when did making adults mad become a crime? keeping kids in school and out of courts
TRANSCRIPT
When Did Making Adults Mad Become
A Crime?
Keeping Kids in School and Out of Courts
IMPACT OF SRO WITH & WITHOUT MOU
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 130
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
MisdemeanorsFelonies
School/Justice MOU Signed
SRO Program Begins
Negotiations Begin on MOU
The process of enabling the participation of students to improve school safety and
climate using positive behavioral techniques,
practices, and interventions that yields a willingness,
capacity, and opportunity to safely participate in the
prevention and solving of discipline and safety concerns
THE POSITIVE STUDENT ENGAGEMENT MODEL FOR SCHOOL POLICING: A DEFINITION ST
Best Practices Improves Safety
99 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 130
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
ComplaintsPetitions
Reform Begins
Don’t Let Appearances Fool You!2013 data as compared to the same measures in 2002
• 80% decrease in average daily detention population (ADP)• 75% reduction in ADP of minority youth• 47% reduction in average length of stay • Felony re-arrest (prior to adjudication) is 0%• 72% fewer commitments to state custody• 66% fewer commitments of minority youth, BUT a• 72% reduction in formal petitions • 62% reduction in complaints
Keeping Kids in School, Out of Court, Improves Community Safety
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Graduation RatesArrest Rates
OSS Alternatives & Court Diversion
Quad C-ST
System of Care: Col-lective Impact
Protocol Begins
JDAI Begins
STAKEHOLDER GROUP DECISION TREE
D SCHOOL-JUSTICE PARTNERS
PUBLIC AGENCIES
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
PRIVATE PROVIDERS
PUBLIC PROVIDERS
FAITH-BASED
ADVOCATES
CORPORATE
VOTING MEMBERS
ADVISORY MEMBERS
School-Justice Stakeholder Group Decision ChartRule One: School-Justice Partners responsible for school, law enforcement, and court decision-making are mandatory voting members;
Rule Two: Only those providing financial or in-kind support have voting authority;
Rule Three: All others are advisory members; and
Rule Four: School-Justice Partners may veto decisions affecting school, law enforcement, and court regulatory or legal authority.
REFERRAL TO COURT
Will the offense be diverted from a formal
petition?
MISDEMEANORS & NON-VIOLENT
FELONIES
Is it more probable than not the judge will divert or informally adjust the case?
upon adjudication?
FOCUS ACT
Stakeholder group decides which offenses will be included as a Focus Act
FOCUS ACT DECISION TREE
YES
YES
YES
MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING
SAMPLE GRADUATED RESPONSE GRID LEVEL FOCUS ACTS RESPONSES
HIGH
2nd Drugs
Drug Assessment/Treatment Behavior Improvement Room
Saturday School School Based Community Service
Class-to-Class Escort Restrict School Events
MEDIUM
2nd Affray/Fight
2nd Disorderly Conduct 2nd Disrupting Public School
Sexual Battery 2nd Theft
2nd Battery (no physical injury) Battery (physical injury)
Sexual battery Drugs
Drug Awareness Education
Conflict Workshop Boundaries
Theft Workshop Mediation
Behavior Improvement Room School-Based Community Service
Class-to-Class Escort Restitution
Behavior Contract Letter of Apology
Restrict School Events
LOW
Disorderly Conduct Disrupting School
Affray/Fight Theft
Battery (no physical injury)
Verbal Warning
Written Warning Essay
Restitution Letter of Apology
SHARED RESPONSIBILTY: THE STEPS TO CREATE A BACKBONE AGENCY
Backbone Agency Development Process
1. Schools do not have capacity to assess & treat the causes of chronic disruptive behavior
2. Community should bridge the schools and community resources through backbone agency
3. Backbone agency focuses on underlying needs where schools are prohibited or lack resources
4. Backbone agency should include the private and public sectors of the community.
ST
SCHOOL-JUSTICE AGREEMENT DECISION TREE
COMPONENT PURPOSE GOALS/CONDITIONS
Preamble or Introduction
Why an agreement?
1. The Research: What works in school discipline;
2. The Law: What supports doing this? Interagency agreements Restorative Justice Diversion Delinquency/Status/Depend
ency prevention Promote Graduation Coordination of Services Other
3. Existing agreements in support of School-Justice Initiative (Ex. School Based Probation)
Definitions What terms
need definition
1. Focus Acts (See Focus Act Decision Tree)
2. Felony vs Misdemeanor 3. Student/Juvenile 4. Delinquent/Status/Dependent 5. IDEA/IEP 6. Diversion/Adjustment 7. Term or phrase describing the
response to the Focus Act (Ex. Graduated Response Grid or System)
1. Role of the SRO/LE 2. Prerequisites to referring to court
What is the general rule? What are the exceptions
(Exigent Circumstances) Response System:
Graduated system with high, medium low?
What are the responses associated to each level?
3. Special Cases IEP students Chronically disruptive:
Referral for assessment & Treatment
What does referral process look like (backbone agency, collaborative, etc)
Probation Bullies
4. Treatment of Elementary Students
Terms of Agreement
How to operationalize
the MOU
FOLLOW TO NEXT PAGE
COMPONENT PURPOSE GOALS/CONDITIONS
Quality Control
Who & How on implementation
& oversight
•Data Collection•Who collects it?•How is it collected?•How is it used?•How is it reported?•Periodic quality control meetings•Who attends?•How often?•What are the Performance measures?•What are the outcome measures?•What is the process for modifications?
INTER-AGENCYAGREEMENT/MOU
Children respond to
what they see and hear
Twitter @scteskelawFacebookLinkedinPhone (770) 477-3260
Geniene Lewis, Judicial Assistant