficacy of delinquency and
dependency courts. The writer also noted that ``prevention and initial
treatment is often a less costly approach to addressing delinquent
behavior.''
Response: OJJDP appreciates learning of the writer's choice of
priority program areas and strongly agrees with the observation about
the cost-effectiveness of prevention and initial treatment.
Comment: The domestic violence coordinator at a county agency wrote
that OJJDP needs to more directly address the problem of gender
violence, specifically male to female violence, and to include school
violence programs that consider the violence directed at girls, not
just gang or gun violence. The writer also stated that ``young men are
assaulting others in their families, but especially their mothers.'' It
was noted that curriculums and responses that address domestic/dating
violence by young men are beginning to be developed in the writer's
county.
Response: OJJDP shares the writer's concern about violence
perpetrated against female adolescents, particularly in light of
research that indicates the median age at which girls report first
becoming victims of sexual assault is 13. In response to this concern,
OJJDP has awarded funds to Greene, Peters, and Associates of Nashville,
TN, to foster comprehensive gender-specific programming for female
juvenile offenders and girls at risk of offending, with work in this
area including attention to the critical issue of victimization. The
grantee also will provide training and technical assistance to help
policymakers, service providers, detention workers, educators, service
providers, parents, and community leaders address the complex needs of
female adolescents who are at risk for delinquent behavior.
OJJDP is supporting several school-based programs that address
problems of interpersonal violence and promote peaceful resolution. The
National Center for Conflict Resolution Education in Urbana, IL, and
the National Resource Center for Safe Schools in Portland, OR, are
working with schools to teach students alternatives to violence,
including date violence. The National Hate Crime Prevention Center in
Newton, MA, is examining the complexities of gender violence in its
trainings with domestic violence and law enforcement personnel.
OJJDP is also a collaborator with the National Advisory Council on
Violence Against Women. The Council is charged with designing a
national agenda on violence against women. When completed, this
document will serve as a call to action and a guide to specific
strategies to end violence against women and girls. OJJDP will continue
to give priority to this area of activity.
Comment: The president and CEO of a mental health organization
wrote that it is important for OJJDP to continue to promote evidence-
based programs and would like OJJDP to take a greater leadership role
in contradicting punitive measures and policies that do not work. The
writer also stated that his organization would like OJJDP to decrease
its emphasis on programs addressing a small number of serious and
violent offenders and concentrate more on prevention of delinquency and
early intervention with at-risk youth. The writer indicated OJJDP's
investment in reducing child abuse, neglect, and dependency seems
inadequate, particularly among girls, but was pleased about the focus
on mental health. Other areas the writer supported for potential new
funding were studying and developing programs that address female
offenders, prevention and treatment programs for status offenders, and
expansion of blueprint programs. This individual questioned why OJJDP
would fund a program to reduce lead and environmental hazards based on
the scope of the mission of OJJDP and suggested that the focus should
be broadened to address the relationship between health status and
delinquency. Other thoughts included concerns that efforts be closely
coordinated, that treatment should not be viewed as a sanction, and
that OJJDP is not focusing enough attention on the overrepresentation
of minority youth in the juvenile justice system, while focusing too
much on gang prevention and suppression. The letter listed four
``unaddressed'' or ``insufficiently addressed'' areas: a focused effort
to evaluate and replicate promising community-based models, the
prevalence of violence exposure and trauma among justice system-
involved youth, conditions of confinement issues for youth with mental
health and other treatment needs, and an emphasis on family outreach
and meaningful inclusion in the juvenile justice system.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's comments concerning where
OJJDP's program emphasis should lie as it provides the kind of feedback
necessary for sound decisionmaking. OJJDP noted that the writer's
comments also highlight the ever-present challenge of balancing
resources among competing needs while addressing the continuum of
juvenile justice and delinquency prevention needs.
[[Page 71207]]
OJJDP acknowledged the writer's support for new programming in the
areas of female offenders and replication of the ``Blueprints''
programs. With regard to his inquiry about the inclusion of ``the
reduction of lead and environmental hazards'' in the 10 areas proposed
for consideration, OJJDP responded that this area is consonant with the
Office's strong emphasis on prevention activities. This Administration
has aggressively pursued interagency partnerships in crossover areas of
interest, and it is clear that the effects of elevated levels of lead
in the bloodstream can cause children to suffer from physical,
neurobiological, and cognitive problems that may lead to aberrant
behavior, including aggression and delinquency.
OJJDP is committed to promoting research-based programs that
demonstrate a positive impact on the lives of at-risk and delinquent
youth and their families. This commitment extends to all of the
Office's work, including those projects in the area of mental health.
This area has gained increasing emphasis in recent years, concomitant
with an increasing recognition of the interconnections among mental
health, substance abuse, and juvenile justice.
In FY 2000, OJJDP will be funding several efforts in the area of
mental health. OJJDP is pleased to support an update of the 1992
monograph, Responding to the Mental Health Needs of Youth in the
Juvenile Justice System. The 1992 document remains the single-most
comprehensive source of information on issues related to the mental
health needs of youth in the juvenile justice system, but a new
publication is needed to capture the progress and innovation that has
occurred during the past 8 years. In addition, OJJDP is supporting a
project to review the issue of screening and assessment in the juvenile
justice system. The goal is to determine what instruments and models
are currently in use, identify their strengths and weaknesses, and
produce recommendations regarding best practices and future research
needs.
OJJDP is also sponsoring basic research to identify the prevalence
of mental health and substance abuse disorders in a large population of
detained youth in Cook County, Illinois. In addition to prevalence
rates, this study will explore service needs and service provision for
this population. In combination with a similar study in New York City,
this research may provide the clearest evidence yet of the level of
unmet mental health needs among youth in the juvenile justice system.
Another project, supported through an interagency agreement with the
National Institute of Mental Health, is examining the connections
between different types of treatment for attention deficit/
hyperactivity disorder (a known risk factor for delinquency) and
youth's later contact with the juvenile justice system.
Finally, OJJDP is in the midst of planning a major mental health
demonstration project, which is still in the developmental stages and
which will be highly dependent on future funding levels. However, the
goal of this project will be to develop a comprehensive model for
delivering mental health services to youth at all points in the
juvenile justice system, from intake to aftercare. Subsequently, this
comprehensive model would be implemented and evaluated at diverse
sites, to determine its ability to meet the mental health needs of
youth in the juvenile justice system.
All the writer's comments, including suggestions of four
unaddressed or insufficiently addressed areas, will be considered in
the planning process for FY 2000 and beyond.
