Transcript The Future of Texas’ Children

Annual North
Texas
An4thIn-Depth
Look on
the
Children’s
Summit:
Status
and Future
of
The Future
Our Children
Texas’ of
Children
May 9th, 2013
WELCOME
Welcoming Remarks
Jaime Hanks Meyers
Managing Director, North Texas
Dr. Bob Sanborn, President and CEO
Essential Data
NORTH TEXAS
CHILDREN’S SUMMIT
DEMOGRAPHICS
As of 2010, there were
1,727,405 children living
in North Texas, a 7.4%
increase since 2006.
39.2% White
37.7% Latino
17% African-American
6.1% Other
DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE
While the overall child population grew by
7.4% between 2006 and 2010,
POVERTY
 A family of four is
considered poor if their
income is less than
$23,050.
 With the federal poverty
definition unchanged since
the 1960’s, these figures
hide the true poverty rate.
 An average family needs an
income twice the poverty
level to meet basic needs.
FOOD INSECURITY
With Dallas ISD’s expansion of
school breakfast, 86,000
eligible students will be
enrolled in the program.
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND
MENTAL HEALTH
Texas spends
$38.38 per
capita on
mental health
services, the
lowest amount
among states.
TEEN PREGNANCY
EDUCATION
 In 2011, CHILDREN AT RISK calculated a 73.7%
graduation rate from North Texas’ High Schools.
 When just 21.9% of 8th graders are projected to
hold a degree or certificate within ten years, we have
an attainment crisis on our hands.
Innovative Approaches
in Higher Education
Michael J. Sorrell, J.D.
President, Paul Quinn College
Grading North Texas’
Schools: Indicators of
Success and Struggle
Dr. Bob Sanborn
President and CEO, CHILDREN AT RISK
Inside C@R’s School Rankings
• Statewide project since 2010
• In North Texas alone, 191 High Schools, 333
Middle Schools, and 1,001 Elementary Schools
appeared in the 2013 edition.
• New grading scale and peer lists empower parents
to demand more from their schools
• With just 21.9% of Texas’ 8th graders projected to
hold a college certificate or degree within ten years
and nearly half of college freshmen requiring
remediation, we need our schools producing
college ready students now more than ever.
Grade composition by county
600
500
F
400
D
300
C
200
100
0
B
A
County breakdown
• Ellis, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, and Rockwall
counties combined have just 3 “A” schools.
• Not only does Dallas county have a higher
percentage of “A” and “B” schools than
Tarrant County, but also a lower percentage
of “D” and “F” schools.
Grades and Economic
Disadvantage
All Schools
6.4%
4%
12.9%
Economically Disadvantaged-Serving
Schools 3.2%
10.9%
A
B
10.9%
C
37.8%
39%
D
F
42.1%
32.8%
Successful models for
bridging the gap
• Felix G. Botello Elementary (Dallas ISD)
o Only economically disadvantaged-serving comprehensive school to receive
an “A” grade.
• Uplift Education
• Irma Rangel Young Women’s Leadership School
• Early College High Schools
o Trinidad Garza ECHS, Middle College HS, Early College HS (Carrolton-Farmers
Branch).
• Hurst-Euless-Bedford ISD, Richardson ISD, Mesquite ISD
o Economically and ethnically balanced, performs at the same level as more
affluent districts.
Deeper Dive:
North Texas’ High Schools
North Texas has 36.6% of Texas’ “A” high
700
schools, but also 26.4% of its “F” schools.
606
600
North Texas
Statewide
500
400
315
300
200
126
100
71
26
49
81
21
53
14
0
"A" Schools
"B" Schools
"C" Schools
"D" Schools
"F" Schools
North Texas’ “A” High Schools
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
School for the Talented & Gifted
School for Science
&Engineering
Rangel Young Women’s
Leadership School
School of Health Professions
Sanders Law Magnet
Trinidad Garza Early College HS
Middle College HS
Sorrells School of Education and
Social Services
Highland Park HS
Uplift North Hills Prep
School of Business and Mgmt.
