This report presents findings and recommendations from an expert panel that explored challenges and opportunities associated with closing juvenile residential facilities and implementing community-based alternatives. The highest-priority needs centered on equity and disparity and on family engagement throughout the correction process.

Community-Based Alternatives to Youth Incarceration

Melissa M. Labriola, Samuel Peterson, Dulani Woods, Michael J. D. Vermeer, Brian A. Jackson

ResearchPublished Sep 19, 2024

Based on a one-day count, the number of youth held in juvenile justice facilities declined 77 percent between 2000 and 2020. Some of this sizable decrease can be attributed to the fact that youth arrests for violent crime decreased by 56 percent from 2010 to 2020, and youth arrests for all offenses declined by 74 percent during that same period. Other efforts to reduce the size of the juvenile justice system population include raising the minimum age at which a person can be processed through juvenile courts, implementing school-based strategies, and expanding juvenile diversion.

As a result, the number of residential placement facilities has also decreased, by 50 percent. This decrease is starkest among large facilities, which have decreased 74 percent from 1997 to 2019. Facility closure has gained attention and support for several reasons, such as investments in alternative rehabilitation and community-based programs, cost savings, and recognition of the need to treat youth involved in the juvenile justice system with a focus on rehabilitation rather than punitive measures. The decisions to close these facilities are complex.

This report presents findings and recommendations from an expert panel that explored challenges and opportunities associated with closing juvenile residential facilities and implementing community-based alternatives. The highest-priority needs centered on equity and disparity and the need for family engagement throughout the correction process. These results are pertinent to a wide audience, including justice-system stakeholders, community corrections practitioners, the research community, and funders or grant-making organizations.

Key Findings

  • Disproportionate representation and disparate treatment of youth of color occur at every point in the legal process.
  • The system is not structured to partner or engage with families as they support their justice-involved youth.
  • Some youth may still be held in a secure facility, which will need to be designed and organized in a way to minimize additional trauma and harm.
  • There are not enough individualized community-based solutions for youth charged with the most-serious offenses.
  • Most affected communities (those with high levels of poverty, historical underinvestment, or structural racism) are underresourced and lack the financial and organizational capacity to serve youth and families with system involvement.

Recommendations

  • Conduct an analysis of the major decision points in the legal system, making sure to consider common demographic dimensions.
  • Examine the impact of risk tools and whether they are continuing to propagate structural bias.
  • Conduct research on the best approaches for family engagement, preparedness, and advocacy throughout the process (including reentry planning).
  • Conduct research on agency best practices for supporting engagement with families.
  • Conduct research to identify the most-effective methods (domestically and internationally) to operate within the best trauma-informed practices (i.e., setting, operational and programmatic, staffing, training).
  • Conduct research to identify strategies to optimize length of stay in the least-restrictive setting and continuity of care and services as youth transition back into the community.
  • Conduct research to determine the best infusion of community services, supports, and opportunities to minimize institutionalization and prepare youth for release.
  • Identify, develop, and promote the application of effective change strategies and best practices to improve outcomes for youth held in facilities.
  • Develop a research strategy to identify community-based interventions (e.g., trauma-informed and community-relevant programs) and gaps in services that are effective in keeping youth healthy and safe in their communities after release.
  • Analyze barriers to working with government and nongovernment funding organizations (i.e., procurement, contracting, and reporting processes), and identify concrete strategies for making those processes easier for organizations with limited capacity.
  • Develop and prioritize approaches to holistic community improvements (e.g., resource mapping, incubator organizations, reinvestment funds).

Topics

Document Details

Citation

RAND Style Manual
Labriola, Melissa M., Samuel Peterson, Dulani Woods, Michael J. D. Vermeer, and Brian A. Jackson, Community-Based Alternatives to Youth Incarceration, RAND Corporation, RR-A108-25, 2024. As of October 10, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA108-25.html
Chicago Manual of Style
Labriola, Melissa M., Samuel Peterson, Dulani Woods, Michael J. D. Vermeer, and Brian A. Jackson, Community-Based Alternatives to Youth Incarceration. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2024. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA108-25.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This research was sponsored by the National Institute of Justice and conducted in the Justice Policy Program within RAND Social and Economic Well-Being.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.