Analysis of Juvenile Crime Problems _ Juvenile Justice Needs by liuqingyan

VIEWS: 13 PAGES: 172

									                            Indiana’s Three-Year
                         Delinquency Prevention &
                         Systems Improvement Plan
                         Plan Update & Application
                                     FY 2006-2008




_____________________________                        i
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
INDIANA CRIMINAL JUSTICE INSTITUTE

One North Capitol Avenue, Suite 1000  Indianapolis, IN 46204
317/232-1233 Phone  317/232-4979 Fax

Heather Bolejack, Executive Director
Kate Gullans, Deputy Director Programs
Michelle Tennell, Youth Division Director/Juvenile Justice Specialist
Robert Mardis, Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group Chair

BUILDING SAFE COMMUNITIES
Every day in Indiana, individuals struggle to keep themselves and their loved ones free from
harm…

In our neighborhoods, home, communities, workplaces, on the roads and in our schools, safety is
one issue that affects us all. When public safety is breached and harm comes to individuals, both
victims and perpetrators enter a complex legal framework of agencies, advocates and interests
constructed with the hope that justice will prevail.

Guided by a Board of Trustees representing all components of Indiana‘s criminal and juvenile
justice systems, the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute serves as the state‘s planning agency for
criminal justice, juvenile justice, traffic safety, and victim services. The Institute develops long-
range strategies for the effective administration of Indiana‘s criminal and juvenile justice systems
and administers federal and state funds to carry out these strategies.

Improving Juvenile Justice & Promoting Positive Youth Development
Hoosiers under the age of 18 occupy a special place within the State‘s justice system. Not yet
adults, they are cast into a world which often requires maturity beyond their years. Because
Indiana‘s juvenile offenders and at-risk youth have special needs, problems and concerns, the
Institute‘s Youth Division works to improve the juvenile justice system and support projects that
prevent and/or reduce juvenile crime while promoting positive youth development through
community collaboration.




_____________________________                                                                       ii
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
ICJI BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Name                                 Represents
Jason Barclay, Chairman              Governor’s Office
Steve Carter                         Attorney General’s Office
Mgr. Tom Melville                    Proxy-Indiana State Police
David Donahue                        Commissioner, Department of Correction
Steve Johnson                        ED of IN Prosecuting Attorneys Council
Jane Seigel                          ED of IN Judicial Center
Larry Landis                         ED Public Defenders Council
Susan Carpenter                      State Public Defender
Russell Ricks                        Chief of Police
Hon. Sheila Carlisle                 Judge, Marion Superior Court
Dick Good                            Citizen/retired
Jeff Schrink                         Citizen/ISU
Shaunda Lynch                        Citizen/Deputy Prosecutor
Mark Stuaan                          Attorney, Barnes and Thornberg




_____________________________                                                 iii
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS
Indiana’s Three-Year Delinquency Prevention and Systems Improvement Plan

Analysis of Juvenile Crime Problems and Juvenile Justice Needs                  1
     Purpose                                                                    1
     System Components                                                          1
     System Flow                                                               15
     Juvenile Justice Statistics                                               19
     Demographic & Socioeconomic Trends                                        33
     Service Network                                                           43
     Problem Statements                                                        60

Plan for Compliance with the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act   62
      Plan for Removal of Status Offenders and Nonoffenders
         from Secure Detention and Correctional Facilities                     62
      Plan for Separation of Juveniles and Incarceration of Adults             63
      Plan for Removal of Juveniles from Adult Jails and Lockups               63
      Plan for Compliance Monitoring                                           64

Indiana‘s Three-Year Program Plan                                              66

Coordination of Child Abuse and Neglect and Delinquency Programs               99
     Reducing the Caseload of Probation Officers                               99
     Sharing Public Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Records                 99
     Establishing Policies and Systems to Incorporate Relevant Child
        Protective Services into Juvenile Justice Records                      103

Technical Assistance Needs                                                     103

SAG Membership                                                                 104

Staff of the JJDP Formula Grants Program                                       105
      Programs Administered by the Youth Division                              105
      Description of JJ Specialist & Other Staff Duties                        106
      Organization Chart                                                       108

Endnotes                                                                       110

Appendix A: Excerpts from Indiana‘s Title IV-E State Plan                      114

Topical Index of Statutes                                                      151
Numerical Index of Statutes                                                    159


_____________________________                                                        iv
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                        LIST OF FIGURES
Number                                              Name                             Page Number

Figure 1               Map of Indiana Counties                                             2
Figure 2               Map of Indiana State Police Districts                               4
Figure 3               Organizational Chart of Indiana Judicial System                     7
Figure 4               IDOC Community Corrections Grant Program
                       Participating Counties, 2004-2005                                  11
Figure 5               Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, All Offenses, 2000-
                       2004                                                               20
Figure 6               Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, All UCR Part I
                       Property Offenses, 2000-2004                                       20
Figure 7               Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Weapons Offenses,
                       2000-2004                                                          21
Figure 8               Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Buying, Receiving,
                       Possessing Stolen Property, 2000-2004                              21
Figure 9               Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Liquor Law
                       Offenses, 2000-2004                                                22
Figure 10              Reported Arrests in Indiana, Curfew Violations, 2000-2004          22
Figure 11              Reported Arrests in Indiana, Runaway Violations, 2000-
                       2004                                                               23
Figure 12              Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, All UCR Part I
                       Violent Offenses, 2000-2004                                        23
Figure 13              Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Drug Abuse
                       Offenses, 2000-2004                                                24
Figure 14              Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Other Assaults, 2000-
                       2004                                                               24
Figure 15              Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Sex Offenses other
                       than Forcible Rape and Prostitution, 2000-2004                     25
Figure 16              Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Driving Under the
                       Influence, 2000-2004                                               25
Figure 17              UCR Offense Categories by Percentage of Reported
                       Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, 2004                                  26
Figure 18              Comparison of Juvenile Arrest Rates for All UCR
                       Offenses, Indiana and U.S., 2000-2004                              27
Figure 19              Comparison of Juvenile Arrest Rates for UCR Part I
                       Property Offenses, Indiana and U.S., 2000-2004                     27
Figure 20              Comparison of Juvenile Arrest Rates for UCR Part I
                       Violent Offenses, Indiana and U.S., 2000-2004                      28
Figure 21              Commitments to the Indiana Department of Correction by
                       Gender and Year, 2000-2004                                         29
Figure 22              Juvenile Males Detained in Indiana DOC by Race, 2005               29
Figure 23              Juvenile Females Detained in Indiana DOC by Race, 2005             30
Figure 24              Indiana Trial Court Filings by Type and Year, 2000-2004            30
_____________________________                                                                      v
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
Figure 25              Indiana Juvenile Court Filings by Type, Divided by Percent
                       Race, 2004                                                   32
Figure 26              IDOC Juvenile Caucasian and African-American
                       Commitments by Year, 2000-2005                               34
Figure 27              IDOC Juvenile Commitments by Percent Offense, 2005           34
Figure 28              Substantiated Cases of Child Maltreatment in Indiana,
                       2000-2004                                                    37
Figure 29              Juvenile Abuse and Neglect Deaths in Indiana, 2000-2004      37
Figure 30              Indiana High School Dropouts by Year, 2000-2004              39
Figure 31              Number of Alternative School Participants in Indiana by
                       Year, 1995-2004                                              40
Figure 32              Indiana Public School Suspensions and Expulsions by
                       Year, 1999-2004                                              40
Figure 33              Indiana and U.S. Teen Birth Rates by Year, 1994-2003         41
Figure 34              Percentage of Indiana 8th Grade Through 12th Grade
                       Students Reporting Monthly Cigarette Use, 1997, 2002,
                       and 2004                                                     42
Figure 35              Percentage of Indiana 8th Grade Through 12th Grade
                       Students Reporting Monthly Alcohol Use, 1997, 2002, and
                       2004                                                         42




_____________________________                                                            vi
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        vii
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        Analysis of Juvenile Crime Problems & Juvenile Justice Needs

Overview of Indiana’s Juvenile Justice System
   The juvenile justice system in Indiana is best described as a network of organizations bound by their
   commitment to serve youth in our communities while protecting the public safety of all citizens of
   those communities. As in many other states, Indiana‘s juvenile justice system is decentralized in
   nature. The following is an overview of the various components of Indiana‘s juvenile justice system.

   PURPOSE
   Indiana State law delineates the principles that guide the operation of Indiana‘s juvenile justice system.
   Those guiding principles mandate that the juvenile justice system:

        recognize the importance of family and children in our society;
        recognize the responsibility of the state to enhance the viability of children and family in
         our society;
        acknowledge the responsibility each person owes to the other;
        strengthen family life by assisting parents to fulfill their parental obligations;
        ensure that children within the juvenile justice system are treated as persons in need of
         care, protection, treatment, and rehabilitation;
        remove children from families only when it is in the child‘s best interest or in the best
         interest of public safety;
        provide for adoption as a viable permanency plan for children who are adjudicated in
         need of services;
        provide a juvenile justice system that protects the public by enforcing the legal
         obligations that children have to society and society has to children;
        use diversionary programs when appropriate;
        provide a judicial procedure that ensures fair hearings, recognizes and enforces the legal
         rights of children and their parents, and recognizes and enforces the accountability of
         children and parents;
        promote public safety and individual accountability by the imposition of appropriate
         sanctions; and
        provide a continuum of services developed in a cooperative effort by local government
         and the state.1

   SYSTEM COMPONENTS
   Law Enforcement. Law enforcement agencies with juvenile jurisdiction in Indiana can be roughly
   divided into four categories: sheriff‘s departments, municipal police departments, the Indiana State
   Police, and miscellaneous agencies that do not fit neatly into the above categories, such as university
   and college police departments, school police departments/school resource officers, the Department of
   Natural Resources (i.e. conservation officers), and the Capitol Police. Indiana state statute grants
   authority to units of local government (excluding townships) to establish, maintain, and operate a
   police and law enforcement system for the purposes of preserving public peace and order and allows
   these governments to provide the facilities and equipment that such a system might require.2



_____________________________                                                                              1
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                             Figure 1
                                     Map of Indiana Counties




   Sheriff’s Departments. Indiana is divided into ninety-two counties (see Figure 1), each of which
   contains a sheriff‘s department per state statute.3 As prescribed by the Indiana State Constitution, the
   county sheriff is an elected official with a term in office of four years.4 The sheriff‘s department is
   responsible for maintaining the county jail and the prisoners within that facility, attending to and
   preserving the orders in all courts of the county; responding to requests for services within the county
_____________________________                                                                                 2
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   but outside municipal limits; and investigating criminal cases. Funding for the department‘s day-to-
   day operations comes from the county general fund.

   Municipal Police Departments. By statute, Indiana cities and towns may choose to establish a police
   department or a town marshal. Unlike the county Sheriff, the position of police chief is appointed by
   the city executive rather than elected by the voting public. Municipal police departments are charged
   with preserving the public peace and order by enforcing the laws within the boundaries of that
   municipality. Currently, there are approximately 456 municipal police departments operating in
   Indiana‘s cities and towns. The majority of these departments are not responsible for housing
   prisoners other than the relatively short period between arrest and transfer to a county jail or juvenile
   facility.

   The number of active police lock-ups operating in Indiana had previously been unknown. In 2000, the
   Youth Division of the Institute developed and administered a survey of municipal police departments
   to determine the actual number of lock-ups operating throughout the State. The results of the survey
   revealed that more than the previously known six police departments were operating active police
   lock-ups. In fact, the number of police departments reporting Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
   Prevention Act (JJDPA) compliance monitoring data to the Youth Division from 2000 to 2001
   increased 30%. The number of departments known to have active lock-ups now stands at 21.

   Indiana State Police. The Indiana State Police (ISP) was created via enabling legislation5 and is
   governed by a State Police Board consisting of six members appointed to four year terms by the
   Governor. A Superintendent of the State Police is also appointed by the Governor and is charged with
   the organization‘s general oversight and leadership. ISP‘s administrative office is located in
   Indianapolis; outlying posts are situated within the 17 State Police Districts located throughout the
   State (see Figure 2). State Police Officers are vested with the necessary police powers to enforce the
   laws that regulate the use of motor vehicles and to protect motorists on the State‘s highways. They are
   also given the same police powers as other law enforcement agencies within their jurisdiction with
   respect to criminal matters. While the State Police technically have jurisdiction over juvenile matters
   that fall within their purview, such cases are often handled jointly or given to local law enforcement
   agencies.

   General Responsibilities. The general duties and responsibilities of law enforcement with regard to
   the handling of juveniles are as follows:

             Taking a juvenile into custody upon the issuance of a warrant from a court concerning both
              delinquency and children in need of services (CHINS) matters;6

             taking a juvenile into temporary custody, without an order from a court, when there are
              reasonable grounds to believe that a delinquent act has been committed;7

             taking a CHINS into custody without a court order if the following conditions exists: a.) the
              child‘s physical or mental condition will be seriously impaired or seriously endangered if the
              child is not immediately taken into custody; b.) there is not a reasonable opportunity to obtain
              an order from the court; and c.) consideration for the safety of the child precludes the
              immediate use of family services to prevent removal of the child;8



_____________________________                                                                                  3
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                           Figure 2
                              Map of Indiana State Police Districts




           Source: Indiana State Police




_____________________________                                         4
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
             taking a juvenile into temporary custody without an order from a court, when there are
              reasonable grounds to believe that direct file offense has been committed.9 This would
              include the interrogation and questioning of a juvenile, as well as the custody of a juvenile
              under the same statutory guidelines as for adults who commit crimes; and

             transportation of juveniles in custody to and from placement locations and court proceedings.

   Prosecuting Attorneys. Prosecuting attorneys gain office via partisan elections in each of Indiana‘s 92
   counties. Funding for the position of prosecuting attorney is provided at the state level; all other
   related positions, such as deputy prosecutors or special prosecutors, are funded through county
   expenditures. Depending on the size and needs of each county, deputy prosecuting attorneys may or
   may not be assigned solely to juvenile matters. Generally, the function of prosecuting attorneys in
   juvenile matters involves determining whether the interests of the child or the community require
   taking action beyond what is considered usual for the given circumstances. In some cases, the
   attorney for the county Office of Family and Children may act in the capacity of prosecuting attorney
   in juvenile matters.

   Prosecutorial responsibilities with regards to juvenile matters include, but are not limited to, the
   following:

             Considering preliminary inquiries submitted by intake officers and making determinations
              whether to file a delinquency or CHINS petition, refer the case to a diversionary program,
              seek a waiver of jurisdiction, and/or dismiss the case;10

             deciding whether to seek criminal court jurisdiction waiver;11

             prosecuting and hearing delinquency and CHINS cases; and

             filing dispositional decree modification motions or probation revocation motions.12


   Public Defenders. Juveniles are afforded the right to be represented by counsel at all proceedings
   under the procedural safeguards provided by the State Constitution and the Indiana Code (IC).13 A
   juvenile and his or her parents/guardians are informed of this right at the initial hearing; the court will
   appoint a public defender if a.) the child does not have an attorney who can represent the child without
   a conflict of interest,14 and b.) the child and his/her parent/guardian have not waived the right to
   counsel. Once appointed, the public defender represents the child to the best of his/her ability in all
   further proceedings. The county Family and Children‘s Fund covers the costs of counsel; however,
   parents can be ordered to reimburse the county for such costs.15

   All counties with a population over 12,000 are required to establish a County Public Defender Board.
   These boards are responsible for adopting a comprehensive plan for indigent defense services within
   the county. Upon completion, these plans must be submitted to the Indiana Public Defender
   Commission.16 Indigent criminal defense services in Indiana are provided in one of three ways: a
   public defender program (currently in effect in 27 counties); a contract between the court and attorneys
   or law firms (in effect in 45 counties); and an assigned counsel system (in effect in 20 counties).17



_____________________________                                                                                 5
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Guardians Ad Litem and Court Appointed Special Advocates (GAL/CASA). GAL/CASAs are
   volunteers appointed by the court to act on behalf of youth involved in juvenile court matters of all
   types to ensure the child‘s best interests are represented throughout the proceedings. Court-appointed
   guardians ad litem are charged with providing services to a child as requested by the court, which
   includes but is not limited to researching the case; examining evidence; advocating on behalf of the
   child; facilitating communication between the defense, prosecutor, and judge; and monitoring the
   child's situation. All non-attorney CASA‘s and guardians ad litem, are required to complete a court
   approved training program.18 Once appointed, the GAL or CASA is considered an officer of the court
   for the purpose of representing the child‘s best interests.19 Juvenile courts in adjacent counties may
   establish joint GAL/CASA services and juvenile courts may contract with community-based
   organizations to provide GAL/CASA services.20 According to the Indiana State Office of GAL/CASA,
   in 2004 61 of Indiana‘s 92 Counties had a volunteer-based GAL/CASA program. These programs
   totaled 136 paid personnel and 2,025 GAL/CASA volunteers.21 GAL/CASA services are paid out of
   each county‘s GAL/CASA fund,22 although under IC 31-40-1-3 parents can be ordered to reimburse
   the county for up to $100 of such costs.

   Juvenile Courts. Indiana does not have a courts system, per se, specifically dedicated to juvenile
   matters. Offenders under the age of eighteen, therefore, are heard in one of Indiana‘s circuit, probate,
   or superior courts—county courts are expressly denied jurisdiction in juvenile matters—that
   specializes in juvenile cases (see Figure 3). Juvenile courts are typically established in a division of a
   superior court; jurisdiction is statutorily established in IC 31-30-1-1. According to the National Center
   for Juvenile Justice,

              ―Circuit courts have jurisdiction over juvenile delinquency matters in Indiana, except
              where the legislature has created additional trial courts and made adjustments to the
              circuit court‘s unlimited trial jurisdiction in a county. Circuit courts are created in the
              state constitution and established, for the most part, on county boundaries by enabling
              legislation. Superior courts are general jurisdiction trial courts created by the state
              legislature as local trial needs grow. Exclusive jurisdiction for juvenile matters is
              typically placed in the Superior Courts in urban areas. For example, Juvenile Divisions
              exist in Marion County (Indianapolis) and Lake County (Gary). The Superior Court,
              Family Relations Division has juvenile jurisdiction in Allen County (Fort Wayne). An
              additional exception created by the legislature exists in St. Joseph County, where the
              St. Joseph Probate Court (the only distinct probate court remaining in Indiana) has
              exclusive juvenile jurisdiction.‖23

   Counties bear all responsibilities and expenses for court operations, excluding judges‘ salaries. Such
   county-specific autonomy has produced a system that permits a great deal of discretion within
   Indiana‘s local courts but that has also introduced a lack of uniformity among the various state-wide
   organizational and administrative court structures. In the late 1990s, the State addressed its judicial
   organizational issues with the implementation of a more unified system of court administration and
   recordkeeping. Indiana now has a uniform case numbering system for every case filed in Indiana
   courts, uniform microfilming standards, a uniform schedule of retention for courts records, and a
   mandated recordkeeping process for all trial courts.24

   Such innovations in court administration and technology will continue to be a State priority, as
   evidenced by the establishment of the Judicial Technology and Automation Committee (JTAC) by the
   Indiana Supreme Court in 1999. As indicated in the 2000 Indiana Judicial Service Report, ―JTAC
   plans to move quickly during the next biennium toward implementing its long range goals of
_____________________________                                                                                6
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                          Figure 3
      ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF INDIANA JUDICIAL SYSTEM




                         Source: The Indiana Courts Webpage, http://www.in.gov/judiciary/about/intro.html

   establishing connectivity between systems, implementing AIMS (Automated Information
   Management System) standards, and ultimately moving Indiana‘s courts toward modern case
   management.‖ The 2004 Judicial Service Report indicated that the JTAC project, though briefly
   interrupted in 2002 to address previously unforeseen technical difficulties, has resumed satisfactory
   forward progress.25

   Also in 1999, the State legislature set aside funds to pay for an Indiana Supreme Court two-year pilot
   project to research methods of improving the delivery of services to children and families with
   multiple cases within the court system. The result was the formation of the Family Court Project,
   administered through the State Court Administrators office, which funded three family court pilot
   projects in Monroe, Johnson and Porter Counties. The project‘s overall mission is to coordinate the
   flow of information, court orders, and service delivery around an entire court-involved family and
   avoid conflicting and redundant court orders that increase the risk of failure for such families.26 In
_____________________________                                                                               7
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   2000, the State legislature approved funds to further expand the projects and six additional counties
   were added (Boone, LaPorte, Montgomery, Marion, Owen, and Putnam). The project expanded yet
   again in 2004 with the addition of Bartholomew, Brown, Jackson, Lawrence, Henry, Lake,
   Tippecanoe, and Vigo counties, thereby, bringing the participating county total to 17. Applications
   were solicited for the next phase of the program in January 2006. According to the Family Court
   Project‘s webpage, ―Programming has expanded to include nonadversarial dispute resolution and other
   programming for high-risk, low-income, and/or pro se families. The original counties remain actively
   involved in the Project and continue to share ideas and mentor new pilot counties. The private family
   court consultant continues to coordinate the efforts of the individual pilot counties and the statewide
   Project.‖27

   Juveniles in Adult Court. In Indiana, Juveniles charged with acts that would be crimes if committed
   by adults can be tried in adult court by two means: waiver of jurisdiction and statutory exclusion (the
   latter also referred to as legislative exclusion or automatic transfer.)

   Waiver. The Indiana Code specifies that waiver of jurisdiction refers to a juvenile court order that
   sends the case to a court that would have jurisdiction had an act been committed by an adult. In the
   event a youth is waived to adult court, all offenses for which a youth is charged will be heard there
   regardless if all charges qualify for waiver if standing alone.28 Waivers of jurisdiction are initiated via
   the filing of a motion by the prosecutor and can be granted only after a full investigation and hearing
   by the juvenile court with original jurisdiction over the case.29 (See Appendix A for the Indiana Code
   outlining the conditions under which waiver of jurisdiction may occur.)

   Statutory Exclusion. As defined in Indiana Code 31-30-1-4, Section 4(a), the juvenile court does not
   have jurisdiction over an individual for an alleged commission of the following crimes:

             murder, as defined by IC 35-42-1-1;
             kidnapping, as defined by IC 35-42-3-2;
             rape, as defined by IC 35-42-4-1;
             criminal deviate conduct, as defined by IC 35-42-4-2;
             robbery, as defined by IC 35-42-5-1;
             carjacking, as defined by IC 35-42-5-2;
             criminal gang activity, as defined by IC 35-45-9-3;
             criminal gang intimidation, as defined by IC 35-45-9-4;
             carrying a handgun without a license, as defined by IC 35-47-2-1;
             allowing a child to possess a dangerous firearm, as defined by 35-47-10 ;
             dealing in a sawed-off shotgun, as defined by IC 35-47-5-4.1; or
             an alleged violation of manufacturing or dealing in cocaine, a narcotic drug, or
             methamphetamine (as defined under IC 35-48-4-1), dealing in a schedule I, II, or III
             controlled substance (as defined in IC 35-48-4-2), or dealing in a schedule IV controlled
             substance (as defined in IC 35-48-4-3), if:

                  (1) the individual has a prior unrelated conviction for dealing in cocaine or a narcotic (as
                  defined under IC 35-48-4-1), dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance (as
                  defined under IC 35-48-4-2), or dealing in a schedule IV controlled substance (as defined
                  under IC 35-48-4-3); or
                  (2) the individual has a prior unrelated juvenile adjudication that, if committed by an
                  adult, would be a crime under IC 35-48-4-1, IC 35-48-4-2, or IC 35-48-4-3;

_____________________________                                                                                8
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                  and the individual was at least sixteen (16) years of age at the time of the alleged
                  violation.

 Also, as set forth by IC 31-30-1-2, the juvenile court does not have jurisdiction over:

         (1) a child who is at least sixteen (16) years of age who allegedly committed a violation of a
             traffic law, the violation of which is a misdemeanor, unless the violation is an offense under
             IC 9-30-5 (operating a vehicle while intoxicated).
         (2) a child who is alleged to have committed a violation of a statute defining an infraction, except
             as provided under IC 7.1-5-7 (this code defines offenses pertaining to, among others, false
             statements of age, furnishing false evidence of identification, possessing false identity, illegal
             possession, and the prohibition of minors in a tavern).
         (3) a child who is alleged to have committed a violation of an ordinance.
         (4) a child who:
             a. is alleged to have committed an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult; and
             b. has previously been waived under IC 31-30-3 to a court have misdemeanor or felony
                  jurisdiction.

   Probation/Supervision. Probation officers are appointed by the presiding juvenile court judge and are
   local, judicial-branch employees who serve at the pleasure of the court. Funding for probation
   departments is paid from the city treasury or county expenditures and can be supplemented by
   probation user fees. Although a program of state financial aid was established in 1979 to be used by
   local governments to support court probation services, the program has never been approved.30

   In the course of executing their duties, juvenile probation officers are generally required to:
         conduct pre-adjudication and pre-dispositional investigations and prepare reports as
            required by law;
         assist the courts in making pre-adjudication release decisions;
         assist the courts, prosecuting attorneys, and other law enforcement officials in
            making decisions regarding the diversion of charged individuals to appropriate non-
            criminal alternatives;
         furnish each youth under his/her supervision a written statement of the conditions of
            his probation and instruct him or her regarding those conditions;
         supervise and assist persons on probation consistent with conditions of probation
            imposed by the court;
         bring to the court‘s attention any modification in the conditions of probation
            considered advisable;
         notify the court when a violation of a condition of probation occurs;
         cooperate with public and private agencies and other persons concerned with the
            treatment or welfare of persons on probation and assists them in obtaining services
            from those agencies and persons;
         keep accurate records of cases investigated by him or her and all cases assigned to
            him or her by the court and make these records available to the court upon request;
         collect and disburse money from persons under his or her supervision according to
            the order of the court and keep accurate and complete accounts of these collections
            and disbursements; and
         assist the court in transferring supervision of a person on probation to a court in
            another jurisdiction. 31
_____________________________                                                                                9
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Detention and Shelter Care. In Indiana, detention and shelter care facilities are organized and
   administered at the county level. A juvenile detention facility is defined by IC 31-31-8-2 as a secure
   facility that is used only for the lawful custody and treatment of juveniles and meets state standards
   and licensing requirements as provided in Department of Correction rule 210 IAC 6 or is located on
   the same grounds or in the same building as an adult jail or lockup and meets the following four
   criteria:
            (A) Total separation between juvenile and adult facility spatial areas so that there could be no
   haphazard or accidental contact among juvenile and adult residents in the respective facilities. If space
   is used for both juveniles and adults, time-phasing of the use is acceptable if the arrangement
   precludes haphazard or accidental contact among juvenile and adult residents at all times. Sleeping or
   other living areas may not be shared under any circumstances.
            (B) Total separation in all juvenile and adult program activities within the facilities, including
   recreation, education, counseling, health care, dining, sleeping, and general living activities. Program
   activities may not be shared by juvenile and adult residents. However, program space, equipment, and
   other resources may be used by both juvenile and adult residents subject to clause (A).
            (C) The administration and security functions of the juvenile detention program must be vested
   in separate staff that, if the staff serves both populations, is trained to serve a juvenile population.
   Security and other direct care staff may not be used to serve the adult jail at the same time or during
   the same tour of duty that security and other direct care staff serves in the juvenile detention facility.
   Specialized services staff, such as cooks, bookkeepers, and medical professionals who are not
   normally in contact with detainees or whose infrequent contact occurs under conditions of separation
   of juveniles and adults, can serve both juvenile and adult residents.
            (D) The facility meets state standards and licensing requirements as provided in department of
   correction rule 210 IAC 6. The architectural and operational configuration of the juvenile facility must
   assure total separation.

   By Indiana law, a shelter care facility is defined as a place of residence that:

         (1) is licensed under the laws of any state; and
         (2) is not locked to prevent the child‘s departure unless the administrator determines that
             locking is necessary to protect the child‘s health.32

   Shelter care facilities operate under rules adopted by the Family and Social Services Administration
   (FSSA), Division of Family and Children (DFC) and must meet the standards outlined in IC 12-17.4 in
   order to obtain Division licensure.