Pearce HS
Washington SPVA Magnet
14. Early College HS (CarroltonFarmers Branch)
15. Plano West Senior HS
16. Coppell HS
17. Lovejoy HS
18. Colleyville Heritage HS
19. Plano Senior HS
20. Westlake Academy
21. Fort Worth Academy of Fine
Arts
22. Hebron HS
23. Grapevine HS
24. Bell HS
25. Plano East Senior HS
26. Allen HS
High Performance and Choice
Dedicated Magnet/Specialized schools and charter schools
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
School for the Talented & Gifted
School for Science
&Engineering
Rangel Young Women’s
Leadership School
School of Health Professions
Sanders Law Magnet
Trinidad Garza Early College HS
Middle College HS
Sorrells School of Education and
Social Services
Highland Park HS
Uplift North Hills Prep
School of Business and Mgmt.
Pearce HS
Washington SPVA Magnet
14. Early College HS (CarroltonFarmers Branch)
15. Plano West Senior HS
16. Coppell HS
17. Lovejoy HS
18. Colleyville Heritage HS
19. Plano Senior HS
20. Westlake Academy
21. Fort Worth Academy of Fine
Arts
22. Hebron HS
23. Grapevine HS
24. Bell HS
25. Plano East Senior HS
26. Allen HS
• North Texas: 26 “A” High Schools
o 12 Traditional High Schools
o 11 Magnet/Specialized Schools
o 3 Charter Schools
• Houston: 20 “A’ High Schools
o 6 Traditional High Schools
o 10 Magnet/Specialized Schools
o 4 Charter Schools
Grades and Geography
Demographics
"A" Schools
"F" Schools
% White
12.8%
13.3%
39.5%
% Latino
10.8%
% AfricanAmerican
% Other
34.4%
38.9%
2.8%
47.5%
Attendance
The average
attendance rate for
“A” schools is 97%
(higher than 92.5% of
all Texas high schools)
while “F” schools
average 90.7%
(lower than 96.5% of
all schools).
If students
completed a 180day school year at
these rates, the
student at the “A”
school would
receive 12 days
more instruction
than the student at
the “F” school.
Graduation Rates and the
Dropout Crisis
A
F
Leaver codes broaden this difference
Rigor and Results
Graduates on
Recommended
plan
Taking
Adv.
Courses
Taking
AP/IB
Exams
“A” Schools
94.3%
61.4%
60%
61.1%
State
Average
81.4%
28.2%
18%
29.4%
“F” Schools
81.6%
26.3% 24.5%
Passing
AP/IB
Exams
12.6%
High standards alone won’t raise a school’s profile,
students must be placed in positions where they succeed.
Urban Comprehensive
Schools on the Rise
• Schools with above-average rates of
advanced courses, AP/IB testing, and
passing AP/IB exams.
o
o
o
o
Skyline HS
Moises E. Molina HS
W.H. Adamson HS
Irving HS
Questions
Dr. Bob Sanborn
@drbobsanborn
@childrenatrisk
Rankings queries:
Ask.fm/childrenatrisk
Food Insecurity and our
Children
Kimberly A. Aaron, PhD
Executive Vice President
Policy, Programs and Research
North Texas Food Bank
May 9, 2013
Trending Topics in Child Hunger
• Public Health Issues
–
–
–
–
–
–
Fair to poor general health
Psychosocial problems
Frequent stomachaches and headaches
Cognitive issues
Asthma
Oral health problems
• Household Financial Management Skills
• Income Impacts
– ½ of poor households are food secure
– 1 in 10 non-poor households are food insecure
Topics in the TX State Legislature
• Interest Areas
–
–
–
–
–
Food bank operations
Increased access to nutrition
General health
Self-sufficiency and reintegration
Protection and strengthening of public benefits
• House
– 84 bills
• Senate
– 27 bills
Bills of Particular Interest
• SB 376/HB 296
– Mandates schools with >80% low-income serve free breakfast
to all students
• HB 3706
– Requires SFSP sponsors to have a performance bond and
background checks
• HB 749/SB 759
– Maintains that the TDA work with the THI on a plan to increase
participation in SFSP
SNAP Bills
• HB 3705, HB1072/SB 879, HB 1141, HB 3486, HB
3845, HB 587, HB 423, HB 523, HB 751, HB 948, HB
1244, HB 1827, HB 3186, HB 3434, HB 3631
• Address an array of topics
– Repeal of the full family sanction
– Count resources of all individuals in “mixed eligibility”
household
– Removal/lessen impact of the drug felony ban
– Exemption/removal of certain assets from the asset test
– Prohibition on purchase of certain products
– Implement incentives on the purchase of nutritious products
– Etc.
