This report — the fourth installment in a series devoted to revolutionizing detention programs and practices in America — tells how sites have cut costs and eased overcrowding concerns by developing new alternatives to detention. Their success stories carve a clear path for jurisdictions interested in planning, implementing and monitoring similar reforms.
Officials new to detention alternatives have similar square one questions—and this report offers been-there, done-that solutions straight from JDAI sites. Some of the many lessons readers will learn: how to decide who is eligible for detention alternatives, whether or not to involve nonprofits, what to do with youth facing adult trials, and how to handle juveniles who test (and retest) the system.
Cook County’s evening reporting centers offer structure and supervision to juveniles in their own communities during the high-crime time interval of 3 to 9 p.m. A report from the National Council on Crime and Delinquency indicates that without this alternative program in place, more than 60% of the 183 youths admitted to the centers in 1997 would have wound up in secure detention.
Generally speaking, a range of detention alternatives consists of three basic program models: 1) home or community detention; 2) day or event reporting centers; and 3) shelter or foster care.
This cost-effective, efficient alternative to secure detention involves a tight curfew, limited movement beyond the home and frequent, unannounced visits and phone calls by program officials. The goal? Minimize a juvenile’s chance of a getting into trouble again while ensuring that they show up for their next court appointment.
This program model is the most restrictive detention alternative in the continuum. It involves 24/7 supervision as well as recreational and educational activities. Experts urge sites to keep shelter programs small — anywhere from eight to 20 beds — as larger programs are difficult to run.
Community-based nonprofits can often recruit, hire, train and replace staff more quickly and cheaply than their government counterparts. The downside to contracting with a community agency to run a detention alternative, however, is a lack of immediate control over the program’s daily operations. To ease this concern — and the resulting heartburn suffered by anxious law enforcement officials — experts recommend clearly defining the program’s responsibilities and expectations from the get-go.
One must-do item on management’s alternatives-launch checklist? Generate support for the new programs. This effort should aim to win over two distinct audiences: juvenile justice officials and the general public.
Secure detention is costly — with an average price tag topping $200 per bed per day. By comparison, some of the detention alternatives developed by JDAI sites cost as little as $6 per day. These figures alone should motivate officials (and taxpayers!) to favor securely detaining only the most serious offenders while investing in alternate options for the rest.
