Restorative Practices: Applying Restorative Justice Practices in the Juvenile Justice and Education Systems

Transcription

1 Restorative Practices: Applying Restorative Justice Practices in the Juvenile Justice and Education Systems Technical Assistance Partnership Webinar April 10, 2013

2 Welcome to Today s Webinar Audio Information: Dial Into: Conference ID: For Technical Assistance: Dial: To Submit Questions: Use the Q&A button at the top of your screen

3 Drag (from the top) the Voice & Video box toward the top left of the Live Meeting screen.

4 Move the Voice & Video box until a gray shaded area appears on the left side of the LiveMeeting screen. Drop the Voice & Video box in the gray area and it will lock in place on the left side of the LiveMeeting screen.

5 The Voice & Video box may appear empty, but video will appear when the presenters begin. If you prefer, you can click the X in the Attendees box to remove it, leaving only the video and the PowerPoint slides on your screen.

6

7 Restorative Practices: Applying Restorative Justice Practices in the Juvenile Justice and Education Systems Presenters: Simon Gonsoulin, M.Ed., Juvenile Justice Content Specialist, Technical Assistance Partnership, American Institutes for Research Mary E. Hatheway, Assistant Chief Probation Officer, Allegheny County, PA Mara Schiff, Ph.D., Associate Professor, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida Atlantic University

8 Poll Question #1: What is your role in your system of care community? Child Welfare Education/Special Education Family Member or Youth Juvenile Justice Mental Health Principal Investigator/Project Director Other

9 Polling Question #2: How would you rate your familiarity with the restorative justice philosophy and practices? I have very little knowledge of the restorative justice philosophy and practices. I have a basic knowledge of the restorative justice philosophy and practices. I have considerable knowledge of the restorative justice philosophy and practices.

10 Restorative Practices: Applying Restorative Justice Practices in the Juvenile Justice and Education Systems Simon Gonsoulin, M.Ed. Juvenile Justice Content Specialist, TA Partnership/American Institutes for Research.

11 The History of Restorative Justice

12 Traditional v. Restorative Traditional Criminal Procedures What laws were broken? Who did it? What should the offender s punishment consist of? Restorative Justice Procedures Who was harmed? What are their needs? What should be done to rectify the harm?

13 Examples of Programs Victim Offender Mediation Fairness Committees Conferencing Circles Victim Assistance Ex-offender Assistance Restitution Community Services

14 Allegheny County Juvenile Probation Balanced and Restorative Justice Mary E. Hatheway, Assistant Chief Probation Officer

15 Allegheny County Demographics Population Million 130 Municipalities Including Pittsburgh 730 Square Miles Population Age 10 to ,710 Juvenile Court Judges - 15 Number of Youth Under Supervision - 2,794

16 Good Juvenile Probation Practice Mission Driven Performance-Based Outcome-Focused

17 The Mission of the Allegheny County Juvenile Probation To reduce and prevent juvenile crime; to promote and maintain safe communities; and to improve the welfare of youth and families served by the court. Principle Beliefs Supporting Mission: Focus on Community Protection, Accountability, Competency Development Engage community residents/organizations Culturally competent services Victims are integral part of system

18 Balanced and Restorative Justice Our mission becomes PA law in 1996 Changes to the Juvenile Act s Purpose Clause (1995) mandates balanced attention to 3 goals: Community Protection Offender Accountability Competency Development 18

19 Juvenile Justice Goals Defined Community Protection: Citizens have a right to safe and secure communities Accountability/Victim Awareness: Juvenile offenders incur an obligation to the victim and community Competency Development: Juveniles should leave system more capable of being responsible and productive members of their communities

20 Successful Juvenile Justice Outcomes Law-abiding Productive Connected citizens Who have made amends 20

21 2008 Pennsylvania Balanced and Restorative Justice Strategic Plan: Goal #4: To develop a family involvement focus within the balanced and restorative justice model.

