Lynchburg (VA) Project - An Analysis of Factors Leading to Substantial Changes in Lynchburg's Juvenile Justice System

• NCJ Number: 69797
• Author(s): E Glettner; C Weston
• Date Published: 1977
• Length: 42 pages
• Corporate Author: Virginia Division of Youth Services
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The causes of significant positive changes in the Lynchburg, Virginia, juvenile justice system were determined in this study.

Abstract

The changes include (1) a 43 percent decrease in the number of youths received at the 24th District Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court; (2) a 47 percent decrease in the number of youth committed to the State Board of Corrections; and (3) the utilization of only 53.5 percent of the maximum capacity of the Lynchburg Detention Home. On a statewide basis comparable percentages have increased. Information was gathered through community group meetings and an Opinion Survey; a review of the existing data from such areas as welfare, education, and the juvenile justice system, and a questionnaire which was sent out to youth service agencies. The main dependent variables for the questionnaire were overall community assessment, cooperation and coordination, delivery of services, and public support. Of the 65 schools and agencies that received the questionnaire, 48 responded. Conclusions of the study follow: (1) a high degree of cooperation and coordination exists among many of the youth service agencies; (2) the city's police department has a strong relationship with the youth service agencies; (3) Lynchburg Youth Services has been effective in influencing the court's attitude toward status offenders and has served as a catalyst in promoting interagency coordination. Other conclusions are that (4) civic and social groups have played an active role in bringing changes without being accused of having a vested interest in either the public or the government at sector and that (5) no one particular program or project has been responsible for the changes. Survey results are presented in tabular form; and appendixes contain the opinion survey, a list of agencies which were surveyed, and chronological outline of events and procedures, and a copy of the questionnaire with overall results. Footnotes and references are not provided. (Author abstract modified)