Federal Update
• Big Concern – SNAP cuts
• Senate Ag Committee Farm Bill mark-up
– Target date – Week of May 6th
• House Ag Committee Farm Bill mark-up
– Target date – May 15th
4thIn-Depth
Annual Look
Northon
Texas
An
the
Children’s
Summit:
Status
and Future
of
The Future
Our Children
Texas’ of
Children
May 9th, 2013
Networking Break
Texas School Budget Cuts:
Impact & Efficiencies
Sarah Goff, MPP
Research Coordinator, CHILDREN AT RISK
Public Schools in Texas
Public school
students
qualify
for free or
reduced
lunch
Per Pupil Expenditures
TX
•$7,886
USA •$11,068
8th graders that
earn a postsecondary
degree six years
after completing
high school
nd
82
Legislative Session
Gap in the
state education
budget
in 2011
$1.4 billion in
discretionary
grants
$4 billion in
formula
funding
$5.4b
budget
cuts
Our Research
65% of the Student Population in Texas
was Represented
Statewide Impact
Trends Emerged
Explored alternate revenue streams
Reduced expenditures
Cost containment strategies
Trends Emerged
Districts reduced staff
Average class sizes increased
High-quality instruction suffers
The Impact in North Texas
Top Expenditure Reductions







Athletics
Guidance Counseling
Administrative Professional Development
Student Support & Interventions
Library Services
Teacher Professional Development
Health Services
Staff Reductions from 2010-2013
600
548
500
400
281
300
205
200
206 212
115
100
79
90
80
0
Dallas ISD
Plano ISD
Teaching Staff
Mansfield ISD
Carrollton-Farmers
Branch ISD
Nonteaching Staff
Lewisville ISD
K-4 Class Size Waivers Increase
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2009-2010
Plano ISD
2010-2011
Lewisville ISD
2011-2012
Mesquite ISD
2012-2013
Irving ISD
THANK YOU TO OUR FUNDERS
Genevieve and Ward Orsinger Foundation
Kathryn & Beau Ross Foundation
KDK-Harman Foundation
Powell Foundation
Meadows Foundation
M.R. and Evelyn Hudson Foundation
RGK Foundation
San Antonio Area Foundation
The Simmons Foundation
The Trull Foundation
Wright Family Foundation
Child
Protection and
Home Visiting
Legislation
Madeline McClure, LCSW
Executive Director
TexProtects, The Texas Association for
the Protection of Children
Actual Reports of Child Abuse
80,000
COWBOY
STADIUM
80,000
COWBOY
STADIUM
80,000
COWBOY
STADIUM
1,681 COWBOY
STADIUM
241,681
Alleged Child
Abuse
Victims
58
Adverse Childhood Experiences = At Risk Children
More Likely to Suffer Learning Disorders
Requiring Special Education
50%
More Likely to Become Involved with
Drugs
66%
More Likely to Have School Related
Problems
50%
More Likely to Become Pregnant as a
Teenager
More Likely to Drop Out of School
40%
25%
More Likely to Never Attend College
60%
Greater Likelihood of Becoming a
Juvenile Deliquent
59%
Greater Likelihood of Being Arrested for
a Violent Crime
70%
Biennial Texas Child Abuse Costs vs.
Prevention Investment
$13.0000
$12.0000
TX 2007 Total Cost spent on
$11.0000
Consequences of Child
$10.0000
Abuse
$9.0000
$8.0000
Total Costs of CPS System $7.0000
Biennium Cost
$6.0000
$5.0000
$4.0000
Total PEI Prevention & Early
Intervention + NFP - 2014-15$3.0000
Budgeted)
$2.0000
$1.0000
$0.0000
$12,500,000,0
000
$2,500,000,00
0
$47,250,000
The Graduate College of Social Work University of Houston analysis of the costs of child abuse concluded that Texas spent $6,279,204,373 in 2007 on direct and
indirect costs dealing with the after-affects of child abuse and neglect.
(2009) Cache Seitz Steinberg, Ph.D. Kelli Connell-Carrick, Ph.D. Patrick Leung, Ph. D. Joe Papick, MSW Katherine Barillas, MSW, ABD (August, 2009). REPORT TO THE
INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR BUILDING HEALTHY FAMILIES AND THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES: Evaluation Elements 1-6
Final Report.
(2007) TDFPS Costs projected for 08-09: LAR budget for CPS costs including foster/ adopt costs. Excludes other DFPS functions (APS, CCL, PEI). Total PEI costs 2007
LAR Prevention budget for 08-09
PREVENTION SOLUTION: Home Visitation
What is “Home Visitation”?