22 Family Involvement PO involves family throughout process arrest intake/detention petition hearing/disposition supervision/placement Family Group Decision Making, MST

23 Balanced and Restorative Justice Community Protection Goal Community and School-Based Supervision Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP) Warrant Unit Electronic Monitoring Out of Home Placement Aftercare Supervision

24 Community Protection: The Warrant Unit Began January POs; 2 full-time WU POs Full range of force options available Specialized training with FBI, DEA, etc. Law enforcement collaboration Pittsburgh PD, State Police, U.S. Marshals, County Sheriffs, Municipal Police Monthly sweeps since June 2004

25 Balanced and Restorative Justice Accountability Goal Victim advocacy/input/notification Victim Awareness Curriculum Community service 94% of court ordered community service hours completed Restitution/Fines/Fees/Costs $449,400 in restitution collected

26 Balanced and Restorative Justice Competency Development Goal Help juveniles acquire skills that lead to law-abiding and productive citizenship Tax payers not tax consumers

27 Competency Development Domains Pro-Social Social interaction, impulse control, and problem solving skills; peers and leisure activities Moral Reasoning Anti-social thinking, attitudes, values, beliefs Academic School performance, behavior, attendance Workforce Development (older youth) Work readiness skills Independent Living (older youth) Daily living skills Additional Domains - family functioning, substance abuse, mental health 27

28 Raising the Bar on Probation More strategic, structured, standardized probation practice Risk and Needs Assessment/Planning aligned with PA s juvenile justice goals Based on best practices research Focused on outcomes 28

29 Risk/Needs Assessment=YLS (Youth Level of Service) TOP FOUR DYNAMIC RISK FACTORS (Criminogenic factors): 1. Thinking/beliefs 2. Personality/behavior 3. Peer relations 4. Family circumstances Non-Criminogenic factors: 1. Self esteem 2. Personal distress 3. Learning disability 4. Health issues 5. Mental health Other risk factors: 1. Substance abuse 2. Education 3. Employment 4. Leisure/recreation 29

30 Mental Illness (non-criminogenic) Mental illness not a good indicator of risk May contribute to but does not cause delinquency May reduce juvenile s ability to benefit from delinquency interventions POs work with mental health professionals to get juveniles treatment POs do NOT recommend delinquent placement to address mental health issues 30

31 Case Plan: The Centerpiece Blueprint for probation Contract between PO, offender, family, provider Based upon Risk and Needs assessment results Directed at addressing goals / achieving outcomes Establishes priorities and directs all parties toward specific activities Focuses on what works

32 Dispositional Guidelines Aid decision-making from intake to placement First, determine the specific level necessary to protect the community (system penetration) Based on risk Next, decide which facility/provider within that level is most appropriate Based on Needs Assessment 32

33 Applying Risk/Needs Results Continuum of Services Least Restrictive Alternative Static Risk determines system penetration Intake Fence Secure CD Probation Day Treatment (CISP) Group Home Non - Secure residential Needs determine services within each level 33

34 Community-Based Probation (since 1974) 7 distinct units geographically dispersed 39 traditional CBPOs 9 Specialist POs (D&A, sex offender) 5 CB Intake POs JJSES unit (YLS assessment interviews) added June of 2012 Focus on Community Engagement

35 Specialized Units D&A Unit (4 specialist POs) Individual and group assessments Parent Survival Skills Training Intake (2 POs) Special Services Unit (5 specialist POs) Group Counseling at SSU Clinical Treatment via WPIC Collaboration Intake (1 PO)

36 School-Based Probation Started 1994 with 3 POs in Pittsburgh Schools - Partnership with school - Supervise all court active juveniles in school - On-site intake Currently: 37 SBPOs 21 POs in Pittsburgh Schools 16 POs in suburban school districts 20 of 43 school districts have SBPO

37 School-Based Probation - Improved communication with school, parents - PO is focal point for family, school, and community agencies - Advocate for educational needs of juvenile - Provide alternatives for managing difficult students on probation

38 School-Based Probation Goals Intensive supervision/intervention Increase attendance Reduce suspensions Improve academic performance Reduce number of probation revocations Reduce recidivism Work with community-based services

39 School-Based Probation Limited legal authority of PO School-based but not school-supervised NOT a school disciplinarian NOT involved in property/person searches of general school population Provide presence to deter school conflicts Integrated with school functions/activities SAP member