Comment: The associate superintendent of public schools wrote to
discuss her collaborative work with the State department of juvenile
justice. As part of a pilot program, probation officers were placed in
a cluster of schools to provide assistance and support in preventing
violence. The writer believes that ``this program has had a significant
influence in assisting delinquency reduction in the community'' and
therefore should be carefully considered as policy decisions are made
regarding future funding.
Response: OJJDP commends the collaborative efforts between the
Prince Georges County Public Schools and the State of Maryland
Department of Juvenile Justice. OJJDP acknowledged that the work of
these two agencies in providing a seamless mesh of services to an at-
risk population has become a statewide model for Maryland's Spotlight
on Schools initiative. OJJDP is pleased to learn that this program has
had a significant influence in assisting in delinquency reduction in
the community.
Most of OJJDP's funding is not provided under Parts C and D, but is
distributed to the States and territories through our Formula Grants,
Challenge, and Title V (Community Prevention) programs. OJJDP referred
the writer to the Juvenile Justice Specialist in her State to explore
these possible sources of funding
Comment: The director of research and development in a law
enforcement agency wrote in support of all of OJJDP's proposed areas as
critical issues, with attention to what works and guidelines for
replication. The writer indicated that improving the juvenile
sanctioning system is of key importance and that development and
implementation of transition programs for juvenile offenders is
critical. It would be useful to have a focus on understanding juvenile
crime trends, particularly if applied research is part of the
methodology. The individual wrote that OJJDP should continue to
encourage, if not mandate, collaboration with community organizations
as well as the development of a continuum of services. The writer also
stated that ``the need for training and technical assistance for public
and community organizations and service providers is paramount,''
urging OJJDP to include a training component with additional support in
the development and implementation of local initiatives.
Response: OJJDP appreciates the writer's support for all 10 program
areas and acknowledged her assessment that improving the juvenile
sanctioning system is of key importance. In response to the writer's
comment about the need for useful and timely information to help law
enforcement agencies understand the ``whys'' behind juvenile crime
trends, OJJDP sent a copy of the recently published, Juvenile Offenders
and Victims: 1999 National Report. The National Report is the most
comprehensive and up-to-date source of information about juvenile
crime, violence, and victimization and about the response of the
juvenile justice system to these problems.
OJJDP agrees with the writer's position on the need for
collaboration between community and resident organizations, the
development of a continuum of services, and training and technical
assistance. The Office has been pleased by the positive response from
the field about the work already under way in these areas as part of
OJJDP's ongoing programs and intends to continue to promote them.
Introduction to Fiscal Year 2000 Program Plan
In administering the discretionary grants program under Parts C and
D of Title II, OJJDP has identified four goals as the major elements of
a sound policy that ensures public safety and security while
establishing effective juvenile justice and delinquency prevention
programs. Achieving these goals, which are discussed below, is vital to
protecting the long-term safety of the public from juvenile delinquency
and violence.
[[Page 71208]]
OJJDP promotes delinquency prevention and early
intervention efforts that reduce the flow of juvenile offenders into
the juvenile justice system, the numbers of serious and violent
offenders, and the development of chronic delinquent careers. While
removing serious and violent juvenile offenders from the street serves
to protect the public, long-term solutions lie primarily in taking
aggressive steps to stop delinquency before it starts or becomes a
pattern of behavior.
OJJDP seeks to improve the juvenile justice system and the
response of the system to juvenile delinquents, status offenders, and
dependent, neglected, and abused children.
OJJDP supports efforts in the area of corrections,
detention, and community-based alternatives to preserve the public
safety in a manner that serves the appropriate development and best use
of secure detention and corrections options, while at the same time
fostering the use of community-based programs for juvenile offenders
that provide developmentally appropriate, culturally competent mental
health and other critical services.
OJJDP seeks to support law enforcement, public safety, and
other justice agency efforts to prevent juvenile delinquency, intervene
in the development of chronic delinquent careers, and collaborate with
the juvenile justice system to meet the needs of dependent, neglected,
and abused children, children who need mental health interventions, and
children with disabilities.
In 1993, OJJDP published its Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,
Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders, which set forth a research-
based comprehensive approach for addressing the problems of juvenile
crime and victimization and for achieving its program goals. The
Comprehensive Strategy was developed to assist States and local
communities in preventing at-risk youth from becoming serious, violent,
and chronic juvenile offenders and in crafting a practical response to
those who do. Over the past few years, OJJDP has tested and refined the
prevention and graduated sanctions components of the Comprehensive
Strategy. In 1996, OJJDP began assisting three pilot sites to formulate
the Comprehensive Strategy plans at the local level. Lessons learned
from those sites are being used in eight States to implement a
strategic planning and implementation process through State
partnerships with up to six local jurisdictions that are developing and
implementing their own comprehensive strategies.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For more information about the Comprehensive Strategy,
readers can request a copy of OJJDP Fact Sheet No. 9883, An Update
on the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic
Juvenile Offenders, by calling the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at
800-638-9736. Additional information is available from the
Comprehensive Strategy program section of OJJDP's Web site at
www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org/strategy/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Final Plan also supports the Coordinating Council's 1996
National Juvenile Justice Action Plan, which grew out of the
Comprehensive Strategy. This Action Plan, which the Coordinating
Council is currently updating, provides eight objectives to reduce
juvenile violence and describes ways to meet these objectives.
Together, the Comprehensive Strategy and the Action Plan constitute a
sound strategy for translating research findings and innovative
programs into action.
Continuation Programs
OJJDP organizes its proposed programs under four broad categories
that reflect its program goals and the principles of the Comprehensive
Strategy. The following summaries briefly describe some of the types of
activities that will receive continuation funding in each category.
Public Safety and Law Enforcement. Eight programs related to the
important public policy issue of proliferating youth gangs are a major
focus of OJJDP's proposals in this category. The programs range from
demonstrations and replication of models to technical assistance and
from evaluation to data collection and analysis. Funds will also be
provided to a partnership between law enforcement and mental health
services agencies to continue school-based activities and efforts to
address the effects on children of exposure to domestic violence. Two
programs deal with a problem of increasing public concern, gun
violence. An evaluation is looking at the effect of transferring the
responsibility for child protective investigations to law enforcement
agencies.
Delinquency Prevention and Intervention. OJJDP will fund a range of
programs that focus on reducing risk factors and increasing protective
factors in children's lives. The types of programs include
demonstrations, pilots, and replication of model programs; outreach;
studies and evaluations; and training and technical assistance.
Beginning with early programs such as prenatal nurse home visitation,
OJJDP's delinquency prevention and intervention efforts feature arts
programs for at-risk youth and for those in detention and corrections
facilities; programs that assess the role of alcohol, illegal drugs,
mental health problems, and learning disorders in juvenile delinquency
and programs that study effective interventions for these risk factors.