   The juvenile court, by law, may establish juvenile detention or shelter care facilities within its
   jurisdiction. The court may contract with other agencies to provide juvenile detention and shelter care
   services. If the juvenile court operates its own juvenile detention and/or shelter care facilities, it is the
   responsibility of the judge to appoint staff and to determine the budgets of these facilities. All
   expenses for juvenile facilities are paid out of the county general fund; counties are statutorily
   prohibited from paying for juvenile detention facilities from the county Family and Children‘s Fund.33

   Community Corrections. Community corrections programs are locally administered and funded
   through grants provided by the Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) and supplemented by
   federal and local funding sources. As defined by Indiana law, a community corrections program refers
   to


_____________________________                                                                                 10
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                            Figure 4




 Source: Indiana Department of Correction




_____________________________                          11
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
         ―… a community based program that provides preventive services to offenders,
         services to persons charges with a crime or an act of delinquency, services to
         persons diverted from the criminal or delinquency process, services to persons
         sentenced to imprisonment, or services to victims of crime or delinquency, and is
         operated under a community corrections plan of a county and funded at least in part
         by the state subsidy provided in IC 11-12-2.‖34

   In order to receive community corrections grant funds from the State, a county or combination of
   counties must establish a Community Corrections Advisory Board (CCAB) to oversee the
   coordination and operation of the community corrections programs. Membership composition of the
   CCAB is mandated by law and includes key community and justice system stakeholders.35 If a county
   is unable to establish a community corrections program, the IDOC may establish and operate
   programs at the local level through contracts with public and private service providers.36 (See Figure 4
   below for a map of the counties receiving community corrections grant funds).

   The following are the types of programs that may be established by local CCAB‘s to provide services
   to juveniles participating in diversionary programs or adjudicated to a secure facility or probation:

         (1)   residential or work release programs;
         (2)   house arrest, home detention, and/or electronic monitoring programs;
         (3)   community service restitution programs;
         (4)   victim-offender reconciliation programs;
         (5)   community work crews;
         (6)   juvenile detention alternative programs;
         (7)   day reporting programs;
         (8)   other community corrections programs approved by the IDOC; and
         (9)   coordination or operation by CCAB‘s of educational, mental health, drug or alcohol
               abuse counseling as part of any of the above listed programs.37

   Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC). The IDOC is statutorily responsible for administering
   the State‘s juvenile correction system. Its mission is to protect the public by incarcerating offenders
   and to comply with established mandates in preparing offenders for reentry into the community.
   Juveniles ranging in age from 12 to 17 may be committed to the IDOC. Commitments are to the
   department as opposed to a specific facility; youth are assigned a facility and appropriate program only
   upon completion of an evaluation regarding his or her medical, psychological, educational, vocational,
   economic and social condition/history; the circumstances surrounding the present commitment; and
   history of delinquency.38

   The IDOC utilizes the Comprehensive Case Management System (CCMS) as the primary mechanism
   to provide a standardized and seamless system of services and programming that adheres to standards
   of high performance and correctional best practices. All juveniles committed to the Department (both
   male and female) participate in CCMS. The system is comprised of a series of distinct phases through
   which youth progress during their course of treatment and commitment. These phases include intake,
   growth, transition, and aftercare.

   The IDOC also utilizes the Comprehensive Program Assessment Instrument (a 130 item, quantitative
   and qualitative assessment instrument) that serves to measure programs against proven best practices.
   The Assessment reflects a program‘s research foundation, level of intensity, and criminogenic needs
   focus. It also provides specific feedback to facilities with guidance toward identified best practices.
_____________________________                                                                            12
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   The IDOC currently operates eight juvenile facilities. A brief description of each facility by security
   level is provided below.39

        Medium/Minimum Facility. These facilities primarily serve juveniles with serious
         property offenses, drug dealing/possession offenses, and selected personal offenses:

           North Central Juvenile Facility
            Housing at this all-male facility is within fenced areas. It allows temporary leaves, visitation,
            education, and limited activities outside its confines. It also receives all housed male juvenile
            parole violators whose status is pending a parole hearing and reassignment. This facility
            operates the federally funded Youth Offender Demonstration Project in collaboration with the
            Indianapolis Public School System. The average daily population for this facility in 2005 was
            143.

           Northeast Juvenile Correctional Facility
            This all-male, self-contained facility allows detainees limited participation in
            programs/activities outside the facility; grants temporary leaves under certain circumstances;
            permits visitation; offers traditional education and GED programs; and allows juveniles to
            work in the community. The average daily population for this facility in 2005 was 62.

           South Bend Juvenile Correctional Facility
            This male-only facility has a segregation area;, allows temporary leaves; offers on-site
            traditional education and GED programs; permits visitation; and maintains a Day Reporting
            Unit. The average daily population for this facility in 2005 was 92.

           Camp Summit
            This facility for juvenile males has a limited segregation area; allows temporary leaves; offers
            several programs off-site; and permits visitation. The boot camp program is highly structured
            and purposeful, with daily routines emphasizing military structure and decorum, physical
            fitness, academics, life skills, peer group resolution and individual challenges (see following
            section for a more detailed discussion on boot camps). The average daily population for this
            facility in 2005 was 69.

        Maximum/Medium/Minimum Facilities. These facilities are set aside for more serious
         offenses:

           Indianapolis Juvenile Correctional Facility
            This facility for juvenile females is staff secure, has campus style cottages, a maximum
            security unit, short term segregation, and observation cells. It offers off-site
            programs/activities, allows temporary leaves, and permits visitation. This facility also provides
            intake/diagnostic services for juvenile females. The average daily population for this facility in
            2005 was 197.

           Pendleton Juvenile Correctional Facility
            This juvenile male facility employs stringent physical and procedural security measures
            commensurate with its ―maximum security‖ classification. Housing is campus-style; it also
            offers a self-contained intensive treatment unit for juveniles with extremely serious emotional
            problems or severe conduct disorders. The facility permits visitation and boasts a full range of
_____________________________                                                                                13
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
             educational, vocational, medical, psychological and psycho-educational services, as well as
             temporary leave for youths participating in the transition program. The average daily
             population f or this facility in 2005 was 245.

            Plainfield Juvenile Correctional Facility
             This facility is also classified ―maximum security‖ and likewise takes appropriate physical and
             procedural security precautions. Detainees are housed in campus-style cottages. A self-
             contained intensive treatment unit for juveniles with extremely serious emotional problems or
             severe conduct disorders is located on-site. The facility permits visitation and offers a full
             range of educational, medical, psychological and psycho-educational services as well as
             temporary leave for youths nearing release. The average daily population for this facility in
             2005 is not available.

        Intake:
        Logansport Juvenile Intake/Diagnostic Facility
         This all-male facility features locked cells in each day room, segregation cells, and close-
         observation cells. It does not allow temporary leave and visitation is limited. Since this
         facility‘s primary purpose is to in-process new detainees, it receives all juvenile males between
         the ages of 12 and 17 committed to the Indiana Department of Correction. It also receives
         transfers from other IDOC male juvenile facilities for reclassification or short-term disciplinary
         segregation. The average daily population for this facility in 2005 was 45.

   Boot Camps. Indiana Code 11-14-2-1 establishes within the DOC the boot camp program for youthful
   offenders40 in order to:

           (1) improve the chances of correction and successful return to the community for youth
               offenders committed to the department by:
               (a) preventing the offender‘s association with older and more experienced criminals;
                   and
               (b) providing the offender with skills for living and rehabilitation; and
           (2) provide a commitment alternative to the department and the courts for dealing with
               youthful offenders who are considered capable of successful integration into the
               community after receiving rigorous training for that task.

   IDOC is responsible for implementing boot camp programs and establishing the rules associated with
   those programs. Specifically, IDOC is charged with adopting procedures that ensure boot camp
   participants receive opportunities to learn self-discipline, self-respect and personal accountability;
   acquire positive work ethic and job skills; form habits of cleanliness and hygiene; receive treatment
   and counseling; receive educational, vocational and life skills training as well as a vocational
   assessment in a paramilitary environment that emphasizes discipline, physical development, and
   positive value modification.41 Upon leaving a boot camp facility, youthful offenders work with a
   transition officer for one year to continue the lessons and coping skills learned while in the program.42

   Community Transition Programs/Parole. Community transition programs are administered at the
   local level and paid for through a combination of community transition program funds administered by
   the State43 and per diem funds from the IDOC for offenders from IDOC jurisdiction assigned to a
   community transition program.44 Courts with juvenile jurisdiction are required to provide community
   transition program services through their respective probation departments in counties that do not offer
   a community transition program.45 Community transition programs, by law, are charged with
_____________________________                                                                              14
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   providing services that improve an offender‘s chances of making a successful transition back into the
   community.

   Parole services are provided through the IDOC. Indiana has eight Parole Districts for adult and
   juvenile caseloads and three offices that provide services to juvenile parolees only. Each district office
   is responsible for monitoring offenders transferred from prison/juvenile correctional facilities to parole
   supervision. As of December 31, 2005, there were 7954 parolees, both adult and juvenile, currently
   being supervised in Indiana.46 Juveniles placed on parole remain under parole supervision until
   reaching the age of 21 unless the juvenile‘s parole is revoked or he/she is discharged by the
   department before that time.47

   Generally, the duties of juvenile parole staff include:

           establishing methods and procedures in the administration of parole, including
            investigation, supervision, workloads, recordkeeping, and reporting;
           assisting offenders in making parole release plans;
           providing employment counseling and assistance in job and residential placement;
           providing family and individual counseling and treatment placement;
           providing financial counseling;
           providing vocational and educational counseling and placement;
           supervising and assisting out of state parolees accepted under the interstate compact;
            and
           cooperating with public and private agencies and with individual citizens concerned
            with the treatment or welfare of offenders and assisting the offender in obtaining
            services from these agencies and citizens.


   SYSTEM FLOW
   The procedures for processing juvenile offenders and children in need of services (CHINS) through
   the legal system are described below. The corresponding statistical data required for this section of the
   Three-Year Plan are included under the ―Juvenile Justice Statistics‖ section that follows.

   Temporary Custody.
   Delinquents. A law enforcement officer may take a delinquent child into custody if the child:

       is under a court order;
       has committed a criminal or delinquent act; or
       is in need of services.

   Indiana statute delineates both delinquent and status (age-based) offenders but, contrary to popular
   usage, does not specifically employ the term ―status offender‖ when referring to the latter. According
   to IC 31-37-1, delinquent criminal offenders are children who commit acts that would be criminal
   offenses if committed by adults.48 Delinquent status offenders are defined as children who commit
   certain other acts and who need care, treatment, or rehabilitation. These ―other acts‖ are deemed
   illegal based on the status (age) of the offender and include violations such as runaway, truancy,
   incorrigibility, curfew violation, and minor consumption.49


_____________________________                                                                             15
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Children in Need of Services (CHINS). A law enforcement officer under a court order may take a
   CHINS into custody. In the event that the child‘s safety is in jeopardy and such an order is
   unavailable, IC 31-34-2-3 states that:

         ―…the child may be taken into custody by a law enforcement officer, probation officer,
         or caseworker acting with probable cause to believe the child is in need of services if: a.)
         it appears that the child‘s physical or mental condition will be seriously impaired or
         seriously endangered if the child is not immediately take into custody; b.) there is not a
         reasonable opportunity to obtain an order from the court; and c.) consideration for the
         safety of the child precludes the immediate use of family services to prevent removal of
         the child.‖

   Detention Hearing. If a delinquent criminal offender, delinquent status offender, or CHINS is not
   released from temporary custody, Indiana law requires that a detention hearing be held within 48 hours
   (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) after the child was taken into custody.50 A child
   may be released to his or her parents, guardian or custodian.
   The court may order further detainment of the child if the court issues a written finding of facts based
   on probable cause to believe that:

         (1) detention is essential to protect the child or the community;
         (2) the child is unlikely to appear for subsequent juvenile court proceedings;
         (3) the child has a reasonable basis for requesting that he/she not be released;
         (4) the parent, guardian, or custodian:
             (a) cannot be located; or
             (b) is unable or unwilling to take custody of the child; or in the case of CHINS
         (5) consideration for the safety of the child precludes the use of family services to
             prevent removal of the child.51

   By statute, delinquent status offenders and CHINS may not be held in a secure facility or in shelter
   care facilities that house persons charged with, imprisoned for, or incarcerated for crimes.52 In
   addition, Indiana law prohibits juvenile courts from placing children outside their county of residence
   in any type of facility or program unless a comparable facility or program with adequate services in
   not located in the child‘s county of residence.53 Indiana follows the 24-hour exception, which allows
   detention centers to hold delinquent status offenders accused of runaway for less than 24 hours in
   order to process and release them to either an appropriate non-secure, community-based
   facility/program or the child‘s parent/guardian.

   Intake/Preliminary Inquiry. In Indiana, juvenile proceedings are initiated with a referral to an
   appropriate party. In the case of CHINS proceedings, the referral is made to an intake officer; for
   delinquency proceedings, it can be made to an intake officer or prosecuting attorney. In this context,
   an intake officer is a probation officer or a caseworker who performs intake, preliminary inquiry, or
   other functions specified by the juvenile court or by juvenile law.54 Under Indiana law, any person
   may provide to intake officer information that a child is a delinquent child or a CHINS. In
   delinquency cases, the intake officer must immediately forward the information to the prosecuting
   attorney. If the prosecuting attorney has reason to believe the child has committed a delinquent act, he
   or she instructs the intake officer to conduct a preliminary inquiry to determine whether the interests of
   the public or the child require further action.55


_____________________________                                                                             16
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   The preliminary inquiry is an informal investigation into the facts and circumstances reported to the
   court and, whenever practical, should include information on the child‘s background, current offender
   status, and school performance.56 If interviewed during the preliminary inquiry, the child shall be
   informed of the nature of the charge(s); the purpose of the interview; the intake officer‘s role; and the
   child‘s Miranda rights and their ability to exercise these rights at any time during the preliminary
   inquiry.57 Based upon the information collected in the preliminary inquiry, the intake officer is then
   required to make recommendations to the prosecuting attorney or the attorney for the Department of
   Child Services (DCS) regarding further action on the case. The intake officer may recommend that a
   petition be filed, that the case be informally adjusted, that the child be referred to another agency, or
   that the case be dismissed.58

   Informal Adjustment. If the intake officer has probable cause to believe that the child is a delinquent
   child or is in need of services, a program of informal adjustment may be implemented by the intake
   officer. The child and the child‘s parent, guardian, custodian or attorney must consent to any program
   of informal adjustment. If the parents/guardians/custodians do not agree or fail to comply, they can be
   court ordered to participate in the program and can be found in contempt of court, following notice
   and a hearing, for continued non-compliance.59 If a child fails to comply with the program of informal
   adjustment, a delinquency petition may be filed.

   The components of a juvenile‘s program of informal adjustment vary by case and by jurisdiction;
   juvenile courts are free to determine the appropriate elements of such programs. By statute, a program
   of informal adjustment may not exceed six months in length, except upon the approval of the juvenile
   court. The court may order each child who participates in an informal adjustment program to pay a fee
   ranging from five to 15 dollars per month.60

   Filing of a Petition. The prosecuting attorney or the attorney for the DCS can initiate either CHINS
   or delinquency proceedings by requesting the filing of a petition with the court.61 If the court finds
   there is probable cause to believe the child is in need of services, it shall approve the filing of a
   CHINS petition.62 If the court finds that there is probable cause to believe that the child is a
   delinquent (status or criminal) child and it is in the best interests of the child or the public that the
   petition be filed, the court shall approve the filing of a delinquency petition.63 If an alleged delinquent
   child is being held in detention, the delinquency petition must be filed within seven days, excluding
   weekends and holidays, of the date the youth was taken into custody.64 Failure to do so will result in
   the child‘s release.65

   Initial Hearing. The juvenile court must hold an initial hearing on each petition filed in the court.66 In
   delinquency matters, the court will inform the child and the child‘s parent, guardian, or custodian of
   the following:

         (A) The nature of the allegations against the child.
         (B) The child‘s right to:
             (1) be represented by counsel;
             (2) have a speedy trial;
             (3) confront and cross-examine witnesses against the child;
             (4) obtain witnesses or tangible evidence by compulsory process;
             (5) introduce evidence on the child‘s own behalf;
             (6) refrain from testifying against himself or herself; and
             (7) have the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the child committed the
                 delinquent act charged.
_____________________________                                                                               17
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
         (C) The possibility of waiver to a court having criminal jurisdiction.
         (D) The dispositional alternatives available to the juvenile court if the child is adjudicated
             a delinquent child.67

   The court may also appoint a guardian ad litem (GAL) or court appointed special advocate (CASA)
   during the initial hearing or at any time during the proceedings.68 The court shall determine during the
   initial hearing if the prosecutor intends to seek a waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction. If waiver is not
   sought or has been requested and denied, the court will ask the juvenile to admit or deny the
   allegations of the petition. If the juvenile admits the allegations, the court may then proceed
   immediately to the dispositional hearing if all parties agree (see below). Otherwise, the dispositional
   hearing will be set for a future date. If the juvenile denies allegations of the petition, a factfinding
   hearing must be held (see below). The factfinding hearing can be held immediately if all parties agree;
   otherwise, it will be set for a future date.69

   Factfinding/Waiver Hearing. If a child denies the allegations of the petition, a factfinding hearing
   must be held.70 If a juvenile is detained in the interregnum, the factfinding hearing must be held
   within 20 days, excluding weekends and holidays, after the filing of the petition. Otherwise, the
   hearing must be held within 60 days of the petition being filed, excluding weekends and holidays.71
   The court must determine at the factfinding hearing whether the juvenile is a delinquent child or child
   in need of services. If so determined, the court must enter the judgment on the record, order a
   predisposition report, and schedule a dispositional hearing.72 If the court finds the child is neither
   delinquent nor a child in need of services, the child shall be discharged.73

   Predispositional Report/Dispositional Hearing. Following the determination that a child is a
   delinquent child or a CHINS, the court orders a caseworker or probation officer to prepare a
   predispositional report. This report should contain a statement of needs that addresses the child‘s care,
   treatment, rehabilitation, or placement and a recommendation on one or more of those elements.74 The
   person who prepares the report must be available to present testimony and recommendations to the
   court during delinquency dispositional hearings and, if possible, at CHINS dispositional hearings.75

   Based on the information provided in the predispositional report and testimony offered during the
   factfinding hearing, the juvenile court will enter a dispositional decree that is consistent with public
   safety and the best interests of the child and that:

         (1) is:
             (a) in the least restrictive (most family like) and most appropriate setting available;
                  and
             (b) close to the parents‘ home, consistent with the best interest and special needs of
                  the child;
         (2) least interferes with family autonomy;
         (3) is least disruptive of family life;
         (4) imposes the least restraint on the freedom of the child and the child‘s parent,
             guardian, or custodian; and
         (5) provides a reasonable opportunity of participation of the child‘s parent, guardian, or
             custodian.76

   Dispositional Options.77 The following is a brief listing of the dispositional choices available to
   juvenile court judges when adjudicating juveniles:

_____________________________                                                                                 18
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
       Supervision by probation or county Office of Family and Children;
       Outpatient and residential treatment facilities/services;
       Drug and alcohol testing and/or treatment;
       Community service/restitution;
       Residence at a shelter care facility/group home;
       Residence at a secure juvenile detention facility; and
       Detention at a secure state correctional facility.

   Review and Modification. Dispositional decrees must be reviewed according to statute. CHINS cases
   must be formally reviewed every six months;78 delinquency cases must be formally reviewed every 12
   months for appropriateness and again every 18 months on the question of continued jurisdiction.79
   Both can be reviewed more frequently if the court so desires.80 Time is measured from the date of the
   original dispositional decree or removal from the parent/guardian/custodian, whichever occurs first. A
   hearing to modify a dispositional decree can be requested by the juvenile court, the child, the legal
   guardian, the probation officer, the caseworker, the attorney representing the state, or a person
   providing services to the child or the child‘s family and, in the case of a child in need of services, by
   the guardian ad litem or court appointed special advocate.81


   JUVENILE JUSTICE STATISTICS

   Juvenile Arrests.82 As a whole, law enforcement agencies throughout Indiana reported a 2.2 percent
   decrease in the number of juvenile arrests brought to their attention in 2004 when compared to figures
   reported in 2000 (see Figure 5). This trend was reflected in an overall decline in reported juvenile
   arrests for Uniform Crime Report (UCR) Part I property offenses 83 during the same period, as that
   number fell from 7,781 arrests in 2000 to 6,895 in 2004 (see Figure 6). Similar downward trends are
   evidenced in juvenile arrests for weapons charges (a 23 percent decrease between 2000 and 2004; see
   Figure 7); buying, receiving, or possessing stolen property (a 12 percent decrease; see Figure 8); liquor
   law violations (a 10 percent decrease; see Figure 9); and the status offenses of curfew (a 64 percent
   decrease84; see Figure 10) and runaway (an 18 percent decrease; see Figure 11).

   However, over the same five-year span reported juvenile arrests for UCR Part I violent offenses85
   increased from 1,580 arrests in 2000 to 1,733 in 2004 (see Figure 12). Likewise, between 2000 and
   2004, the number of reported juvenile arrests rose for drug abuse violations (a 1.8 percent increase; see
   Figure 13); other assaults (a 22 percent increase; see Figure 14); sex offenses other than forcible rape
   and prostitution (a 38 percent increase; see Figure 15); and driving under the influence (a 32 percent
   increase; see Figure 16). It should be noted that the upward trends in juvenile arrests for these
   categories might be the result of a greater number of law enforcement agencies reporting UCR data
   than in previous years and may not reflect a genuine increase in actual offenses committed (see the
   section below entitled ―Reporting‖).

   For the fourth consecutive year, the category ―other offenses except traffic violations‖ was listed as the
   offense for which the greatest number of juvenile arrests were reported in Indiana (6,429 reported
   juvenile arrests in 2004), followed closely by larceny theft (5,383 juvenile arrests). Runaway
   violations (3,576 reported arrests in 2004), disorderly conduct (3,161 juvenile arrests), liquor law
   violations (2,822 juvenile arrests), and drug abuse violations (2,406 juvenile arrests) rounded out the
   top six. (For a breakdown of 2004 reported arrests by percent of total arrests per category, see Figure
   17.)
_____________________________                                                                             19
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                        Figure 5
                                Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, All Offenses, 2000-2004
                                      34800




                                                  34,789
                                      34600
               Total Arrests




                                                               34,493
                                      34400
                                      34200
                                      34000




                                                                                                     34,024
                                      33800




                                                                           33,841



                                                                                        33,746
                                      33600
                                      33400
                                      33200
                                                 2000        2001         2002       2003         2004

                                                                         Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




                                                                          Figure 6
                                       Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, All UCR Part I Property Offenses, 2000-2004

                                      8,000
                                                   7,781




                                      7,500
                      Total Arrests




                                                               7,247




                                      7,000
                                                                                                  6,895
                                                                           6,745




                                      6,500
                                                                                      6,590




                                      6,000
                                      5,500
                                                 2000       2001          2002      2003         2004

                                                                         Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




_____________________________                                                                                              20
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                  Figure 7
                                      Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Weapons Offenses, 2000-2004

                                   200
                                            200         199
                                                                    172
                   Total Arrests
                                   150
                                                                               151        155
                                   100

                                    50

                                      0
                                           2000       2001         2002       2003       2004

                                                                  Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




                                                                  Figure 8
                          Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Buying, Receiving, Possessing Stolen Property,
                                                                2000-2004
                                   1,600
                                   1,400
                                                          1,409
                                              1,332
               Total Arrests




                                   1,200
                                                                     1,214




                                                                                             1,172
                                                                                 1,138




                                   1,000
                                     800
                                     600
                                     400
                                     200
                                       0
                                            2000       2001         2002       2003       2004

                                                                   Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005


_____________________________                                                                                    21
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                               Figure 9
                                 Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Liquor Law Offenses, 2000-2004

                                 3300




                                                                     3,252
                                 3200
                Total Arrests

                                 3100


                                            3,122




                                                                              3,108
                                 3000




                                                       3,006
                                 2900
                                 2800




                                                                                       2,822
                                 2700
                                 2600
                                          2000       2001         2002       2003     2004

                                                                 Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




                                                               Figure 10
                                  Reported Arrests in Indiana, Curfew Violations, 2000-2004
                                 1400
                                                                              1,349




                                 1200
                                            1,270




                                                                     1,247
                 Total Arrests




                                 1000
                                  800
                                                       896




                                  600
                                  400
                                                                                       457




                                  200
                                    0
                                          2000       2001         2002       2003     2004

                                                                 Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005


_____________________________                                                                           22
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                               Figure 11
                                        Reported Arrests in Indiana, Runaway Violations, 2000-2004
                                         4500




                                                           4,379
                                         4000




                                                                       4,186
                                         3500
                        Total Arrests




                                                                                   3,720




                                                                                                       3,576
                                                                                            3,420
                                         3000
                                         2500
                                         2000
                                         1500
                                         1000
                                          500
                                            0
                                                   2000            2001          2002      2003     2004

                                                                                Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




                                                                               Figure 12
                                        Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, All UCR Part I Violent Offenses, 2000-2004

                                    1,850
                                    1,800
                                                                    1,817




                                    1,750
             Total Arrests




                                    1,700
                                                                                                         1,733
                                                                                            1,716
                                                                                  1,681




                                    1,650
                                    1,600
                                                   1,580




                                    1,550
                                    1,500
                                    1,450
                                                 2000              2001          2002      2003       2004

                                                                                 Year



   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005


_____________________________                                                                                              23
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                               Figure 13
                                Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Drug Abuse Offenses, 2000-2004

                                2,450
                                2,400




                                                                                        2,406
               Total Arrests

                                2,350




                                                                               2,366
                                            2,362
                                2,300
                                2,250




                                                                      2,266
                                2,200



                                                       2,179
                                2,150
                                2,100
                                2,050
                                          2000      2001           2002       2003     2004

                                                                 Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




                                                               Figure 14
                                   Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Other Assaults, 2000-2004

                                3,000
                                2,500
                                                                                        2,623
                Total Arrests




                                                                               2,400
                                                                      2,417
                                                       2,286




                                2,000
                                            2,129




                                1,500
                                1,000
                                  500
                                     0
                                          2000       2001          2002       2003     2004

                                                                 Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005


_____________________________                                                                          24
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                            Figure 15
                    Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Sex Offenses other than Forcible Rape
                                           and Prostitution, 2000-2004
                                  300
                                  250




                                                                                     276
                 Total Arrests




                                                                    228
                                  200




                                                                              217
                                         200



                                                     182
                                  150
                                  100
                                  50
                                   0
                                        2000      2001           2002        2003   2004

                                                                Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005




                                                             Figure 16
                        Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, Driving Under the Influence, 2000-2004

                                  300
                                                                              279




                                  250
                                                                    277
                  Total Arrests




                                                                                     231
                                                      226




                                  200
                                         175




                                  150
                                  100
                                   50
                                    0
                                        2000      2001           2002        2003   2004

                                                                Year


   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005



_____________________________                                                                          25
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                             Figure 17
                          UCR Offense Categories by Percentage of Reported Juvenile Arrests in Indiana, 2004

                                                                           Curfew and Loitering Law
                                                                                  Violations               Forcible Rape      Murder and Non-negligent
                                                                                     4%                         0%                 Manslaughter
                                     All Other Offenses (Except                                                                         0%
       Disordery Conduct                  Traffic Violations)
              8%                                  18%                                           Runaways                                        Robbery
                                                                                                  11%                                             1%




       Drunkenness                                                                                                                   Aggravated Assault
           1%                                                                                                                               4%




                                                                                                                                                Burglary
                                                                                                                                                  2%


      Liquor Law Violations
               9%



                                                                                                                                           Larceny Theft
Driving Under the Influence
                                                                                                                                               15%
           1%



                                                                                                                                     Motor Vehicle Theft
 Offenses Against Family and                                                                                                                2%
          Children
             1%



        Drug Abuse Violations
                7%


        Sex Offenses (Except                                                                                                                    Arson
         Forcible Rape and                                                                              Buying, Receiving, or                    0%
            Prostitution)                                                                             Possessing Stolen Property
                             Prostitution and               Weapons; Carrying,                                   3%              Other Assaults
                 1%
                          Commercialized Vice                Possessing, etc.    Vandalism                                             7%
                                    0%                            0%                4%

  Source: The Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2005


                 _____________________________                                                                                             26
                 Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
                 Youth Division
                 JJDP Formula Grant Program
                 FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                           Figure 18
                         Comparison of Juvenile Arrest Rates for All UCR Offenses,
                                       Indiana and U.S., 2000-2004
                 25
                 24          23.64                      23.98
                                                                                                    23.2
                 23                        23.22                                23.1
         Rate*




                 22
                              22.06
                 21                        21.68          21.17                                            21.26
                                                                                      21.1           Indiana
                 20
                                                                                                     United States
                 19
                              2000            2001               2002               2003              2004
                                                                Year
                                              *Expressed as Arrests per 1,000 Youth

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005; Annie E. Casey Kids Count Database




                                                           Figure 19
                             Comparison of Juvenile Arrest Rates for UCR Part I
                              Property Offenses, Indiana and U.S., 2000-2004
                         6
                               5.43
                                                         5.32                                 4.95
                         5                   5.23
                                                                               5.04
                         4      4.93
                                           4.55
                 Rate*




                                                         4.22                    4.12               4.31
                         3
                         2
                                                                                          Indiana
                         1                                                                United States

                         0
                                 2000          2001             2002             2003            2004
                                                                Year
                                                  *Expressed as Arrests per 1,000 Youth


    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005; Annie E. Casey Kids Count Database

_____________________________                                                                                        27
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                        Figure 20
                 Comparison of Juvenile Arrest Rates for UCR Part I Violent
                          Offenses, Indiana and U.S., 2000-2004

                      1.2
                                              1.14
                     1.15
                      1.1                                                            1.07           1.08
                                 1.06
             Rate*



                                                                     1.05
                     1.05
                                                 1.07                                               1.01
                         1                                      1.04          1.02
                                  1.00                                                    Indiana
                     0.95
                                                                                          United States
                      0.9
                                  2000            2001            2002            2003            2004

                                                                 Year
                                               *Expressed as Arrests per 1,000 Youth

   Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Report, 2001-2005; Annie E. Casey Kids Count Database

   Juvenile Arrest Rates. In 2004, Indiana‘s juvenile arrest rate for all UCR crimes was 21.26 per 1,000
   youth,86 a figure well below the national average of 23.20. In fact, for the years 2000-2004, Indiana‘s
   overall juvenile arrest rate was consistently lower than its national counterpart (see Figure 18). During
   this same span, Indiana‘s juvenile arrest rate for UCR Part I property offenses also compared
   favorably with the national average (see Figure 19); however, Indiana‘s juvenile arrest rate for UCR
   Part I violent offenses generally hovered very near or slightly above national figures in this category
   (see Figure 20). The national juvenile arrest rate for UCR Part I violent offenses was, for some years,
   calculated with missing data,87 the effect of which on national arrests rates cannot be reckoned
   accurately at this time.