HV programs offer information,
guidance, risk assessment, and
parenting support in the home for
families with young children.
 Services delivered by trained
professionals or
paraprofessionals
 Targeted to specific at-risk
groups
 Families enroll voluntarily
 Last from 6 months to 2yr.
 Intergenerational focus
 Designed to improve a myriad of
health, educational, safety and
economic issues
 Different model curricula for
different clients
61
Home Visitation-Most Effective Defense
Outcomes Among Multiple
Evidence-Based Home Visiting
Programs
35%
Reduction in ER Visits
44%
Reduction in Out-of-Home Placements
20%
Reduction in months on welfare
32%
Fewer subsequent pregnancies
28-
Reduction in child abuse and neglect
48-
Reduction in low birth weight babies
50%
Reduction in language delays at 21 months
59%
Reduction in child arrests at age 15
79%
Reduction in premature delivery
83%
Mom's labor force participation by child's fourth…
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
83rd Legislative Agenda
Child Abuse Prevention Priorities: Home Visitation
Legislation
SB 426 (Nelson / Zerwas)
Texas Home Visitation Expansion and
Accountability Act
• Ensure home visiting programs (HVP) set clear
standards and are accountable for their
outcomes.
• HHSC ensures HVP Implemented with fidelity
to research model and evaluated for efficacy
• Create a framework that ensures 75% of state
revenues invested in evidence-based programs
• Allow 25% of the funds to be invested in
Innovative “Promising Practices.”
Funding Request
• $27.5 million- Original Ask for 30% state
funding increase
• $7.9 million: In Senate Budget-Conference
Cmte Item
• SB 1836 (Deuell) and Article II Budget Rider
(Zerwas)
Permissive language for BC, ML and DF fee
check-off donation
Monetary Benefits to
Society
$45,000
$41,419
$40,000
$35,000
Cost
$30,000
Increased Participant Income
$25,000
Reduction in Crime Losses
$20,000
Savings to Government
$15,000
$10,000
$7,271 $9,151 $7,271
$5,000
$0
Higher-risk Higher-risk Lower-risk Lower-risk
families families Cost families families Cost
Savings
Savings
83rd Legislative Agenda
Child Abuse Prevention Priorities: Child Protection Act
Legislation
SB 939 (West) / HB 2495 (Parker)
Child Protection Act
• Require institutions of higher education, elementary and
secondary schools and charter schools to provide professional
training to new and existing staff on preventing, recognizing,
and reporting suspected child abuse.
• Must have written policy directly reflecting reporting statute
• No fiscal impact
SB 384 (Carona) / HB 1205 (Parker)
Increase Penalty for Failure to Report
• For statutorily defined “professional reporters,” failing to report
child abuse, with the intent to conceal abuse, allow a range of
penalties from the current Class C misdemeanor to a state jail
felony.
• No fiscal impact
Texas CPS Caseworker Turnover
Texas CPS Caseworker T
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
All State Employees
CPS Spec. II
2007
2008
CPS CVS Caseworker
2009
2010
2011
CPS FBSS
Caseworker
CPS INV Caseworker
2012
Rider 11 – Human Resources Management Plan, October 1, 2012
State Auditor Office – Annual Report on Classified Employee Turnover for Fiscal
Year 2012 , December 2012
Fewer Changes in Caseworkers Increases the
Chances of Permanency for Children
# of Caseworkers
Children Entering and Exiting Care to Permanency, from
January 1, 2004 through September 2004, Who Experienced
Worker Changes
0.00%
20.00%
4 Workers
40.00%
3 Workers
60.00%
2 Workers
80.00%
1 Worker
83rd Legislative Agenda
CPS Caseworker Retention Solutions
SB 1758 (Uresti)
Task Force on Caseworker
Recruitment and Retention
• Establish a task force composed of
external business CEO’s, expert labor
consultants, human resource leaders,
other innovators and CPS program
staff to design a performance-based
compensation and recognition
system.
• Recommend strategies for screening,
recruitment and training to improve
the hiring and retention of CPS
caseworkers.
Questions?
Madeline McClure,
E.D.
