In a 2013 publication by the National Research Council (NCR), - PDF document

BRIEF Merging Care with Control Brief I: March 2015 Why Engage Juvenile Justice in System of Care The Issue Adolescence is a period of developmental transition, characterized by changes in family, school, peers, self-concept, and general physical development (Bergman & Scott, 2001). Although most youth successfully Erin M. Espinosa, PhD navigate this developmental period, incidents of rule breaking and behavioral problems are common and can result in involvement with law Tegan Henke, MS, LMFT enforcement. Further, youth with untreated or undiagnosed mental Texas Institute for Excellence in health needs may engage in behaviors that are viewed as delinquency. It Mental Health has become common knowledge that youth with mental health needs are Center for Social Work Research disproportionately represented within the juvenile justice system. The University of Texas at Austin Consequently, private foundations, federal agencies and state and local stakeholders have joined together to address juvenile justice and mental health reform. At the forefront of recent juvenile justice reform efforts Jill Farrell, PhD are the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Denise Sulzbach, JD Models for Change. Recognizing the unique challenges presented by The Institute for Innovation and youth with mental health needs involved with or at risk of involvement in Implementation the juvenile justice system, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur School of Social Work Foundation extended their Models for Change efforts by creating the Mental Health and Juvenile Justice Action Network coordinated by the University of Maryland National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice (NCMHJJ). The Action Network initially targeted four states (Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Washington) and eventually expanded to include four additional states (Colorado, Connecticut, Ohio, and Texas), all focusing on efforts to address both policies and practices for mental health and juvenile justice reform. This collaboration resulted in the development of the Mental Health and Juvenile Justice Collaborative for Change. The Collaborative for Change is a resource center coordinated by NCMHJJ to share information on mental health reforms and to provide guidance for effectively implementing those reforms in communities and states throughout the country (for more information go to cfc.ncmhjj.com). This document was prepared for the Technical Assistance Network for Children’s Behavioral Health under contract with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Contract [Type text] #HHSS280201300002C. However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.

2 | M e r g i n g C a r e w i t h C o n t r o l B r i e f I : W h y E n g a g e J u v e n i l e J u s t i c e i n S y s t e m o f C a r e In a 2013 publication by the National Research Council (NCR), Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach, national experts assessed recent research and initiatives in juvenile justice and endorsed a framework of reform based on a scientific understanding of adolescent development. Upon publication, the administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) requested a follow-up study to develop an implementation plan for OJJDP. With support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, an expedited study resulted in the publication of Implementing Juvenile Justice Reform: The Federal Role (NCR, 2014). Grounded in knowledge about adolescent development, the plan sets forth seven hallmarks of a developmental approach to juvenile justice reform: 1. Accountability without criminalization; 2. Alternatives to justice system involvement; 3. Individualized response based on assessment of needs and risks; 4. Confinement only when necessary for public safety; 5. A genuine commitment to fairness; 6. Sensitivity to disparate treatment; and 7. Family engagement. While the plan was designed to provide specific guidance to OJJDP regarding the steps that it should take, both internally and externally, to facilitate juvenile justice reform, it is also valuable in designing and implementing juvenile justice reform in states, localities and tribal communities. Further, this developmental approach to juvenile reform aligns with system of care values and principles and is instructive when integrating such efforts within system of care planning and implementation. To further facilitate juvenile justice and mental health reform, a three-part policy series titled Integrating Juvenile Justice with System of Care: Merging Care with Control examines the following topics: (1) the importance of engaging the juvenile justice system in a system of care; (2) how to integrate juvenile justice into a system of care; and (3) financing strategies to sustain successful juvenile justice integration into a system of care. This brief, Why Engage Juvenile Justice in a System of Care, is the first in the series and explores specific reasons why integrating juvenile justice in a system of care is essential and necessary. Background Although prevalence rates differ depending on which point in the juvenile justice system the study was conducted (i.e., intake, detention, probation, or incarceration), most estimates of prevalence range from 50% to 75%, with approximately 20% to 25% of youth having a serious emotional disorder (Cocozza & Skowyra, 2000; Colins et al., 2010; Kazdin, 2000; Shufelt & Cocozza, 2006; Teplin et al., 2002). When compared to general population estimates of between 9% and 20% of youth indicating a mental health need (Cocozza & Skowyra, 2000; Hubner & Wolfson, 2000; Skowyra & Cocozza, 20076), it is clear that youth experiencing mental health challenges are disproportionately represented within the juvenile justice system. Furthermore, youth involved with the juvenile justice system often have not one, but several comorbid psychiatric disorders. In an examination of youth processed through intake in six urban probation departments, Wasserman et al. (2005) found the prevalence of youth meeting criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder to be 39%, with 16% meeting criteria for three or more disorders. The Technical As sistance Network for Children’s Behavioral Health