   Reporting. The number of local law enforcement agencies reporting crime data to the Federal Bureau
   of Investigation increased slightly over the last five years, rising from 134 reporting agencies in 2000
   to 155 agencies in 2004. The Indiana Criminal Justice Institute (ICJI) acknowledges the importance of
   UCR data reporting and all divisions within the agency have identified as a top priority the need for
   more thorough reporting. ICJI has initiated research to identify ways to increase reporting statewide
   and is currently examining several models for potential replication. ICJI is encouraged by the recent
   increase of reporting agencies but realizes that more needs to be done to increase the State‘s various
   law enforcement agencies‘ participation in reporting UCR data.

   Detention. Based on the Compliance Monitoring report submitted to the Office of Juvenile Justice
   and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in 2002, there were 25,418 records in Indiana‘s compliance
   monitoring database for the sample period July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002. This number equates to an
   increase of almost nine percent from the prior reporting period. Compliance monitoring records
   represent instances of juvenile detainment in a secure facility rather than the number of juveniles
_____________________________                                                                                    28
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                             Figure 21
                          Commitments to the Indiana Department of Correction by
                                      Gender and Year, 2000-2004

                         1600


                                   1528
                         1400




                                                1448




                                                               1380
                         1200
           Commitments




                                                                               1237
                         1000                                                                                     Male




                                                                                            1031
                         800                                                                                      Female
                         600
                                          507




                                                       472
                         400



                                                                      433




                                                                                      334
                         200




                                                                                                   238
                           0
                                  2000          2001           2002           2003          2004
                                                               Year
   Source: The Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database




                                                             Figure 22
                                Juvenile Males Detained in Indiana DOC by Race, 2005 (n=781)

                                  Hispanic                                  Other
                                   4.90%                                    3.80%



                                                                                                          White
                                                                                                         58.40%
                                 Black
                                32.90%


   Source: Indiana Department of Correction 2005 Year End Review



   detained, as any particular juvenile could have been held multiple times during the sample period.
   Seventy-two percent (72%) of the 2002 sample was male, a one percent (1%) in that category since the
   prior reporting period. The most common offenses for which juveniles were detained include battery,
   theft, and drug offenses, in that order (it should be noted that drug offenses replaced runaways as the
   third most common offense during this reporting period). Juveniles were detained in adult facilities on
   337 separate instances; a marked decrease from the 700 such reported instances in 2001.

_____________________________                                                                                              29
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                           Figure 23
                          Juvenile Females Detained in Indiana DOC by Race, 2005 (n=142)


                                 Hispanic                           Other
                                  8.50%                             2.10%




                    Black                                                                       White
                    28.90%                                                                      60.60%



    Source: Indiana Department of Correction 2005 Year End Review

.

                                                             Figure 24
                            Indiana Trial Court Filings by Type and Year, 2000-2004
                  30000
                                                                    26,101                       26,653
                                               25,547                               25,861
                            24,419
                  25000

                                                                    CHINS
                  20000
                                                                    Delinquency
        Filings




                                                                    Status
                  15000                                             Miscellaneous


                                                                                        8,655        9,574
                  10000          8,080                                  8,215
                                                     7,888
                                                                                7,695                 7,245
                             6,244               6,434               6,281
                          6,033                 6,375               6,314           6,832         6,430
                  5000


                     0
                               2000                 2001               2002             2003        2004

                                                                     Year
    Source: 2004 Indiana Judicial Services Report

    In 2004, males represented 51 percent of all persons in Indiana under the age of 18. However, in the
    same year juvenile males represented 81 percent of all youth committed to the Department of
    Correction.88 Juvenile male overrepresentation in DOC commitments can also be found in data for the
    four years preceding 2004 (see Figure 21). Currently, there are no data available for Indiana regarding
    juvenile male and female arrests by offense category or severity, so an analysis of the above trend is

_____________________________                                                                                 30
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   unavailable at this time. This dearth of information in critical areas is a situation on which Indiana
   will continue to focus.

   In 2005, Caucasians comprised just over 58 percent of Indiana‘s IDOC juvenile male detainees.
   African-Americans totaled slightly less than 33 percent and youth of Hispanic extraction tallied just
   fewer than five percent of IDOC‘s juvenile male population during the same year. Youths whose
   ethnicity was listed as ―Other‖ equaled nearly four percent (see Figure 22). IDOC‘s juvenile female
   detainees followed the same basic ethnic distribution in 2005. Caucasians accounted for 60.6 percent
   of the population, followed by African-Americans (28.9 percent), Hispanics (8.5 percent), and ―Other‖
   (2.1 percent; see Figure 23).

   Juvenile Court. Overall, the number of juvenile court filings in circuit, superior, and probate courts
   increased throughout the State from 2000 to 2004. During this time, delinquency filings increased
   nine percent, CHINS filings increased 18 percent, status filings increased seven percent, and juvenile
   miscellaneous filings (filings not fitting into one of the above categories, such as court approval of an
   informal adjustment) increased 16 percent (see Figure 24). Pursuant to IC 31-31-10-1, probation
   departments for the juvenile courts were required by 2000 to maintain information regarding
   delinquent children and children in need of services who receive juvenile law services. The definition
   of juvenile law services was not provided in the statute; thus the Division of State Court
   Administration, in conjunction with the Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee of the Indiana
   Judicial Conference of Indiana, developed a definition of juvenile law services, which follows:

           ―The filing of a JD (Juvenile Delinquent) case, JS (Juvenile Status), JC (Juvenile
           CHINS), or JM (Juvenile Miscellaneous) case as defined pursuant to Administrative
           Rule 8, with a court constitutes ―juvenile law services” for the purpose of the reporting
           requirements of this law.‖89

   This reporting requirement marks the first time that statewide race and gender data for juveniles served
   in juvenile courts were made available. Indiana has grasped this opportunity to track juvenile
   demographic data in relation to delinquency and CHINS filings and put it to good use. In 2004,
   Caucasian youth represented 65 percent of juvenile delinquent filings. African-American youth, on
   the other hand, comprised 28 percent of delinquency filings during the same year, while Hispanic
   youth and youth of ―other‖ races represented five percent and two percent, respectively. The ethnic
   distribution of CHINS, status, and miscellaneous filings in 2004 mirrored the same basic pattern as
   delinquency filings (see Figure 25).

   Pauper Counsel and GAL/CASA Appointments. The number of pauper counsel appointments for all
   types of filings has been increasing steadily over the last five years. In 2004, pauper counsel was
   appointed in 3,358 CHINS cases, 16,437 delinquency cases, and 1,963 status cases. These figures
   represent increases of 231 percent, 135 percent, and 146 percent, respectively, since 2000. They also
   illustrate a genuine positive change and are not merely representative of an increase in raw data as
   evidenced in a corresponding increased rate of pauper counsel assignments. In 2000, pauper counsel
   was assigned for delinquency, CHINS, status, and miscellaneous filings at a rate of one appointment
   for every 2.58 filings; in 2004, that figure was reduced to one assignment for every 1.81 filings, a rate
   increase of 30 percent.




_____________________________                                                                               31
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                               Figure 25
                                    Indiana Juvenile Court Filings by Type, Divided by Percent Race, 2004
                                                      5%           5%             4%                   3%
                                    100%             2%           4%            4%
                                                                                                      2%
                  Percent Filings                                                                     10%

                                    80%             28%         21%             28%


                                    60%
                                                                                                    85%
                                    40%             65%         70%
                                                                                64%

                                    20%
                                      0%
                                               cy




                                                                           us
                                                              S




                                                                                                 us
          Other
                                                            IN
                                               en




                                                                           at




                                                                                               eo
                                                           H




                                                                         St
                                             qu




                                                                                                n
                                                           C


          Hispanic




                                                                                             la
                                           in




                                                                                        el
                                         el




                                                                                         c
          African-American




                                                                                      is
                                        D




                                                                                  M
          Caucasian
                                                                       Year
   Source: 2004 Indiana Judicial Services Report

   In 2004, GAL/CASA volunteers served as advocates in a total of 14107 cases involving 15,669
   children throughout Indiana. Over the same period, the 2,025 GAL/CASA volunteers around the state
   donated an estimated total of 349,716 hours in 2004.90

   Probation. Probation departments receive juvenile cases in one of two ways: supervision referrals
   from the court and direct referrals to the probation department. Over the last five years, the number of
   juvenile referrals received increased four percent, rising from 58,055 in 2000 to 60,431 in 2004.
   However, during the same time period the number of juvenile supervisions received by Indiana
   probation departments decreased four percent, dropping from 24,652 in 2000 to 23,670 in 2004.
   Forty-two percent of juvenile referrals resulted in the formal filing of a petition in 2004, while 18
   percent resulted in a recommendation for a program of informal adjustment. Dismissal was
   recommended in 14 percent of 2004 cases; the remaining cases were referred to another agency (five
   percent) or do not fit into any of the aforementioned categories (22 percent).91

   Supervision types can be divided into three categories: informal, post-judgment, and ―other,‖ which is
   comprised primarily of transfer acceptances. In 2004, informal supervisions totaled approximately 40
   percent of all supervisions, while post-judgment and ―others‖ represented 57 percent and three percent,
   respectively. These supervisions can also be divided by offense type. For the same year, non-status
   delinquents equaled 73 percent of all supervisions, followed by status delinquents (23 percent) and
   CHINS (less than one percent) .92


_____________________________                                                                               32
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Of the 24,371 juvenile probation cases disposed in 2004, nearly 65 percent were discharged
   successfully. Three percent were modified due to a new offense, while two percent was modified and
   committed to a correctional facility. Just over one percent were modified and committed to a non-
   correctional facility; one percent either absconded, transferred, or were emancipated. The remaining
   27 percent do not fit into any of the aforementioned categories.93

   Corrections. IDOC monitors its population and compiles statistics that provide a snapshot of
   Indiana‘s correctional population throughout the year. The number of juveniles incarcerated in Indiana
   has decreased 45 percent over the last two years, dropping from 1,824 on July 1, 2003 to 1,003 on July
   1, 2005. This decrease can be explained, at least in part, in Indiana‘s closing of two juvenile detention
   facilities over the same span. It also reflects Indiana‘s continuing commitment to reducing the number
   of juveniles committed to detention facilities via the implementation and increased use of graduated
   sanctions and other alternative correctional methods.

   In 2005, 33 percent of detained juveniles were African American (see Figure 26). The average age at
   intake for juveniles held in correctional facilities was 16 years old for both 2003 and 2004; however,
   the average age at intake fell to 15 years old in 2005. Seven percent of juveniles committed to the
   IDOC had one or more drug offenses 2005, while property offenses remain the most common offense
   category of those for which youth are committed to the IDOC (see Figure 27).


   DEMOGRAPHIC and SOCIOECONOMIC TRENDS

   Population Size and Age Distribution
   In 2004, Indiana‘s total population was estimated at nearly 6.3 million people,94 ranking Indiana the
   14th most populous and the 24th fastest growing state in America.95 Persons under 18 years of age
   (780,362 females and 819,933 males96) represented 26 percent of Indiana‘s total population in 2004, a
   figure roughly equal to that of 2000. This estimate runs counter to earlier predictions that Indiana‘s
   juvenile population would continue to decline into the new millennium. The proportion of adolescents
   in Indiana‘s general population mirrored the proportion of males and females nationally, as persons
   under the age of 18 accounted for 25 percent of the country‘s total population in 2004.97

   Population Diversity.
   Indiana‘s population is generally homogeneous, as the 2000 census revealed that minorities represent
   less than three percent of the population in 36 of the State‘s 92 counties, less than five percent in 63
   counties, and less than ten percent in 78 counties.98 However, Indiana has continued to experience an
   increase of in-migration during the past two decades, much of which involves persons of racially and
   ethnically diverse backgrounds. The most significant demographic phenomenon of late has been the
   steady increase in the State‘s Hispanic population, especially since 2000. During that time, the
   number of Hispanic juveniles residing in the State has risen 23 percent, from 76,749 in 2000 to 94,717
   in 2004.99 African-American youth continue to represent approximately ten percent of the state‘s
   juvenile population, a figure that has remained relatively unchanged in the last five years.

   Indiana‘s population is geographically concentrated in the five largest counties: Allen, Lake,
   Hamilton, Marion, and St. Joseph. Overall, roughly 35 percent of the State‘s total population and 38
   percent of all juveniles reside in these five counties.100



_____________________________                                                                             33
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                        Figure 26
                      IDOC Juvenile Caucasian and African-American Commitments by Year,
                                                  2000-2005
                     2000                                      1824
       Commitments
                                                    1563
                     1500                  1382
                               1217                                       1419
         Number


                                                                1009
                     1000       710        818         872                          1003
                                                                         766
                      500                                       691       561       591
                                455        484        594                           338
                        0
                             2000       2001      2002       2003     2004       2005
                                                              Year
                        African-American
                        White
                        Total Commitments


   Source: Indiana Department of Correction



                                Public Administration                 Figure 27
                                        10%
              Person                                IDOC Juvenile Commitments by Percent Offense, 2005
               30%



                                                                               Controlled
                                                                               Substances
                                                                                  7%

                                                                                     Public Order
                                                                                         7%

                                                                                     Status, 2%



                Property
                  42%                                      Other
                                                            2%                     Weapons
                                                                                     2%

   Source: Indiana Department of Correction

   Households and Families
   Single Parent Families and Non-Parental Primary Caregivers. While research indicates that the
   presence of a single parent family alone is not a predictor of future delinquency, there is evidence to
   suggest that children in single parent homes may be exposed to more risk factors that contribute to
   delinquent behavior or, at the very least, may be disadvantaged in terms of the economic, emotional,
   and social support needed for healthy development. In 2004, there were an estimated 211,723 single
   parent families in Indiana. For the same year, 28 percent of Indiana families that had juveniles under
   the age of 18 and no husband present were below the poverty line, a decrease of just under two percent
   since 2000.101 However, the number of grandparents reporting themselves their grandchild(ren)‘s
_____________________________                                                                            34
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   primary caregiver increased since 2000, rising from 48,181 to 56,076. The latter number represents
   56.6 percent of all grandparents in Indiana, ranking the State ninth in that category and well above the
   national average of 41.8 percent.102

   Divorce. Indiana is one of the few states that does not compile divorce statistics. However, the
   number of persons reporting themselves ―divorced‖ in the Census Bureau‘s 2004 U.S .Population
   Estimate decreased substantially since 2000, dropping from 518,243 to 229,269. The only other
   available indicator of divorce trends in Indiana is gleaned from annual caseload statistics compiled by
   the State Court Administration office of the State Supreme Court. As an indicator of divorces, these
   statistics can be inflated and otherwise confounded by instances of divorce filings later withdrawn, as
   well as multiple filings by the same couple. Moreover, these numbers do not provide information on
   the number of divorces that involve children each year. With this in mind, these data indicate that
   Indiana has experienced an overall decrease in the number of divorces over the last decade, dropping
   from 47,157 filings in 1991 to 41,587 in 2000. Unfortunately, more current data are unavailable at
   this time.

   Economic Indicators.
   Unemployment. Indiana‘s unemployment rate has been climbing steadily since a 10-year low of 2.7
   percent in 1998. As of December 2005, the State‘s unemployment rate was 5.3 percent, slightly above
   the national average of 4.6 percent. Unfortunately, the unemployment rates of the State‘s smaller,
   rural counties have also reflected this upward trend and, in most cases, have surpassed it. As of
   December 2005, 74 of Indiana‘s 92 counties (80 percent) reported unemployment rates above the
   national average, and 50 counties (54 percent) had unemployment rates higher the state average.
   Current rates are at their highest since they reached 5.7 percent in 1992.103

   Poverty. Indiana continues to enjoy one of the lowest juvenile poverty rates in the nation, as slightly
   fewer than 15 percent of Indiana‘s children lived below the poverty line in 2004, a figure well below
   the national average of 18.4 percent. Although this development is encouraging, too many of Indiana‘s
   children continue to exist in unsatisfactory economic conditions. In 2004, 22 of the State‘s 92 counties
   reported in excess of 15 percent of their juvenile population living in poverty. According to the
   Indiana Youth Institute:

                  ―Although the percentage of Indiana‘s children living in families with
                  incomes below the poverty level has declined since the early 1990s and
                  remains below the figure for U.S. children, many Indiana families have
                  moved from poverty into the economic group designated as ―low-income
                  working families‖. These families have household incomes ranging
                  between 100% and 150% of the poverty level. ‖104

   The data support this claim. In 2003, an estimated 189,829 Indiana children were living in low-
   income working households that struggled to provide for their families.105 This is evidenced by the
   number of families that continue to require ―temporary assistance for needy families‖ (TANF) funds
   each month. Although that figure has decreased over the last decade, it still remains high as an average
   of 51,025 families received TANF funds each month in 2004. Similarly, the percentage of Indiana‘s
   students who are eligible for free lunch/textbooks has increased steadily over the last ten years, rising
   from an eligibility rate of 21.5 percent in 1995 to 26.1 percent in 2004.106



_____________________________                                                                             35
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Child Abuse and Neglect.
   Continued concern about child abuse and neglect nationwide stems not only from the desire to reduce
   the harm done as a result of the immediate physical and emotional trauma, but also from a growing
   recognition of the potential for long-term, developmentally negative implications that maltreatment
   has on the child and the role it can play in the onset of future delinquent behaviors.

   Changes to Indiana‘s child welfare system led to significant increases of reported cases of child
   maltreatment and improved efforts to substantiate instances of abuse and neglect. The latter was the
   result of years of frustration with the former system. Efforts to combat the vagary produced by a lack
   of means to document the veracity of neglect and abuse claims culminated in a classification system to
   differentiate between ―substantiated‖ and ―unsubstantiated‖ cases of child maltreatment. Indiana
   further demonstrated its commitment to child abuse and neglect issues through hiring more
   caseworkers and implementing an improved caseworker training program. As a result, the State
   experienced declines in the number of substantiated cases of child maltreatment since 2000, though
   this trend has begun to reverse itself slightly (see Figure 28). In 2003, the Indiana General Assembly
   passed legislation to further strengthen child protection services (CPS) throughout the State by
   allowing CPS report writers greater latitude in executing their duties via the inclusion of a
   determination on the presence or absence of abuse and neglect indicators. House Enrolled Act 1437
   (2003) requires local CPS offices to provide to caseworkers training on the statutory and constitutional
   rights of persons subject to investigation. It also established a statewide Child Fatality Review Team
   to investigate fatalities involving children and requires the release of information relevant to
   establishing the facts and circumstances concerning the death of a child determined to be the result of
   abuse, abandonment, or neglect.

   Mortality.
   Child Deaths. The child death rate (deaths to children between 1 and 14 years of age per 100,000
   population) in Indiana has declined over the last ten years, dropping from a high of 33 in 1995 to 22 in
   2002. Said decline has improved Indiana‘s national standing in this category, as in 1995 Indiana‘s
   child death rate ranked40th in the nation; as of 2002 it ranked 23rd.107 Although the State is making
   strides in reducing the number of child deaths, there is still much work to be done if Indiana is to
   improve to the level of the nation‘s leaders.
   Fatalities from abuse and neglect have increased slightly since a five-year low of 44 in 2000, topping
   out at 69 in 2002 before decreasing to the 2004 mark of 57 (see Figure 29). Of the 57 reported deaths
   in 2004, 39 percent were the result of abuse and 61 percent were due to neglect. The majority of abuse
   deaths occurred at the hands of the natural father, while the majority of neglect deaths were the result
   of action or inaction by the natural mother.108 Recent media attention revealed that these figures may
   not reflect the genuine number of child abuse and neglect deaths. The purported inaccuracies may be
   the product of discrepancies in the number of child fatalities reported to the Family and Social
   Services Administration (FSSA) between 1999 and 2002. As reported the 2003 Kids Count in Indiana
   Databook:

                  ―According to FSSA, 48 child fatalities were omitted in the statewide
                  reporting for SFYs 1999-2002. …FSSA has appointed a Child Fatality
                  Reports Task Force to review the system used by the Indiana Division of
                  Family and Children (DFC) to report child fatalities.‖109




_____________________________                                                                            36
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                      Figure 28
                      Substantiated Cases of Child Maltreatment in Indiana, 2000-2004

                     16,000




                               15,634
                     14,000




                                                         14,229




                                                                                                                                                13,128
                     12,000




                                                                                                                  12,269
                                                                                    12,040
                     10,000
            Cases




                      8,000

                      6,000

                      4,000


                                                                          4,763
                                        4,415
                                                4,637




                                                                                                                                                                 4,539
                                                                  4,173




                                                                                                                                   4,290
                                                                                                     4,291




                                                                                                                           3,584
                                                                                             3,595




                                                                                                                                                         3,583
                      2,000

                         0
       Child Neglect               2000                      2001                      2002                           2003                          2004
       Child Physical Abuse
       Child Sexual Abuse                                                           Year
   Source: Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database




                                                                          Figure 29
                       Juvenile Abuse and Neglect Deaths in Indiana, 2000-2004

                        70
                        60                                                        69
                        50                                                                                                                 57
            Deaths




                        40
                                                                                                             51
                                 44                     45
                        30
                        20
                        10
                         0
                               2000                     2001                      2002                       2003                      2004

                                                                          Year
   Source: Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database




_____________________________                                                                                                                                            37
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   The Task Force found a number of factors that contributed to the underreporting of child fatalities and
   outlined a number of recommendations to improve the reporting system. These recommendations
   included:

            The development of a definitive definition of the abuse and neglect and the establishment of
             policy to designate a specific entity at the local level to determine whether a child death was
             the result of abuse or neglect;
            The standardization of reporting procedures among the 92 local Offices of Family and
             Children (OFC);
            The development of statewide computer system as the sole source of child death data; and
            The regional or local establishment of Child Fatality Review Teams (legislation was signed
             into law by the late Governor Frank O‘Bannon in 2002 authorizing, but not mandating, the
             development of CFR Teams at the local level).

   Teen Deaths. While Indiana‘s teen death rate (deaths to teens between the ages of 15 and 19 per
   100,000 population) has remained relatively steady for the 10-year period between 1993 and 2002, the
   State‘s rate has consistently been above the national average over the latter half of that period. Despite
   this consistency, Indiana‘s national rank in this category has steadily declined, slipping from 16th in
   1993 to 28th in 2002. The number of teen deaths has also remained relatively steady over the same
   period between, increasing from a low of 303 in 1993 to a high of 358 in 1996 before declining to 320
   in 2002 (see Figure 30). The number of teen deaths by accident, homicide, and suicide has been
   steadily declining over the last five years for which there is data. In 1999, teen deaths in this category
   numbered 263; in 2003 there were 196. The 2003 mark is the lowest this figure has been since
   statistics were compiled on the category beginning in 1990.

   Educational Indicators.
   Graduation Rates. Indiana‘s graduation rate, as measured by the percentage of freshman graduating in
   four years, has remained fairly steady over the period from 2000 to 2004. The rate was lowest in
   2000, when just 68.3 percent of freshman graduated in four years, peaked in 2001 with a rate of 70.9
   percent, and dropped slightly to its 2004 level of 70.1.

   The Class of 2000 was the first class in Indiana whose graduation was contingent upon passing the
   Graduation Qualifying Examination (GQE) in order to receive a diploma. Results from the first
   administration of the GQE revealed that many Indiana students, especially those with special
   education needs, may be unable to demonstrate the required proficiency to meet graduation standards.
   However, the overall GQE pass rate has remained fairly steady since its inception, hovering near the
   95 percent mark all five years between 2000 and 2004.

   Dropout and Alternative School Figures. The number of reported dropouts declined steadily
   throughout the majority of the period between 2000 and 2004 before sharply rising in the final year
   (see Figure 30). Despite this decline, Indiana has ranked consistently in the bottom five states in
   dropout percentage over the last four years.110 The decrease in the number of dropouts may be due, at
   least in part, to the number of students who are being retained in school systems through alternative
   school programs, the number and use of which has grown considerably in the past decade. Between
   1995 and 2004, the number of alternative school system participants has increased 2,278 percent,
   rising from 1,328 participants to 30,254. However, toward the end of that period the number of
   alternative school participants declined slightly, dropping from a high of 37,051 in 1999 to a five-year
   low of 29,826 before rising slightly again to 30,254 in 2004 (see Figure 31.) The marked increase in
   the use of alternative schools after 1997 is not surprising, considering that Indiana‘s school systems
_____________________________                                                                                  38
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                Figure 30
                            Indiana High School Dropouts by Year, 2000-2004

                    10000

                    8000
         Dropouts



                    6000    8,309
                                       7,443                                           8,045
                    4000                              6,714            6,769
                    2000

                       0
                             2000      2001              2002        2003           2004

                                                     Year



   Source: Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database

   have reported the number suspensions and expulsions consistently above 300,000 for almost every
   school year since 1999 (2001 was the lone exception; see Figure 32). Another related trend is the
   increasing number of families choosing a home school option. Growing parental dissatisfaction with
   the public school system may be why the number of home schooled students in Indiana has increased
   over 702 percent in the past decade, rising from 3,185 home-schooled students in 1995 to 22,372
   reported in 2004.111

   High Risk Behaviors
   Teen Pregnancy. The teen birth rate has steadily declined in Indiana since a peak in 1995, mirroring a
   similar national trend (see Figure 33). In 2003 Indiana‘s teen birth rate of 22 births per 1,000 females
   aged 15 to 17 years equaled the national rate in that category. However, Indiana‘s national rank was
   relatively high, as 30 other states reported lower teen birth rates for the year.

