Determinants of Juvenile Detention Rates (From Reforming Juvenile Detention: No More Hidden Closets, P 30-46, 1994, Ira M Schwartz and William H Barton, eds. -- See NCJ-166824)

• NCJ Number: 166827
• Author(s): T K Martin
• Date Published: 1994
• Length: 17 pages
• Sale Source: Ohio State University Press
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This analysis of detention rates in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland, Ohio) shows the central influence of philosophy, policy, and practice on detention population levels; suggestions are offered for controlling juvenile detention population levels.

Abstract

The data reveal significant fluctuations in juvenile detention admissions, average length of stay (ALS), and the average daily population (ADP) in Cuyahoga County's secure detention facility during the past 24 years. For the most part, annual admissions and ALS show little correlation with one another, although together they determine ADP. The analysis of the county's secure detention history suggests that the size of a jurisdiction's secure detention population is not something that "happens to" the locality, but rather is determined to a significant degree by policy choices within the control of local decision makers. Detention-use monitoring, which was initially so effective in Cuyahoga County, can provide the cornerstone of a population-management program; however, the resistance of Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court judges to monitoring their use of secure detention has been the single most significant impediment to population-control efforts. Although some judicial resistance to a new monitoring effort is possible in any jurisdiction, judges usually appreciate timely access to accurate information relevant to their detention admission and release decisions. This paper lists the elements of a monitoring program and outlines other policy and program initiatives that can help to ensure that detention monitoring and population control are understood and consistently supported by local decisionmakers. Generally, collaborative development of written detention intake and release policies by judges and court staff should help to ensure consistency of detention use over time, even if personnel and administrative structures change. Objective written criteria for placement of juveniles in secure detention and alternatives should be a part of these intake and release policies. 3 tables and a 6-item bibliography