40 Community Intensive Supervision Program (CISP) Court-Operated Program (1990) Step up from Probation supervision Alternative to residential placement Aftercare (step down) for juveniles released from placement 6 Centers in Pittsburgh area

41 CISP Community Protection 24-Hour / 7-Day direct and indirect (electronic monitoring) supervision Daily School Attendance Weekly Drug Testing Progressive Sanctions for Program / Technical Violations Parent Support Groups Collaboration with Community Agencies, Organizations and Citizen Groups

42 CISP Graduated Sanctions Technical Violations: Sanctions (from 72 hours to 30 days) New Crime: Informal Adjustment Delinquent Petition

43 CISP Accountability Restitution Community Service Victim Awareness Curriculum Each youth completes 15 hours of classes Victim/Offender Mediation Selected Cases

44 CISP Competency Development Academic After school tutoring Computers / educational software (Nova net) Pro-Social/Moral Reasoning Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Thinking Errors Workforce Development Job interviewing preparation Apprenticeships Recreational/Cultural Activities

45 Delinquency Prevention SNAP for Boys & girls Stop Now and Plan (SNAP) - An award winning, evidencebased program developed in Toronto, Canada in 1980s Boys and girls ages 6-11 with difficulties at home, school, community (lying, stealing, fighting, school suspensions, defiant behavior) 12 week hour / week Children s group and a concurrent Parents group Cognitive-behavioral programming Referrals from CYF, court, schools, community Goal: Prevent future anti-social behavior

46 Contact Information Mary E. Hatheway Assistant Chief Probation Officer, Allegheny County, PA

47 Effective Restorative Justice Strategies for Enhancing Supportive School Discipline Mara Schiff, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Florida Atlantic University President, PeaceWorks Consulting, Inc.

48 Presentation Goals Briefly examine the current state of school discipline Explain and clarify the elements of restorative justice Examine the research supporting restorative justice in schools Consider current restorative justice policy at the school district, state, and federal levels Propose the expanded use of restorative justice for redefining the collaborative role of educators, juvenile justice professional, and the communities they serve

49 Purpose of Zero Tolerance in Schools To keep drugs and weapons out of schools To emulate retributive justice interventions such as mandatory minimums and structured sentencing To provide consistent consequences in proportion to the harm caused

50 Unintended Consequences of Exclusionary Discipline Student Push- Out Disproportionate Minority Exclusion School-to-Prison Pipeline

51 What the Data Say There is no evidence that zero tolerance results in safer schools or increased academic achievement Zero-tolerance punishments put students at greater risk for: Decreased connectivity to school Increased participation in risky or illegal behavior Poor academic achievement and school dropout

52 What the Data Say (continued) School suspension and expulsion increases: The likelihood that students will be held back a grade, not graduate, and become involved in the justice system. The likelihood of subsequent suspension, expulsion, and dropping out of school. Higher suspension rates lower academic achievement and standardized test scores, even when controlling for factors such as race and socioeconomic status.

53 What the Data Say (continued) Students suspended and expelled for minor infractions are more likely to be Black and those with disabilities. Nationally, Black students represented only 17% of public school enrollment in 2000 but accounted for 34% of suspensions; special education students represented 8.6% of public school students, but 32% of youth in juvenile detention nationwide. Black students with learning disabilities are three times more likely to be suspended than similarly situated White students and four times more likely to end up in correctional facilities.

54 Restorative Justice Views crime or harm primarily as a violation of individuals, relationships, and communities that "creates obligations to make things right" Justice is about repairing the harm caused to victims, offenders, and community To the greatest extent possible, restorative processes seek to rebuild relationships damaged by crime and other conflicts.

55 Restorative Justice Principles Repairing Harm Including Stakeholders Accountability Safety Reintegration Shifting Government/ Community Roles

56 Defining Restorative Justice A restorative response includes two primary components: 1) A non-adversarial and dialogue-based decisionmaking process that allows affected parties (known as stakeholders ) to discuss the harm done to victims, while considering needs of all participants 2) An agreement for going forward based on the input of all stakeholders about what is necessary to repair the harm directly to the persons and community

57 3 Questions in Traditional Systems 1. What law was broken? 2. Whose fault is it? (Who did it and who do we blame?) 3. What do they deserve? (What should the punishment be? How should we punish them?)