   Births to single mothers of all ages represented approximately 36 percent of live births in Indiana in
   2001, ranking the State 36th nationally in that category. While being a single parent is not a direct
   predictor of future juvenile at-risk behavior, it is interesting to note that in the same year 17 percent of
   all births to single mothers were to mothers under the age of 20 without a high school diploma.112
   Indiana will continue to monitor this statistic, as the combination of teen motherhood with lack of
   formal education can greatly increase the potential for exposure to future risk factors by both mother
   and child.

   Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs (ATOD). Since 1991, the Division of Mental Health and
   Addictions (DMHA), a division of the Family and Social Service Administration (FSSA), has
   sponsored a survey of ATOD use by Indiana students in grades six through 12. Indiana University‘s
   Indiana Prevention Resource Center (IPRC) conducts the survey and provides invaluable trend data
   regarding the use of and attitudes towards ATOD by Indiana‘s youth.



_____________________________                                                                                39
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                Figure 31
                             Number of Alternative School Participants in Indiana
                                             by Year, 1995-2004
                           40,000
                                                             36,715
                           35,000                                                            31,454
      Alternative School



                                                                                                                     30,011               30,254
                                                                                37,051
                           30,000
         Participants



                                                                                                      31,454
                                                                                                                          29,826
                           25,000

                           20,000

                           15,000

                           10,000

                            5,000   1,328       1,513
                                                              1,322
                               0
                                   95

                                           96

                                                    97

                                                                98

                                                                            99

                                                                                       00

                                                                                                      01

                                                                                                               02

                                                                                                                          03

                                                                                                                                           04
         Year
                                19

                                        19

                                                 19

                                                             19

                                                                         19

                                                                                    20

                                                                                                   20

                                                                                                            20

                                                                                                                       20

                                                                                                                                        20
   Source: Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database



                                                                Figure 32
                            Indiana Public School Suspensions and Expulsions by
                                               Year, 1999-2004
                               330,000
                               325,000
                                                                                                                              326,808




                               320,000
          Suspensions and
           Public School




                               315,000
            Expulsions




                               310,000
                                                                                                           314,699
                                                   312,202




                               305,000
                               300,000
                                                                                                                                                303,543
                                                                      301,243




                               295,000
                               290,000
                                                                                         293,919




                               285,000
                               280,000
                               275,000
                                                1999            2000                2001              2002              2003                2004

                                                                                Year
   Source: Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database
_____________________________                                                                                                                             40
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                       Figure 33
                 Indiana and U.S. Teen Birth Rates by Year, 1994-2003 (Rate expressed as
                    births to mothers aged 15-17 years per 1,000 females in age group)

                                    40
                                    35 3537
                                            3635
                                                 3333 32
                       Birth Rate   30                  31
                                                           2930
                                    25                          2728
                                                                     2627
                                    20                                    2425 2323 2222
                                    15
                                    10
                                     5
       Indiana                       0
       United States
                                     94

                                           95

                                                 96

                                                       97

                                                             98

                                                                   99

                                                                         00

                                                                               01

                                                                                     02

                                                                                           03
                                    19

                                          19

                                                19

                                                      19

                                                            19

                                                                  19

                                                                        20

                                                                              20

                                                                                    20

                                                                                          20
                                                                  Year
   Source: The Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count Database


   In 2004, the IPRC surveyed over 91,577 students in 297 schools in Indiana. While the survey‘s results
   were encouraging, Indiana continues to be above the national average for both monthly cigarette and
   alcohol usage. However, Indiana‘s 8th through 12th grade students have demonstrated substantial
   decreases in reported monthly use of alcohol and cigarettes since 1997 (see Figures 34 and 35).
   According to ―Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drug Use by Indiana Children and Adolescents, 2004,‖
   Indiana‘s prevalence rates for marijuana and most other illicit substances are still higher than the rates
   reported in 1991 and 1992. However, the data from the past five to six years indicate that in general,
   illicit use of most drugs by youth is experiencing a slow yet steady decline.

   Mental Health
   Mental Health & Detention. Beginning in 2000, the Youth Division of ICJI utilized Title IIe
   Challenge Grant funds to support the Indiana Juvenile Detention Mental Health & Substance Abuse
   Assessment Project. The project is designed to produce an assessment package that can be readily
   implemented and analyzed to determine the mental status and treatment needs of youth entering the
   state‘s detention facilities. The assessment package, still in the pilot phase, is a combination of the:

            Personality Inventory for Youth (PIY);
            Youth Risk Behavior Survey Adaptation; and
            Proprietary Demographic Survey instrument.

   The pilot sample included 299 youth entering detention facilities in 12 Indiana counties with juveniles
   ranging in age from 11 to 19 years of age with 76 percent of the sample being male. Sixty-six percent
   of the sample was white, while 22 percent was African-American, 5 percent was Hispanic, one percent
   Native American, less than one percent Asian, and six percent reported as ―other‖.




_____________________________                                                                                 41
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                          Figure 34
                   Percentage of Indiana 8th Grade Through 12th Grade Students Reporting
                                 Monthly Cigarette Use, 1997, 2002, and 2004

                                   50
                                   40
                      Percentage




                                                                                                    41.6
                                                                                     39.2
                                                                      37.2
                                   30



                                                       30.5




                                                                                                             30.5
                                                                                                           27.4
                                                                                             27.1
                                        25.8




                                                                                            25.1
                                   20




                                                                              23.8
                                                                             22.1
                                                               19.1
                                                              18.2
                                                14.7
                                   10          13.4



               1997
                                    0
               2002
                                         8th            9th           10th           11th           12th
               2004                                                   Grade

   The Indiana Prevention Resource Center 1997, 2002, and 2004 Surveys of Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug
   Use by Indiana Children and Adolescents



                                                          Figure 35
                  Percentage of Indiana 8th Grade Through 12th Grade Students Reporting
                                 Monthly Alcohol Use, 1997, 2002, and 2004

                                   60
                                   50
                     Percentage




                                                                                                        50.1
                                                                                                       48.1
                                                                                          45.8




                                   40
                                                                           43.9




                                                                                                    42.2
                                                                                       41.4
                                                                        38.1
                                                          36.0




                                                                                     36.5




                                   30
                                                                      34.1
                                            30.3




                                                        30.5
                                                       29.4
                                        24.9




                                   20
                                        23.5




                                   10
               1997
                                    0
               2002
                                        8th            9th            10th           11th           12th
               2004                                                   Grade
   The Indiana Prevention Resource Center 1997, 2002, and 2004 Surveys of Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug
   Use by Indiana Children and Adolescents
_____________________________                                                                                       42
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Results from pilot phase of the instrument revealed alarming statistics regarding substance abuse by
   juveniles entering detention centers. When asked about the frequency of substance use in the 30 days
   prior to being admitted to detention, 20 percent reported using alcohol more than six days, while 34
   percent reported drug use of more than six days. Even more disturbing was the percentage reporting
   daily use of alcohol or drugs in the 30 days prior to being detained – four percent and 24 percent
   respectively. When asked if they had ever been drunk or under the influence of drugs while
   committing a crime, 46 percent of respondents answered ―yes.‖

   With regards to the results of the mental health component of the assessment instrument, self-reported
   incidence of sexual and/or physical abuse among respondents was 30 times higher than what is
   observed in the general youth population. In addition, nearly a quarter (24%) of the respondents
   reported several instances of suicidal ideation, while just over a third (33%) reported that they often
   wonder if their parents love them.

   Hoosier Assurance Plan (HAP). HAP is the primary vehicle by which DMHA funds community
   mental health and addiction services. The HAP replaced the previous ―deficit‖ and grants-in-aid
   funding with a methodology that directly funds eligible consumers in the targeted populations.113 As
   established by the Indiana legislature, the HAP is designed to support and manage the delivery of
   behavioral healthcare services to a targeted low-income population who has clearly identified needs.
   The four primary populations served through the HAP include:

            Adults with serious mental illness (SMI)
            Children with serious emotional disturbance (SED)
            Persons with chronic addiction (SA)
            Persons with compulsive gambling disorder (GAM).



   SERVICE NETWORK
   Planning Process. The Indiana Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group (JJSAG) and the Youth
   Division of the ICJI Board of Trustees participated in a series of three (3) intensive three-year
   planning meetings to facilitate the development and update of Indiana‘s Three-Year Plan. During the
   second meeting, participants were asked to engage in what was called a ―Service Network
   Brainstorming Activity‖ to refine the work done for the prior three-year plan in identifying resources
   available throughout the state to address juvenile delinquency, the needs of youth and families and
   positive youth development. The results of this brainstorming activity are provided below under
   specific ―service network areas‖ that have been updated for the current three-year plan. A more
   detailed description of a number of key resources identified, as well as a selected federal funding grid
   are provided in this section.

   Service Network Areas. The following are the broad topic areas designed to organize the results of the
   planning body‘s service network brainstorming activity:

     Alcohol, Tobacco, and Drug-Related Programs/Initiatives
     Victimization Related Programs/Initiatives
       o Child Abuse/Neglect
       o Sexual Assault/Abuse
       o Victimization
_____________________________                                                                             43
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
     Mental Health Related Programs/Initiatives
     Education Related Programs/Initiatives
      o Special Education
      o Alternative Education
      o Extra Learning Opportunities
     Job Training and Career Development Programs/Initiative
     Health Related Programs/Initiatives
     Child/Youth Development Programs/Initiatives
     Public Safety Related Programs/Initiatives

     Alcohol, Tobacco, and Drug Related Programs/Initiatives

            State Drug-Free Communities Fund
                 o Indiana Criminal Justice Institute/Governor‘s Commission for a Drug-Free Indiana
                          Local Coordinating Councils
                          Regional Community Consultants
                          Indiana Point of Youth Program
            Indiana Criminal Justice Institute/Youth Division
                 o Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws Program
                 o Governor‘s Safe Haven Education Program
            Substance Abuse Prevention & Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant
                 o Family Social Service Administration (FSSA)/Division of Mental Health & Addiction
                     (DMHA)
                          SYNAR Study – Governor‘s Commission for a Drug-Free Indiana
                          Indiana Tobacco Retailer Inspection Program (TRIP) – State Excise Police
            Indiana Tobacco Prevention & Cessation (ITPC)
                 o Tobacco Settlement Funds
            U.S. Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) – State Incentive
             Grant
                 o FSSA/DMHA
                          Indiana Grassroots Prevention Coalitions Initiative
            DMHA – State Funded After School Prevention Coalitions
                 o Afternoons R.O.C.K. in Indiana Program
            U.S. Department of Education, Safe & Drug Free Schools & Communities (SDFSC) Fund
                 o SDFSC Governor‘s Program – FSSA/DMHA
                          Geminus Corporation – LEAD Initiative
                 o Indiana Department of Education SDFSC Grant Program
            National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
                 o Indiana Criminal Justice Institute/Governor‘s Council on Impaired and Dangerous
                     Driving
                          DUI Indiana Taskforces
            Indiana Department of Health
                 o PEA Soup Program (Tobacco Prevention for Pregnant Mothers)
            Indiana University, Indiana Prevention Resource Center(IPRC)
                 o Alcohol & Drug Use Survey
            Indiana Coalition to Reduce Underage Drinking
                 o Project ACE – Alcohol Compliance Enforcement training program
_____________________________                                                                     44
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
            Indiana Association of Prevention Professionals (IAPP)
            Indiana High School Athletic Association (IHSAA)
                 o Tobacco Prevention Initiative
            Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD)
                 o Statewide Coordinator
                 o Local Chapters
            Smoke Free Indiana
            PRIDE Clubs
            Teen Institute

     Victimization Related Programs/Initiatives

     Child Abuse/Neglect

           Prevent Child Abuse Indiana
                 o State & Local Chapters
           FSSA/Division of Family & Children (DFC)
                 o Child Abuse & Neglect State Grants
                 o Family Preservation & Support Services Funds
                 o Family Violence Prevention/Services Funds
                 o Women & Children (WIC) Program
                 o Healthy Families Indiana
           Purdue University/Community System wide Response (CSR)
                 o It‘s My Child Too (Teen Parenting Program for Males)
                 o Have a Healthy Baby (Teen Mothers Program)
           Department of Education
                   No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
                         Title I, Part D Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk Funding
           Child Protection Teams
           Guardian Ad Litem/Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) Programs
           Kid‘s Voice
           Child Advocates
           Indiana Association of Residential Child Caring Facilities
           Listing of Licenses Residential Childcare/Foster Care Programs – Indiana Judicial Center

     Sexual Assault/Abuse

            ICJI/Victim‘s Assistance Division
                 o STOP Violence Against Women Act Grants
                 o State Victims of Crime Compensation (sex crimes)
            Indiana Coalition Against Sexual Assault (INCASA)
            Purdue University/Community System wide Response
                 o C.A.R.e (Communities Against Rape) Initiative – Indiana Department of Health
                     Funding

     Victimization

_____________________________                                                                          45
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
            ICJI/Victim‘s Assistance Division
                 o Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Grants
                 o State Victims of Crime Compensation (violent crimes)
            Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence
            Indiana Victims Advocacy Network (IVAN)

     Mental Health Related Programs/Initiatives

            Indiana Department of Education
                 o Office of Student Services
                         School Counseling and Student Assistance Services
                         Elementary School Counseling Grants
                         Community Crisis Response Team
            FSSA/DMHA
                 o Community Mental Health Services Block Grant
                 o Social Services Block Grant
                 o State Funds
                         Hoosier Assurance Plan
                                 DMHA-Certified Managed Care Providers (MCPs)
                         Community Mental Health Centers
                         DAWN Project Replication Grants
                         Indiana State Psychiatric Hospitals
                                 Logansport State Hospital, Evansville State Hospital, Larue D. Carter
                                    Memorial Hospital, Richmond State Hospital, Madison State
                                    Hospital, Evansville Psychiatric Children‘s Center, Delta Services
                         Private Residential Treatment Facilities
                                 FSSA/DMHA Director of Service Providers
                 o IARCCA, Association of Children & Family Service Providers
                 o Indiana Counseling Association
                 o Indiana School Counselor Association
                 o Indiana Association of School Psychologists
                 o Association of Retarded Persons (ARC)
                 o Mental Health Association
                         Childhood Mental Health Committee

     Education Related Programs/Initiatives
     Special Education

            Indiana Department of Education
                 o Division of Exceptional Learners
                          State APC Funding
                          Special Education Planning Districts (67)
                          Alternative/Wrap Around Services Team
                          State Advisory Council of the Education of Students with Disabilities
            Indiana Council of Administrators of Special Education (ICASE)
            Association of Retarded Persons (ARC)
            United Way
_____________________________                                                                        46
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                 o    Sheltered Workshop Program

     Alternative Education
        Indiana Department of Education
               o Alternative Education and Learning Opportunities Division
                       Alternative Education Grants (259 Local Programs)
                       Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) Program
               o No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
                       Title V, Part B, Public Charter Schools
        Home Schooling
               o Indiana Association of Home Educators
               o Home School Legal Defense Association
               o Life Education and Resource Network (LEARN)
               o Southwest Indiana Home School Association
               o Northeast LIFE Association
               o East Central Home School Association

     Extra Learning Opportunities (ELOs) Programs

            Indiana Department of Education
                 o No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
                         Title I, Part B, Subpart 3, EVEN START Educational Agency Grants for
                            Family Literacy
                         Title IV ,Part A, Safe & Drug-Free Schools and Communities funds
                         Title IV ,part B, 21st Century Community Learning Centers Grants
                 o Indiana Attorney General‘s Office & Indiana State Bar Association
                         Project PEACE (Peaceful Endings through Attorneys, Children, and
                            Educators)
            ICJI/Youth Division
                 o Governor‘s Safe Haven Education Grant Program
            Purdue University/4-H Cooperative Extension Services
                 o Project LEAD (Legal Education to Arrest Delinquency)
            FSSA/Division of Family & Children (DFC)
                 o Child Care & Development Block Grant
                         Head Start Programs
            Indiana Department of Health
                 o Abstinence Education Funds
            United Way
                 o Faith Based After school Programs
            Local Education Foundations

     Job Training and Career Development Programs/Initiatives

            Department of Workforce Development
                o Indiana School-To-Work Program
                o John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program
                o Welfare-To-Work Programs
_____________________________                                                                    47
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                 o    Job Training Partnership Act funds
                 o    Competitive Funds for Innovative Youth Programs (IDOE)
                 o    Workforce Investment Boards
                 o    Work One Centers

            Indiana Department of Education
                 o Office of Student Services
                         Indiana Education & Career Services
                 o Office of Career & Technical Education
                         Future Farmers of America
            Indiana Commission on Community Service & Volunteerism
                 o AmeriCorps
            Junior Achievement
            Youth Job Corp
            Law Enforcement Career Camps/Explorers Program
            Building Ladders for Success Program (Partners for Communities)
            Indiana Career & Postsecondary Advancement Center
            Indiana Association of College Admissions Counseling

     Health Related Programs/Initiatives

            State Department of Health
                 o Governor‘s Council for Physical Fitness & Sports
                          Governor‘s Fitness Award
                 o Division of HIV/STD
                          Local Prevention Programs
                          HIV Care Coordination Program
                 o Maternal & Child Health Services (MCHS) Division
                          Maternal & Child Health Block Grant
                          Federal Sexual Abstinence Education Block Grant
                                  Indiana RESPECT (Indiana Reduces Early Sex & Pregnancy by
                                    Educating Children & Teens) Program
                          Prenatal Substance Use Prevention Program
                          Child Injury Prevention Program
                 o Women, Infants, & Children Division
            Community Health Centers
            Indiana Department of Education
                 o Office Student Services
                          School AIDS Resource Person (ARP)
                          AIDS Advisory Councils
            Purdue University Cooperative Extension Services
                 o USDA Expanded Foods & Nutrition Program
                 o Local 4-H Programs
            Indiana Minority Health Coalition
            FSSA/DFC
                 o Hoosier Healthwise Program

_____________________________                                                                  48
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
     Child/Youth Development Programs/Initiatives
       ICJI/Youth Division
              o Point of Youth Program
       FSSA/OFC & DMHA
       Teen Institute
              o Geminus Corporation – LEAD Initiative
              o Child Care & Development Block Grant
              o Head Start
              o First Steps/Step Ahead
       Indiana Youth Institute
              o Youth Development Academy
              o LINK (Linking Indiana Neighbors with Kids) Initiative
              o Kids Count in Indiana Conference
       Purdue University/Youth Development Division
              o Community System wide Response
              o Cooperative Extension Offices
              o Local 4-H
       Indiana Youth Services Association
              o Youth Services Bureaus
       Indiana Association of Cities & Towns
              o Positive Youth Development Initiative
       Girls‘ & Boys‘ State
       Boys‘ & Girls‘ Clubs
       Boy & Girl Scouts
       21st Century Scholars
       Big Brothers/Big Sisters
       Girls, Inc.
       Faith Based Recreational & Youth Group Programs
       PRIDE Clubs
       Future Farmers of America
       Marion County Commission on Youth (MCCOY)
       Police Athletic Leagues
       Character Council
       Commission on the Social Status of African-American Males
       Indiana Latino Institute
       Kiwanis Clubs
              o ―Outstanding Kid Awards‖
              o Key Clubs
       Lion‘s Clubs
              o Youth Initiatives
       Rotary Clubs
              o Youth Initiatives
       Elks Clubs
              o Exchange Clubs




_____________________________                                           49
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
     Public Safety Related Programs/Initiatives

            ICJI/Council on Impaired and Dangerous Driving
                 o National Highway Traffic Safety Institute Funds
                           Operation Pull Over
                           DUI Indiana Taskforces
                           Safe Communities/Safe Kids Grants
            ICJI/Youth Division
                 o Governor‘s Safe Haven Education Grants program
                 o Countywide School Safety Commissions
            Indiana Department of Education
                 o School Traffic Safety and Emergency Planning Division
                 o Office of Student Services
                           Indiana School Safety Specialist Academy (Safe Haven Funding)
            State Police
                 o Gang Initiatives
            Indiana Youth Service Association
                 o Youth Service Bureaus – Project Safe Place
            Purdue University/Community System wide Response
                 o Drive RITE Initiative (Indiana Law Enforcement Academy)
            Counter-Terrorism and Security Council
            State Emergency Management Agency
                 o Indiana Safety Net
                 o Sparky the Fire Dog Program
                 o Public Safety Training Institute
            Indiana Medical Association
                 o Bullying Curriculum
            Emergency Response Commission
            Bicycle Action Program
            Indiana Fire Chiefs Association
            Indiana Sheriff‘s Association
            Indiana Association of Chiefs of Police
            Center for Successful Parenting

   Service Network Selected Program Descriptions.

   Governor’s Commission For A Drug-Free Indiana & Governor’s Council on Impaired & Dangerous
   Driving. Both the Council and the Commission are divisions of the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
   and thus provide the Youth Division of ICJI opportunities to coordinate efforts and initiatives that
   affect youth issues across the State.

   The Council is the public opinion catalyst and the implementing body for statewide action to reduce
   death and injury on Indiana roadways. By administering federal funding from the National Highway
   Traffic Safety Administration, the Council provides targeted traffic safety grants to state and local
   organizations. The Council coordinates aggressive public information campaigns designed for
   implementation at the local level and provides materials, grants funding, and information to local


_____________________________                                                                          50
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   traffic safety advocates. Moreover, the Council serves as Indiana‘s primary source for information
   and research on traffic safety issues that directly affect public safety and policy.

   Created in 1989, the Commission is charged by statute with developing a comprehensive statewide
   approach to alcohol and other drug problems through advising the Governor and General Assembly on
   legislative strategies, mobilizing communities and coordinating state efforts. Through a network of
   field and support staff, the Commission assists local communities in the development of a community
   comprehensive plan to address those issues.

   Local communities are eligible to establish Local Coordinating Councils (LCC), which are, by statute,
   defined as a countywide citizen body approved by the Commission to plan, monitor, and evaluate
   comprehensive local alcohol and drug abuse plans. LCCs are broad-based community coalitions that
   make recommendations on how State Drug Free Communities funds are spent in each county. The
   Commission administers the State Drug Free Communities Fund established in 1990, consisting of a
   combination of public and private funding sources including federal, state, and local monies. The fund
   was statutorily established114 to promote comprehensive alcohol and drug abuse prevention initiatives
   by supplementing state and federal funding for the coordination and provision of treatment, education,
   prevention, and criminal justice efforts.

   The Commission is also charged with providing technical assistance and guidance to LCCs, which
   includes the establishment of operating guidelines for these, mainly, volunteer organizations. This has
   been accomplished through a system of Regional Community Consultants who serve as the technical
   assistance mechanism of the Commission for the LCC‘s. (See Appendix F)

   Point of Youth (POY) involves approximately 40 youth from around the State who are selected based
   on adult referred applications to the Youth Division of ICJI to serve for one year to give a unified
   voice on substance abuse, traffic and public safety issues to the Governor, Indiana General Assembly
   and other key decision makers.115 For the past ten (10) years ICJI has sponsored a Youth Summit.
   This event is an attempt to further develop the voice of Indiana youth with regards to the issues that
   the agency is involved with. Over one-hundred (300) selected youth from around the State gather to
   discuss alcohol, tobacco and other drug issues, traffic and public safety issues with key policymakers,
   community members and each other. The Summit encourages Hoosier youth to become involved with
   drug-free and safety advocacy by building relationships with their state representatives and by
   developing connections within their local communities. POY members are highly involved with the
   planning and implementation of the Summit and act as facilitators at the event.

   Indiana Tobacco Retailer Inspection Program (TRIP). Administered by the Family and Social
   Services Administration (FSSA) Division of Mental Health and Addiction (DMHA) in conjunction
   with the Indiana Alcoholic Beverage Commission, TRIP enforces Indiana Code 35-46-1-10.2. This
   code establishes progressive penalties for retailers who sell tobacco to minors under the age of 18,
   while section 11(c) of the code provides for a system of fines for retailers who fail to post a notice
   informing youth under the age of 18 that it is illegal for them to purchase tobacco.

   DMHA utilizes inspections teams made up of off-duty police officers, young people aged 16 and 17
   and adult monitors organized by the Indiana Prevention Resource Center. The inspection teams
   conduct unannounced inspections of tobacco retail outlets throughout the state. Youth involved with
   the inspections carry identification and honestly answer all questions posed to them by the clerk they
   attempt to purchase tobacco products from. If a sale is made, the officer issues a notice of violation to

_____________________________                                                                               51
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   the store within 48 hours of the inspection and the Indiana Alcoholic Beverage Commission
   prosecutors issue notices of civil money penalty and handle prosecution of violators.

   Local Prevention Services Coalition/DMHA After-School Prevention Programs. In 1997, the Indiana
   Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA), Division of Mental Health (DMH) initiated a
   strategy to focus limited prevention funds on the population most likely to benefit from prevention
   funds using proven strategies during the most vulnerable times. Research identified young adolescents
   between the ages of ten (10) and fourteen (14) as the most vulnerable population and the hours
   immediately following school (3 p.m. to 6 p.m.) as the time that this population is most vulnerable for
   at-risk behaviors. Based on this data, the DMHA implemented its After-School Prevention Program.

   In order to support the implementation of After-School Prevention Programs across the state, DMHA
   began funding Local Prevention Services Coalitions to coordinate the delivery of proactive primary
   prevention programs to the targeted population (10-14 year olds). There are fourteen (14) Prevention
   Services Coalition around the State and there must be a minimum of five (5) subcontractors to deliver
   programming to the target population within that service area (see Appendix G). After-School
   Prevention Programs are to consist of two types of programming: focused prevention activities, which
   include such activities as conflict resolution, refusal skills/resistance training, and normative education
   programming; and supportive prevention activities, including such activities as remedial tutoring, peer
   or adult mentoring programs, positive peer organizations, and structured recreational time.

   Indiana Prevention Resource Center. The IPRC, a part of Indiana University, is a statewide
   clearinghouse for prevention technical assistance and information about alcohol, tobacco, and other
   drugs for the State of Indiana. IPRC serves as Indiana‘s officially designated RADAR (Regional
   Alcohol and Drug Awareness Resource) Network State Center. The Center is operated by the
   Department of Applied Health Science in the School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation at
   Indiana University-Bloomington and is funded in part by a contract with the Indiana Family an Social
   Services Administration – Division of Mental Health and Addictions (DMHA)

   IPRC was established in 1987 to assist Indiana-based alcohol, tobacco, and other drug (ATOD)
   prevention programs improve the quality of their services. The primary target audience is the
   community of prevention professionals and volunteers, and government officials who provide or
   monitor the delivery of services to Indiana residents. IPRC provides a number of services, including:
   library resources, prevention technical assistance, grantwriting technical assistance, drug use surveys,
   publication and outreach services, and evaluation services. IPRC is also involved with the After-
   School Prevention Programs funded by the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration,
   Division of Mental Health and Addictions (DMHA)(discussed above).

   Guardian Ad Litem (GAL)/Court Appointment Special Advocates (CASA) Programs. In 1989 the
   Indiana General Assembly established an office of GAL/CASA to be administered through the
   Division of State Court Administration. By establishing a state office, counties are encouraged to
   provide appropriate GAL/CASA services by receiving matching state funding administered by the
   Division and disbursed pursuant to a statutory formula. The state office provides training and support
   services for local GAL/CASA programs and staff support for an Advisory Commission appointed by
   the Indiana Supreme Court and made up of local program directors and judges. The Advisory
   Commission certifies local programs through a voluntary process by which local programs are
   certified to meet certain minimum standards for their operation, recruitment, and training of
   volunteers.

