By Jenny Collier, Chris Scott, and Marcy Mistrett

Yesterday, President Obama took a step toward improves access to quality education for young people involved in and returning from the juvenile justice system by signing the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) into law, a bill that reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). 

Established in 1965 as part of the war on poverty ESEA has provided services to schools, communities, and neglected and  low-income children over the decades.  Title 1, aimed at improving outcomes for disadvantaged children as well as the primary source of federal funding for schools and districts, has been the cornerstone of the Act. Title 1, Part D was established to provide prevention and intervention programs for children and youth who are neglected, delinquent or at risk of dropping out of school.  Part D was created in part to help ensure that the educational needs of youth who come in contact with the law are addressed, since these young people often are behind in school, have higher rates of learning differences from the general population, and can fall behind in their education during periods of detention and reentry. To help address these educational needs, Title 1, part D provides funding for state agencies and districts to assist in the educational transition of students from correctional systems back to their home communities to help ensure that they get access to the same quality education as provided in the local community.

New provisions in the Every Student Succeeds Law will help improve the success of youth involved in the juvenile justice system and strengthen their reentry outcomes by providing increased access to education and supports upon reentry. Under the reauthorized and improved law, states receiving Title 1, Part D funding for prevention and intervention programs for children and youth who are neglected, delinquent or at risk, must promote:

1. Smoother education transitions for youth entering juvenile justice facilities, including records transfer, better planning and coordination of education between facilities and local education agencies, and educational assessment upon entry into a correctional facility, when practicable;

2.  Stronger reentry supports for youth returning to the community, including requiring education planning, credit transfer, and timely re-enrollment in appropriate educational placements for youth transitioning between correctional facilities and local educational agencies and programs, and requiring correctional facilities receiving funds under the law to coordinate educational services with local educational agencies so as to minimize education disruption;

3. Opportunities for youth to earn credits in secondary, postsecondary, or career/technical programming, and requiring transfer of secondary credits to the home school district upon reentry;

4. Prioritizing achievement of a regular high school diploma not just a GED;

5. Supportive services for youth who have had contact with both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

These critical provisions fill significant gaps in the existing education law that will complement pending reentry and education reforms and provisions in the proposed Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) reauthorization bill; hopefully the next bill to get passed that supports justice involved youth.

Jenny Collier is Project Director of the Robert F. Kennedy Juvenile Justice Collaborative, a joint youth reentry policy project of Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights and Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps.

Chris Scott is a senior policy analyst at the Open Society Foundation, where he advocates for criminal, civil and racial justice.

By Brian Evans, CFYJ State Campaign Coordinator

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is the most widely adopted human rights treaty in the world. With the accessions earlier this year of Somalia and war-torn South Sudan, every single nation on earth has ratified it except for one – the United States.  

The U.S. notoriously lags behind much of the industrialized world when it comes to engaging with the United Nations and signing on to human rights instruments (the Convention to End Discrimination Against Women – CEDAW – is another example, as is the U.S. Senate’s recent rejection of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities). But when it comes to the CRC, the U.S. literally stands alone. Why is that?

To be ratified in the United States, an international treaty requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate, and a strong opposition, citing concerns about usurpation of U.S. sovereignty and undermining of parental rights, has thus far prevented the CRC from passing. Opponents of the CRC also claim to fear a spike in lawsuits asking for the government to financially support the social and economic rights established by the treaty.

These arguments do not hold up to serious scrutiny. Acceding to the CRC will not put our children, or the U.S. government, under the thumb of international forces beyond our control. But it could serve as a helpful guide for advocates and policy-makers seeking fair and more equitable treatment of our children. For example, on the question of youth in the adult criminal justice system the CRC says that “every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults.” There is no good reason for the U.S. not to strive to meet this standard.

Many U.S. social justice movements have begun to leverage international human rights mechanisms to enhance their efforts; and pushing the U.S. to finally ratify the CRC would be an important step forward.  However, the movement to get children out of the adult system hasn’t been waiting for that ratification; as advocates and state legislatures in 30 states have shown, removing children from the adult criminal justice system is smart policy—to provide youth with a second chance and the tools necessary to succeed, and in keeping communities safe. 

In Spring 2014, the U.N. Human Rights Committee reviewed U.S. compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a core human rights treaty the U.S. ratified in 1992. In its review, the U.S. was called on to: “…ensure that juveniles are separated from adults during pretrial detention and after sentencing, and that juveniles are not transferred to adult courts.”