58 3 Questions in Restorative Systems 1. Who has been hurt and what harm was done? 2. What are their needs? 3. Whose obligation is this? (What repair is needed and who is responsible?)

59 The Possibility of Restorative Justice Restorative justice has been proven to reduce suspensions, expulsions, and disciplinary referrals and is modeled after approaches used in juvenile justice and now increasingly applied in schools for dealing with youth misbehavior, rule violations, and for improving school climate.

60 Goals of Restorative Justice in Schools 1. Create a restorative and inclusive school climate rather than a punitive one 2. Decrease suspensions, expulsions, and disciplinary referrals by holding youth accountable for their actions through repairing harm and making amends 3. Include persons who have harmed, been harmed, and their surrounding community in restorative responses to school misconduct 4. Reengage youth at risk of academic failure and juvenile justice system entry through dialoguedriven, restorative responses to school misbehavior

61 Restorative Strategies in Schools 1. Focus on relationships first and rules second 2. Give voice to the person(s) harmed and the person(s) who caused the harm 3. Engage in collaborative problem-solving 4. Enhance personal responsibility 5. Empower change and growth 6. Include strategic plans for restoration/reparation

62 Benefits to Person(s) Harmed Has a VOICE and a CHOICE in the process Feels less intimidated by a less formal process Has root causes of conflict uncovered Can express needs for reparation Experiences increased satisfaction Begins to heal through positive resolution and reparations Feels some power, safety, and/or reassurance

63 Benefits to Person Who Commits Harm Understands affects of his/her actions on others Develops empathy Repairs harm (meets needs of victim) Takes responsibility Becomes part of solution Learns from experience Changes future behavior

64 Benefits to School Community Students learn conflict resolution skills Focus is on inclusion, not exclusion and isolation Negative incidents decrease School climate improves Empowerment increases Personal responsibility increases Deals with underlying problems/issues Acknowledges harm to community Establishes norms, values, culture, and accountability

65 Benefits to Broader Community Community involvement increases Relationship to school strengthens Community members feel their children are safe Students know the community cares Community experiences less conflict

66 For School Administrators, Teachers, and Staff Involves others in problem solving to eliminate secondguessing (too harsh/too lenient) All parties agree to participate in decisionmaking process and information is shared

67 Restorative Justice in Schools At this time, restorative practices in schools are known to exist in: California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut. Restorative Practices include: Restorative mediation Conferences Circles School accountability boards Daily informal restorative meetings Classroom circles Restorative dialogue Restorative youth courts Peer mediation

68 Research Outcomes City/State Restorative Process Outcome Source/Year Minnesota, MN Circles Conferences Mediation Referrals, Suspensions: 48%-63% Minnesota Department of Education, 2003, 2011 Denver, CO Classroom meetings panels, and conferences Police Tickets: 68% Out of school suspensions: 34-40% Advancement Project, 2010 Gonzalez, 2012 Expulsions: 82% Philadelphia, PA Circles Suspensions: 50% Violent/serious acts /08: 52% 2008/09 : 40% Lewis, 2009

69 Research Outcomes (continued) City/State Restorative Process Outcome Source/Year Oakland, CA Whole-school restorative justice circles Suspensions 87% Expulsions = zero Sumner et. al, 2010 Chicago, IL: Restorative peer juries Suspension Days 1000 days Ashley and Burke, 2009 Palm Beach, FL Circles Suspension days in 2 schools Referrals: 78% Schiff, 2012 Absences: 54%

70 Research Outcomes (continued) City/State Restorative Process Outcome Source/Year Portland, OR Restorative meetings Suspension Days: 2008/09: 71 days 2009/10: 108 days Gonzalez, 2011 Baltimore, MD Whole-school restorative justice Suspension Days: from SY 08/09 to 09/10: 88% Ashley and Burke, 2009 Lansing, MI Restorative Practices Suspensions: 15% Gonzalez, 2011 St. Louis, MO Whole-school restorative justice Circles Suspension severity: 27% Gonzalez, 2011