_____________________________                                                                              52
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   GAL/CASA volunteers are assigned to abuse and neglect cases (or other juvenile related cases in
   some Indiana counties) by a judge. They are expected to conduct thorough research on the background
   of the case, reviewing documents, interviewing all parties involved, including the child to ensure that
   the best interests of the child are communicated to the judge. GAL/CASA volunteers can also be
   instrumental in assuring that a child or family receives the services which the court has ordered, such
   as substance abuse counseling or special education testing. During the life of a case, a GAL/CASA
   volunteer monitors a child‘s situation to make sure remains safe. In 2001 sixty-seven (67) of Indiana‘s
   ninety-two (92) counties had volunteer-based GAL/CASA programs with over 1,900 active
   GAL/CASA trained volunteers. Statewide these volunteers provided services in a total of 11,776
   cases donating over 243,000 hours of their time.

   Hoosier Assurance Plan. The Hoosier Assurance Plan (HAP) is the primary vehicle by which DMHA
   funds community mental health and addiction services. As established by the Indiana legislature, the
   HAP is not intended to directly serve the total Indiana population in need of mental health and
   addiction services. Rather, HAP serves only that portion of the population in greatest need of public
   support – those at or below 200% of the federal poverty level – and then only based on the availability
   of services.

   In 1996, DMHA-certified Managed Care Providers (MCPs) who had previous contracts to serve
   persons with chemical addictions and gambling disorders began enrolling clients in HAP. Enrollments
   in this first year also began for persons with chronic addictive disorders or serious mental illness who
   were deaf or hear of hearing. The following year, MCPs that were certified to offer services to children
   and adolescents with serious emotional disturbances began enrolling clients. Services designed to
   prevent the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs by children between the ages of 10 and 14 also
   began at that time. Beginning with State Fiscal Year 1999, full implementation of HAP occurred when
   contracts were executed with MCPs to provide services to adults with serious mental illness.

   21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) Grant Program. In January 2002 President
   George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Education Act of 2001 (NCLB) reauthorizing the 21st
   CCLC program under Title IV Part B of the Act. The most significant change in the program is the
   conversion of the 21st CCLC authority from a Federal to a State formula grant. Under the old
   program, the USDOE made competitive awards directly to local education agencies. Under the
   reauthorized authority, the funds are required to flow to states based on their share of the Title I, Part
   A funds, with the State Educational Agency (SEA) in charge of the management and administration of
   the program. As such the Indiana Department of Education is charged with administering the new 21st
   CCLC state formula grant program, although current 21st CCLC grantees will continue to be
   administered and receive funding through the USDOE.

   Indiana‘s first fiscal allocation from the 21st CCLC for fiscal year 2002 is approximately $4.5 million.
   The purpose of the reauthorized 21st CCLC program is to provide opportunities for communities to
   establish or expand community learning centers that provide students with academic enrichment
   opportunities along with activities designed to complement the students‘ regular academic program.
   Community learning centers must also offer families of these students‘ literacy and related education
   development. Centers – which can be located in elementary or secondary schools or other similarly
   accessible facilities – are to provide a range of high-quality services to support student learning and
   development, including tutoring and mentoring, homework help, academic enrichment
   (science/technology programs), and community service opportunities, as well as music, arts, sports,
   and cultural activities. Grants will be awarded for four-year periods with a minimum of $50,000.00

_____________________________                                                                             53
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
    per award per year for a minimum total of $200,000.00 per local education agency. Priority will be
    given to schools that serve a high percentage of students from low income families.

    Project PEACE. Project PEACE (Peaceful Endings through Attorneys, Children, and Educators) is a
    peer mediation program implemented by the Indiana Department of Education with support from the
    Indiana Attorney General‘s Office and the Indiana State Bar Association. This public-private
    partnership introduces dispute resolution techniques to elementary and middle school students
    throughout the state.

    The program strives to reduce conflicts and violence in schools by teaching children how to discuss
    and mediate their disagreements. The objective of Project PEACE is to neutralize minor conflicts
    before they become explosive confrontations that often lead to violence. Through the training of
    teams of students and educators in peer mediation, these teams are then able to return to their home
    schools and teach other students the concepts and techniques of peer mediation. Beginning with the
    2002 trainings, Project PEACE began incorporating bullying prevention into its curriculum. This
    component provides students with additional ideas on making schools more peaceful and secure
    learning environments.

    Indiana’s Safe Haven Education Program. Governor Frank O‘Bannon established the Safe Haven
    Program as part of his commitment to make Indiana‘s schools safer. Since its inceptioni, the program
    has allocated over $30 million state dollars to school corporations throughout Indiana for the purpose
    of designing and implementing their own Safe Haven programs.

    In 2005, 235 of Indiana‘s 293 School Corporations received Safe Haven funding through the Indiana
    Criminal Justice Institute to implement one or more of the following activities:

       The development and implementation of school safety plans that include provisions for zero
        tolerance of alcohol, tobacco, drugs and weapons on school property.
       Programs that keep schools open for all students before and after normal operating hours,
        preferably from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. on days determined by the School Corporation. The program
        must operate according to a plan to do the following in the school: (a) reduce alcohol, tobacco,
        and drug abuse, (b) reduce violent behavior and (c) promote educational progress.
       The purchase of equipment or materials to be used to enhance the physical safety of schools.

    The key to the success of local Safe Haven programs has been local input, including collaborations
    with parents, community groups, businesses and community leaders. This type of partnership has not
    only given school corporations help in identifying needs and potential resolutions, but also allows
    them to reap benefits of volunteers, financial contributions and other donations. The Safe Haven
    program has improved the lives of students and community members as a whole in Indiana.

    School-To-Work Program. The national School-To-Work (STW) program began with the passage of
    the School-To-Work Opportunities Act, which was signed into law in 1994 and administered by the
    U.S. Departments of Education and Labor. The Act provides funds to states and local communities to
    develop School-To-Work systems. STW encourages exposure to a broad variety of career options and
    can begin with speakers and field trips at the elementary level and progress to academically connected
    internships in a high school student‘s field of interest. The underlying goal of the program is to
i
 The Safe Haven Program began when the Indiana Safe Schools Fund was established by legislation in 1995   .(IC
5-2-10.1)
_____________________________                                                                              54
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   provide students with the knowledge and skills that will allow them to opt for college, additional
   training, or a well-paying job after graduation. STW also stresses the importance of making education
   relevant to a student‘s life.

   Indiana‘s STW is administered through the Department of Workforce Development. Fifteen (15)
   regional partnerships have developed internships and apprenticeships, and are working on plans for
   future sustainability of the programs after federal funding. The STW initiative is active all across the
   state and in most schools. These schools have varying levels of involvement and many are working
   towards permanently building STW into their curriculum.

   School AIDS Resource Person (ARP). The ARP is an individual assigned by the superintendent in
   each school corporation to ensure that the standards of the HIV education and policy within schools
   specified in the Indiana Code are met. This person functions as a resource for the school corporation
   by organizing appropriate and required universal precautions training for faculty and staff, by
   coordinating with the AIDS Advisory Council, and assuring that age appropriate HIV education is
   delivered in grades K-12. Additionally, the ARP raises awareness of the importance of HIV education
   within the context of comprehensive school health education; assures accuracy of the information
   presented; and acts as an advocate for the rights of school children affected directly or indirectly by
   HIV.

   Indiana Youth Institute. The Indiana Youth Institute promotes healthy development of children and
   youth by serving the institutions and people of Indiana who work on their behalf. IYI provides a
   variety of services to juvenile justice and community-based professionals throughout the state,
   including:

       Free fund raising assistance – including a Fund Development Hotline, a Fund Raising e-forum and
        scholarships to fund raising training;
       IYI/Search Institute statewide partnership to build youth developmental assets in local
        communities through the LINK (Linking Indiana Neighbors with Kids) Initiative;
       Assistance with technology planning for youth agencies through Tech Wizards program;
       Low cost assessments for youth programs and agencies through the IYI Assessment Team;
       28-hour certification course designed to provide practical training in positive youth development
        through the Youth Development Academy;
       IYI Weekly Update providing quick, no-cost source of information on grant tips, updates on youth
        issues and other useful information;
       Statewide KIDS COUNT Conference with practical workshops and top name speakers;
       KIDS COUNT in Indiana Data Book providing the only county by county statistical guide to
        children‘s well-being in the state;
       KIDS COUNT, half-hour public affairs program on youth issues broadcast over Network Indiana;
       A nationally recognized circulating youth development library and one-on-one research assistance.

   Community System wide Response (CSR). CSR is an initiative that began in Indiana in 1991 when five
   southern Indiana counties were invited to send representatives to a national training program
   sponsored by the Departments of Justice, Transportation, Agriculture, and the National 4-H Council.
   The result of Indiana‘s participation was the foundation for CSR.

   The goal of CSR is to develop a partnership among the local juvenile judiciary, Cooperative Extension
   Service, and other segments of the community including education, law enforcement, human service
_____________________________                                                                                 55
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   agencies, existing collaborative efforts such as Step Ahead and everyday citizens including youth.
   CSR provides communities with the necessary tools and processes to develop comprehensive and
   coordinated policies, procedures, programs, practices, and services to reduce the risks and increase the
   assets of youth, families, and the community. The CSR initiative is accomplished through
   collaboration training that provides CSR team members with appropriate research-based educational
   information that will help them develop and sustain a healthy asset-based infrastructure for youth and
   families in their community.

   There are fifty-five (55) CSR sites in forty-eight (48) counties throughout Indiana. The CSR initiative
   has also been utilized to create collaborative training opportunities for Juvenile Accountability
   Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) and Title V: Community Prevention Grants applicants in Indiana. In
   late 1999, early 2000 nearly 25 sites were trained in Community Relationship Building (CRB), which
   is based on the CSR model.

   Indiana Youth Services Association/Youth Service Bureaus. The Indiana Youth Services Association
   (IYSA) is the network and association of Youth Service Bureaus (YSBs) throughout Indiana. YSBs
   are county- and community-based organizations serving the needs of vulnerable youth and families.
   The four core roles of YSBs are:

       Juvenile delinquency prevention;
       Information and referral services;
       Community education; and
       Advocacy for youth.

   The mission of IYSA is to advocate for and support Indiana‘s YSBs and the children and families they
   serve. IYSA‘s functions include the following:

       Providing support and mutual assistance to Association members;
       Maintaining and disseminating information on the needs of youth and families;
       Promoting community awareness of the needs of vulnerable and at-risk youth and families within
        the State;
       Supporting legislation pertaining to healthy development of youth and families and providing
        effective services for those at risk;
       Encouraging communities and the State in efforts to provide effective prevention and intervention
        services for vulnerable youth and their families;
       Fostering and promoting alternatives to the juvenile justice system;
       Linking member agencies with other youth service programs; and
       Advocating for the rights of youth.

   YSBs are implemented at the local level in a variety of settings, including Boys & Girls Clubs, Youth
   Shelters, or locally created YSB non-profit entities. YSBs are funded using a variety of sources
   including, small amounts of state funding, per diem charges for residential programs, local United
   Way funding, contracts for services, foundation grants, corporate and individual contributions and
   local fund raising events. There are currently thirty-two (32) Youth Service Bureaus operating in
   twenty-nine (29) counties throughout the State. Currently, five (5) county YSBs are recipients of Title
   V Delinquency Prevention grants after having completed three 2-day trainings provided by DSG, the
   OJJDP T&TA provider.

_____________________________                                                                            56
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   CountyWide School Safety Commission/Indiana School Safety Specialist Training Academy. Funded
   by the Indiana Safe Schools Fund are the CountyWide School Safety Commission (CWSSC) and
   Indiana School Safety Specialist Training Academy (ISSSA) programs.

   School Corporations were provided with the opportunity to receive one-time only $2,000 planning
   grants (administered by ICJI) to aid in the establishment and implementation of CountyWide School
   Safety Commissions. The Commissions are charged with the responsibility of performing a
   cumulative analysis of school safety needs within the county and to coordinate and make
   recommendations for a number of key issues, such as: prevention of juvenile offenses, identifying and
   assessing at-risk youth, methods to improve communications among agencies that work with youth,
   and methods to improve security and emergency preparedness countywide. Among the required
   members of the CWSSCs is the School Safety Specialist.

   Each school corporation is required to appoint a School Safety Specialist.116 Through Indiana Safe
   Schools funding and collaboration with ICJI, the Indiana Department of Education established the
   Indiana School Safety Specialist Training Academy in order to provide School Safety Specialists with
   statutorily required training. The mission of the ISSSA to provide on-going training and information
   on national and state best practices, as well as exemplary resources for school safety, security,
   intervention/prevention, and comprehensive safe schools planning. School safety specialists are
   trained to guide the development and implementation of school safety practices, which will help to
   ensure safe educational environments for all students in Indiana.




_____________________________                                                                         57
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                TABLE 1
                                                       SELECTED FEDERAL FUNDING

CFDA #        Agency                               Program Name                        Funding         Program Description
 16.540         ICJI                Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention      $1,202,000.00         Juvenile Justice
 16.548         ICJI              Title V – Community Prevention Grants Program       $301,000.00          Juvenile Justice
 16.523         ICJI               Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant      $838,300.00          Juvenile Justice
 16.575         ICJI                          Crime Victim Assistance                $7,597,364.00       Victim Assistance
 16.576         ICJI                         Crime Victim Compensation                $580,000.00      Victim Compensation
 84.186        IDOE                Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities       $15,222,114.00     Education/Prevention
 84.186        IDOE              EVEN START – State Educational Agencies Grants      $2,749,852.00           Education
 84.010        IDOE                 Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies   $117,590.005.00           Education
 84.027        IDOE                      Special Education – Grants to States       $86,177,164.00           Education
 84.196        IDOE                 Education for Homeless Children and Youth         $417,141.00            Education
 84.186        FSSA                Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities        $7,257,110.00     Education/Prevention
 93.575        FSSA                   Child Care and Development Block Grant         $1,944,830.00   Child Care/Early Education
 93.600        FSSA                              Head Start Program                   $164,860.00    Child Care/Early Education
 93.667        FSSA                          Social Services Block Grant            $66,592,604.00          Child Welfare
 93.671        FSSA               Family Violence Prevention and Services Grants     $1,277,818.00   Family Support/Prevention
 93.556        FSSA                   Family Preservation and Support Services       $3,596,727.00         Family Support
 93.658        FSSA                           Foster Care – Title IV - E            $53,181,114.00          Child Welfare
 93.669        FSSA                     Child Abuse and Neglect State Grants          $347,703.00           Child Welfare
 93.958        FSSA                  Block Grants for Community Mental Health        $7,408,537.00     Health/Mental Health
 93.235        IDOH                             Abstinence Education                  $646,966.00        Health/Prevention
 93.917        IDOH                           HIV Care Formula Grants                $5,050,103.00       Health/Prevention
 93.994        IDOH                Maternal and Child Health Service Block Grant    $38,962,524.00             Health
 94.006       ICCSV                                  AmeriCorps                      $2,504,820.00   Education/Service Learning
 17.250        DWD                         Job Training Partnership Act            $25,460,965.00       Employment/Career
 93.586         SC                      State Court Improvement Program             $298,024.00           Child Welfare

_____________________________                                                                                                     58
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                         TABLE 2
                              RELATIONSHIP OF PROBLEM STATEMENTS TO PROGRAM PURPOSE AREAS

Problem
                   05        06      07   08   09   10   13    14    19     20     23     24        27   31   32   33
Statements
      A
                    X                X                                       X                                X
      B
                                     X                         X             X             X
      C
                                     X              X                 X      X      X
      D
                                     X                         X      X             X                    X
      E
                                               X                                                    X         X
      F
                                                    X          X
      G
                             X       X    X                                         X                    X         X
      H
                                                         X                          X                    X
Purpose Area Codes:
05   Community Assessment Centers (CAC)                  19   Juvenile Justice System Improvement
06   Compliance Monitoring                               20   Mental Health Services
07   Court Services                                      23   Planning & Administration
08   Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders          24   Probation
09   Delinquency Prevention Programs                     27   School Programs
10   Disproportionate Minority Contact                   31   State Advisory Group Allocation
13   Gender-Specific Services                            32   Substance Abuse
14   Graduated Sanctions                                 33   Youth Advocacy
_____________________________                                                                                           59
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
     PROBLEM STATEMENTS
     Introduction

     Based on the data provided above, and discussions during the series of Three-Year Planning Meetings,
     the planning groupii developed and refined prior year‘s problem statements that define and describe the
     problems surrounding youth development, delinquency and the juvenile justice system in Indiana.
     After in-depth discussion surrounding the composition of the problem statements, the planning group
     began the process of prioritizing the problem statements in order to inform our distribution of Formula
     funding. The problem statements are provided in alphabetical order below with their corresponding
     priority ranking in the far right column.

                                                   Table 3
                                       Prioritized Problem Statements

LETTER                             PROBLEM STATEMENT NARRATIVE                                            RANK
  A           Lack of comprehensive mental health services for both at-risk juveniles and                   1
              juveniles already within the juvenile justice system. There is a growing
              recognition that many youth are entering the juvenile justice system with co-
              occurring disorders (mental health & substance abuse) that have been
              unrecognized and misunderstood. The extent and nature of this problem varies
              from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Further, the problem is exacerbated by a lack of
              available statewide data with regards to the mental health needs of youth and the
              array of services available in jurisdictions to address those needs once identified.
              In smaller, rural areas the problem may be one of lack of services, while the larger
              areas may face a lack of service coordination leading to youth ―falling through the
              cracks‖. There is a need to continue developing and fostering linkages between
              mental health, substance abuse, educational, and criminal justice systems. There
              is funding available through other federal funding streams to meet these needs,
              but this may be an area that requires coordination in order to address the unmet
              mental health needs of juveniles entering the state‘s juvenile justice system.
     B        Lack of resources for sound researched-based intervention programs in the areas              5
              of aftercare, juvenile probation and both non-secure and secure juvenile
              programs/facilities. Specifically, programming to address cognitive-behavioral
              based approaches, mental health needs, life skills, work-force development,
              graduated sanctions, etc., within the justice system and youth-serving agencies
              should be emphasized. (Should be noted that resources in these areas have
              increased with the implementation of JAIBG that is designed to address such
              programming needs.)
     C        There continues to be a need for training and technical assistance statewide for             6
              juvenile justice professionals and key community stakeholders in order to provide
              expertise and cutting edge information to improve the level and quality of
              services being provided to youth. This includes training in the areas of
              community collaboration, cultural diversity, child/adolescent development,
              positive youth development, interagency communication/ coordination, fiscal
              management, and program evaluation (process & outcome). Cross-training in the
              areas of mental health, substance abuse, education, and child welfare systems is
ii
 Members included the Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group and the Youth Division of the ICJI Board of
Trustees.
_____________________________                                                                                  60
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
              needed as well.

    D         Continued need to support the development of comprehensive juvenile justice            8
              information systems to coordinate service delivery at the local level and to
              promote comprehensive data collection for planning and policymaking purposes.
              It should be noted that JABG does provide funding in this area on a local level,
              but that funds, whether through Formula or JABG, to coordinate local information
              systems may be necessary.
    E         Decreasing levels of funding for primary prevention efforts to fund sound,             2
              research-based prevention programming. Specifically funding to support
              mentoring efforts, character education/morals/values-based programming, life-
              skills, and faith-based programming. There continues to be a need to focus on
              positive youth development through the development of healthy communities that
              provide youth with the support and positive structure necessary to thrive and be
              successful.
    F         Further research is needed to determine the extent of overrepresentation of            4
              minority youth at each point of the justice system, as well as the factors that
              contribute to overrepresentation. There are a number of underlying factors that
              can lead to an overrepresentation of minority youth in the justice system.
              Interestingly, less than 5% of criminal justice professionals surveyed around the
              State ―strongly agreed‖ that minority juveniles are overrepresented in arrests,
              charging, waivers, secure pre- and/or post-trial detention. This reveals a need for
              in-depth research into the issue, as well as public education regarding the issue of
              minority overrepresentation and the factors that contribute to higher levels of
              minority involvement within Indiana‘s justice system.
    G         Statewide jail removal and alternatives to secure detention efforts successfully       3
              brought the state into compliance with JJDP Act. These efforts must continue to
              be supported through funds, training, technical assistance and compliance
              monitoring activities. The continued compliance monitoring and public education
              efforts regarding the proper handling of juvenile offenders and non-offenders
              must continue to be a high priority for the Criminal Justice Institute. The
              occurrence of violations in specific areas (deinstitutionalization of status
              offenders) and facilities reveals that continuing with targeted rather than
              widespread compliance monitoring efforts is the best strategy.
    H         National and State data reveal that female offenders are increasingly involved         7
              with the justice system for more serious offenses. Further research reveals that
              gender-specific programming is necessary for young, at-risk females and
              delinquent females. The availability and level of gender-specific programming
              Statewide is currently in the early stages of research. The Criminal Justice
              Institute should continue to support the importance of developing and
              implementing gender-specific programming, while promoting information-
              sharing regarding successful programs focused on at-risk and delinquent females
              across the State.




_____________________________                                                                            61
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
Plan for Compliance with the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act

       REMOVAL OF STATUS OFFENDERS AND NONOFFENDERS FROM SECURE
       DETENTION AND CORRECTIONAL FACILITIESiii
       Indiana‘s 2004 Compliance Monitoring Report revealed that the State has remained in substantial
       compliance with the deinstitutionalization mandate of the JJDPA. Our efforts to provide intensive
       training and technical assistance to detention centers, law enforcement, probation and judges around
       the state have continued to reap the benefits of reduced violations.

       There has been a dramatic decrease in the number of violations in this category. As indicated in the
       2004 Compliance Monitoring Report, Indiana was successful in accurately determining the number of
       active Police lockups via a survey sent to all city Police Departments across the State. The result of
       these efforts led to a 95% reporting rate for Police lockups around the State while simultaneously
       decreasing the number of violations in this category.

       The Youth Division of the Institute will continue targeted efforts at providing training and technical
       assistance to jurisdictions reporting high levels of violations. These efforts have led to substantial
       changes in the handling of juvenile offenders at the local level. Our training and technical assistance
       will now be further enhanced by the collaborative efforts of the Youth Law T.E.A.M. (YLT) of
       Indiana and ICJI. The YLT will continue to conduct regular on site visits as well as provide on site
       technical assistance to facilities that have a high number of violations. At the same time, staff of the
       YLT are working to further enhance our training efforts improving both the training curriculum and
       expanding the audiences targeted to receive training.

       Beginning this fiscal year, the Youth Division will begin to coordinate with the Indiana Association of
       Residential Child Caring Agencies (IARCCA) in order to begin working with residential facilities in
       order to provide training and technical assistance to these facilities regarding the mandates of the
       JJDPA. Working with the our YLT compliance monitor, on-site visits began in the Summer of 2003 to
       residential facilities to determine the secure/non-secure status of these facilities and to ensure the both
       state law and federal mandates are being met with regards to the handling of the juveniles. Regional
       trainings are being organized in collaboration with the YLT and IARCCA to ensure that facilities are
       aware both state law and the mandates of the act as they pertain to residential facilities and to provide
       the opportunity to receive further technical assistance.

       Finally, as described in the 2004 Compliance Monitoring report, the Compliance Monitor will send a
       letter to each facility found to be in violation with any part of the JJDP Act, with copies of the letter
       going to each chief probation officer and judge with juvenile jurisdiction within the county. The letter
       will detail incidents of non-compliance and will offer the jurisdiction assistance in eliminating violations
       within the facility and request a written response regarding violations and the plan to eliminate these
       incidents. This letter will be followed up with on-site visits to each facility with violations. For facilities
       with a high number of violations (over 10) or those whose plan to eliminate violations is not satisfactory,
       the Compliance Monitor will request a meeting with the relevant agencies within the jurisdiction to
       discuss options for bringing the jurisdiction into compliance. If all attempts to bring the jurisdiction back
       into compliance fail, the State will exercise the right to file a writ of habeas corpus through the State
       Public Defender's Office.

iii
      This section contains excerpts from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, 2004 State Monitoring Report.
_____________________________                                                                                      62
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   PLAN FOR SEPARATION OF JUVENILES AND INCARCERATED ADULTS
   Based on Indiana‘s 2004 Compliance Monitoring Report, Indiana is in full compliance with the sight and
   sound separation mandate of the JJDP Act. It is extremely important, in light of the high rate of detention
   and jail construction across the State, to maintain an adequate strategy to prevent future violations of this
   federal requirement. Compliance monitoring will continue to include on-site visits to verify and
   determine in the case of new facilities, that sight/sound separation is continuing to be upheld. The
   Compliance Monitor will continue to work collaboratively with the Jail Monitor of IDOC to share
   information regarding compliance with the sight/sound separation mandate.

   There are several barriers that need to be overcome in order for Indiana to maintain compliance with
   the sight/sound separation mandate in the future. First, local officials must continue to be convinced
   that alternatives to secure detention, such as nonsecure holdovers with attendant care, are more
   appropriate alternatives than adult jails and lock-ups. Second, Indiana needs to insure that there are
   adequate detention resources for the children who are actually appropriate for secure detention. In
   some areas, county officials may feel that they have no other alternative available to them other than to
   securely detain the juvenile in an adult jail or lock-up.

   The first barrier can be overcome by utilizing resources than are available through the Criminal Justice
   Institute and Department of Correction. Every county in Indiana now has access to alternatives to
   detention through these agencies. Special efforts will be made to work with those counties that are
   still detaining juveniles in adult jails and lock-ups. Training and technical assistance will be provided
   through subgrants to the Youth Law TEAM. The second barrier is being overcome by facilitating
   relationships between counties that have juvenile detention centers and counties that have a need for
   occasional detention but do not have the resources to build a center in the county. Agreements
   between these counties allow non-detention center counties to have certain access to juvenile detention
   beds when needed. Finally, the Youth Division of the Institute has forged a partnership with the
   Indiana Association of Residential Child Caring Agencies (IARCCA). These facilities report that they
   are often not at full capacity and that they are often overlooked as a viable alternative to secure
   detention. The Youth Division in partnership with IARCCA and YLT will continue to promote the use
   of viable alternatives to secure detention such as the residential agencies that are currently members of
   IARCCA.

   PLAN FOR REMOVAL OF JUVENILES FROM ADULT JAILS AND LOCKUPS
       The 2004 Compliance Monitoring Report revealed reductions in the number of jail removal
    violations, enough of a reduction to bring the state into substantial compliance with the jail removal
    mandate. The Youth Division of ICJI has continued to train jurisdictions through the JJDP Act to
    improve the accuracy of report and to change local policies to ensure that status offenders are not held
    securely. Unfortunately, improving the accuracy of reporting is more quickly achieved than changing
    the practices and policies at the local level. As such, we have continued to experience an unfortunate
    artifact of increased training and improved reporting that has only just begun to be reversed as local
    policies are changing. We continue to experience a significant improvement in the number of
    violations being reported to the compliance monitoring program.

    ICJI will continue our targeted efforts at providing training and technical assistance to jurisdictions
    reporting high levels of violations. These efforts have led to substantial changes in the handling of
    juvenile offenders at the local level. Our training and technical assistance will now be further
    enhanced by the collaborative efforts of the ICJI and the YLT of Indiana. The YLT will continue to
_____________________________                                                                                63
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
    conduct regular on site visits as well as provide on site technical assistance to facilities that have a
    high number of violations. At the same time, staff of the YLT are working to further enhance our
    training efforts improving both the training curriculum and expanding the audiences targeted to
    receive training. Currently the YLT is working closely with the Indiana Sheriff‘s Association and
    Indiana Judicial Center to include JJDP Act training in the training curriculum for newly elected
    Sheriffs and Judges.

   PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE MONITORING
   The only change in the Plan for Compliance Monitoring is the funding of a full-time Compliance
   Monitor through a grant to the Youth Law T.E.A.M. of Indiana (see program goals, objectives, and
   performance indicators for Program Purpose Area 06, Compliance Monitoring). Included on
   Update]

   The Compliance Monitor will continue to conduct on-site visits to verify data and determine continued
   compliance with the sight/sound separation mandate. Each type of facility identified in Indiana‘s
   Compliance Monitoring Universe will receive a site visit as prescribed by OJJDP, as well as those
   facilities identified as having ten (10) or more violations in the Compliance Monitoring Report. These
   site visits will be conducted in collaboration with the IDOC jail monitoring. Data will continue to be
   collected utilizing the revised ―Monthly Log of Juveniles Held‖ and as provided by the IDOC.

