Division of Juvenile Corrections (DJC)
 

JUVENILE CORRECTIONS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Meeting – May 21, 2004 - Madison

Minutes

Attending:

Members – John Chrest, Wood County; Jerry Huber, LaCrosse County; Cheryl Huenink, Dunn County (by phone); Kathy Malone, Milwaukee County; Dave Sarow, Polk County (WJCIA); Ann Wondergem, Sheboygan County; Charles Tubbs, Silvia Jackson, Pam Eitland, Elaine Olson and Shelley Hagan, WI-DOC-DJC; Mark Campbell, WI-DHFS-DCFS.

I. Introductions and Approval of Minutes

New DJC Administrator Charles Tubbs introduced himself and spoke positively about his initial experience in the Division. TAC members made several suggestions for Charles to become more acquainted with county programs, including site visits and a WCHSA Executive Board meeting. Charles is open to invitations, and is eager to get out as his schedule permits.

The minutes of the January 31, 2004 meeting were approved as submitted.

II. DJC Follow-Up from Juvenile Justice Listening Sessions

Silvia Jackson reported that DJC was proceeding to respond to concerns and suggestions raised at the 2003 county listening sessions. The Division’s response is in five main areas: improved communication; short-term programming; training and technical assistance; family-friendly goals and initiatives; and refining the JPRC process. Some specific efforts were outlined.

A. Training and technical assistance. Pamela Eitland reported that, through collaboration with WCCF, several regional sessions were designed to address the top training priorities from the survey of county agency training needs. About half of the sessions have been held to date, with generally good attendance and evaluations. Additional training on current topics in juvenile justice is being hosted this summer. Also, training on mental health-related topics is being held for DJC staff. The committee discussed how to get more training to JJ workers, especially longer-term staff who may not see their own need for continuing education. There is no interest in or funding for mandatory training, but technology solutions such as Web conferencing and interactive video might bring down the travel-related costs of training. Possible topics to focus on in coming years include sex offender management (slated for 2004-2005 through DJC grant-funded program), and supervision of youth with mental health issues. Mark Campbell hopes to hire a staff person to coordinate training of county child welfare staff.

Enhance communication. Response has been positive to the initial effort in enhancing communication between DJC and its various constituencies, the e-newsletter that went out May 17. Pam Eitland, newsletter editor, has received many requests from interested persons, particularly judges, to be added to the e-mailing list. John Chrest suggested the addition of a section to highlight successful programs at the county level. In the next newsletter, DJC will ask counties to send in their program write-ups, which would be featured in subsequent editions.
 

Outcome reports. Also related to the effort to enhance communication, the TAC reviewed a draft Administrator’s Memo to Counties conveying summaries of outcome reports on (1) DJC institution education programs and (2) correctional recidivism. [Update: Sent out as Memo #04-05.] Discussion centered on the recidivism data. It was noted that the DJC study used a relatively narrow definition of recidivism, placement in a correctional institution for a new offense, which does not include other possible indicators of continued criminal activity such as arrest or placement in jail. While the recidivism data in the report is presented by institution and sex, interested persons could request other analyses such as by county or by race.

III. Juvenile Justice Data Collection

Shelley Hagan briefly reviewed selected data reports produced in past years to describe the juvenile justice system. These included the biennial "County Characteristics and Juvenile Justice Resources" data reports and the survey data and analysis in the 1996 "Early Intervention and Community Services" committee report. The group then reviewed the recommendations of the TAC-appointed workgroup charged with developing a proposal for a web-based system of voluntary JJ data reporting by counties. A discussion ensued regarding the usefulness of data and what types should be collected, e.g. process vs. outcome. Given the current Visions effort and the possibility of WCA and WCHSA asking counties for client and services data in the coming months, the group voted to delay its recommendation pending development of a collaborative data collection effort with the Visions steering committee. Jerry Huber, who sits on the Visions committee, agreed to act as the liaison, and inform the committee about the TAC’s interest and direction. It is hoped that a coordinated request can be made to counties that addresses both the TAC’s needs and those of the Visions process.

IV. CASOM

Silvia distributed a handout on the CASOM (Comprehensive Approaches to Sex Offender Management) program and noted that dates for county training are being finalized for Fall 2004.

V. County Notes

A round-robin discussion at the end of the meeting centered on trends in use of secure detention and other services. Jerry Huber noted a drop in utilization of the LaCrosse County juvenile detention facility and some possible revisions in the continuum of services provided. Several TAC members noted a recent rise in out-of-home placement of delinquent youth in their counties, apparently involving sex offender and emotionally disturbed youth. Kathy Malone said that Milwaukee County had seen a drop in its detention population also. She speculated that review of facility admission and release criteria arising from the county’s DMC (disproportionate minority confinement) study may be having an impact on the detention numbers. The group agreed that despite the current downward trends in use of juvenile secure facilities, it is important to preserve bed capacity to deal with possible increases in demand in the future.

IV. Next Meeting

The next TAC meeting will be Friday, October 15, from 10:00 am to 12:30 pm in Madison. Topics will include the status of the Department’s 05-07 budget proposal, and whether to recommend that a comprehensive report on the juvenile justice system, similar to the biennial "County Characteristics" or 1995 "Early Intervention" report, be attempted by DJC and counties.

DOC/DJC/OMB/SH
Final