TexProtects
Meadows Foundation
Executive Suite 2904 Floyd
Street, Suite C
Dallas, TX 75204
214.442.1674
[email protected]
www.texprotects.org
69
4thIn-Depth
Annual Look
Northon
Texas
An
the
Children’s
Summit:
Status
and Future
of
The Future
Our Children
Texas’ of
Children
May 9th, 2013
LUNCH
Dr. Terry Smith
Executive Director
May 9, 2013
Dallas County Juvenile Department
To assist referred youth in becoming productive, law abiding citizens, while promoting public
safety and victim restoration.
Executive Team:
Executive Director
Dr. Terry S. Smith
Assistant Executive Director
Mr. John Heath
Deputy Directors:
Mr. Bill Edwards
Dr. Danny Pirtle
Dr. John Pita
Ms. Karen Ramos
Mr. Ervin Taylor
Juvenile Board Members:
Judge Cheryl Shannon-Chair
Commissioner John Wiley Price-Vice Chair
Honorable Judge Clay Jenkins
Judge Andrea Plumlee
Ms. Paula Miller
Judge Gracie Lewis
Judge Robert Burns
Judge William Mazur
Judge Craig Smith
Juvenile Judges:
Judge Cheryl Shannon-305th District Court
Judge William Mazur-304th District Court
Associate Judge Derrick Morrison- 305th District Court
Associate Judge Diana Herrera- 304th District Court
Judge Melinda Forbes- Referee Court
ESTEEM Court Protocol
Court Program
Name
Judicial Circuit
Presiding Judge
Name and contact
information
Coordinator Name and
contact information
County
Target Population
Pre-or Post (or
hybrid)
Adjudication or
Reentry
Start Date
Served
Type
Court Physical
Address
Mental Health
Court
304th &
305th
Judge Robert Herrera
Diane Boyd
214-698-4223
Dallas
06/2011
Juveniles
Pre-Diversion
Juveniles with Mental
Health Issues
Henry Wade
2600 Lone Star Dr.
Dallas, TX. 75212
Drug Court
304th &
305th
Judge George
Ashford
Lisa Murad
214-860-4311
Dallas
2002
Juveniles
Pre-Diversion
Juveniles with Drug
Diagnosis
SAU
414 S.R.L. Thornton
Dallas, TX 75203
ESTEEM Court
304th &
305th
Judge Cheryl Lee
Shannon
Connie Espino
214-956-2029
Dallas
01/25/12
Juveniles
Pre-Diversion
High Risk Juvenile Girls
Letot Center
10505 Denton Dr.
Dallas, TX. 75220
DMC
304th &
305th
Judge George
Ashford
Mario Love
214-589-7903
Dallas
02/2013
Juveniles
Pre-Diversion
High Risk Minority
Juvenile Boys
Henry Wade 2600
Lone Star Dr. Dallas,
TX. 75212
Mission Statement: To provide positive experiences for referred female youth that will foster success and
empowerment and thereby prevent further involvement in the legal system.
TARGET POPULATION
◦ This population can be enrolled with the Girls Diversionary Program (ESTEEM Court).
◦ High Risk Victims (HRV) who have committed a CINS offense or have had misdemeanor charges
deferred by the District Attorney, and have at least one of the following criteria:
 At least four runaways from home in 12 month period, or
 At least one residential stay at Letot, or
 Family fails to participate in any Aftercare/Non-Residential service and does not follow through
with recommendations, and is
 A victim of child exploitation as defined below:
 Has been prostituted, or
 Has worked in a strip club, or
 Has been sexually advertised, or
 Has been sexually photographed for sharing with others, or
 Has received (or was promised) food, money, shelter, or anything of value in exchange for sex
(or any sexually explicit activity), or
 Has been or is currently in an on-going sexual relationship with an adult described as a
boyfriend/girlfriend.
◦ Letot Residential/Non-residential Case Managers, Field Deferred Prosecution Probation Officers (PO),
and Detention Intake POs can identify girls on their caseload who are victims of sexual exploitation as
previously defined.

Later the ESTEEM Court will consider a Track 2 for adjudicated girls identified as High Risk Victims.
II GOALS
A. Facilitate successful program completion by providing continuity of Judge, Probation Officer and service provider.
B. Address the needs of the target population by providing wraparound/family services, which includes PO supervision utilizing home
and school visits, and electronic monitoring if needed.
C. Utilize available community-based resources first and Department services as needed, ensuring clients have access to supervision,
clinical services, medical care, and substance abuse services. The family can continue to access community resources after
discharge from the Diversionary Program.