The UN Human Rights Committee also added, in a direct reference to the (at the time) 10 U.S. states that had still not “raised the age” of adult court jurisdiction to 18, that the U.S.: “…should encourage states that automatically exclude 16 and 17 year olds from juvenile court jurisdictions to change their laws.”

In short, sending kids to the adult criminal justice system is already recognized as a violation of their human rights.Today, December 10 – International Human Rights Day – is a good day to remember that to meet human rights standards it has pledged to uphold, the United States (and the state governments therein) must end the jailing of children with adults, and the transfer of children to adult court

As I reflect on the upcoming holidays, I am struck by how much gratitude is shared among juvenile justice reformers.

• For the young people who courageously and repeatedly share their very personal stories in public—on paper, in the news, through blogs, in tweets, on panels and through imagery and artwork.  Your truth—often raw and trauma filled-- and yet, always hopeful about the possibility that tomorrow might be different.  Grateful that you have courage that most adults would never have nor be expected to share; you are changing the dialogue.
• For the legislators who say “we are better than this”—and who make bold policy step--whether that is raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction to 21; calling for the end of solitary confinement for our young people; or committing to end the racial disparities that are so pervasive in our ‘just-us’ systems. Thank you; doing what’s right is often more important than what is possible.
• To the family members who show up. Again and again. To labor through another legislative session; another promise for bipartisan reform; another year of trying to make children a legislative priority. While their own children sit, behind bars, far away from family support, hugs, and holidays. Grateful that you keep fighting when we know how tired you must be.
• To the system administrators, and judges, and law enforcement who stand against the tide and remind us that these are OUR children.  For not taking away family visits as punishment; for pushing to close facilities knowing children need to be raised in families and communities; for citing “love” as a policy goal; for a willingness to turn over power; for acknowledging that harm is being done, we give you thanks. 
• To the philanthropists who take risks, fund innovation, push for documentation and research. Who fund the unpopular and risky; that invest in tomorrow with dollars today. Who use their platforms to call for the closure of youth prisons; or transformative justice; or ending the practice of criminalizing children. We are grateful that you fill gaps; shout loudly; study, educate, and learn.
• To the advocates—who never rest, who are often unsung heroes, behind the scenes tinkering. Who fight boldly and strategically to make the world better for our children and communities. Who think outside the box, who build from the community up and educate from policymakers down.  Who turn one dollar into fifty; and who achieve the “unbelievable.”  We are grateful for your impatience, unwillingness to compromise for children, for tolling the moral line, and reminding us all that these children are OUR future.

Honored to work among you—in this short year alone, on the one issue of removing youth from the adult criminal justice system you have introduced more than 20 bills, changed 7 state laws, educated hundreds of policymakers, moved the national dialogue, championed 13 bipartisan supporters on a federal bill, changed thousands of youth lives, made a difference. #Gratitude.

Marcy Mistrett
CEO
Campaign for Youth Justice

The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center has just released Reducing Recidivism and Improving Other Outcomes for Young Adults in the Juvenile and Adult Criminal Justice Systems, an issue brief designed to help state and local officials better support young adults in the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems. Research has shown that young adults ages 18 to 24 stand out as a distinct developmental group with heightened impulsive behavior, risk taking, and poor decision making; and many young adults are disconnected from school and work. These factors increase the odds that a young adult might come into contact with the justice system. Of course, the majority of young adults are not involved in any criminal activity, and those young adults who have committed a crime most often have committed a minor offense. Still, young adults drive a disproportionately large share of criminal justice activity and therefore should be an important focus of juvenile and adult justice systems alike. 

This issue brief describes young adults’ distinct needs and summaries the limited research available on what works to address these needs. In addition, recommendations are provided for steps that policymakers, juvenile and adult criminal justice agency leaders, researchers, and the field can take to improve outcomes for these young people. For more information about the brief or the CSG Justice Center’s work on young adults, please contact Emily Morgan at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

CFYJ released a new report today, Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA’s Youthful Inmate Standard. This report explores how states house youth under 18 in prisons in the new age of PREA compliance and enforcement. Furthermore, this report highlights national trends in juvenile arrests, crimes, and incarceration of children in the adult system.