   The Youth Division will continue to work with local jurisdictions currently utilizing the Quest
   information-sharing software system to provide compliance monitoring data electronically in order to
   reduce paperwork and reporting errors. We will also continue to work with the Indiana Sheriff‘s
   Association to facilitate the establishment of on-line reporting capabilities for jails across the state.
   Finally, the Youth Division will continue to expand the monitoring universe starting first with a
   partnership with IARCCA in order to ensure that residential facilities are properly handling juveniles
   and are reporting compliance monitoring data in the appropriate circumstances.


   PLAN FOR REDUCING THE DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION OF MINORITY
   YOUTH CONFINED IN SECURE FACILITIES (DMC)

   1. While aggregate statistics do reveal disproportionate minority confinement among Indiana‘s
      juvenile African-American population (see Graph 2, page 28; Graph 4, page 30; Chart 19, page
      32) little is currently known about its causes and the current extent of minority overrepresentation
      at each level the State‘s juvenile justice system. For example, while African-American youth
      represent approximately ten percent (10%) of the juvenile population in Indiana, thirty-nine
      percent (39%) of the youth confined in Indiana correctional facilities are African-American.
      Research was conducted on minority overrepresentation in Indiana over a decade ago, timeliness
      of the data as well as an increase in the level of minority youth around the State (particularly youth
      of Hispanic origin) suggested that new research be conducted.

       This was the conclusion and recommendation of Indiana‘s Disproportionate Minority
       Confinement: Intervention Plan submitted by OJJDP in March of 1999. Regarded as a model by
       OJJDP, Indiana‘s recent request for proposals to conduct research on disproportionate minority
       representation was regarded as a daunting and potentially doomed undertaking by scientists at
       colleges and universities in our state (ICJI research division personal communications, April 2002
       to February 2003). Consequently, even more recent and more rigorous attempts have faltered
       despite strong investments in their success.
_____________________________                                                                                  64
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        The Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group and Youth Division of the ICJI Board of Trustees
        continues to support and prioritize the issue of reducing minority overrepresentation in the current
        Three-Year Plan designating $150,000 in Title II Formula Grant funds to support projects that
        prevent, address and reduce minority overrepresentation. Both advisory groups are committed to
        seeking and prioritizing funding for programs targeted at reducing minority involvement in the
        juvenile justice system, as well as requiring all applicants to the Youth Division to address the need
        for and implementation of culturally appropriate programming as a component of their programs.

        The Indiana Criminal Justice Institute continues to partner with the Minority Health Coalition and
        the Latino Institute to provide well-informed and targeted prevention and intervention efforts
        within the areas of impaired and dangerous driving, underage drinking, and alcohol, tobacco and
        other drug (ATOD) issues. We will continue to forge these partnerships as we move forward with
        DMC research and utilize these partners in the development of our DMC intervention strategies.

     2. See Tables 3, 4 & 5 below.

     3. The distinctly local nature of Indiana‘s juvenile justice process and the non-uniform manner in
        which juvenile records are maintained, coupled with the lack of a central repository for juvenile
        justice records, has severely hindered ongoing efforts to comprehensively assess the representation
        of minority youth in Indiana‘s justice system. Early assessments were deemed unrepresentative
        due to methodological limitations originating, in part, from the difficulty of accessing
        comprehensive juvenile justice data at that time.

        Indiana‘s juvenile justice process is as jurisdictionally unique today as it was when Indiana first
        examined disproportionate minority contact (DMC), and juvenile records are still maintained in
        non-uniform ways. These ongoing realities have made the collection of uniform and standardized
        information on disproportionate minority representation exceedingly difficult.

     Representing Indiana‘s third comprehensive attempt to systematically assess DMC, the Indiana
     Criminal Justice Institute is currently collecting data in seven Indiana counties which now maintain
     detailed, automated records using the Quest case management systemiv. Estimates compiled by the
     Indiana Supreme Court Division of State Court Administration indicate that these seven counties,
     including Allen, Howard, Lake, Madison, Marion, St. Joseph, and Tippecanoe, collectively account
     for 70% of all juvenile justice cases processed in the state (ICJI research division personal
     communication, August 2002). As shown in Tables 3 and 4, the seven ―Quest counties‖ also are
     among the Indiana counties where African American, American Indian, and Asian males and females
     comprise the largest proportions (and numbers) of all 10 to 17 year olds in those counties (see gray
     shaded rows).

     In a series of half-day meetings, Institute researchers have been traveling to Quest counties to answer
     questions the juvenile court may have about the DMC research initiative, to learn about the local
     juvenile justice process, to identify how data are maintained and defined in Quest, and to discuss
     technological aspects of receiving electronic files containing data on all juvenile cases processed in
     calendar years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002, when available. Meetings in Allen, Howard, and
     Tippecanoe counties have been completed. March meetings in Madison, Marion, and Lake have been


iv
     See www.united4youth.com and www.ncsconline.org/D_Tech/Vendor/vendor98/GottliebWertz.HTM
_____________________________                                                                               65
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   scheduled. We are still working with St. Joseph County to arrange a meeting to discuss the DMC
   initiative.

   Meetings held to date have confirmed that the Quest case management system contains the
   information needed to update Indiana‘s Phase I and II matrices for DMC. Quest data will permit
   examination of minority representation at all possible stages or decision points of the juvenile justice
   process in Indiana, from arrest and the decision to temporarily detain to disposition and commitments
   to periods of secure confinement in state correctional facilities. Consistent with federal guidelines for
   the DMC initiative, if minority youth are found to be over-represented in one or more stages of the
   juvenile justice process, Indiana‘s RFP will be revised and reissued to solicit in-depth, accomplishable
   research examining why minority youth are over-represented at those points in the process.


Indiana’s Three-Year Program Plan (FY2006- FY2008)

   DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM FUNDING AREAS

        A. State Program Designator:                01, Planning & Administration

        B. Standard Program Area Code:              23

        C. Title:                                   Planning & Administration

        D. Program Problem Statement
           NA
        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase the capacity of the Youth Division of ICJI (DSA) to adequately administer
                      the Title II Formula Grant program and serve as the State‘s leader in juvenile justice
                      planning.

                      Objective 1:    Improve the administration of and planning for the Title II Formula
                                      Grant program in Indiana.

                      Performance Indicators:                 1) Number of plans or plan updates submitted
                                                              2) Number of subgrants awarded
                                                              3) Number of programmatic site visits
                                                              conducted
                                                              4) Number of SAG and Board of Trustees
                                                              meetings staffed
                                                              5) Number of planning meetings conducted
                                                              6) Change in number of programmatic site
                                                              visits conducted
                                                              7) Improvements to administration of Formula
                                                              Grants program

                      Activities:     Continue to improve the administration of the Formula Grants
                                      program through changes in application, reporting, monitoring, and
                                      evaluation procedures. Plans include utilizing Governor‘s
_____________________________                                                                                  66
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                      Commission for a Drug-Free Indiana system of community
                                      consultants to conduct programmatic site visits, determine training
                                      and technical assistance needs, and provide technical assistance
                                      regarding application and administration procedures at the local level.
                                      Move towards electronic submission of all subgrant documents and
                                      provide for electronic review of grant applications.

                      Budget:         JJDPA Funds                         State/Local/Private Funds

                                      FY 06 $ 120,200                     FY 06 $ 120,200
                                      Total $ 240,400                     Total $ 240,400

                  Expected Number of Subgrants: NA
        A. State Program Designator:      02, Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group Allocation

        B. Standard Program Area Code:             31

        C. Title:                                  State Advisory Group Allocation

        D. Program Problem Statement
           NA

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Raise the level of participation, involvement and capability of the JJSAG to engage in
                      statewide planning for juvenile justice improvement, monitoring for compliance with
                      the JJDPA, and judicious use of federal funding streams.

                      Objective 1:    Increase and diversify JJSAG membership.

                      Performance Indicators:             1) Percentage of members appointed while under
                                                          the age of 24
                                                          2) Percentage of members who are full-time
                                                          employees of Federal , State, or local government
                                                          3) Number of members currently or previously
                                                          under juvenile court jurisdiction
                                                          4) Type of professional fields represented

                      Activities:     Work with current JJSAG members, ICJI staff and the Governor‘s
                                      Office to identify and appoint new JJSAG members.

                      Objective 2:    Increase the capacity of the JJSAG to engage in planning and
                                      evaluation activities.



                      Performance Indicators:           1) Number of site visits attended by JJSAG members
                                                        2) Number of JJSAG members active in the
                                                        development of the State Plan
_____________________________                                                                              67
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                      3) Number of grant applications reviewed,
                                                      objectively evaluated and commented on
                                                      4) State compliance recommendations submitted to
                                                      the Governor and legislature
                                                      5) Submission of annual report
                                                      6) JJSAG oversight of funding decisions
                                                      7) Percentage of JJSAG recommendations
                                                      implemented


                      Activities:    Provide training to JJSAG members on program evaluation, best
                                     practices and evidence-based programming. Provide opportunities for
                                     JJSAG members to attend site visits or funded activities. Work with
                                     JJSAG members to conduct regular planning meetings. Fully staff
                                     regular quarterly JJSAG meetings.

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 30,000.00                    FY 06 $_____0____
                                     Total $ 60,000.00                    Total $______0___

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: NA



        A. State Program Designator:           03, Development of Community Assessment Centers

        B. Standard Program Area Code: 05

        C. Title:                              Community Assessment Centers (CAC)

        D. Program Problem Statement
           Funding for standard program area 05, Community Assessment Centers (CAC) is based on
           problem statement A of Indiana‘s Three Year Delinquency Prevention & Systems
           Improvement Plan, FY 2006-2008:

                  ―Lack of comprehensive mental health services for both at-risk juveniles
                  and juveniles already within the juvenile justice system. There is a
                  growing recognition that many youth are entering the juvenile justice
                  system with co-occurring disorders (mental health & substance abuse)
                  that have been unrecognized and misunderstood. The extent and nature
                  of this problem varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Further, the
                  problem is exacerbated by a lack of available statewide data with regards
                  to the mental health needs of youth and the array of services available in
                  jurisdictions to address those needs once identified. In smaller, rural
                  areas the problem may be one of lack of services, while the larger areas
                  may face a lack of service coordination leading to youth ―falling through
                  the cracks‖. There is a need to continue developing and fostering
                  linkages between mental health, substance abuse, educational, and
_____________________________                                                                            68
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                   criminal justice systems. There is funding available through other
                   federal funding streams to meet these needs, but this may be an area that
                   requires coordination in order to address the unmet mental health needs
                   of juveniles entering the state‘s juvenile justice system.‖

             Each year, more than two million youth under age 18 are arrested. A million of them will
             have formal contact with the juvenile justice system, and more than 100,000 will eventually be
             removed from their homes and placed in juvenile detention and/or correctional facilities.
             Available research indicates that at least 20 percent of all youth who enter the juvenile justice
             system experience serious mental disorders, with a much higher percentage experiencing some
             level of mental health problems. There is also a growing recognition that many of these
             youths, nearly 50 to 75 percent, have serious substance abuse problems.. 117

             Nationally, research has revealed that between thirty (30) and eighty (80) percent of juveniles
             in substitute care have mental health problems requiring treatment (National Center for Mental
             Health and Juvenile Justice, 2004). The Indiana Child and Family Service Review found that
             families are often referred to needed services, but that juveniles placed in substitute care are
             not routinely screen or referred to needed services. Often referrals are not made until a crisis
             has occurred. Access to assessment and intervention in a coordinated fashion is an important
             issue throughout the State and the multiple systems that services children and families
             (juvenile justice, mental health, corrections, education, and child welfare). Families working
             with these systems often describe it as a maze, being confused as to how and where to receive
             needed treatment and services (President‘s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health,
             2002). Funding and services are fragmented and interventions are often dependent upon which
             system the child and family enter.v

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase the capacity of local juvenile justice, child protection, child welfare, and
                      mental health systems to provide coordinated and comprehensive services to children
                      and families entering these systems leading to more positive outcomes for populations
                      served and decreases further involvement in the formal juvenile justice system.

                      Objective 1:    Support the development of community assessment centers at the
                                      locally or regionally.

                      Performance Indicators:       1) Number of memorandums of understanding
                                                    developed between various components of systems (e.g.,
                                                    juvenile justice, child welfare, child protection, mental
                                                    health) to support development and sustainability of
                                                    CAC.
                                                    2) Number of subcontracts developed with service
                                                    providers and referral agencies to deliver services to
                                                    families referred from CAC.
                                                    3) Length of time between intake and referral for
                                                    juveniles/families brought to the CAC.

v
 Information provided by 2003 Title II Formula Grant Application, Early Mental Health Identification and
Intervention for Child Welfare, FSSA/DMHA, Project Director, Cheryl Shearer.
_____________________________                                                                              69
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                  4) Number of hours saved for a. police officers, b.
                                                  juvenile justice units, c. child welfare/child protection
                                                  units by intake of juvenile to CAC.

                      Activities:    Incorporate information regarding the development and
                                     implementation of Community Assessment Centers into the request
                                     for proposals (RFP) for the Title II Formula Grant program and
                                     provide information and links to OJJDP website on the ICJI Youth
                                     Division website. Partner with the Indiana Judicial Center and the
                                     Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee to promote the development
                                     of CACs at the local level. Provide training and technical assistance
                                     and funding (on a competitive basis) to interested communities.

                      Objective 2:   Increase the number of children and families receiving mental
                                     health/substance abuse screenings, assessments and referrals to reduce
                                     further involvement in the formal juvenile justice system.

                      Performance Indicators:     1) Number of communities to implement a system of
                                                  screening, assessment, and referral using validated and
                                                  reliable screening and assessment instruments.
                                                  2) Number and types of screenings conducted
                                                  3) Number of psychological evaluations completed
                                                  4) Number of referrals made
                                                  5) Percentage of CAC juveniles who successfully
                                                  complete referred services compared to non-CAC
                                                  juveniles
                                                  6) Number of CAC juveniles successfully diverted from
                                                  the juvenile justice system compared to non-CAC
                                                  juveniles.

                      Activities:    The Indiana Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group (JJSAG) will
                                     continue to promote and support the use of validated and reliable
                                     screening and assessment instruments and practices at the local level
                                     by partnering with the Indiana Juvenile Detention Association
                                     (IJDA), DMHA, Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee, the
                                     Department of Correction and through the work of the Indiana
                                     Juvenile Law Commission. Provide training/technical assistance and
                                     funding to support the development and implementation of
                                     coordinated systems of screening and assessment across systems.

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 150,000.00                      FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $300,000.00                       Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The state expects to make either one subgrant at
                                                    $150,0000 or two subgrants at $75,000. Funds
                                                    under the mental health program purpose area will
                                                    also be used to supplement these funds by
_____________________________                                                                                 70
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                             focusing on the second objective for this program
                                                             purpose area. Projects are funded for a minimum
                                                             one year grant period (April 1st – March 31st) and
                                                             are eligible to receive up to three years of funding
                                                             on a competitive basis and step down process or
                                                             until the award is below $5,000 (whichever occurs
                                                             first).


        A. State Program Designator:                 04, JJDPA Compliance Monitoring

        B. Standard Program Area Code:               06

        C. Title:                                    Compliance Monitoring

        D. Program Problem Statement
           The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 2002 requires states to meet core
           requirements regarding the detention of juveniles in order to receive Formula Grants funding.
           Section 223(a)11 of the JJDP Act provides that:

             …juveniles who are charged with or who have committed offenses that would not be
             criminal if committed by an adult…or alien juveniles in custody, or such nonoffenders
             as dependent or neglected children, shall not be placed in secure detention facilities, or
             secure adult detention facilities or secure correctional facilities.

             The exceptions to the Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO) requirement include:
             the detention of accused status offenders in juvenile detention facilities for up to twenty-four
             (24) hours pending an initial hearing; and adjudicated status offenders being held in a juvenile
             detention facility on a violation of a Valid Court Order provided that a hearing is held within
             twenty-four (24) hours with all due process rights being met.

             Section 223(a)(13) of the JJDP Act involves the removal of delinquent (criminal) offenders
             from jails. The act mandates that juveniles are not to be detained or confined in any jail or
             lockup for adults. The exceptions to this requirement include: the detention of accused
             delinquent offenders in adult facilities for up to six (6) hours in order to conduct identification
             and processing and to find adequate alternative placement for the juvenile; and detention for
             up to six (6) hours immediately following a court appearance. In both cases, Section
             223(a)(12) of the JJDP act provides that juveniles detained in adult facilities will be
             guaranteed sight and sound separation from adults held in the same facility.vi

             While the Public Defender Litigation and Jail Removal/Juvenile Alternatives Projects
             established over a decade ago were successful in bringing the State into compliance with the
             JJDP Act and raising awareness among juvenile justice professionals and community
             members regarding the unlawful detention of juveniles, it appears that a renewed commitment
             to these efforts is necessary across the State. While violations of the deinstitutionalization of
             status offenders (DSO) and jail removal core requirements of the JJDP Act had dropped

vi
  The exception to the sight and sound separation requirement involves accidental or inadvertent contact in secure
areas of the facility not dedicated to juvenile offenders (e.g., booking areas).
_____________________________                                                                                        71
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
             dramatically in the State, results from Compliance Monitoring Reports since 2001 have
             indicated erratic increases in violations, which threatens the State‘s compliance status and
             future funding.

             With regards to DSO there are three types of status offenders that continue to be a challenge in
             maintaining compliance with this core requirement:

                 Accused status offenders, particularly runaways, held at juvenile detention centers for
                  over 24 hours;
                 Accused status offenders, mainly juveniles accused of minor consumption, held at secure
                  adult facilities due to confusion over the Indiana Code regarding these offenders; and
                 Adjudicated status offenders sentenced to juvenile detention center.

             In addition to these type specific issues, the efforts to expand the monitoring universe and
             improve the level of monitoring for DSO have revealed that there are many private, residential
             treatment facilities currently housing status offenders for treatment purposes under juvenile
             court order (rather than a civil commitment). The Youth Division, in collaboration with the
             YLT has begun to partner with the Indiana Association of Residential Child Caring Agencies
             (IARCCA) to identify any and all facilities that are or potentially could be holding status
             offenders (securely or non-securely) under juvenile court jurisdiction in order to provide
             training/technical assistance regarding the JJPDA and to establish compliance monitoring data
             collection and site visit schedules.

             With regards to jail removal and sight/sound requirements, Indiana continues to be in
             compliance with the sight/sound separation mandate thanks in large part to the statewide
             efforts of the Jail Removal/Juvenile Alternatives Project. Unfortunately jail removal
             violations continue to be at unacceptable levels, often due to a lack of alternative placements
             within the community. While the Jail Removal/Juvenile Alternatives Project made great
             strides in increasing the availability of alternatives to secure detention for juveniles across the
             State, this continues to be a challenge faced by Indiana‘s communities. Particularly rural
             Indiana counties faced by costly and timely transportation options, with little community-
             based programming.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

               Goal(s):
                                    To reduce the number of accused status offenders held for longer than 24
                                     hours and adjudicated status offenders for any length of time in secure
                                     facilities.
                                    To reduce the number of juveniles inappropriately detained in adult jails
                                     and lock-ups.
                                    To provide training and technical assistance to members of the judiciary,
                                     law enforcement, probation, juvenile service providers, and the community,
                                     including juveniles, regarding compliance with the JJDP Act.


                      Objective 1:        Increase the capacity of the State to adequately monitor all facilities
                                          for compliance with the JJDPA of 2002.
_____________________________                                                                                       72
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Performance Indicators:     1) Rollout of Web-based reporting system by end of
                                                  CY2006. Number of facilities identified and included in
                                                  the monitoring universe compared with the total number
                                                  of facilities in the State.
                                                  2)Number of facilities self-reporting on the ―Monthly
                                                  Log of Juveniles Held database‖ compared to the
                                                  number non-reporting facilities.
                                                  3) Number of facilities to receive an on-site compliance
                                                  monitoring visit.
                                                  4) Number of confirmed violations.
                                                  5) Submission of Annual Monitoring Report to OJJDP
                                                  by reporting deadline.
                                                  6) Achievement of numerical de minimis noncompliance
                                                  levels.
                                                  7) Percentage of facilities in compliance with the JJDPA.
                                                  8) Number of JJ practitioners trained about the JJDPA.

                      Activities:    Fund a full-time compliance monitor through a subgrant to the YLT
                                     of Indiana. Receive compliance monitoring data from public and
                                     private facilities, while continuing to expand the monitoring universe
                                     by identifying all facilities that could potentially hold juveniles under
                                     juvenile court jurisdiction. Maintain the Compliance Monitoring
                                     access database at ICJI. Conduct site visits. Analyze compliance
                                     monitoring data annually for the Annual Monitoring Report and work
                                     with facilities/communities found to be out of compliance with the
                                     JJDPA to develop violation reduction plans.

                      Objective 2:   Increase the capacity of the Youth Division to provide training and
                                     technical assistance to members of the judiciary, law enforcement,
                                     probation, juvenile service providers, and the community, including
                                     juveniles, regarding compliance with the JJDP Act. Enhance data set
                                     and ability to provide quantitative analyses of trends and issues in
                                     offending and regarding DMC.

                      Performance Indicators:            1) Number of facilities receiving technical
                                                         assistance compared to the number of requests for
                                                         technical assistance
                                                         2) Number of trainings conducted for a) judiciary,
                                                         b) law enforcement , c) probation, d) juvenile
                                                         service providers (public or private), e) general
                                                         public (including juveniles)
                                                         3) Response time to public inquiries regarding
                                                         potential violations or general JJDPA or juvenile
                                                         code questions
                                                         4) Increase in key stakeholder knowledge
                                                         regarding JJDPA and juvenile code regarding the
                                                         proper handling of juveniles

_____________________________                                                                               73
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                         5) Change in facility and/or juvenile justice
                                                         system policies and practices to align with the
                                                         JJDPA

                      Activities:    Partner with the YLT of Indiana to provide JJDPA training and
                                     technical assistance. Take advantage of opportunities to provide
                                     statewide training through the Indiana Judicial Center, Probation
                                     Officer‘s Association, Indiana Juvenile Detention Association,
                                     Sheriff‘s Association, Chiefs of Police, Juvenile Judges Symposium,
                                     IARCCA membership forums, etc.

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                         State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 150,000.00                  FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $ 300,000.00                  Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The state expects to make one subgrant at
                                                    approximately $150,000 to provide a full-time
                                                    compliance monitor and training/ technical
                                                    assistance. Projects are funded for a minimum
                                                    one year grant period (April 1st – March 31st) and
                                                    are eligible to receive up to three years of funding
                                                    on a competitive basis and a three year step down
                                                    or until the award is below $5,000 (whichever
                                                    occurs first).

        A. State Program Designator:              05, Juvenile Justice Court Programming

        B. Standard Program Area Code:            07

        C. Title:                                 Court Services

        D. Program Problem Statement
           Funding for standard program area 07, Court Services is based on a number of problem
           statements from Indiana‘s Three Year Delinquency Prevention & Systems Improvement Plan,
           FY 2006-2008, but stems mainly from problem statement B:

                  Lack of resources for sound researched-based intervention programs in
                  the areas of aftercare, juvenile probation and both non-secure and secure
                  juvenile programs/facilities. Specifically, programming to address
                  cognitive-behavioral based approaches, mental health needs, life skills,
                  work-force development, graduated sanctions, etc., within the justice
                  system and youth-serving agencies should be emphasized. (Should be
                  noted that resources in these areas have increased with the
                  implementation of JABG that is designed to address such programming
                  needs.)



_____________________________                                                                              74
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
           With the imminent reductions in JABG funding, support to allow local juvenile courts to
           implement promising programs and best practices to bridge the gap between traditional
           probation and secure corrections will once again be severely limited.

           Indiana has been experiencing an overall decrease in juvenile arrests since peaks in 1996, the
           have been slight increases since 1999 with reported arrests fro violent crimes increasing fifteen
           percent (15%) and for property crimes six percent (6%) during this time period. While
           aggregate data reveal relatively positive strides in decreasing juvenile crime in general, trends
           for specific offenses indicate a continued need to support evidence -based programming at the
           community level. For example, the reported juvenile arrest rates for aggravated assaults and
           other assaults have increased twenty-four percent (24%) and twenty-one percent (21%) between
           1999 and 2001. The reported juvenile arrest rates for driving under the influence have increased
           forty-one percent (41%) during the same time period.

           Local juvenile courts, probation departments, and community corrections agencies are being
           forced to serve increasing numbers of juveniles while experiencing decreases in budgets,
           particularly in the areas of programming and training. The number of juvenile cases filed in
           Indiana‘s juvenile courts between 1991 and 2001 has increased sixty-one (61%) for juvenile
           delinquency cases, sixty percent (60%) for CHINS cases, and a startling ninety-four percent
           (94%) for status offender cases. During the same time period the number of juvenile
           miscellaneous cases filed, which includes informal adjustments, declined thirty percent (30%).

           While the number of juvenile referrals and post-judgment supervisions received by probation
           departments statewide has decreased slightly in the past four (4) years (12% for supervisions
           and 13% for referrals); this follows a period of substantial increases in the population served
           between 1989 and 1998 (47% increase in supervisions and 43% increase in referrals during this
           time period), leading to substantially higher probation populations served without an equivalent
           increase in probation resources. Interestingly, while probation referrals and supervisions have
           decreased slightly since 1999 the number of commitments to Indiana‘s secure juvenile
           correctional facilities has increased fifty-four percent (54%) from 1184 commitments in 1999 to
           1824 commitments as of January 1, 2003.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase the capacity of local juvenile justice systems to develop and implement a
                      continuum of pre- and post-adjudication services to address local gaps in services
                      between traditional probation and secure corrections.

                      Objective 1:    Identify and support the development of evidence-based
                                      programming to address the needs of pre- and post-adjudication
                                      populations served by local juvenile justice systems.

                      Performance Indicators:         1) Number and type of evidence-based pre-
                                                      adjudicatory programs developed, implemented, or
                                                      delivered.
                                                      2) Number and type of evidence-based post-
                                                      adjudicatory programs developed, implemented, or
                                                      delivered.
                                                      3)Utilization rate for each program
_____________________________                                                                              75
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                       4) Change in average number of services received
                                                       before and after implementing a continuum for
                                                       preadjudicated & postadjudicated clients.

                      Activities:    Identify resources on evidence-based programming for community-
                                     based court services and incorporate into RFP process and Youth
                                     Division web-site (links). Partner with the Indiana Judicial Center,
                                     Division State Court Administration, and the Juvenile Justice
                                     Improvement Committee to determine priorities for state juvenile
                                     courts and to solicit proposals. Competitively fund promising program
                                     models across the State.

                      Objective 2:   Decrease system reliance on secure detention and secure corrections.

                      Performance Indicators:          1) Number and type of evidence- and community-
                                                       based alternatives to secure detention and corrections
                                                       developed and implemented
                                                       2) Utilization of valid and reliable screening
                                                       instruments for alternative programming
                                                       3) Decrease in the detention rate
                                                       4) Decrease in the correctional commitment rate

                      Activities:    Identify resources on evidence-based programming for alternatives to
                                     secure confinement and incorporate into RFP process and Youth
                                     Division web-site (links). Partner with the Indiana Judicial Center,
                                     Division State Court Administration, Indiana Juvenile Detention
                                     Association, and the Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee to
                                     determine priorities for state juvenile courts and to solicit proposals.
                                     Competitively fund promising program models across the State.

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 65,000.00                 FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $ 130,000.00                Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The state expects to make one or two subgrants
                                                    under this purpose area ranging from $25-$50
                                                    thousand dollars. Projects are funding for a
                                                    minimum one year grant period (April 1st –
                                                    March 31st) and are eligible to receive up to three
                                                    years of funding on a competitive basis and a
                                                    three year step down or until the award is below
                                                    $5,000 (whichever occurs first).

