Crisis = Opportunity
Indianapolis was a juvenile justice system in crisis. Operating under long-standing policies and practices, the detention facility was chronically overcrowded.
According to a 2006 National Partnership of Juvenile Services report, the Marion County Juvenile Detention Center was dirty, chaotic, over its capacity and unsafe for children.
That same year a Marion County grand jury investigation brought 52 indictments for sex abuse against 11 staff members and the center’s superintendent. All but one of the charges were eventually dropped and the superintendent was exonerated.
In response to the sexual misconduct charges, the U.S. Department of Justice opened an investigation, pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), into conditions within the detention center. In 2007, the Justice Department concluded that "certain conditions violate the constitutional rights of the youth … youth confined are not adequately protected from harm … and deficiencies in the areas of fire safety, general sanitation, and general safety pose a significant risk of disease and injury to youth and staff."
Following a sustained and rigorous effort by local detention and court personnel to improve conditions and reduce the facility’s population, DOJ and the Marion County Superior Court reached a settlement agreement in April 2008. It requires three years of federal monitoring.
Changes in leadership, a public scandal and radical reductions in the detention population all contributed to a systemwide transformation, turning a once-troubled jurisdiction into a model for the nation.
 |
| The Hon. Marilyn A. Moores, presiding judge, Marion Superior Court, Juvenile Division |
Gael Deppert, a former juvenile court public defender serving as the Indianapolis JDAI coordinator, said the overwhelming amount of attention paid to what was going on in the detention facility was a good thing.
"All the negative stuff in the press actually turned into a plus-positive for Indianapolis. It led to a sense of urgency and motivation for change," Deppert said.
Marilyn A. Moores took over as presiding judge of the Marion Superior Court, Juvenile Division in 2005. Soon after, the Annie E. Casey Foundation awarded its first grant to Marion County and a newly formed JDAI executive committee began work on reducing the detention population.
In a little more than two years, Indianapolis overhauled its juvenile justice system.
One of the executive committee’s first tasks was to revise the risk-assessment instrument. Consensus was not reached until extensive field testing of the new instrument was completed.
Dr. William Barton, professor of social work at Indiana University, volunteered his time and talent to the process, providing the group with expertise and leadership.
 |
| The Hon. Gary Chavers, chief magistrate |
Among the skeptics was Gary Chavers, a 22-year veteran of the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office who was then serving as supervising attorney in the juvenile division. (In 2007, Chavers was appointed magistrate by the Marion Juvenile Court.)
Chavers took an active interest in the development and testing of the new instrument. He unpacked the individual case files of more than 80 youth who were destined for detention under the old guidelines but were candidates for release or release with conditions under the newly designed criteria.
"It was an eye-opener for me," Chavers said. "Quite frankly, I didn’t expect the result we got."
"Seventy-seven out of 80 youth headed for detention turned out not to present a risk to public safety," he added. "I found myself agreeing with the results of the new instrument in almost every case."
Once Chavers concluded that there was no reason to oppose release for these kids, he helped convince the remaining skeptics in law enforcement and the prosecutor’s office.
The final result, Deppert said, was a "fairly dramatic" decline in population. "We began resisting the urge to detain low-risk kids and focused our energies on detaining only those that were a risk to our public safety," she said.
A follow-up study by Barton and colleague Dr. Roger Jarjoura concluded that Indianapolis’ risk instrument had failure-to-appear and re-arrest rates of less than 10 percent.
Overall, detention admissions fell by 60 percent between 2004 and 2007, from 5,606 to only 2,214.
Chronic overcrowding at the 144-bed facility was also affected. In 2004 the average daily population was 171, but by 2008 Indianapolis had reduced its ADP to 98 – a reduction of more than 40 percent.
Indianapolis was taking its responsibility as gatekeeper very seriously.
In 2007 Judge Moores initiated a review of all petitions to determine if the filing of each petition is in the best interest of the child and/or the public.
To stem the tide of school-based referrals, the Marion County Juvenile Court began applying a rare and unusual law that has been on the books for years.
The Indiana statute provides a two-prong determination for the filing of a delinquency petition by juvenile court, allowing a court to reject a petition that meets probable cause but is not seen as in the best interest of the child or the public.
In its first year, the county’s newly formed Initial Hearing Court, charged with ruling on all delinquency petitions on that two-part basis, refused to approve the filing of 422 petitions (4 percent). Of those rejections, approximately 40 percent were school-related referrals. (For more information see the January 2008 JDAI News.)
Despite operating under a federal consent decree, Marion County was moving forward with its juvenile detention reform.
Key personnel participated in visits to the JDAI model sites in Portland (Multnomah County), Ore., and Albuquerque (Bernalillo County), N.M.
A federal grant from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute was used to pilot a local reception center, modeled on Multnomah County, that provided police officers an alternative to detaining misdemeanants and status offenders. Based on a needs assessment, center staff provide case management services and non-residential resources for youth in the midst of family difficulties or in need of crisis intervention.
In its first year, Indianapolis diverted 12 percent of youth who would have otherwise been referred to juvenile court and saw a 27 percent decrease in misdemeanors filed with the court. The program served 750 youth in its first nine months of operation.
Indianapolis also implemented a day reporting and supervision program for expelled or suspended youth who would have otherwise been detained. Overall, 90 percent of the youth have appeared for hearings and 85 percent did not re-offend. Six youth were diverted from residential treatment, saving the county almost $500,000.
Indianapolis also adopted a probation sanctions grid that has resulted in a 25 percent reduction in probation violations. Rather than automatically referring cases to court, probation officers were given authority to order alternative sanctions, such as parent-monitored curfew, referral to a substance abuse program or increased drug-testing frequency.
 |
| Christine Ball, juvenile chief probation officer |
Christine Ball, Marion County’s chief juvenile probation officer, said the change reflects a philosophical shift away from a system that was punitive in nature.
"The probation sanctions gave probation officers additional options and discretion," she said. "The responses are more immediate because the youth does not have to wait for court to resolve the matter."
Recently, JDAI Indianapolis presented its results to the Indiana Commission on Disproportionality in Youth Services. The commission is in the process of recommending to the Indiana governor and the Indiana General Assembly that JDAI be implemented statewide as a proven, practical tool for system transformation.
For more information contact Gael Deppert at Gdeppert@Indygov.org.
Indianapolis Reforms
- Developed guiding principles for the use of detention.
- Developed, piloted and implemented consensus-built risk-assessment instrument.
- Provided probation staff and judges risk-assessment training.
- Eliminated automatic detention for certain warrants.
- Created detention review team to meet weekly and recommend cases for earlier release based on changed circumstances.
- Expanded public defender representation to all youth in secure detention awaiting initial hearing.
- Established Initial Hearing Court based on "best interest of child or community."
- Expanded alternatives to secure detention include: Reception Center; Day Reporting; Parental Supervision; Community Supervision; Electronic Monitoring; and, Assessment and Intervention Center.
< JDAI Newsletter