D. Increase family involvement by providing support services for the family as well as the child.
E. Provide an exit plan for success after diversion.
F. Decrease further entry into the juvenile system, reducing Department expenses, and improving outcomes for the families.
Experiencing Success Through Encouragement, Empowerment and Mentoring
The Pathway to Success
Path
ESTEEM
Level 1
Court
Once
ESTEEM
Level 2
2 Visits
2 Checks
Sapphire
(minimum 30 days)
School
Weekly
Twice
Emerald
(minimum 30 days)
Monthly
ESTEEM
Once
Level 3
Monthly
Level 4
7:00 pm
Once
1 Visit
7:00 pm
Twice
1 Check
Twice
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
1 Visit
8:00 pm
Once
Attend services recommended by Case Plan with
85% compliance.
Attend services recommended by Case Plan with
95% compliance.
Once
Monthly
Monthly
Once for Exit
Hearing
1 Check
Monthly
8:30 pm
Monthly
Once
Seen as needed by the Probation Officer.
Attend community resources offered as needed.
Once
Aftercare
Graduation
(minimum 30 days)
Monthly
Monthly
Services
Case plan completed.
Services set up as needed. Expect 75% compliance.
Once
Weekly
ESTEEM
Diamond
Home
Visit
Weekly
Ruby
(minimum 30 days)
Curfew
At least 95% compliance in order to graduate.
Monthly
Mission Statement: The goal of Diversion Male Court is to reduce the disproportionate representation of minority
male youth in the Juvenile Justice System by diverting these youth from the court process by providing communitybased alternatives that promote positive empowerment to the youth and family.
GOALS:
A. Divert the minority males from becoming involved in the Juvenile Justice System, by providing opportunities and guided
alternatives.
B. Assist minority males and their families by encouraging positive interactions within the structure of the home.
C. Educate families on community resources and encourage increased family involvement with, and stronger advocacy for,
their children.
D. Maximize department resources while improving outcomes for the families.
E. Facilitate successful program completion by providing continuity of Judge, Probation Officer and service provider.
F. Address the needs of the target population by providing wraparound/family services (if needed), which includes PO
supervision utilizing home and school visits, and electronic monitoring if needed.
G. Utilize available community-based resources first and Department services as needed, ensuring clients have access to
supervision, clinical services, medical care, and substance abuse services. The family can continue to access community
resources after discharge from the Diversionary Program.
H. Increase family involvement by providing support services for the family as well as the youth.
I. Provide an exit plan for success after diversion.
J. Assist minority males and provide them with additional skills in order to ensure more positive roles in the community
and society.
STAFFING:

Currently there are not any additional costs associated with the implementation of the Dallas County Juvenile Probation
Diversion Male Court. All staff and/or vendors are presently in these positions and will absorb the functionality of the
Diversion Male Court.
OBJECTIVES:
A. Intervene at the pre-adjudication point to address problem areas quickly and without further Juvenile Court
intervention.
B. Provide services to the family that meet the needs identified by an assessment, using community resources and/or
services from the Department.
C. Develop and implement a clear and concise case plan involving the youth, parents and probation officer.
D. Make appropriate referrals for the identified services needed; to include mental health, educational, vocational, and
family health care.
E. Diligently monitor each juvenile’s attendance in school, their behavior at home and their progress in therapy and/or
community based services.
F. Implement the use of immediate and appropriate incentives and/or responses for both compliance and noncompliance
with the Diversion Male Court requirements.
G. Provide judicial oversight and coordination of all services initiated to promote accountability, and to bring together all
involved community agencies to work in partnership with the Diversion Male Court to achieve the identified goals.
H. Provide character development skills and behavior strategies.
REFERRALS:

Probation Intake Officers, Psychology staff, Deferred Prosecution Officers, DA Liaison Officer can refer youth to the
Diversion Male Court program if any of the following criteria apply:
A. A psychological/psychiatric screening or evaluation reveals that the youth is appropriate for the program due to
referral/offense status, is a minority males or has a recommendation;
B. The Detention Intake Screening process or the Intake Screening Officer determines that:
1. the juvenile may benefit from on-going clinical services in the community; and
2. the juvenile qualifies for a diversion program;
3. the juvenile is currently participating in therapy or counseling in the community and might benefit from additional
services and monitoring.