        A. State Program Designator:              06, Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders

        B. Standard Program Area Code:            08

        C. Title:                                 Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders
_____________________________                                                                              76
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        D. Program Problem Statement
           Section 223(a)11 of the JJDP Act provides that:

             …juveniles who are charged with or who have committed offenses that would not be
             criminal if committed by an adult…or alien juveniles in custody, or such nonoffenders
             as dependent or neglected children, shall not be placed in secure detention facilities, or
             secure adult detention facilities or secure correctional facilities.

             The exceptions to the Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO) requirement include:
             the detention of accused status offenders in juvenile detention facilities for up to twenty-four
             (24) hours pending an initial hearing; and adjudicated status offenders being held in a juvenile
             detention facility on a violation of a Valid Court Order provided that a hearing is held within
             twenty-four (24) hours with all due process rights being met.

             With regards to DSO there are three types of status offenders that continue to be a challenge in
             maintaining compliance with this core requirement:

                 Accused status offenders, particularly runaways, held at juvenile detention centers for
                  over 24 hours;
                 Accused status offenders, mainly juveniles accused of minor consumption, held at secure
                  adult facilities due to confusion over the Indiana Code regarding these offenders; and
                 Adjudicated status offenders sentenced to juvenile detention center.

             In addition to these type specific issues, the efforts to expand the monitoring universe and
             improve the level of monitoring for DSO have revealed that there are many private, residential
             treatment facilities currently housing status offenders for treatment purposes under juvenile
             court order (rather than a civil commitment). The Youth Division, in collaboration wit the
             YLT of Indiana has begun to partner with the Indiana Association of Residential Child Caring
             Agencies (IARCCA) to identify any and all facilities that are or potentially could be holding
             status offenders (securely or non-securely) under juvenile court jurisdiction in order to provide
             training/technical assistance regarding the JJPDA and to establish compliance monitoring data
             collection and site visit schedules.

             While Indiana has achieved de minimis compliance with the DSO requirement, violations of
             DSO remain unacceptably high and the potential of increased violations from secure, private
             residential treatment facilities threatens to push Indiana into a non-compliant status. The
             potential for DSO violations in these facilities stems from confusion for local facilities
             regarding the types of offenders and juveniles they can securely detain and the fundamental
             definition of secure detention and is the result of fundamental differences between FSSA
             licensing requirements for residential treatment and child caring facilities, the state‘s juvenile
             code, CHINS code and the JJDPA of 2002.




_____________________________                                                                                 77
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase the capacity of local juvenile justice systems to address the needs of status
                      offenders without reliance on secure confinement and decrease violations of the DSO
                      mandate.

                      Objective 1:    Increase the number of status offender alternative programs and non-
                                      secure placement options available throughout the State.

                      Performance Indicators:      1) Number and type of status offender alternative
                                                   programs developed and implemented at the local level
                                                   2) Number and type of non-secure placement options
                                                   developed and implemented at the local level
                                                   3) Number of youth diverted after implementing status
                                                   offender alternatives compared to before


                      Activities:     Identify promising/model status offender alternative programs and
                                      placements and include on Youth Division website and RFP. Include
                                      information on status offender alternatives in JJDPA training for local
                                      communities. Fund, competitively, status offender alternative
                                      programs/placements.

                      Objective 2:    Decrease the number of DSO violations statewide.

                      Performance Indicators:      1) Number of facilities monitored for compliance with
                                                   DSO
                                                   2) Number of accused status offenders held longer than
                                                   24 hours in a juvenile detention facility
                                                   3) Number of adjudicated status offenders detained in
                                                   juvenile detention or adult facilities
                                                   4) Number of jurisdictions to utilize the valid court order
                                                   (VCO) exception checklist
                                                   5) Percentage of facilities in full compliance with DSO
                                                   6) Percentage of facilities in de minimis compliance with
                                                   DSO
                                                   7) Change in number of jurisdictions ineligible for
                                                   finding of compliance with the JJDPA

                      Activities:     Partner with Indiana Judicial Center and Juvenile Justice
                                      Improvement Committee to approve and endorse the use of the VCO
                                      checklist. Distribute checklist to juvenile courts around the State.
                                      Update and expand monitoring universe and conduct site visit to
                                      verify compliance with DSO. Receive, input and analyze compliance
                                      monitoring data for DSO violation rates. Partner with
                                      FSSA/Department of Family & Children (DFC) to begin investigation
                                      and reconciling conflicts between licensing requirements and JJDPA
                                      of 2002.
_____________________________                                                                              78
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Budget:         JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                      FY 06 $ 60,000.00                    FY 06 $_________
                                      Total $ 120,000.00                   Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The state expects to make one (1) to three (3)
                                                    subgrants in the first two years of funding for
                                                    DSO at $20,000 to $60,000. Projects are funding
                                                    for a minimum one year grant period (April 1st –
                                                    March 31st) and are eligible to receive up to three
                                                    years of funding on a competitive basis and then a
                                                    three year step down or until the award is below
                                                    $5,000 (whichever occurs first).


        A. State Program Designator:               07, Primary Delinquency Prevention

        B. Standard Program Area Code:             09

        C. Title:                                  Delinquency Prevention

        D. Program Problem Statement
           The Juvenile Justice SAG and Youth Division of the ICJI Board of Trustees recognize the
           importance of primary prevention as an effective and cost-efficient means of crime control.
           What appears to be continued decreases in levels of funding nationwide for primary
           delinquency prevention efforts to fund sound, research-based prevention programming was a
           problem that the planning group (made up of individuals from the groups above) felt required
           a continued commitment from the State.

             Increases in all types of juvenile court case filings reveal a continued need to focus on
             delinquency prevention and intervention, but the dramatic increases in CHINS and Status
             filings (60% and 94% respectively over the last decade) indicate that efforts to address at-risk
             conditions and high-risk behaviors that can lead to further delinquency involvement are
             needed and necessary. Indiana citizens support this assertion through their responses to a
             survey recently conducted by Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, Indiana Citizens’
             Perspectives on Crime Survey. The survey revealed that when asked to name one thing that is
             most often the root cause of crime committed by youth ages 10-17 over a quarter of
             respondents cited either ―poor upbringing‖ or ―drugs and alcohol‖.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

         Goal: To reduce delinquency in Indiana through primary delinquency prevention programming
               and positive youth development initiatives.

                      Objective 1:    Increase the capacity of local communities to address the needs of at-
                                      risk youth in order to reduce/prevent juvenile delinquency.


_____________________________                                                                              79
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Performance Indicators:    1) Number and type of programs from the OJJDP Model
                                                 Programs Guide and Database implemented
                                                 2) Number of communities to incorporate risk/protective
                                                 factors or asset model into a primary delinquency
                                                 prevention plan
                                                 3) Number of youth diverted from formal juvenile
                                                 justice system
                                                 4) Frequency and severity of program participants high-
                                                 risk behaviors
                                                 5) Change in juvenile arrest rate for curfew, vandalism,
                                                 disorderly conduct, incorrigibility, and runaway

                      Activities:    Incorporate information from and links to OJJDP‘s Model Programs
                                     Guide and Database in to the Formula Grant RFP. Require that all
                                     programs applying for the primary delinquency program area
                                     implement programs from either the OJJDP database or another
                                     approved listing of evidence-based programs (e.g, CSAP or
                                     SAMSHA). Provide opportunities for subgrantees to receive training
                                     and technical assistance in program development, implementation and
                                     evaluation and innovations in positive youth development (partner
                                     with the Indiana Youth Institute to keep subgrantees informed of such
                                     opportunities outside the Youth Division.). Track arrest trends and
                                     other measures of high-risk behavior statewide.

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                        State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 50,000.00                  FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $ 100,000.00                 Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The state expects to have between one (1) and
                                                    five(5) subgrantees under this purpose area with
                                                    grants ranging from $10,000 to $50,000. Funding
                                                    for specific delinquency prevention efforts will
                                                    also be provided under school programs (27) and
                                                    substance abuse programs (32). Projects are
                                                    funding for a minimum one year grant period
                                                    (April 1st – March 31st) and are eligible to receive
                                                    up to three years of funding on a competitive basis
                                                    and then a three year step down or until the award
                                                    is below $5,000 (whichever occurs first).

        A. State Program Designator:              08, Disproportionate Minority Contact

        B. Standard Program Area Code:            10

        C. Title:                                 Disproportionate Minority Contact

        D. Program Problem Statement

_____________________________                                                                           80
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
               The December 1999, OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Minorities in the Juvenile Justice
               System summarized the relationship of minority overrepresentation to Formula Grant funding:

               Since 1988, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act has required
               States that receive Formula Grants program funding to determine whether the
               proportion of juvenile minorities in confinement exceeds their proportion of the
               population and, if so, to develop corrective strategies. In 1992, Congress strengthened
               the national commitment to addressing disproportionate minority confinement of
               minority youth in secure facilities by elevating this issue to a ‗core requirement‘ of the
               JJDP Act.

               Nationally, statistics reveal that minority youth, particularly African-American males, are
               disproportionately represented at each level of the juvenile justice system. While statistics do
               reveal disproportionate minority confinement among Indiana‘s black juvenilesvii, little is
               currently known about its causes and the current extent of minority overrepresentation at each
               level of the State‘s juvenile justice system.

               Research was conducted on minority overrepresentation in Indiana over nine (9) years ago,
               timeliness of the data as well as an increase in the level of minority youth around the State
               (particularly youth of Hispanic origin) suggests that new research should be conducted. This
               was the conclusion and recommendation of Indiana‘s Disproportionate Minority
               Confinement: Intervention Plan submitted to OJJDP in March of 1999.

               Progress towards completing this research has been slow, but aggregate statistics do reveal at
               least the presence of DMC for African-American youth in Indiana, but falls short of providing
               the causal factors leading to disproportionate minority contact. For example while the 2000
               census revealed that African-American youth constitute approximately 10% of the overall
               juvenile population in the State, thirty-three percent (33%) of the reported juvenile arrests in
               2001 were of African-American youth. Interestingly, African-American youth are also
               disproportionately represented in all but juvenile miscellaneous (JM) filings which include
               agreements for informal adjustment rather than formal adjudication (African-American youth
               represent 38% of delinquency filings, 20% of status filings, and 34% of CHINS filings).
               Finally, African-American youth represented thirty-nine percent (39%) of commitments to
               secure correctional facilities throughout the State as of January 1, 2003.

           E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

              Goal:     Increase statewide capacity to identify and reduce the disproportionate number of
                        minority juveniles who come into contact with the juvenile justice system.


                        Objective 1:      Maintain full-time DMC coordinator position and presence/leadership
                                          role on the Indiana Disproportionality Committee. Work with
                                          juvenile justice system stakeholders to increase the capacity of local
                                          communities (when appropriate) to identify and address the
                                          underlying causes of disproportionate minority contact.


vii
      See Graph 2 page 28, Graph 4 page 30, Chart 19 page 32 and Corrections section narrative page 34.
_____________________________                                                                                81
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Performance Indicators:        1) Type of data collection and information-sharing
                                                     systems improvements made statewide or within a
                                                     local jurisdiction
                                                     2) Percentage of court/detention/corrections staff who
                                                     reflect similar proportions of minority populations
                                                     3) Number of culturally appropriate offender and
                                                     victim services compared with number expected
                                                     4) Changes in annual Disproportionate Minority
                                                     Contact Index at each decision point in the system
                                                     (arrest, referral, diversion, detention, petition,
                                                     adjudication, probation, corrections and transfer to
                                                     adult court)
                                                     5) Evidence of more reliable and valid data
                                                     collections/analysis capacity compared to before
                                                     funding

                      Activities:    Work with ICJI Research Division (State Statistical Analysis Center)
                                     to facilitate collection of DMC matrices data and conduct analysis of
                                     data for DMC index. Collaborate with Indiana Judicial Center,
                                     Division of State Court Administration, and counties with Quest
                                     database systems to facilitate improvements in data collection,
                                     information-sharing and data submission for DMC. Work with ICJI
                                     Research Division to conduct further analysis of the underlying
                                     causes of potential DMC, provide technical assistance to jurisdictions
                                     to address DMC and work with JJSAG to develop statewide strategies
                                     to address DMC.

                      Objective 2:   Identify and support programs/initiatives with the greatest to potential
                                     to impact disproportionate minority contact.

                      Performance Indicators:     1) Number and percentage of staff (program, agency,
                                                  unit, facility, etc.) trained in cultural competency
                                                  reporting/grant period
                                                  2) Increase in the number of community-based programs
                                                  targeting minority youth
                                                  3) Number and types of objective decision-making tools
                                                  used at specified juvenile justice decision points
                                                  4) Changes in annual Disproportionate Minority Contact
                                                  Index at each decision point in the system (arrest,
                                                  referral, diversion, detention, petition, adjudication,
                                                  probation, corrections and transfer to adult court)


                      Activities:    Work with ICJI Research Division and the IU Center on
                                     Environmental and Education Policy to conduct further analysis of
                                     the underlying causes of potential DMC, provide technical assistance
                                     to jurisdictions to address DMC and work with JJSAG to develop
                                     statewide strategies to address DMC. Fund programs at the local level
                                     (when appropriate) to address DMC or prevent DMC from occurring.
_____________________________                                                                              82
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 190,000.00                       FY 06 $20,000.00
                                     Total $ 380,000.00                       Total $60,000.00

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The state expects to award one (1) subgrant to a
                                                    University for approx. $120,000 per year and to
                                                    fund a full-time DMC coordinator including
                                                    extensive travel $70,000. Projects are funding for
                                                    a minimum one year grant period (April 1st –
                                                    March 31st) and are eligible to receive up to three
                                                    years of funding on a competitive basis and then a
                                                    three year step down or until the award is below
                                                    $5,000 (whichever occurs first).

        A. State Program Designator:               09, Gender Relevant Programming

        B. Standard Program Area Code:             13

        C. Title:                                  Gender-Specific Services

        D. Program Problem Statement
           National and State data reveal the juvenile female offenders are increasingly involved with the
           juvenile justice system for more serious offenses. Further research has revealed the
           differences in the development pathways between adolescent boys and girls and the associated
           risks factors for the onset of female delinquent and at-risk behavior. OJJDP‘s Guiding
           Principles for Promising Female Programming: An Inventory of Best Practices (October
           1998) reveals that:

             For decades, girls who have broken the law have entered a juvenile justice system that
             was designed to help someone else. Boys commit the overwhelming number of
             juvenile crimes, and their offenses tend to be more violent and dangerous than the
             status offenses most girls commit. It‘s no wonder then, that female delinquents have
             been overlooked and neglected by a system engineered to help troubled boys become
             law-abiding men.

             The report goes on to indicate that two trends are changing the landscape of gender-specific
             programming. First, the number of girls entering the juvenile justice system is growing at
             alarmingly high rates (faster than the rates for male delinquent offenders) and girls are
             entering the system at younger ages for more serious offenses, including such violent crime as
             assaults. Second, research has revealed the need for programming focused on the specific
             development needs and associated risk factors faced by at-risk adolescent females. For
             example, female delinquents are far more likely to have been victims of sexual or physical
             abuse, a risk factor for subsequent delinquent behavior.

             Currently the level of female involvement in the juvenile justice system in Indiana, as well as
             the availability of gender-specific programming statewide is relatively unknown. In the
_____________________________                                                                              83
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
             Spring of 2002 Indiana‘s Gender Relevant Programming Initiative (IGRPI) was launched in
             concert with the annual Keeping Kids Safe Conference co-sponsored by the ICJI and
             Community Systemwide Response of the Purdue 4-H Youth Development Department. One
             day of the conference was dedicated to introducing key stakeholders from around the state to
             gender-relevant programming concepts and issues and describing existing promising gender-
             specific initiatives/programs in Indiana. Dr. Sheila Peters of Greene, Peters & Associates led
             the day-long workshop. The following day, approximately 20 juvenile justice, mental health,
             academic, and prevention professionals from around the State attended the first IGRPI
             Workgroup meeting. Overviews of the current status of female and male juveniles in Indiana
             and information about ongoing gender-specific initiatives in other states were provided. These
             presentations stimulated conversation about what Indiana‘s gender-specific initiative should
             involve. Verbatim responses of IGRPI Workgroup members to the question ―Based on the
             information provided in the morning presentations and what you already know about gender-
             specific issues, what do we still need to know?‖ included:

                Research on developmental differences and delinquency pathways for males and females;
                Concise definition of gender-specific;
              More data across disciplines – criminal justice, mental health, victimization, socio-
                 economic, demographic;
              Input of the juvenile female population served;
              Views of juvenile justice professionals and parents of delinquent females;
              Need for theoretically driven programs and empirically driven policy;
              Current availability of gender-specific programming;
              Best practices, model programs;
              Outcome measures; and
              Selling this as an important issue – identifying political champions.

             Information gathered during the IGRPI Workgroup meeting were used to inform a research
             plan that was then funded through a SAC Evaluation Partnership Program grant through
             Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA). The final results of the initiative were
             presented in the summer of 2004.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Support the development, implementation, and evaluation of empirically based gender
                      relevant programming statewide.

                      Objective 1:   Increase statewide capacity to address the gender-relevant needs of at-
                                     risk and delinquent youth through empirically-based programming.

                      Performance Indicators:         1) Number of gender-relevant programs developed
                                                      and implemented
                                                      2) Percentage of youth to successfully complete the
                                                      program
                                                      3) Utilization rate for the program (number of
                                                      placements(referrals)/program capacity)
                                                      4) Percentage of staff to receive gender-relevant or
                                                      adolescent development training
_____________________________                                                                                84
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                       5) Changes in program participants demonstration of
                                                       appropriate social skills
                                                       6) Changes in program participants relationship with
                                                       parents and family
                                                       7) Number juveniles diverted from formal juvenile
                                                       justice system
                                                       8) Recidivism (rearrest, recommitments) of juveniles
                                                       who receive gender-relevant programming within 12
                                                       months of completion compared with juveniles who
                                                       did not receive gender-relevant programming

                      Activities:    Complete the Indiana Gender Relevant Programming Initiative study
                                     (IGRPI) and disseminate statewide. Provide opportunities for local
                                     communities to receive training and technical assistance on gender-
                                     relevant programming. Support and replicate promising programs.



                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 20,000.00                 FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $ 40,000.00                 Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to award two (2) subgrants for
                                                    approximately $10,000. Projects are funding for a
                                                    minimum one year grant period (April 1st –
                                                    March 31st) and are eligible to receive up to three
                                                    years of funding on a competitive basis and then a
                                                    three year step down or until the award is below
                                                    $5,000 (whichever occurs first).


        A. State Program Designator:              10, Graduated Sanctions

        B. Standard Program Area Code:            14

        C. Title:                                 Graduated Sanctions

        D. Program Problem Statement
           Funding for standard program area 14, Graduated Sanctions is based on problem statement B
           from Indiana‘s Three Year Delinquency Prevention & Systems Improvement Plan, FY 2006-
           2008:

                  Lack of resources for sound researched-based intervention programs in
                  the areas of aftercare, juvenile probation and both non-secure and secure
                  juvenile programs/facilities. Specifically, programming to address
                  cognitive-behavioral based approaches, mental health needs, life skills,
                  work-force development, graduated sanctions, etc., within the justice
                  system and youth-serving agencies should be emphasized. (Should be
_____________________________                                                                            85
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                   noted that resources in these areas have increased with the
                   implementation of JABG that is designed to address such programming
                   needs.)

           With the imminent reductions in JABG funding, support to allow local juvenile courts to
           implement promising programs and best practices to bridge the gap between traditional
           probation and secure corrections will once again be severely limited.

           Indiana has been experiencing an overall decrease in juvenile arrests since peaks in 1996, the
           have been slight increases since 1999 with reported arrests for violent crimes increasing fifteen
           percent (15%) and for property crimes six percent (6%) during this time period. While
           aggregate data reveal relatively positive strides in decreasing juvenile crime in general, trends
           for specific offenses indicate a continued need to support evidence -based programming at the
           community level. For example, the reported juvenile arrest rates for aggravated assaults and
           other assaults have increased twenty-four percent (24%) and twenty-one percent (21%) between
           1999 and 2001. The reported juvenile arrest rates for driving under the influence have increased
           forty-one percent (41%) during the same time period.

           Local juvenile courts, probation departments, and community corrections agencies are being
           forced to serve increasing numbers of juveniles while experiencing decreases in budgets,
           particularly in the areas of programming and training. The number of juvenile cases filed in
           Indiana‘s juvenile courts between 1991 and 2001 has increased sixty-one (61%) for juvenile
           delinquency cases, sixty percent (60%) for CHINS cases, and a startling ninety-four percent
           (94%) for status offender cases. During the same time period the number of juvenile
           miscellaneous cases filed, which includes informal adjustments, declined thirty percent (30%).

           While the number of juvenile referrals and post-judgment supervisions received by probation
           departments statewide has decreased slightly in the past four (4) years (12% for supervisions
           and 13% for referrals); this follows a period of substantial increases in the population served
           between 1989 and 1998 (47% increase in supervisions and 43% increase in referrals during this
           time period), leading to substantially higher probation populations served without an equivalent
           increase in probation resources. Interestingly, while probation referrals and supervisions have
           decreased slightly since 1999 the number of commitments to Indiana‘s secure juvenile
           correctional facilities had increased fifty-four percent (54%) from 1184 commitments in 1999 to
           1824 commitments as of January 1, 2003. However, since 2005, the DOC commitment rate is
           approximately 50% of the January 1, 2003 rate at any given point.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase statewide knowledge of and capacity to deliver a system of graduated
                      sanctions.

                      Objective 1:    Investigate and identify potential changes in statutes policies, and
                                      justice system practices necessary to develop a statewide structure to
                                      support implementation of graduate sanctions.

                      Performance Indicators:         1) Number of trainings and provision of technical
                                                      assistance provided to local communities on
                                                      graduated sanctions
_____________________________                                                                              86
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                      2) Number of sanctioning options available statewide
                                                      3) Changes in statute, policies, and justice system
                                                      practices to support graduated sanctions
                                                      4) Commitment rate to secure correctional facilities

                      Activities:    Work with Governor‘s Juvenile Law Commission to review and
                                     recommend statutory changes and provide guidance on appropriate
                                     policies and practices to support graduated sanctions. Provide
                                     increased opportunities for statewide training and technical assistance
                                     on developing systems of graduated sanctions.

                      Objective 2:   Increase capacity of local jurisdictions to implement a full range of
                                     graduated sanctions.

                      Performance Indicators:         1) Number of sanction options available at each point
                                                      in the continuum (immediate, intermediate, secure
                                                      care, and aftercare) compared to before funding
                                                      2) Utilization rate for each program
                                                      3) Ratio of juveniles involved in sanctions program
                                                      to available slots for each sector of the continuum
                                                      4) Time between offense and sanction
                                                      5) Recidivism (rearrests ore recommitments)
                                                      occurring within 12 months after the program
                                                      completion
                                                      6) Number of juveniles diverted from secure care

                      Activities:    Provide information regarding graduated sanctions and links to
                                     evidence-based models on Youth Division website and in the RFP
                                     process for Title II Formula grants. Provide opportunities for training
                                     and technical assistance on graduated sanctions. Fund local programs
                                     to develop and/or implement a system of graduated sanctions locally.


                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 55,000.00                    FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $110,000.00                    Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to make two (2) subgrants under
                                                    this program purpose area, ranging from $10,000
                                                    to $27,500. Projects are funded for a minimum
                                                    one year grant period (April 1st – March 31st) and
                                                    are eligible to receive up to three years of funding
                                                    on a competitive basis and then a three year step
                                                    down or until the award is below $5,000
                                                    (whichever occurs first).



_____________________________                                                                                87
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        A. State Program Designator:                11, Juvenile Justice System Improvement

        B. Standard Program Area Code:              19

        C. Title:                                   Juvenile Justice System Improvement

        D. Program Problem Statement
           Indiana‘s juvenile justice system is largely decentralized, fragmented and in many areas lacks
           resources, particularly with regard to funds to improve the operations and coordination of the
           juvenile justice system statewide and at the local level. This problem manifests itself in a
           variety of ways: a lack of integrated juvenile data systems; the inability to track juvenile
           offenders through the juvenile justice and social service systems; inconsistency and differing
           resource levels to divert juveniles; variance in decision-making to incarcerate juveniles;
           insufficient alternatives to incarceration; lack of coordinated prevention programming;
           inadequate interagency coordination and information-sharing; and inadequate after-care
           resources for juveniles returning to their communities.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:
                          To increase interagency coordination and information-sharing to promote
                           comprehensive, community-wide delinquency prevention and intervention
                           planning.
                          To promote a system that values and supports community-based planning to
                           implement evidence programming and services.
                          To promote coordination of existing coalitions, boards and service providers to
                           reduce service and planning duplication.


                      Objective 1:     Increase the capacity of local jurisdictions to implement information-
                                       sharing programs/initiatives in order to improve service delivery and
                                       decrease duplication of services/efforts.

                      Performance Indicators:            1) # of memorandums of understanding
                                                         established/maintained to conduct information-
                                                         sharing at the local level
                                                         2) Number of staff hours dedicated to system
                                                         improvement/information-sharing activities
                                                         3) Number of jurisdictions to implement/improve
                                                         information-sharing systems
                                                         4) Reductions in the level of system duplication of
                                                         efforts (intakes, assessments, evaluations, referrals
                                                         and services)

                      Activities:      Collaborate with the Judicial Improvement Committee (Judicial
                                       Center), Division of State Court Administration, and Probation
                                       Officer‘s Association to identify the most promising information-


_____________________________                                                                                    88
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                     sharing models and technology and provide funding to support the
                                     implementation of such models at the local level.

                      Objective 2:   Increase statewide juvenile justice system capacity to engage in
                                     community-wide planning to reduce duplication of services and
                                     implement evidence-based programming.

                      Performance Indicators:        1) Number of grants applied for to conduct research
                                                     or evaluation of juvenile justice decision making or
                                                     programs
                                                     2) Number of current Juvenile Justice Service
                                                     Improvement committees or related ongoing
                                                     initiatives
                                                     3) Systems improvements made as a result of funded
                                                     research or committee activities
                                                     4) Change in the number of subgrantees to conduct
                                                     rigorous program evaluations

                      Activities:    Work with ICJI Research Division and OJJDP‘s technical assistance
                                     provider to provide information and training to subgrantees on
                                     program evaluation. Link subgrantees to evaluation resources within
                                     the State (e.g.., Indiana Youth Institute) and through OJJDP (technical
                                     assistance). Work with on-going juvenile justice system improvement
                                     committees and initiatives (e.g., Juvenile Justice Improvement
                                     Committee, Juvenile Law Commission, Indiana State Bar Association
                                     (ISBA) Committee on the Legal Rights of Juveniles, Youth Law
                                     TEAM of Indiana).

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                         State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 200,000.00                  FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $ 400,000.00                  Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to award between one (2) and
                                                    ten (10) subgrants under this program purpose
                                                    area ranging from $20,000 to $100,000. Projects
                                                    are funded for a minimum one year grant period
                                                    (April 1st – March 31st) and are eligible to receive
                                                    up to three years of funding on a competitive basis
                                                    and a three year step down or until the award is
                                                    below $5,000 (whichever occurs first).




_____________________________                                                                            89
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        A. State Program Designator:                12, Coordinated & Comprehensive Mental Health
                                                    Services

        B. Standard Program Area Code:              20

        C. Title:                                   Mental Health Services

        D. Program Problem Statement 118
           Each year, more than two million youth under age 18 are arrested. A million of them will
           have formal contact with the juvenile justice system, and more than 100,000 will eventually be
           removed from their homes and placed in juvenile detention and/or correctional facilities.
           Available research indicates that at least 20 percent of all youth who enter the juvenile justice
           system experience serious mental disorders, with a much higher percentage experiencing some
           level of mental health problems. There is also a growing recognition that many of these
           youths, nearly 50 to 75 percent have serious substance abuse problems.

             The lack of comprehensive mental health services available for at-risk juveniles and juveniles
             already within the juvenile justice system has been identified as a priority issue in the State.
             There is a growing recognition that many youth are entering the juvenile justice system with
             co-occurring disordersviii that have been unrecognized and misunderstood. The extent and
             nature of this problem varies statewide. The problem is further exacerbated by a lack of
             available statewide data with regards to the mental health needs of at-risk or delinquent youth
             and the array of services available in jurisdictions to meet those needs. Previously, the
             Criminal Justice Institute addressed this gap in information by utilizing Challenge Grant
             monies to fund a statewide Juvenile Detention Mental Health and Substance Abuse Needs
             Assessment.119 This was the first step in providing comprehensive mental services to at-risk
             and delinquent youth.

