NCJ Number
161130
Date Published
1996
Length
228 pages
Annotation
This report presents statistical, descriptive, and evaluative information on Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system during a time of significant change; in particular, Special Session Act 1995-33, enacted in December 1995, provides that juveniles aged 15 years and older can be automatically sent to adult court for certain crimes committed with a deadly weapon or for repeat serious crimes.
Abstract
Although the total number of juvenile arrests in Pennsylvania has declined since 1974, the number of juveniles arrested for violent crimes, including robbery, rape, aggravated assault, and murder, has increased. Factors associated with juvenile delinquency include drug and alcohol abuse, poverty, negligent and abusive behavior at home, and poor school performance. Recognized experts warn that, unless these and other factors are addressed, the future appears ominous given the large cohort of high-risk children. Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system is a shared responsibility between counties and the Commonwealth, and this diffused responsibility has caused recurring problems. For example, the juvenile justice system lacks coordinating planning and effective communication, little is done to measure program performance, and county budgets are not fully funded. To evaluate the juvenile justice system, visits were made to youth development centers, secure treatment centers, and youth forestry camps operated by Pennsylvania's Department of Public Welfare and to different private provider programs. In addition, questionnaires were sent to juvenile court judges, chief probation officers, district attorneys, public defenders, and private providers. Findings revealed that Pennsylvania has an extensive network of both public and private programs offering a wide range of services. The following concerns were also raised as a result of visit and questionnaire findings: overcrowding in public facilities, need for enhanced aftercare services, greater emphasis on prevention, the fact that older violent offenders can disrupt programming, shortage of specialized programs, complex categorical funding, high per diem rates at public facilities, and the need to modernize vocational training. The importance of evaluating juvenile program effectiveness is discussed, and recommendations to improve Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system are offered. Additional information on juvenile crime and the juvenile justice system is contained in 37 appendixes. Footnotes, tables, and exhibits