71 Select Qualitative Data Palm Beach County (FL) Teachers and Administrators: Since [the restorative justice program] has been on our campus, our [out-of-school] suspension rate has dropped by 40% and our in-school suspension rate has decreased by approximately 50%. PBL Assistant Principal students like being heard many of our students don t even know certain actions are wrong. This opens the door to teach students acceptable and appropriate behaviors, behaviors that will be expected of them in mainstream society. PBL Teacher [The program] allows students an opportunity to be accountable for their actions in a non-threatening way with a productive positive outcome being the end result. PBL Reading Teacher

72 Select Qualitative Data From Students: I realize that I was doing things that I shouldn't have been doing and making big mistakes I learned in this process that I have a bad attitude and I could do better for myself. PBL Student I have gained self confidence and have found myself helping others. I realize that they are capable of being accountable for their actions. I have also learned how to be a better person by not judging others. Santa Fe Student I realize that I have come a long way from where I was then. I have become a bigger person and have learned to think about my actions before I do them If I talk about a problem I can keep myself from doing something I may regret later. I used to believe that I didn't have much control over how I react to events, but now I realize that it s up to me how I react and I can t blame my anger for all my problems. PBL Student

73 Changing School Policy

74 Chicago Public Schools Policy Since , the Chicago Public Schools Student Code of Conduct reflects a comprehensive approach to student discipline and include[s] components of restorative justice, alternatives to out-of-school suspension, and additional measures aimed to ensure a safe and positive environment for students and school personnel. For infractions ranging from disruptive behavior in the classroom to fighting, the code of conduct encourages the use of ageappropriate discipline and balanced and restorative justice strategies, including student, teacher and parent conferences, detention, in-school suspension, and referral to school peer jury in lieu of out-of-school suspension.

75 Oakland Unified School District Policy Since 2009, restorative justice is the official policy of The Oakland Unified School District (OUSD). OUSD uses a three-tiered model of prevention/ intervention/supported reentry in response to conflict and harm. The restorative justice program lowers suspension and expulsion rates and fosters positive school climates with the goal of eliminating racially-disproportionate discipline practices and the resulting push-out of students into the prison pipeline.

76 Denver Public Schools Policy As of August 2008, Denver Public Schools discipline policy includes restorative interventions. Restorative options are:... problem solving interventions done with the offender. They are driven by the victim as much as is possible and focus on the harm caused and how it will be repaired. Examples include family group conferencing, victim-offender mediation, or classroom peace circles.

77 Additional School Policies In 2009, the San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education adopted Resolution No A1 to replace some student suspensions with more restorative interventions. Instead of simply suspending students who violate school rules, restorative interventions will be used. Since 2008, Minneapolis Public Schools has offered restorative justice services. The Safe and Healthy Learners Unit at the Minnesota Department of Education has promoted and used restorative measures for over a decade.

78 Pending Federal Legislation Restorative Justice in Schools Act (H.B. 415; Cohen, D-Tennessee) would allow school districts to use Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) funding to train teachers and counselors in restorative justice and conflict resolution and help save countless hours lost to school discipline each school year. Successful, Safe, And Healthy Students Act (S. 919; Harkin, D-Iowa) includes funding and technical assistance for implementing positive, preventive approaches to school discipline like restorative justice and schoolwide positive behavior supports.

79 Conclusions 1. Zero tolerance and other exclusionary discipline policies in schools do not work. 2. Restorative justice is an effective, evidence-based, nonpunitive disciplinary response based on repairing harm, including stakeholders, and accountability. 3. Restorative justice helps educators, juvenile justice professionals, and community members collectively and collaboratively reengage youth in school and keep them off the street and out of the juvenile justice system. 4. Restorative justice strategies work best when developed and used in collaboration with community input.

80 Contact Information Mara Schiff, Ph.D Associate Professor, Florida Atlantic University President, PeaceWorks Consulting, Inc.

81 Presenter Contact Information Simon Gonsoulin, M.Ed. Mary E. Hatheway Mara Schiff, Ph.D.