Challenge Activity G

• NCJ Number: 165936
• Author(s): G Raley
• Date Published: 1996
• Length: 5 pages
• Contract Number(s): OJP-94-C-004
• Sponsoring Agency: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Type: Program/Project Description
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: From Challenge Activities Program Areas.

Annotation

This paper reviews issues pertinent to the implementation of Challenge Activity G under the 1992 reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974; this activity relates to the diversion of juvenile status offenders from the juvenile justice system.

Abstract

The major area of reform with which the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended, is identified concerns the relationship of status offenders and nonoffenders to the juvenile justice system. The act requires States that voluntarily participate in the act's programs to refrain from placing status offenders or nonoffenders in secure juvenile detention or correctional facilities; allowing status offenders, nonoffenders, or delinquents in secure custody to have contact with adult criminal offenders; and placing status offenders, nonoffenders, or delinquents in adult jails and lockups (since 1980). Although Congress has focused in the act on the deinstitutionalization of status offenders and nonoffenders, it did not address the issue of removing them from juvenile court jurisdiction until it passed the State Challenge Program in the 1992 amendments to the act. Although much progress has been made since passage of the act in the deinstitutionalization of status offenders, their removal from secure settings is far from complete. When used in the context of status offenders, diversion aims to reduce status offender and nonoffender contact with formal juvenile court system processing. There are two variations of status offender diversion from court systems that might be helpful to States that initiate challenge grant activity in this area: divestment and referral to community-based alternatives. Research that documents the success of failure of these approaches across an entire jurisdiction is lacking. State involvement in the diversion of status offenders and nonoffenders, coupled with evaluation of innovative approaches, could determine whether such diversion helps prevent status offenders from subsequent involvement in the juvenile justice system. A 9-item bibliography and 21 notes