Funding will also be provided for programs to reduce truancy and keep
students from dropping out of school and to evaluate those efforts,
conflict resolution programs, programs that discourage violence, and
programs that provide opportunities for positive development and
promote public awareness of effective solutions to juvenile crime.
Strengthening the Juvenile Justice System. In this category, OJJDP
will support efforts to develop comprehensive approaches to juvenile
justice and delinquency prevention, including programs designed to
reform juvenile justice systems in specific locations. Research-based
guidance will be provided to States and others to improve juvenile
justice services for students with disabilities. Some programs attempt
to increase youth's accountability for their behavior and to prevent
violence, while others seek to improve the quality of youth's legal
representation and the equity and efficiency of the treatment of youth
(including girls and minorities) at all points within the juvenile
justice system, including points where the justice and mental health
systems intersect and the time when youth return to the community from
residential facilities. In addition, OJJDP will fund programs focusing
on providing the information base necessary for sound policymaking.
Examples include censuses and surveys of juveniles in facilities and on
probation, an accurate program directory for use in the censuses and
surveys, and a data analysis project.
Child Abuse and Neglect and Dependency Courts. Three programs fall
within this category: Safe Kids/Safe Streets: Community Approaches to
Reducing Abuse and Neglect and Preventing Delinquency, its national
evaluation, and a research program focusing specifically on the issue
of child neglect.
Overarching. In addition to the activities in the four categories
described above, OJJDP supports programs in a broader, overarching
category. These are programs with significant elements common to more
than one of the other four categories. Among the overarching programs
is a major longitudinal study of the causes and correlates of
delinquency, which is also providing an opportunity for an
[[Page 71209]]
examination of the intergenerational transmission of antisocial
behavior. School violence is addressed by a university-based consortium
and by a national resource center. One initiative is assisting six
communities in implementing comprehensive programs to reduce youth
violence and delinquency. OJJDP will continue to fund a crime
prevention center whose tasks include investigating the reasons for the
overrepresentation of minorities in the Texas juvenile justice system.
Finally, national-level statistical support, training and technical
assistance programs, and a clearinghouse are included in the
overarching category, as are an OJJDP management evaluation contract
and telecommunications assistance.
Descriptions of the specific programs in each of the five
categories follow the discussion of new programs.
New Programs
Because the Proposed Plan was published before the FY 2000
appropriation was enacted, possible new programming was discussed only
in the most general terms with descriptions of 10 broad areas in which
new programs might be funded in FY 2000. The public was asked to
comment on the proposed areas, which are listed below.
1. Improving the Juvenile Sanctioning System
2. Developing and Studying Programs Addressing Female Offenders
3. Monitoring and Understanding the ``Whys'' Behind Juvenile Crime
Trends
4. Developing Blueprint Programs Through Replication and Evaluation
5. Replicating Effective Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and
Treatment Program Models on Native American Tribal Lands and in Alaskan
Native Communities
6. Developing and Evaluating Model Practices Regarding the Efficacy
of Delinquency and Dependency Courts
7. Reducing Lead and Environmental Hazards
8. Addressing the Problem of Juvenile Sex Offending
9. Developing Prevention and Treatment Programs for Status
Offenders
10. Supporting Field-Initiated Research and Evaluation Programs
It appears that the funding available to OJJDP for this fiscal year
limits its ability to support new programming. Information regarding
the FY 2000 appropriation, feedback from the juvenile justice field,
other public comments on the Proposed Plan, and staff review have
resulted in a narrowing down and refinement of the 10 proposed priority
areas. Final determination of all FY 2000 programs will depend,
however, on the completion of the review of congressional program
priorities for OJJDP and funding availability.
OJJDP will give priority to funding two new program areas:
improving the juvenile sanctioning system and improving the response to
juvenile sex offenders. If additional monies become available or
interagency agreements can be negotiated, other areas of interest that
OJJDP would prioritize for funding include the following: evaluation of
model dependency courts; survey of correctional education; a national
survey of youth; and reducing lead and environmental hazards.
In addition, depending on availability of funds, the Office intends
to enhance or restructure existing efforts to better focus its work in
the following areas: girls in the juvenile justice system;
disproportionate minority confinement; hate crime prevention; gang-free
schools and communities initiatives; State and local juvenile justice
policymaking; the engagement of faith-based organizations;
``Blueprint'' program replication and evaluation; detention and
corrections programming; and monitoring and understanding the ``whys''
behind juvenile crime trends.
Two additional points should be made concerning new programming
listed for consideration in the Proposed Plan:
First, consistent with the public comments received, OJJDP is
cognizant of the need to give the States good guidance on the handling
of status offenders. The Office is currently conducting work around
underage drinking, family strengthening, runaways and missing youth,
and truancy programs. In addition, OJJDP will explore possible ways to
gather and disseminate the best information available about status
offending, including training and technical assistance support through
its new training and technical assistance provider.
Second, it may be possible to support some field-initiated research
in FY 2000 by identifying funding streams other than those that support
programs under Parts C and D of the JJDP Act (e.g., Juvenile
Accountability Incentive Block Grants).
Those who commented on the Proposed Plan and other interested
parties should watch for program announcements on OJJDP's Web site
(www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org--click on ``Grants & Funding'') during the coming
months to learn of any new programming that may be funded in FY 2000.
Readers can also obtain this information by calling the Juvenile
Justice Clearinghouse (800-638-8736) or subscribing to OJJDP's
electronic newsletter, JUVJUST, by sending an e-mail message to
[email protected], leaving the subject line blank, and typing
subscribe juvjust your name in the body of the message.
Fiscal Year 2000 Programs
The following are the programs that OJJDP intends to continue to
fund in FY 2000. These programs are listed alphabetically and
summarized within each of the five categories: Overarching, Public
Safety and Law Enforcement, Strengthening the Juvenile Justice System,
Delinquency Prevention and Intervention, and Child Abuse and Neglect
and Dependency Courts.
With regard to implementation sites and other descriptive data and
information, program priorities within each category will be determined
based on grantee performance, application quality, fund availability,
and other factors.
As part of the appropriations process, Congress identified a number
of programs for priority funding consideration by OJJDP with regard to
the grantee(s), the amount of funds, or both. These programs, which are
listed below, are not included in the program descriptions.