The United States’ extraordinary use of adult correctional facilities to house youth presents numerous concerns, including serious, long-term costs to the youth offender and to society at large. Science and research conducted over the last 20 years confirm what common sense tells us: kids are different. Adolescent development and adolescent brain research have prompted leaders across the country to start looking at our juvenile justice system through a developmentally appropriate lens.1 Such a perspective equally applies to the treatment of youth who would be eligible for adult prison sentences. In light of the decline of youth arrests and youth crime, coupled with the requirements of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) the housing status of the 1200 youth under 18 years of age in the adult prison must be investigated. Each state has its own unique prison system, so in order to determine the housing status of youth we gathered information on each state’s statutes, policies, and practices for housing the shrinking — and at times — invisible, population of youth in adult prisons across the country.

Despite the strong language provided in the Prison Rape Elimination Act, state laws vary widely as to the regulations and parameters for housing youth in adult prisons. In fact, some states have no regulations or parameters governing the treatment of youth sentenced as adults at all. While some states have fully removed youth from their prison systems — Hawaii, West Virginia, Maine, California, and Washington — the overwhelming majority of states allow youth to be housed in adult prisons. In fact 37 states housed youth under 18 years of age in their state prisons in 2012. The PREA requirements have become the emerging standard of care for the housing of youth in adult facilities, yet the majority of states still permit the housing of youth in adult facilities, often times with no special housing protections. Once youth are sentenced in adult court to an adult prison term, few jurisdictions have enacted safeguards to protect their physical, mental and emotional health. Additionally, programs and behavioral responses in adult facilities rarely are adjusted to meet the needs of adolescent populations.

Link To Full Report
Link To Executive Summary

Also please help us spewad the word on social media:

Twitter:

-        CFYJ’s latest report explores how states house youth in prisons in the new age of PREA compliance and enforcement http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        CFYJ launches a new report: “Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA’s Youthful Inmate Standard” http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        Despite PREA regulations, the majority of states still permit the housing of youth in adult facilities, highlights CFYJ’s new report http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        According to CFYJ’s latest report, the number of youth incarcerated in the adult prison system has decreased 70% since 2000 http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        CFYJ’s new report finds that youth of color are placed in adult facilities at much higher rates than their white peers http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        Youth housed in adult prisons face higher risks for sexual abuse, physical force or threat of force, says CFYJ’s latest report http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        CFYJ’s new report once again exposes the consequences of sending youth to adult prison: recidivism, abuse and suicide http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        Florida is the state with the highest population of juveniles in prison, according to CFYJ’s latest report http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        Youth in adult prisons recidivate 34% more often than youth in the juvenile system, reminds CFYJ’s new report http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        CFYJ’s latest report once again shows that youth in the adult system commit suicide at greater rates http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

Facebook:

-        CFYJ just released a brand new report, “Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA’s Youthful Inmate Standard”, which explores how states house youth under 18 in prisons in the new age of PREA compliance and enforcement. The report highlights that despite the official implementation of PREA, the majority of states still permit the housing of youth in adult facilities and/or refuse to comply. Youth housed in adult prison face greater risk of physical abuse and suicide than youth in juvenile facilities. http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

-        CFYJ’s latest report, “Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA’s Youthful Inmate Standard”, once again shows the disastrous consequences of incarcerating youth in adult facilities. Youth in adult prisons recidivate 34% more often than youth in the juvenile system. Youth of color are the first targets of this system and are much more likely to be placed in adult facilities than their white peers. http://bit.ly/1MX7BHF

Written by Nils Franco, CFYJ Intern

A new study calls for preventive approaches on youth crime after examining mortality rates for youth offenders. The study finds that long-term early mortality rates are highest among youth in the adult criminal justice system.

The article, published Thursday in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, examines mortality under the scope of various socioeconomic factors and the severity of justice-system involvement – for instance, whether the youth was tried as an adult or simply arrested.

The study is the largest-scale effort to examine the link between the severity of involvement and youth offender mortality rates. Across race and gender, youth at each higher level of involvement have a greater mortality rate in the time span studied.

To obtain these findings, the study’s authors tracked the records of almost 50,000 youth offenders (that is, people arrested under the age of 18) in Marion County, Indiana, over the course of more than a decade. Of the sample of youth offenders, 518 died during the study period. The most common causes of death for these deceased – homicide, suicide, and overdose – are indicative of troubles that haunt young offenders into adulthood.
 

The authors broke up their sample into four groups: youth who were only arrested, youth detained pre-trial but never incarcerated, youth incarcerated in the juvenile system, and youth transferred to the adult system. Overall, these young offenders’ mortality rates measured 48% higher than the rates of the general community over the study period.