ELIGIBILITY:

The juvenile must have a pending charge alleging an offense other than truancy, a sexual offense or runaway, and has not
previously been adjudicated on any charge. The juvenile is found to be appropriate for supervision through a deferred
prosecution program. The juvenile and their family must agree to participate in the program
2010 Juvenile Population Data Comparison
44.7%
48%
44%
43%
39.1%
34%
12.7%
25%
21%
22%
42%
Hispanic
14%
White
Texas Population
Black
Texas Juvenile Referrals
DC Juvenile Age Population
DCJD Population
Mission Statement: To assist and divert juveniles with mental health illness from entry into the juvenile
justice system, while connecting the juveniles/families with community mental health based services.
The Annie E. Casey Foundation, established in 1948, is a private charitable organization dedicated to
helping build better futures for disadvantaged children in the United States. Within the Foundation
the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI) was designed to support the Foundation’s vision
that all youth involved in the juvenile justice system have opportunities to develop into healthy,
productive adults. After more than 15 years of innovation and replication, JDAI is one of the nation’s
most effective, influential, and widespread juvenile justice system reform initiatives.
The Dallas County Juvenile Department became a JDAI replication site in June 2005. We are entering
our sixth year as a site. JDAI promotes changes to policies, practices, and programs to:
 reduce reliance on secure confinement;
 improve public safety;
 reduce racial disparities and bias;
 save taxpayers’ dollars; and
 stimulate overall juvenile justice system reforms.

More than 1.2 million children in Texas have a diagnosable mental health disorder. One in five children suffers
from a mental illness, and one in ten of these children suffer from a serious mental illness. According to the
National Alliance on Mental Illness, it is estimated that approximately 70% of the youth in the Juvenile Justice
System have at least one mental health diagnosis. Conversely out of this 70%; twenty percent (20%) of these
youth present with significant mental health impairment. The justifications for establishing Mental Health Courts
or Specialized Needs Units is a response to keep those youth with mental health concerns or issues from entering
into more expensive and possibly less effective detention facilities or private placement.

With a juvenile mental health court, intensive screening is done upfront to identify kids with mental illness early
on and determine if they are eligible for and can benefit from the court’s community-based programs, instead of
detention. The court also provides more treatment options for youth with mental illness.

As of mid-2010, there were approximately 50 Juvenile Mental Health Courts across the country. In Texas, there are
four such specialized courts. The first began in Austin (Travis County), followed by San Antonio (Bexar County), El
Paso, (El Paso County), and Houston (Harris County). (The Council of State Governments, Justice Center (2010)
http://www.consensuproject.org)

The justifications for establishing Mental Health Courts or Specialized Needs Units is a response to keep those
youth with mental health concerns or issues from entering into more expensive and possibly less effective
detention facilities or private placement.

Probation officers in the Special Needs Unit (SNU) are assigned to supervise youth on probation who have been
diagnosed as exhibiting some type of mental or medical impairment which significantly hampers their overall
functioning. Probation staff partners with Dallas MetroCare therapists to deliver special services to youth with
mental health issues, psychiatric symptoms or emotional disturbance. Staff design highly individualized
supervision plans which incorporate intensive in-home family therapy, medication management when necessary
and other community-based resources.
Dallas County Mental Health Statistics
Number of SNU and FEDI Referrals
for 2009
150
Youth in Placement
w/ Mental Health Issues
for 2009
(1682 Dispositions)
300
120
247
200
100
54
50
2009
0
2009
100
0
SNU
FEDI
Placements
Average cost per day: $13.67
Average cost per day: @ $127.00
(detention costs)
Number of SNU and FEDI Referrals
for 2010
150
Youth Dispositions
for 2010
300
125
100
1501
200
48
50
0
2010
2010
100
0
SNU
FEDI
Dispositions
If we take 10% or 15 youth with an Average
Length of stay= 151 days. We could save
$287,655.
Mission: The Drug Court Diversionary Program’s mission is to provide pre-adjudication intervention services to youth referred to the Juvenile
Department for a misdemeanor drug offense by introducing skills that will aid them in leading productive, substance-free lives, by encouraging
academic success, by supporting the youth in resisting further involvement in delinquent behavior and thereby assisting the youth in avoiding
formal adjudication and disposition.
The Drug Court Diversionary Program is a voluntary program addressing adolescent drug abuse and related delinquent behavior through:
◦
Education
◦
Intervention
◦
Treatment
◦
Family Involvement
This is accomplished through collaborative efforts by community service providers and the Dallas County Juvenile Department Drug Court.