Achievable Dream After School Program
Catholic Charities, Inc., Louisville, Kentucky
Center on Crimes/Violence Against Children
Culinary Arts for At-Risk Youth
Innovative Partnerships for High Risk Youth
Juvenile Justice Tribal Collaboration and Technical Assistance
Kids With A Promise Program
L.A. Best Youth Program
L.A. Dads/Family Programs
L.A. Bridges After School Program
Lincoln Action Programs-Youth Violence Alternative Project
Low Country Children's Center Program
Mecklenburg County's Domestic Violence HERO Program
Milwaukee Safe and Sound Program
Mount Hope Center
National Association of State Fire Marshals-Juvenile Firesetters
Initiative
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges
Law-Related Education
No Workshops * * * No Jump Shots Program
Operation Quality Time Program
Parents Anonymous
Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, After School Program
Suffolk University Center for Juvenile Justice
[[Page 71210]]
University of Missouri-Kansas City Juvenile Justice Research Center
University of Montana Juvenile After School Program
Vermont Association of Court Diversion
Youth Crime Watch Initiative of Florida
Youth Challenge Program
In addition, OJJDP is directed to examine each of the following
proposals, provide grants if warranted, and report to the Committees on
Appropriations on both the House and Senate on its intentions for each
proposal.
At Risk Youth Program in Wausau, Wisconsin
Consortium on Children, Families, and the Law
Hawaii Lawyers Care Na Keiki Law Center
Juvenile Justice program in Kansas City, Missouri
Learning for Life Program
New Mexico Cooperative Extension Service 4-H Youth Development Program
OASIS
Oklahoma State Transition and Reintegration Services (STARS)
Rapid Response Program, Washington/Hancock County, Maine
St. Louis City Regional Violence Prevention Initiative
University of South Alabama's Youth Violence Project
Fiscal Year 2000 Program Listing
Overarching
Coalition for Juvenile Justice
Hamilton Fish National Institute on School and Community Violence
Insular Area Support
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse
Juvenile Justice Statistics and Systems Development
National Resource Center for Safe Schools
National Training and Technical Assistance Center
OJJDP Management Evaluation Contract
OJJDP Technical Assistance Support Contract--Juvenile Justice Resource
Center
Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency
SafeFutures: Partnerships To Reduce Youth Violence and Delinquency
Technical Assistance for State Legislatures
Telecommunications Assistance
Texas Juvenile Crime Prevention Center at Prairie View A&M University--
Enhancing Personal Training and Understanding Minority
Overrepresentation in the Juvenile Justice System
Training and Technical Assistance Coordination for the SafeFutures and
Safe Kids/Safe Streets Initiatives
Public Safety and Law Enforcement
Child Development-Community-Oriented Policing (CD-CP)
Education on Gun Violence and Safety
Evaluation of the Comprehensive Community-Wide Approach to Gang
Prevention; Intervention, and Suppression Program
Evaluation of the Partnerships To Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence Program
Evaluation of the Rural Gang Initiative
Evaluation of the Transfer of Responsibility for Child Protective
Investigations to Law Enforcement Agencies
Gang Prevention Through Targeted Outreach (Boys & Girls Clubs)
Juvenile Justice Law Enforcement Training and Technical Assistance
Program
National Youth Gang Center
Partnerships To Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence
Rural Gang Initiative Demonstration Sites
Technical Assistance to Gang-Free Schools and Communities Initiatives
Training and Technical Assistance for the Rural Gang Initiative
Delinquency Prevention and Intervention
America's Promise: Enhanced Collaboration
Arts and At-Risk Youth
Arts Programs for Juvenile Offenders in Detention and Corrections
Assessing Alcohol, Drug, and Mental Health Disorders
Communities in Schools--Federal Interagency Partnership
A Demonstration Afterschool Program
Diffusion of State Risk- and Protective-Factor Focused Prevention
Evaluation of the Truancy Reduction Program
Hate Crime
Intergenerational Transmission of Antisocial Behavior Project
Investing in Youth for a Safer Future--A Public Education Campaign
Multisite, Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
National Center for Conflict Resolution Education
Partnerships for Preventing Violence
Proactive Youth Program
Professional Development in Effective Classroom and Conflict Management
Risk Reduction Via Promotion of Youth Development
Strengthening Services for Chemically Involved Children, Youth, and
Families
Training and Technical Assistance Program for the Arts Programs for
Juvenile Offenders in Detention and Corrections Initiative
Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program
Strengthening the Juvenile Justice System
Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ) Training Project
Building Blocks for Youth
Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement
Center for Students with Disabilities in the Juvenile Justice System
Circles of Care Program
Community Assessment Center
Comprehensive Children and Families Mental Health Training and
Technical Assistance
Development of the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and
Chronic Juvenile Offenders
Evaluation of the Department of Labor's Education and Training for
Youthful Offenders Initiative
Evaluation of the Intensive Community-Based Aftercare Program
Evaluation of Teen Courts
Helping Communities To Promote Youth Development
Intensive Community-Based Aftercare Demonstration and Technical
Assistance Program
Juvenile Defender Training, Technical Assistance, and Resource Center
The Juvenile Justice Prosecution Unit
Juvenile Residential Facility Census
Linking Balanced and Restorative Justice and Adolescents (LIBRA)
Longitudinal Study To Examine the Development of Conduct Disorder in
Girls
National Juvenile Justice Data Analysis Project
National Juvenile Justice Program Directory
The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 97
Performance-Based Standards for Juvenile Correction and Detention
Facilities
San Francisco Juvenile Justice Local Action Plan--Delancy Street
Initiative
Survey of Juvenile Probation
Technical Assistance to Native American Tribes and Alaskan Native
Communities
TeenSupreme Career Preparation Initiative
Training and Technical Support for State and Local Jurisdictional Teams
To Focus on Juvenile Corrections and Detention Overcrowding
Child Abuse and Neglect and Dependency Courts
National Evaluation of the Safe Kids/Safe Streets Program
Nurse Home Visitation
[[Page 71211]]
Research on Child Neglect
Safe Kids/Safe Streets: Community Approaches to Reducing Abuse and
Neglect and Preventing Delinquency
Overarching
Coalition for Juvenile Justice
This project supports the Coalition in its efforts to meet the
statutory mandates through the development of a technical assistance
capability that provides training, technical assistance, and
information to the State Juvenile Justice Advisory Groups. This will be
accomplished through a series of regional training and information
workshops and a national conference designed to address the needs of
the membership of the Coalition.
This project will be implemented by the current grantee, the
Coalition for Juvenile Justice. No additional applications will be
solicited in FY 2000.
Hamilton Fish National Institute on School and Community Violence
The Institute, with assistance from OJJDP, was founded in 1997 to
serve as a national resource to test the effectiveness of school
violence prevention methods and to develop more effective violence
prevention strategies. The Institute's goal is to determine what works
and what can be replicated to reduce violence in America's schools and
their immediate communities. The Institute works with a consortium of
seven universities whose key staff have expertise in adolescent
violence, criminology, law enforcement, substance abuse, juvenile
justice, gangs, public health, education, behavior disorders, social
skills development and prevention programs. The George Washington
University develops and tests violence prevention strategies in
collaboration with the following universities: Eastern Kentucky
University, Florida State University, Morehouse School of Medicine,
Syracuse University, University of Oregon, and University of Wisconsin-
Milwaukee.