With each increment in justice-system involvement, mortality rates increased: mortality rates for youth detained pre-trial measured 83% higher than arrested youth, incarcerated youth mortality measured 140% higher than arrested youth mortality, and transferred youth mortality rates measured 247% higher than the rates of arrested youth.

The study corroborates another disturbing trend in racial disparity: black youth represent 47% of Marion County’s youth arrests, though only 28% of the county is black. That disparity grows at each level of involvement, from 47% in arrests, to 52% in pre-trial detention, to 58% in juvenile prison, to 68% in transfers to the adult court. Notably, adult-system involvement represents the greatest jump in the gap between black youth and white youth.

The limited data prevents the study’s authors from drawing conclusions about the role of the justice system’s treatment of youth in these outcomes, but the authors still call for more evidenced-based practices to lower crime and improve violence prevention services for youth in detention centers. Past studies have suggested a causative link between sentencing youth to adult prison and future criminal behavior.

LINK- http://goo.gl/forms/wUFplr1A7C

The Campaign for Youth Justice (CFYJ) is happy to partner with the Elite Group of Rebels for the District 13 Scavenger Hunt!

Thank you for visiting us. 

A little about us... research—and common sense—tell us that kids are different than adults. They aren't permitted to vote, drive a car, get drafted, buy alcohol and more because society has deemed them too young to handle these incredible responsibilities. Despite these facts, the U.S. continues to be a global outlier by treating our kids like adults in the criminal justice system. In 23 states, kids as young as age 7 are allowed to be prosecuted as adults.

That’s why CFYJ believes that kids should be treated like kids who are worth more than their worst decision, and that holding them accountable means we do so in developmentally appropriate ways. 

Witten by Sheryl Dublin, American University Law Student, CFYJ Intern

Today, the Governor of Connecticut issued a press release on criminal justice reform in which he urged the legislature to consider raising the age of being tried as adult to 21. Raisng the age of juvenile justice jursdiction through to the age of 20 instead of 17 is a poineering effort, however, it does have credible roots in research based evicence on youth development. 

Marcy Mistrett, CEO of The Campaign for Youth Justice touches upon the importance of age appropriate sentencing.

"Making decisions informed by brain research, evidence- based practice, local data and what is in the best interest of kids and the community is smart public policy. We applaud the Governor for treating kids like kids, " said Mistrett. "Governor Malloy’s statement today on criminal justice reform continues to build momentum on the great progress already underway in Connecticut. 

The following is direct from the press release:

Governor Dannel P. Malloy presented some first-in-the-nation ideas regarding criminal justice today at a Connecticut Law Review symposium held at the UConn School of Law in Hartford.  While Connecticut has become a national leader in its criminal justice efforts, the Governor introduced several ideas to deliver further progress, including raising the age of the juvenile justice system's jurisdiction through age 20 instead of age 17, as well as allowing low-risk young adults aged 21 through 25 to have their cases heard confidentially, their records sealed, and the opportunity to have those records expunged.  He also discussed exploring bail bond reform.

Find the complete press release transcipt here. 

The Council of State Governments Justice Center released a report analyzing data collected from a nationwide survey of state juvenile correctional agencies. The following is the introduction to their report.

Policymakers across the political spectrum agree: all young people should have access to a high-quality public education. Within the past two decades, particular emphasis has been placed on ensuring that students receive instruction that prepares them for college and careers, and that schools are held accountable for realizing these goals.

There is perhaps no subset of young people whose need for a quality education is more acute—and whose situation makes them especially challenging to serve—than incarcerated youth. Of the more than 60,000 youth who are incarcerated on any given day in the United States, nearly 36,000 are committed to state custody,* two-thirds of whom are youth of color. The majority of these youth are over-age and under-credited,† several grade levels behind their peers, more likely to have a disability than their peers,2 and have been suspended multiple times and/or expelled from their local schools.3

In 1997, the majority of incarcerated youth were housed in state-run facilities; as of 2013, almost two-thirds of incarcerated youth were held in privately or locally run facilities. [See Figure 1] In most states, an array of state and local agencies and nonprofit and private organizations are responsible for overseeing and delivering educational and vocational services to incarcerated youth. As the proportion of youth incarcerated in privately or locally run facilities has grown, this has evolved into an increasingly complicated patchwork of government and nongovernment agencies. This shift means that any combination of state, local, nonprofit, and private entities now manage educational and vocational services for incarcerated youth. 

Read the full report here!