Benefits
◦
◦
◦
◦
of Drug Court? Drug Court Diversionary Program provide youth with:
An opportunity to be clean and sober
Skills to lead productive, substance-free, and delinquent-free lives
Guidance to perform well in school
Diversion from formal involvement with the justice system.
The Drug Court Diversion Program can be completed within six months. After successful completion, program staff complete the necessary
paperwork to seal the child’s records.
Failure to complete the program due to a new arrest, continued substance abuse, or failure to comply with the Drug Court Agreement will result in
a referral to the District Attorney’s Office for filing the current offense.
Requirements?

Youth attend review hearings regularly, submit to frequent and random drug testing, complete community service, and participate in
therapeutic treatment based on their level of substance use. Youth are intensively supervised through curfew checks, school attendance and
monitoring, among others.

Parents attend required review hearings with the child before the Drug Court Judge and participate in treatment based on the youth’s drug
use. Parents provide an open and honest progress report about their child’s behavior and substance use at home. The program staff provide
parents with information and education that empowers them to supervise their children and promote positive behaviors.
Dallas County Juvenile Department reviews all police reports submitted by county police agencies and refers only misdemeanor drug related cases
to Drug Court. If this is the youth’s first referral for a misdemeanor drug offense, an orientation is scheduled with the parent and child to
determine if the Drug Court Diversionary Program will be beneficial to all involved.
Drug Court hearings, meetings and groups meet south of downtown Dallas near 35E and 8th street, at 414 South R.L. Thorton Freeway,
Dallas, Texas 75203.
Dr. Terry Smith
Executive Director
May 9, 2013
E.S.T.E.E.M. Court
Experiencing Success Through Empowerment,
Encouragement and Mentoring
Judge Cheryl Lee Shannon
Mission Statement
To provide positive experiences for referred
female youth that will foster success and
empowerment and thereby prevent further
involvement in the legal system.
TARGET POPULATION
High Risk Victims (HRV) who have
committed CINS offense or have had
misdemeanor charges deferred by the
District Attorney and have one of the
following criteria:
- At least 4 runaways in 12 month period,
or at least one residential stay at Letot;
- A victim of child exploitation
GOALS
-Facilitate successful completion by providing
continuity of Judge, Probation Officer and service
provider.
- Address the needs of the target population by
providing wraparound services.
- Utilize available community-based resources
and Department services as needed.
- Increase family involvement by providing
services for the family as well as the child.
Goals con’t
- Provide and exit plan for success after diversion
- Decrease further entry into the juvenile system,
reducing Department expenses, and improving
outcomes for the families.
IMPLEMENTATION
- Conduct an Intake Staffing with the family to
explain the program (determine if admission
criteria is met and their willingness to participate)
- Administer Assessment to determine the needs of
the child and family.
- Develop and implement a clear and concise case
plan
- Provide referrals to the family that meet the
identified needs
Implementation con’t
- Girls group session after Court to debrief,
promote comraderie and build positive
relationships.
- Parent Group session after Court to debrief,
provide group support and introduce new
parenting strategies.
- Treatment Group, HOPE, specifically designed
for this population by Letot’s clinical staff
Implementation con’t
- Provide the family with a directory of
community services for their personal use.
- Assign girls 15 hours of CSR
Court Process
- Court meets weekly
- Court Team staffs cases weekly
- Judge gives overview of the program to
child and family
- Review Hearings
- Groups following Court
COMMUNITY PARTNERS
Big Brothers/Big Sisters
AIM Truancy
The Pathway to Success
-
Level 1 – Sapphire
- Level 2 – Emerald
-
Level 3 – Ruby
- Level 4 - Diamond
OUR SUCCESSES
Graduates
Healthy Families and
Healthy Communities:
A Dialogue
Nancy Correa, CHILDREN AT RISK
Thom Suhy, Center on Communities and Education of the Annette
Caldwell Simmons School of Education and Human Development,
Southern Methodist University
Moderated By: Jaime Hanks Meyers, CHILDREN AT RISK
Cities for People
Brent Brown, AIA
Founding Director, bcWORKSHOP
Safe at Home:
The Impact of Domestic
Violence on Children
Debra Mitchel-Ibe
Director of Community Outreach, The Family Place
4thIn-Depth
Annual Look
Northon
Texas
An
the
Children’s
Summit:
Status
and Future
of
The Future
Our Children
Texas’ of
Children
May 9th, 2013
THANK YOU