This project will be implemented by the current grantee, George
Washington University. No additional applications will be solicited in
FY 2000.
Insular Area Support
The purpose of this statutorily required program is to provide
support to the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Funds are available to
address the special needs and problems of juvenile delinquency in these
insular areas, as specified by Section 261(e) of the JJDP Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 5665(e).
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse
A component of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service
(NCJRS), the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse (JJC) collects,
synthesizes, and disseminates information on all aspects of juvenile
justice. OJJDP established the Clearinghouse in 1979 to serve the
juvenile justice community, legislators, the media, and the public. JJC
offers toll-free telephone access to information; prepares specialized
responses to information requests; produces, warehouses, and
distributes OJJDP publications; exhibits at national conferences;
maintains a comprehensive juvenile justice library and database; and
administers several electronic information resources. NCJRS is
administered by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) under a
competitively awarded contract to Aspen Systems Corporation.
This program will be implemented by the current contractor, Aspen
Systems Corporation. No additional applications will be solicited in FY
2000.
Juvenile Justice Statistics and Systems Development Program
The Juvenile Justice Statistics and Systems Development (SSD)
Program was competitively awarded in 1990 to the National Center for
Juvenile Justice (NCJJ) to improve national, State, and local
statistics on juveniles as victims and offenders. The SSD project has
traditionally consisted of three tracks of work: National Statistics,
Dissemination, and Systems Development. In FY 2000, NCJJ will continue
many activities under the first two tracks, including maintaining an
extensive library of data files, producing Easy Access software
packages and the Web-based OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book, and
continuing to service requests for juvenile justice information. In FY
2000, additional funding from OJJDP will also enable NCJJ to enhance
activities under the Systems Development track of the project.
To meet the challenge of managing the cases of youth within their
jurisdiction effectively and efficiently, juvenile court administrators
and judges need ready access to information that will support the
operation, management, and decisionmaking of the full-service juvenile
court system. Knowledge and decisionmaking (which should be the
hallmark of every juvenile justice system) requires not just the
collection of data, but the collaboration of the community leaders who
will give meaning to the data. This is the focus of the forthcoming
book, Juvenile Justice With Eyes Open, which will be published in FY
2000 as part of the Statistics and Systems Development Project (Systems
Development Track). Also in FY 2000, NCJJ will use the principles
outlined in this publication to develop and field-test an approach that
local jurisdictions can employ to systematically identify and then
fulfill their local information needs. This includes training local
juvenile justice leaders in the rational decisionmaking model (RDM) as
a design tool for management information systems; developing data
specifications for an effective information system to meet operational,
management, and research needs; identifying data needs from collateral
service providers and data that will be of use to collaterals; and
modeling agreements and protocols with collateral service providers to
share case-level and/or aggregate data.
This project will be implemented by the current grantee, the
National Center for Juvenile Justice. No additional applications will
be solicited in FY 2000.
National Resource Center for Safe Schools
Since 1984, OJJDP and the U.S. Department of Education have
provided joint funding to promote safe schools. This work has focused
national attention on cooperative solutions to problems that disrupt
the educational process. Because an estimated 3 million incidents of
crime occur in America's schools each year, it is clear that this
problem continues to plague many schools, threatening students' safety
and undermining the learning environment. With FY 1998 funding, the
U.S. Department of Education's Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program and
OJJDP established the National Resource Center for Safe Schools under a
3-year project period. This project expanded the scope and provision of
previous training and technical assistance to communities and school
districts across the country. The grantee is working to help schools
develop and put in place comprehensive safe school plans. It does this
through onsite training and consultation to schools and communities, by
creating and distributing resource materials and tools, through Web-
based information services, and by partnering with State-level agencies
to build State capacity to assist local education agencies. Through the
inclusion on the project's Advisory Committee of representatives of
Hamilton Fish National Institute on School and Community Violence and
[[Page 71212]]
other school-related training and technical assistance providers, this
project has developed training materials and information resources
based on the latest research findings on effective programs and best
practices.
The project will continue to be implemented by the current grantee,
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. No additional applications
will be solicited in FY 2000.
National Training and Technical Assistance Center
The National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Training
and Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC) was established in FY 1995
under a competitive 3-year project period award. NTTAC serves as a
national training and technical assistance clearinghouse, inventorying
and coordinating the integrated delivery of juvenile justice training
and technical assistance resources and establishing a database of these
resources.
NTTAC's funding in FY 1996 provided services in the form of
coordinated technical assistance support for OJJDP's SafeFutures and
gang program initiatives, continued promotion of collaboration between
OJJDP training and technical assistance providers, developed training/
technical assistance materials, and completed and disseminated the
first OJJDP Training and Technical Assistance Resource Catalog.
In FY 1997, NTTAC disseminated a second, updated Training and
Technical Assistance Resource Catalog; created a Web site for the
Center and a ListServe for the Children, Youth and Affinity Group; held
three focus groups on needs assessments; and coordinated and provided
38 instances of technical assistance in conjunction with OJJDP's
training and technical assistance grantees and contractors.
In FY 1998, NTTAC finalized the jurisdictional team training and
technical assistance packages on critical needs in the juvenile justice
system, updated the resource catalog, facilitated the annual OJJDP
training and technical assistance grantee and contractor meeting,
continued to update the repository of training and technical assistance
materials and the electronic database of training and technical
assistance materials, and continued to respond to training and
technical assistance requests from the field.
In FY 1999, NTTAC was operated by OJJDP staff with the support of
the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse, providing clearinghouse services
and maintenance of the 800 number. The Fourth Grantee-Contractor
meeting was conducted by OJJDP staff in Chicago and the training and
technical protocols developed in 1998 were discussed for final issue.
These are being finalized and will be disseminated in FY 2000. A
contract was awarded to Caliber Associates to continue implementation
of the Center.
This project will be implemented by the current grantee, Caliber
Associates. No additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
OJJDP Management Evaluation Contract
This contract was competitively awarded in FY 1999 to Caliber
Associates for a period of 3 years to provide OJJDP with an expert
resource to perform independent program evaluations and assist in
implementing evaluation activities. Evaluations may be conducted on
OJJDP-funded programs and on other programs designed to prevent and
treat juvenile delinquency. The time and cost of each evaluation
depends on program complexity, availability of data, and purpose of the
evaluation. Because the purpose of many evaluations is to inform
management decisions, the completion of an evaluation and submission of
a report may be required in a specific and, often, short time period.
This program will be implemented by the current contractor, Caliber
Associates. No additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
OJJDP Technical Assistance Support Contract--Juvenile Justice Resource
Center
This contract has been competitively awarded since the mid-1980's
when OJJDP identified the need for technical assistance support in
carrying out its mission. The Juvenile Justice Resource Center (JJRC)
provides technical assistance and support to OJJDP, its grantees, and
the Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
in the areas of program development, evaluation, training, and
research. With assistance from expert consultants, JJRC coordinates the
peer review process for OJJDP grant applications and grantee reports,
conducts research and prepares reports on current juvenile justice
issues, plans meetings and conferences, and provides administrative
support to various Federal councils and boards.
This contract will be implemented by the current contractor, Aspen
Systems Corporation. No additional applications will be solicited in FY
2000.
Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency
Since 1986, this longitudinal study has addressed a variety of
issues related to juvenile violence and delinquency and has produced a
massive amount of information on the causes and correlates of
delinquent behavior. Three project sites participate: Institute of
Behavioral Science, University of Colorado at Boulder; Western
Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh; and
Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center, University at Albany, State
University of New York. These projects are designed to improve the
understanding of serious delinquency, violence, and drug use by
examining how youth develop within the context of family, school,
peers, and community. The three sites engage in both collaborative and
site-specific research. From the beginning, the three research teams
have worked together to ensure that certain core measures are identical
across the sites. This strengthens the findings from these projects by
allowing for replications of findings in individual sites and enabling
cross-site analyses.
Results from the study have been used extensively in the field of
juvenile justice and contributed significantly to the development of
OJJDP's Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic
Juvenile Offenders and other program initiatives. Over the years,
findings from the Causes and Correlates research have been presented in
a number of OJJDP Bulletins and Fact Sheets. In an effort to make these
important findings increasingly accessible to the public, OJJDP
recently added to its Web site a subpage devoted to the Program of
Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. This subpage,
under the ``Programs'' topic of the OJJDP Web site, includes
descriptions of the individual projects and a bibliography of all the
publications resulting from these projects.
In the upcoming year, the Causes and Correlates projects will
continue collaborative and site-specific analyses of the data. Topics
for upcoming reports will include defining characteristics and
predictors of very young offending, delinquency and victimization at
school, and the causes of violence in disadvantaged neighborhoods. In
addition, there are plans for a meeting to bring together all the
Federal agencies that have contributed to the Program of Research on
the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency to discuss future plans and
directions for these projects.
[[Page 71213]]
This program will be implemented by the current grantees. No
additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
Safe Futures: Partnerships To Reduce Youth Violence and Delinquency
OJJDP is awarding grants of up to $1.4 million annually to each of
six communities for a 5-year project period that began in FY 1995, to
assist in implementing comprehensive community programs designed to
reduce youth violence and delinquency. Boston, MA; Contra Costa County,
CA; Fort Belknap, MT (tribal site); Imperial County, CA (rural site);
St. Louis, MO; and Seattle, WA, were competitively selected to receive
awards under the SafeFutures program on the basis of their substantial
planning and progress in community assessment and strategic planning to
address delinquency.
SafeFutures seeks to prevent and control youth crime and
victimization through the creation of a continuum of care in
communities. This continuum enables communities to be responsive to the
needs of youth at critical stages of their development by providing an
appropriate range of prevention, intervention, treatment, and sanctions
programs.
Each of the six sites will continue to provide a set of services
that builds on community strengths and existing services and fills in
gaps within their existing continuum. These services include family
strengthening; after school activities; mentoring; treatment
alternatives for juvenile female offenders; mental health services; day
treatment; graduated sanctions for serious, violent, and chronic
juvenile offenders; and gang prevention, intervention, and suppression.
During the fourth year of the project, specific attention will be given
to care coordination and program sustainability.
A national evaluation is being conducted by the Urban Institute to
determine the success of the initiative and track lessons learned at
each of the six sites. OJJDP has also committed a cadre of training and
technical assistance (TTA) resources to SafeFutures through a full-time
TTA coordinator for SafeFutures and a host of partner organizations
committed to assisting SafeFutures sites.
SafeFutures activities will be carried out by the six current
grantees. No additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
Technical Assistance for State Legislatures
Since FY 1995, OJJDP has awarded annual grants to the National
Conference of State Legislatures to provide relevant, timely
information on comprehensive approaches in juvenile justice to aid
State legislators in improving State juvenile justice systems. Nearly
every State has enacted, or is considering, statutory changes affecting
the juvenile justice system. This project has helped policymakers
understand the ramifications and nuances of juvenile justice reform.
The grant has improved capacity for the delivery of information
services to legislatures. The project also supports increased
communication between State legislators and State and local leaders who
influence decisionmaking regarding juvenile justice issues.
The project will be implemented by the current grantee, the
National Conference on State Legislatures. No additional applications
will be solicited in FY 2000.
Telecommunications Assistance
OJJDP uses information technology and distance training to
facilitate access to information and training for juvenile justice
professionals. This cost-effective medium enhances OJJDP's ability to
share with the field salient elements of the most effective or
promising approaches to various juvenile justice issues. In FY 1995,
OJJDP awarded a competitive grant to Eastern Kentucky University (EKU)
to produce live satellite teleconferences. To date, EKU has produced 21
telecasts. In FY 1999, OJJDP continued the cooperative agreement with
EKU to provide program support and technical assistance for a variety
of information technologies and to explore linkages with key
constituent groups to advance mutual information goals and objectives.
During the past year, EKU has experimented with cybercasting ``live''
satellite videoconferences on the Internet.
This project will be implemented by the current grantee, Eastern
Kentucky University. No additional applications will be solicited in FY
2000.
Texas Juvenile Crime Prevention Center at Prairie View A&M University--
Enhancing Personal Training and Understanding Minority
Overrepresentation in the Juvenile Justice System
This 3-year project was initially funded in FY 1998. The purpose of
the program was to create the Texas Juvenile Crime Prevention Center at
Prairie View A&M University (the Center) and to have the Center
undertake three initial tasks. These tasks included the development of
a master's degree in Forensic Psychology, the development of a training
institute for the coordinators of 13 community youth development
projects, and a study to investigate the factors contributing to the
disproportionate representation of minority youth in the Texas juvenile
justice system.
The master's degree in Forensic Psychology includes a minimum of 30
semester hours, exclusive of thesis. The development of the curriculum
and an instrument to test its effectiveness will occur in the first 2
years of the grant. The courses for the master's degree will be taught
in the second and third years with the testing of the effectiveness of
the curriculum being completed by the end of the third year. The
objectives of this curriculum development are to increase the
understanding, knowledge, and skills of in-service professionals
regarding juvenile behaviors; to increase the number of qualified
professionals working with juvenile offenders; and to decrease the
number of juveniles who become repeat offenders.
The training institute at Prairie View A&M University (PVAMU) will
focus training on the coordinators of the Texas Department of
Protective and Regulatory Services Community Youth Development Project.
The 12 counties in Texas with the highest number of juvenile arrests
were selected to design comprehensive approaches to support families
and enhance the positive development of youth. PVAMU is offering the
project coordinators program management and evaluation skills courses.
Each year for 3 years an intensive 2-week course will be offered to the
coordinators on managing and monitoring service delivery and basic
research and evaluation skills development.
Funding in FY 2000 will allow PVAMU to implement and test the
curriculum that has been developed in the first 2 years, hold a third
2-week seminar that develops skills in managing and monitoring services
and basic research and evaluation skills of the youth development
coordinators, and continue support for the study of the
overrepresentation of minorities in the Waller County Juvenile Court.
The project will be implemented by the current grantee, the Texas
Juvenile Crime Prevention Center at Prairie View A&M University. No
additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
[[Page 71214]]
Training and Technical Assistance Coordination for the SafeFutures and
Safe Kids/Safe Streets Initiatives
OJJDP will continue funding for long-term training and technical
assistance to the SafeFutures and Safe Kids/Safe Streets initiatives.
This coordination effort builds local capacity for implementing and
sustaining effective continuum-of-care and systems chance approaches in
six SafeFutures and five Safe Kids/Safe Streets sites. Project
activities include assessment, identification, and coordination of the
implementation of training and technical assistance needs at each of
the sites and the administration of cross-site training.
This program will be implemented by the current grantee, Patricia
Donahue. No additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
Public Safety and Law Enforcement
Child Development-Community-Oriented Policing (CD-CP)
The Child Development-Community-Oriented Policing (CD-CP) program
is an innovative partnership between the New Haven Department of Police
Services and the Child Study Center at the Yale University School of
Medicine that addresses the psychological burdens on children,
families, and the broader community as children witness increasing
levels of community violence. In FY 1993, OJJDP provided support to
document Yale-New Haven's child-centered, community-oriented policing
model. The model consists of interrelated training of police officers,
consultation, and teaming mental health clinicians with law enforcement
in intervening onsite with children and families who witness violence.
OJJDP, with first-year support from the Office of Justice Programs'
Bureau of Justice Assistance, funded a 3-year replication of the model
in Buffalo, NY; Charlotte, NC; Nashville, TN; and Portland, OR. Other
OJP components joined OJJDP in funding an expansion of CD-CP in FY
1998. This expansion moved the project into school-based activities and
the area of addressing exposure to violence in domestic settings and
will continue to do so in FY 2000.
This project will be continued by the current grantee, the Yale
University School of Medicine, in collaboration with the New Haven
Department of Police Services. No additional applications will be
solicited in FY 2000.
Education on Gun Violence and Safety
OJJDP will continue partnering with the Bureau of Justice
Assistance to support Education on Gun Violence and Safety. This
project seeks to educate gunowners and parents about how to safely use
and store guns and how to protect children from gun violence. Through a
coordinated communications, education, grassroots, and media campaign,
the project will reach gunowners and other caring adults with important
information on preventing youth's illegal access to and unlawful use of
guns. In FY 2000, based upon critical communications research with
gunowners, the communications campaign will disseminate appropriate
educational materials.
The program will be implemented by the current grantee, the
National Crime Prevention Council and the Ad Council. No additional
applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
Evaluation of the Comprehensive Community-Wide Approach to Gang
Prevention, Intervention, and Suppression Program
OJJDP will continue funding this evaluation in FY 2000. Under a
competitive cooperative agreement awarded in FY 1995, the evaluation
grantee assisted the five program sites (Bloomington, IL; Mesa, AZ;
Riverside, CA; San Antonio, TX; and Tucson, AZ) in establishing
realistic and measurable objectives, documenting program
implementation, and measuring the impact of this comprehensive
approach. It has also provided interim feedback to the program
implementors and trained the local site interviewers. The grantee will
continue to gather and analyze data required to evaluate the program,
monitor and oversee the quality control of data, provide assistance for
completion of interviews, and provide ongoing feedback to project
sites.
This project will be implemented by the current grantee, the
University of Chicago, School of Social Service Administration. No
additional applications will be solicited in FY 2000.
Evaluation of the Partnerships To Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence Program
This project began with a competitive award in FY 1997 to document
and evaluate the process of community mobilization, planning, and
collaboration needed to develop a comprehensive, collaborative approach
to reducing gun violence involving juveniles. The Partnerships to
Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence Program is being implemented in three
sites: Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Oakland, California; and Syracuse, New
York. The grantee, COSMOS Corporation, will complete data collection
for the impact portion of this evaluation and submit a final report in
the next year. In addition to working with the three Partnership sites,
COSMOS Corporation completed work in FY 1998 on the Promising
Strategies To Reduce Gun Violence Report. COSMOS will develop a
training and technical assistance protocol based on its experience with
the Partnership sites and the gun violence report. This training and
technical assistance package will be used with additional communities
across the country that are focused on reducing gun violence through a
collaborative planning process.
This evaluation and training development will be implemented by the
current grantee, COSMOS Corporation. No additional applications will be
solicited in FY 2000.
Evaluation of the Rural Gang Initiative
This initiative is a continuation of ongoing efforts to test
OJJDP's Comprehensive Gang Model. In FY 1999, four rural sites began
conducting comprehensive assessments of their local gang problem and
engaging in program design to implement the Comprehensive Gang Model.
These sites are Elk City, OK; Glenn County, CA; Mt. Vernon, IL; and
Longview, WA. The National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD) is
conducting case studies to document and analyze the 1-year community
assessment and program planning efforts in the four sites. These case
studies will contribute to the development of a model approach to
assessment of community gang problems in rural areas. NCCD will also be
developing an outcome evaluation design for sites that are funded to
implement the model in subsequent years. FY 2000 funding will support
the first year of the outcome evaluation.
This program will be implemented by the current grantee, the
National Council on Crime and Delinquency. No additional applications
will be solicited in FY 2000.
Evaluation of the Transfer of Responsibility for Child Protective
Investigations to Law Enforcement Agencies
In response to concerns about the increasing demands on public
child welfare agencies, the safety of children, and the effectiveness
of law enforcement and social service agencies to deliver critical
services, the State of Florida has passed legislation that allows for
the transfer of the entire responsibility for child protective
investigations to a law enforcement agency. Currently, three counties
in Florida are in various stages of
[[Page 71215]]
implementing this transfer of responsibility. This project will compare
the outcomes in the three counties where responsibility is being
transferred to the Sheriff's Office with three comparison counties in
the State of Florida. The project will primarily be concerned with
whether children are safer, whether perpetrators of severe child abuse
are more likely to face criminal sanctions, and whether there are
impacts on other parts of the child welfare system. Also, a thorough
process evaluation will be conducted to describe and compare the
implementation process across the three counties.
This project will be conducted by the School of Social Work at the
University of Pennsylvania. No additional applications will be
solicited in FY 2000.
Gang Prevention Through Targeted Outreach (Boys & Girls Clubs)
The purpose of this program is to enable local Boys & Girls Clubs
to prevent youth from entering gangs, intervene with gang members in
the early stages of gang involvement, and divert youth from gang
activities into more constructive programs. This program reflects the
ongoing collaboration between OJJDP and the Boys & Girls Clubs to
reduce problems of juvenile delinquency and violence. The Boys & Girls
Clubs of America provides training and technical assistance to local
gang prevention and intervention sites, including some at SafeFutures
and OJJDP Comprehensive Gang sites, and other clubs and organizations
through regional trainings and national conferences. In FY 1999, the
Boys & Girls Clubs added as many as 30 new gang prevention sites, 5 new
gang intervention sites, and at least 2 ``Targeted Reintegration''
sites where clubs work to provide services to youth returning to the
community from juvenile correctional facilities to prevent them from
returning to gangs and violence. The Boys & Girls Clubs of America will
also hold a Delinquency and Gang Prevention Symposium in March 2000. A
national evaluation of this program is being implemented by Public/
Private Ventures.
This program will be implemented by the current grantee, the Boys &
Girls Clubs of America. No additional applications will be solicited in
FY 2000.
Juvenile Justice Law Enforcement Training and Technical Assistance
Program
Over the past decade, alarming reports of youth violence have
appeared with increasing frequency in publications and the news media.
Law enforcement agencies across the Nation are responding to this sense
of national emergency by changing many of their policies and practices
to cope with juvenile crime and victimization.
The Juvenile Justice Law Enforcement Training and Technical
Assistance Program examines adolescent violence in the United States
both as a social phenomenon and a policy issue. The program covers the
range of youth violence issues from crime statistics to new
legislation. The program also sets forth comprehensive analysis of key
areas of youth violence policy and practice: youth firearm possession
and use, school violence and safety, youth-oriented community policing,
gang and drug involvement, serious habitual offenders,
multidisciplinary communitywide youth violence reduction strategies,
police management of youth programs, tribal juvenile crime, and Chief
Executive Officer responses to delinquency and violence.
Throughout the program, the core issues of youth violence are
examined through an appropriate set of responses to youth violence that
are consistent with effective police practice and a positive future for
America's youth. In addition, key leaders from law enforcement,
prosecution services, the courts, corrections, probation, and other
juvenile justice agencies are offered information, materials, solutions
to management issues, and technical assistance in the prevention and
control of youth crime.
FY 1998 and 1999 funds supported the continuation of eight State,
local, and tribal program workshops: The Chief Executive Officer Youth
Violence Forum (CEO Forum); Managing Juvenile Operations (MJO); Gang,
Gun, and Drug Policy; School Administrators for Effective Operations
Leading to Improved Children and Youth Services (SAFE POLICY); Youth-
Oriented Community Policing; Tribal Justice Training and Technical
Assistance; the Serious Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Program
(SHOCAP); and the Youth Violence Reduction Comprehensive Action
Program.
This program will be implemented by the current grantee, the
International Association of Chiefs of Police under a cooperative
agreement with OJJDP. No additional applications will be solicited in
FY 2000.
National Youth Gang Center
The proliferation of gang problems over the past two decades led
OJJDP to develop a comprehensive, coordinated response to America's
gang problem. This response involved five program components, one of
which was implementation and operation of the National Youth Gang
Center (NYGC). Competitively funded with FY 1994 funds to expand and
maintain the body of critical knowledge about youth gangs and effective
responses to them, NYGC provides support services to the National Youth
Gang Consortium, composed of Federal agencies with responsibilities in
this area. NYGC is also providing technical assistance for the Rural
Gang Initiative planning and assessment phase. OJJDP will extend the
NYGC project an additional year and provide FY 2000 funds to NYGC to
(1) conduct more indepth analyses of the National Youth Gang Survey
results that track changes in gang membership and gang-related crime,
(2) produce timely information on the nature and scope of the youth
gang problem, and (3) continue efforts to foster integration of gang-
related items into other relevant surveys and national data collection
efforts.
This program will be implemented by the current grantee, the
Institute for Intergovernmental Research. No additional applications
will be solicited in FY 2000.
Partnerships To Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence
OJJDP will award continuation grants to each of three competitively
selected communities that initially received funds in FY 1997 to
increase the effectiveness of existing youth gun violence reduction
strategies by enhancing and coordinating prevention, intervention, and
suppression strategies and strengthening linkages among community
residents, law enforcement, and the juvenile justice system. Baton
Rouge, LA; Oakland, CA; and Syracuse, NY, were selected to receive 3-
year awards. The goals of this initiative are to reduce juveniles'
illegal access to guns and address the reasons they carry and use guns
in violent exchanges. A national evaluation currently under way will
document the process of community mobilization, planning, and
collaboration needed to develop a comprehensive, collaborative approach
to reducing juvenile gun violence.
The Partnerships To Reduce Juvenile Gun Violence program will be
carried out by the three current grantees, Baton Rouge, LA; Oakland,
CA; and Syracuse, NY. No additional applications will be solicited in
FY 2000.
[[Page 71216]]
Rural Gang Initiative Demonstration Sites
In FY 1999, OJJDP supported four rural communities (Elk City, OK;
Glenn County, CA; Longview, WA; and Mount Vernon, IL) to conduct a
comprehensive assessment of the local youth gang problem in these
communities. Each site has collected relevant data from multiple
sources, including police, schools, courts, and community residents,
and has gathered various types of data, including gang crime data, data
on the presence of risk factors for gang membership, community
demographics, and community surveys and focus groups. Once data
collection is complete, the communities will use these data in a
comprehensive program planning process to adapt and implement the OJJDP
Comprehensive Gang Model. In FY 2000, OJJDP will support these
communities in the implementation of the OJJDP Comprehensive Gang
Model. An independent evaluation of this effort will also be conducted,
along with technical assistance through the National Youth Gang Center.
This initiative will be implemented by the four current grantees:
Elk City, OK; Glenn County, CA; Longview, WA; and Mount Vernon, IL. No
additional applications will be solicited for this initiative in FY
2000.
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.