             Preliminary results from the Juvenile Detention Mental Health and Substance Abuse Needs
             Assessment have revealed that juveniles entering detention centers throughout the state have
             substantial mental health and substance abuse treatment needs that have often been
             undiagnosed and untreated. For example, in the sample completed the assessment instrument
             the incidence of self-reported physical and sexual abuse was thirty (30) times higher than what
             is seen in the general youth population. While a quarter of respondents reported that several
             times they had wanted to kill themselves.

             The second step involves the need for coordination among and across systems. There is a need
             to develop new linkages between mental health, substance abuse and criminal justice systems.
             These linkages can provide appropriate interventions to break the cycles of decomposition and
             incarceration in these people‘s lives that repeatedly harm them and the communities in which
             they live. All three systems must recognize the need for a holistic approach to treating each
             person and should be willing to share information, money and clients across these systems.




viii
  For example, data reveal that many of Indiana‘s youth are faced with multi-faceted problems such as family
dysfunction, mental health disorders, substance abuse, educational failure, etc.
_____________________________                                                                                  90
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      To promote and support the development of comprehensive and coordinated mental
                      health services for at-risk and delinquent youth.


                      Objective 1:    To increase statewide capacity address the multi-faceted needs of
                                      both at-risk and delinquent youth exhibiting mental health or co-
                                      occurring disorders through coordinated mental health services and/or
                                      systems-of-care.

                      Performance Indicators:             1) Number and percentage of juveniles screened
                                                          for substance abuse or mental health problems
                                                          2) Percentage of juveniles screened and found to
                                                          have mental health or co-occurring disorders who
                                                          received services
                                                          3) Utilization rate for mental health services
                                                          4) Percentage of juveniles served with Serious
                                                          Emotional Disturbances (SED)
                                                          5) Length of stay (LOS) for inpatient services
                                                          6) Recidivism (rearrests, recommitments)
                                                          occurring within 12 months after completion of
                                                          the program/treatment
                                                          7) Evidence of changes in family relationships
                                                          after the program compared to before
                                                          8) Measurable changes in program participant
                                                          functioning after completion of the program

                      Activities:     Collaborate with FSSA/DMHA to continue to develop and support a
                                      statewide system-of-care that will fully incorporate juveniles entering
                                      the justice system through delinquency or status offenses. Fund only
                                      evidence-based programs at the local level (e.g. SAMSHA, CSAP,
                                      OJJDP database).

                      Budget: JJDPA Funds                           State/Local/Private Funds

                                 FY 06 $ 100,000.00                 FY 06 $_________
                                 Total $ 200,000.00                 Total $_________

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to fund between two subgrants
                                                    under this program purpose area ranging from
                                                    $20,000 to $50,000. Projects are funded for a
                                                    minimum one year grant period (April 1st –
                                                    March 31st) and are eligible to receive up to three
                                                    years of funding on a competitive basis and then a
                                                    three year step down or until the award is below
                                                    $5,000 (whichever occurs first).


_____________________________                                                                              91
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        A. State Program Designator:               13, Probation/Intensive Supervision

        B. Standard Program Area Code:             24

        C. Title:                                  Probation

        D. Program Problem Statement
           Funding for standard program area 24, Probation is based on problem statement B from
           Indiana‘s Three Year Delinquency Prevention & Systems Improvement Plan, FY 2006-2008:

                  Lack of resources for sound researched-based intervention programs in
                  the areas of aftercare, juvenile probation and both non-secure and secure
                  juvenile programs/facilities. Specifically, programming to address
                  cognitive-behavioral based approaches, mental health needs, life skills,
                  work-force development, graduated sanctions, etc., within the justice
                  system and youth-serving agencies should be emphasized. (Should be
                  noted that resources in these areas have increased with the
                  implementation of JABG that is designed to address such programming
                  needs.)

           Local juvenile courts, probation departments, and community corrections agencies are being
           forced to serve increasing numbers of juveniles while experiencing decreases in budgets,
           particularly in the areas of programming and training. The number of juvenile cases filed in
           Indiana‘s juvenile courts between 1991 and 2001 has increased sixty-one (61%) for juvenile
           delinquency cases, sixty percent (60%) for CHINS cases, and a startling ninety-four percent
           (94%) for status offender cases. During the same time period the number of juvenile
           miscellaneous cases filed, which includes informal adjustments, declined thirty percent (30%).

           While the number of juvenile referrals and post-judgment supervisions received by probation
           departments statewide has decreased slightly in the past four (4) years (12% for supervisions
           and 13% for referrals); this follows a period of substantial increases in the population served
           between 1989 and 1998 (47% increase in supervisions and 43% increase in referrals during this
           time period), leading to substantially higher probation populations served without an equivalent
           increase in probation resources. Interestingly, while probation referrals and supervisions have
           decreased slightly since 1999 the number of commitments to Indiana‘s secure juvenile
           correctional facilities has increased fifty-four percent (54%) from 1184 commitments in 1999 to
           1824 commitments as of January 1, 2003. Of note, however, is the fact that since January 2003,
           DOC commitments have declined by 50% on a consistent basis and two (2) DOC juvenile
           facilities have been closed.

           The 2002 Indiana Probation Report, published annually by the Indiana Division of State Court
           Administration, indicates that:

                  ―Probation services, as the overwhelming majority of all other trial court
                  operations, are supported almost entirely through local expenditures…
                  Because many counties do not have a separate probation budget, non-
                  personnel expenditures are absorbed within the court‘s expenditures,
                  making it impossible to derive a complete picture of all probation related
                  expenditures.‖
_____________________________                                                                            92
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
             For 2002 the report revealed that county trial courts around the State could identify
             approximately $45 million spent on probation services, while city and town courts reported
             just over $1.3 million spent on probation related expenditures. At the end of 2002 probation
             offices around the State reported supervising 138,693 juveniles and adults (a 4% increase from
             the previous year). At the same time the number of professional probation officers around the
             State was 1,185; thus providing the best estimate of average caseload of approximately 117
             probationers per professional probation officer it should be noted that this can vary widely
             depending on the jurisdiction).

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase the capacity of local probation departments to adequately monitor and serve
                      the needs of probationers.

                      Objective 1:    Reduce probation officer caseloads in order to increase supervision of
                                      probationers, conditions of probation, and service referral completion.

                      Performance Indicators:               1) Number of juveniles placed on probation
                                                            2) Average length of stay (LOS) on probation
                                                            3) Percentage of probationers with satisfactory
                                                            case closures
                                                            4) Number of supervision intensity levels for
                                                            probation cases
                                                            5) Average number of contacts between juveniles
                                                            and Intensive Supervision probation officers
                                                            6) Number of commitments to secure facilities or
                                                            juvenile correctional facilities
                                                            7) Number of probation revocations
                                                            8) Recidivism (rearrests, recommitments)
                                                            occurring within 12 months after completion of
                                                            program
                                                            9) Recidivism rate of ISP juveniles compared with
                                                            rate of traditional probation participants
                                                            10) Decreases in juvenile probation officers‘
                                                            caseloads

                      Activities:     Collaborate with Indiana Judicial Center and Probation Officer‘s
                                      Association to solicit proposals to competitively fund local
                                      jurisdictions. Provide training and technical assistance opportunities
                                      regarding probation and intensive supervision.

                      Budget:         JJDPA Funds                            State/Local/Private Funds

                                      FY 06 $ 61,500.00ix                    FY 06 $_________
                                      Total $ 123,000.00                     Total $_________

ix
  Pursuant to Section 223(a)(25) of the JJDP Act of 2002 the amount allocated to the probation program purpose
area represents 5% of Indiana‘s Title II Formula Grant allocation (other than funds made available to the SAG).
_____________________________                                                                                     93
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to award between one (1) and
                                                    three subgrants under this program purpose area
                                                    ranging from $22,833 to $36,500. Projects are
                                                    funded for a minimum one year grant period
                                                    (April 1st – March 31st) and are eligible to receive
                                                    up to three years of funding on a competitive basis
                                                    and then a three year step down or until the award
                                                    is below $5,000 (whichever occurs first).


        A. State Program Designator:                   14, School Programs

        B. Standard Program Area Code:                 27

        C. Title:                                      School Programs

        D. Program Problem Statement
           Currently in Indiana schools and communities face a growing problem of maintaining a safe
           and effective learning environment for the majority of students. In order to maintain this
           environment, schools must sometimes exercise their option of suspension and expulsion as
           punishment for students with disciplinary problems. Unfortunately, this type of punishment
           offers little for the suspended or expelled student. These students often spend their days
           unsupervised, without continued academic instruction and with more opportunity for daytime
           criminal activity. Schools may also suspend or expel students without addressing the
           underlying cause of their behavior. These students become more likely to drop out of school
           entirely and become involved in the juvenile and criminal justice systems.

             Statewide the number of reported dropouts has continued to steadily decline since 1992. This
             may be, in part, due to the number of students that are being retained in school systems
             through alternative school programs, which have grown considerably in the past decade.
             Between 1992 and 2002 the number of alternative school system participants has increased
             2,802% from 1034 to 30,011 participants respectively. Such an increase is not surprising with
             the number of suspensions and expulsions reported at 314,699 for the 2002 school year,
             earning Indiana the dubious honor of leading the nation in suspensions/expulsions. Another
             related trend is the increasing number of families choosing a home school option. The number
             of home schooled students in Indiana has increased over 2000% in the past decade from 964
             students reported as home-schooled in 1992 to over 21,000 reported in 2002.

             With the passage of the NCLB schools, schools are increasingly be asked to improve
             educational achievement and the safety of schools, while at the same time reduce the number
             of students suspended/expelled or dropping out. This is all being asked in an environment
             where funding for programs that are often deemed ancillary to the core educational
             curriculum, programs such as alternatives to suspension/expulsion, alternative schools and
             school safety initiatives (e.g., school resource officers), is being drastically cut or limited.




_____________________________                                                                               94
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase capacity of local school corporations to meet the educational needs of all
                      students in a safe learning environment.

           Objective 1:       Decrease the number of youth removed from the educational system through
                              the support of already existing alternative school, alternative to
                              suspension/expulsion, and truancy prevention/intervention programs and the
                              development of enhanced or new programs.

                      Performance Indicators:              1) Number of participants successfully completing
                                                           truancy reduction program compared with the
                                                           number originally referred
                                                           2) Number of students enrolled in alternative
                                                           schools
                                                           3) Number of students successfully completing
                                                           alternative to suspension/expulsion program
                                                           4) Number of students receiving school individual
                                                           and/or family therapy compared to number
                                                           referred
                                                           5) Number of in-school and out-of-school
                                                           suspension before the program compared with
                                                           afterward
                                                           6) Changes in problem behavior before the
                                                           program compared with after the program
                                                           7) Recidivism (e.g,, suspensions, arrest, rearrests,
                                                           adjudications) within 12 months of program
                                                           completion
                                                           8) Number of unexcused absences/truancies
                                                           before the program compared with afterward
                                                           9) Reductions in dropout rate for program
                                                           participants
                                                           10) Reductions in overall suspension/expulsion
                                                           rates

                      Activities:      Identify and support the development, implementation, and
                                       replication of promising, evidence-based programs to address truancy,
                                       and the underlying causes of suspensions/expulsions. Partner with the
                                       Indiana Department of Education (IDOE), Division of Exceptional
                                       Learners to provide training and technical assistance.

                      Objective 2:     Increase the capacity of local school corporations to provide a safe
                                       learning environment.

                      Performance Indicators:              1) Number of School Resource Officer/School
                                                           Safety Programs implemented
                                                           2) Number of SRO‘s hired
                                                           3) Level of utilization of/enrollment in law-related
                                                           education programs
_____________________________                                                                                 95
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                            4) Number of altercations/school-related
                                                            discipline incidents after program implementation
                                                            compared to before program implementation
                                                            5) Reported victimization rates on school grounds
                                                            (including buses)

                      Activities:      Collaborate with the IDOE/DEL to provide school corporations with
                                       information on state-of-the-art school safety practices and provide
                                       training to each school safety specialist. Support local efforts through
                                       federal and state funding.


                      Budget:          JJDPA Funds                            State/Local/Private Funds

                                       FY 06 $ 80,000.00                      FY 06 $ 3,000,000.00
                                       Total $ 160,000.00                     Total $ 6,000,000.00

                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to fund between two (2) and
                                                    four (4) subgrants under this program purpose
                                                    area ranging from $20,000 to $30,000. Projects
                                                    are funding for a minimum one year grant period
                                                    (April 1st – March 31st) and are eligible to receive
                                                    up to three years of funding on a competitive basis
                                                    and then a three year step down or until the award
                                                    is below $5,000 (whichever occurs first).


        A. State Program Designator:                 15, Substance Abuse Programs & Prevention

        B. Standard Program Area Code:               32

        C. Title:                                    Substance Abuse Programs

        D. Program Problem Statement
             While we have experienced reductions in substance use among Indiana‘s 8 th – 12th graders, we continue
             to be above the national average for both monthly cigarette and alcohol usage. In 2005 the IPRC
             surveyed over 80,000 students in over 250 of Indiana‘s schools. While overall the results were
             encouraging, the survey still revealed some alarming trends according to the Indiana Youth
             Institute, Kids Count in Indiana, 2005 Data Book:

                           One in five Indiana high school seniors smoke cigarettes on a
                            daily basis in 2005.
                           One in three high school seniors had tried binge drinking
                            (consuming five or more drinks in one sitting) during the two
                            weeks preceding the survey in 2005.
                           One in ten high school students has used acid (LSD) and/or
                            ecstasy (MDMA) by the time they graduate.


_____________________________                                                                                    96
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
             In addition, juvenile arrests for driving under the influence increased forty-one percent (41%)
             between 1999 – 2001 and an even more alarming trend has been the invasion of
             methamphetamine production and use throughout Indiana‘s rural communities.

             Results from pilot phase of the Indiana Juvenile Detention Mental Health and Substance
             Abuse Assessment Project revealed a less encouraging picture of substance abuse for juveniles
             entering detention centers. When asked about their frequency of substance use in the thirty
             (30) days prior to being admitted to detention, twenty percent (20%) reported using alcohol
             more than six (6) days, while thirty-four percent (34%) reported drug use of more than six (6)
             days. Even more disturbing was the percentage reporting daily use of alcohol or drugs in the
             thirty days (30) days prior to being detained – four percent (4%) and twenty-four percent
             (24%) respectively. When asked ―Have you ever been drunk or under the influence of drugs
             while committing a crime?‖, forty-six percent (46%) of respondents answered ―yes‖. A
             follow-up to the pilot phase of the project revealed that while no youth reported having used
             ecstasy during the 1999 pilot, just two years later twenty-seven percent (27%) percent of the
             sample reported having used ecstasy or other date rape drugs at least once. A new and
             emerging phenomenon is the use of methamphetamine by teenage youth. This emerging trend
             is being aggressively addressed by the Drug and Crime Control Division of the Indiana
             Criminal Justice Institute.

        E. Program Goal(s)/Objectives/Performance Indicators/Activities and Services Planned

           Goal:      Increase the capacity of local jurisdictions to develop and implement substance abuse
                      prevention and intervention programs/strategies.

                      Objective 1:    Increase the number of evidence-based substance abuse prevention
                                      programs available in local communities.

                      Performance Indicators:             1) Number of youth participating in substance
                                                          abuse prevention programs
                                                          2) Number and type of evidence-based prevention
                                                          programs developed and implemented
                                                          3) Number of community partners
                                                          participating/collaborating to deliver substance
                                                          abuse prevention programming/messages
                                                          4) Changes in attitudes regarding ATOD after the
                                                          program/campaign compared to before
                                                          5) Number of youth arrested or referred to
                                                          probation for substance abuse related offenses 12
                                                          months after completion of the program

                      Activities:     Work with Drug and Crime Control Division, Governor‘s
                                      Commission for a Drug-Free Indiana to identify local needs and
                                      promising programs to prevent substance abuse among teens. Fund
                                      and promote replication of evidence-based programming based on
                                      recommendations of SAMSHA, CSAP and OJJDP databases.

                      Objective 2:    Increase the capacity of local jurisdictions to meet the substance abuse
                                      treatment needs of juvenile offenders.
_____________________________                                                                              97
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                      Performance Indicators:            1) Number of new (or enhanced) outpatient and
                                                         inpatient AOD services available in the
                                                         community
                                                         2) Number of juveniles referred to juvenile justice
                                                         system to receive AOD services
                                                         3) Percentage of youth to successfully complete
                                                         each program type
                                                         4) Recidivism (rearrest, readjudications,
                                                         reincarcerations) for AOD offenses within 12
                                                         months of program completion
                                                         5) Number of positive drug tests before the
                                                         program compared with after the program

                      Activities:    Identify and support the funding of evidence-based programs to
                                     address AOD needs of juvenile offenders (SAMSHA, CSAP, OJJDP).
                                     Collaborate with Indiana Juvenile Detention Association to increase
                                     collaboration within local jurisdictions, particularly juvenile detention
                                     centers, to address AOD needs of juvenile offenders.

                      Budget:        JJDPA Funds                          State/Local/Private Funds

                                     FY 06 $ 36,150.00                    FY 06 $_________
                                     Total $ 72,300.00                    Total $_________




                      Expected Number of Subgrants: The State expects to award between one (1) and
                                                    two (2) subgrants under this program purpose area
                                                    ranging from $18,075 to $36,150. Projects are
                                                    funding for a minimum one year grant period
                                                    (April 1st – March 31st) and are eligible to receive
                                                    up to three years of funding on a competitive basis
                                                    and then a three year step down or until the award
                                                    is below $5,000 (whichever occurs first).




_____________________________                                                                              98
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Coordination of Child Abuse and Neglect and Delinquency Programs

   REDUCING THE CASELOAD OF PROBATION OFFICERS

   Pursuant to Section 223(a)(25) of the JJPD Act of 2002 the state must provide incentive grants to units
   of local government that reduce the caseload of probation officers in an amount not to exceed five
   percent (5%) of the state‘s allocation (other than funds made available to the SAG). As such, Indiana‘s
   FY 2006-2008 Program Plan allocates $61,500 in funds under Program Purpose Area 24, Probation to
   provide incentive grants, on a competitive basis, to local probation departments to implement
   programs (e.g., intensive supervision) that would act to reduce the caseload of probation officers and
   improve the capacity of such departments to adequately monitor juvenile probationers.

   SHARING PUBLIC CHILD WELFARE RECORDS (INCLUDING CHILD PROTECTIVE
   SREVICES RECORDS) WITH COURTS IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM

   Pursuant to Section 223(a)(26) of the JJPD Act of 2002, the state must implement a system to ensure
   that if a juvenile is before a court in the juvenile justice system, public child welfare records (including
   child protective services records) relating to such juvenile that are on file in the geographical area
   under the jurisdiction of the court will be made know to such court.

   Investigation of the current statutes governing child welfare records and juvenile justice procedures
   and discussions with justice system stakeholders regarding the court‘s policies and practices regarding
   the inclusion of child welfare records revealed that while a system has yet to be formally adopted
   statewide to ensure that child welfare records are made known to the court, that statute and the
   current policies and practices of many local courts, particularly family courts, does promote such a
   system. Indiana Code 31-33-18 is as follows:

   Chapter 18. Disclosure of Reports; Confidentiality Requirements
   IC 31-33-18-1
   Confidentiality of reports and photographs
       Sec. 1. The following are confidential:
        (1) Reports made under this article (or IC 31-6-11 before its repeal).
        (2) Any other information obtained, reports written, or photographs taken concerning the reports
   in the possession of:
           (A) the division of family and children;
           (B) the county office of family and children; or
           (C) the local child protection service.
   As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.16.

   IC 31-33-18-2
   Access to reports and other material
      Sec. 2. The reports and other material described in section 1 of this chapter shall be made available
   only to the following:
        (1) Persons authorized by this article.
        (2) A legally mandated public or private child protective agency investigating a report of child
   abuse or neglect or treating a child or family that is the subject of a report or record.
        (3) A police or other law enforcement agency, prosecuting attorney, or coroner in the case of the
   death of a child who is investigating a report of a child who may be a victim of child abuse or neglect.
_____________________________                                                                               99
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
         (4) A physician who has before the physician a child whom the physician reasonably suspects
   may be a victim of child abuse or neglect.
         (5) An individual legally authorized to place a child in protective custody if:
            (A) the individual has before the individual a child whom the individual reasonably suspects
   may be a victim of abuse or neglect; and
            (B) the individual requires the information in the report or record to determine whether
   to place the child in protective custody;
         (6) An agency having the legal responsibility or authorization to care for, treat, or supervise
   a child who is the subject of a report or record or a parent, guardian, custodian, or other person
   who is responsible for the child's welfare.
         (7) An individual named in the report or record that is alleged to be abused or neglected or, if the
   individual named in the report is a child or is otherwise incompetent, the individual's guardian ad litem
   or the individual's court appointed special advocate, or both.
         (8) Each parent, guardian, custodian, or other person responsible for the welfare of a child named
   in a report or record and an attorney of the person described under this subdivision, with protection for
   the identity of reporters and other appropriate individuals.
         (9) A court, upon the court's finding that access to the records may be necessary for
   determination of an issue before the court. However, access is limited to in camera inspection
   unless the court determines that public disclosure of the information contained in the records is
   necessary for the resolution of an issue then pending before the court.
         (10) A grand jury upon the grand jury's determination that access to the records is necessary in
   the conduct of the grand jury's official business.
         (11) An appropriate state or local official responsible for the child protective service or legislation
   carrying out the official's official functions.
         (12) A foster care review board established by a juvenile court under IC 31-34-21-9 (or IC 31-6-
   4-19 before its repeal) upon the court's determination that access to the records is necessary to enable
   the foster care review board to carry out the board's purpose under IC 31-34-21.
         (13) The community child protection team appointed under IC 31-33-3 (or IC 31-6-11-14 before
   its repeal), upon request, to enable the team to carry out the team's purpose under IC 31-33-3.
         (14) A person about whom a report has been made, with protection for the identity of:
            (A) any person reporting known or suspected child abuse or neglect; and
            (B) any other person if the person or agency making the information available finds that
   disclosure of the information would be likely to endanger the life or safety of the person.
   As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.16.

   IC 31-33-18-3
   Disclosure to qualified researchers
       Sec. 3. (a) Section 2 of this chapter does not prevent the county office of family and children or the
   local child protection service from disclosing to a qualified individual engaged in a good faith research
   project either:
         (1) information of a general nature, including the incidents of reported child abuse or neglect or
   other statistical or social data used in connection with studies, reports, or surveys, and information
   related to their function and activities; or
         (2) information relating to case histories of child abuse or neglect if:
            (A) the information disclosed does not identify or reasonably tend to identify the persons
   involved; and
            (B) the information is not a subject of pending litigation.
      (b) To implement this section, the division of family and children shall adopt under IC 4-22-2 rules
   to govern the dissemination of information to qualifying researchers.
_____________________________                                                                               100
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.16.

   IC 31-33-18-4
   Notice to parent, guardian, or custodian of availability of reports, information, and juvenile
   court records; release form; copying costs
       Sec. 4. (a) Whenever a child abuse or neglect investigation is conducted under this article, the local
   child protection service shall give verbal and written notice to each parent, guardian, or custodian of
   the child that:
        (1) the reports and information described under section 1 of this chapter relating to the child
   abuse or neglect investigation; and
        (2) if the child abuse or neglect allegations are pursued in juvenile court, the juvenile court's
   records described under IC 31-39;
   are available upon the request of the parent, guardian, or custodian except as prohibited by federal law.
      (b) A parent, guardian, or custodian requesting information under this section may be required to
   sign a written release form that delineates the information that is requested before the information is
   made available. However, no other prerequisites for obtaining the information may be placed on the
   parent, guardian, or custodian except for reasonable copying costs.
   As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.16.
   In short, the above code citation indicates that the general rule is that all reports of child abuse and
   neglect, and any additional information resulting from those reports are confidential. A court,
   however, is allowed access to these records if the court finds that access to the records may be
   necessary for determination of an issue before the court. Review of these records is generally limited
   to a review by the judge in private (to protect the confidentiality of the person reporting the abuse or
   neglect) unless the court determines that public disclosure of the information contained in the records
   in necessary for the resolution of an issue before the court. The specific information that is to be kept
   by the Division of Family and Children and specific procedures for accessing that data are found in
   Indiana Code 31-33-17-6(5):

   IC 31-33-17-6
   Access to information
       Sec. 6. Upon request, a person or an organization may have access to information contained in the
   registry as follows:
         (1) A law enforcement agency or local child protective service may have access to a substantiated
   report.
         (2) A person may have access to information consisting of an identifiable notation of a conviction
   arising out of a report of child abuse or neglect.
         (3) Upon submitting written verification of an application for employment or a consent for
   release of information signed by a child care provider, a person or an agency may obtain the following
   information contained in the child abuse registry regarding an individual who has applied for
   employment or volunteered for services in a capacity that would place the individual in a position of
   trust with children less than eighteen (18) years of age or regarding a child care provider who is
   providing or may provide child care for the person's child:
            (A) Whether a child was found by a court to be a child in need of services based on a report of
   child abuse or neglect naming the applicant, volunteer, or child care provider as the alleged
   perpetrator.
            (B) Whether criminal charges were filed against the applicant, volunteer, or child care provider
   based on a report of child abuse or neglect naming the applicant, volunteer, or child care provider as
   the alleged perpetrator.

_____________________________                                                                             101
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
            (C) Whether a court has issued an arrest warrant for the applicant, volunteer, or child care
   provider based on a report of child abuse or neglect in which the applicant, volunteer, or child care
   provider is named as the alleged perpetrator.
         (4) A person may have access to whatever information is contained in the registry pertaining to
   the person, with protection for the identity of:
            (A) the person who reports the alleged child abuse or neglect; and
            (B) any other appropriate person.
         (5) A person or an agency to which child abuse and neglect reports are available under
   IC 31-33-18 may also have access to information contained in the registry.
         (6) If a child care provider provides child care in the provider's home, upon submitting a consent
   for release of information signed by an individual who is at least eighteen (18) years of age, who
   resides with the child care provider, and who may have direct contact with children for whom the
   provider provides child care, a person may obtain the following information contained in the child
   abuse registry regarding the individual:
            (A) Whether a child was found by a court to be a child in need of services based on a report of
   child abuse or neglect naming the individual as the alleged perpetrator.
            (B) Whether criminal charges were filed against the individual based on a report of child abuse
   or neglect naming the individual as the alleged perpetrator.
            (C) Whether a court has issued an arrest warrant for the individual based on a report of child
   abuse or neglect in which the individual is named as the alleged perpetrator.
         (7) The division of family and children may use the following information contained in the
   registry regarding an individual described in IC 12-17.2-3.5-4.1(a) for purposes of determining the
   eligibility of a child care provider to receive a voucher payment (as defined in IC 12-17.2-3.5-3):
            (A) Whether a child has been found by a court to be a child in need of services based on a
   report of child abuse or neglect naming the individual as the alleged perpetrator.
            (B) Whether criminal charges have been filed against the individual based on a report of child
   abuse or neglect naming the individual as the alleged perpetrator.
            (C) Whether a court has issued an arrest warrant for the individual based on a report of child
   abuse or neglect in which the individual is named as the alleged perpetrator.
         The division of family and children may not disclose information used in connection with the
   division's activities under this subdivision.
   As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.16. Amended by P.L.36-2001, SEC.3; P.L.109-2002, SEC.13; P.L.18-
   2003, SEC.33.

   Whether such records are made known the court relates to Indiana Code 31-37-8-2, which outlines the
   contents of a preliminary inquiry to include information on the child‘s:

            background;
            current status; and
            school performance.

   While it is not explicitly required that the intake officer conducting the preliminary inquiry contact the
   local Office of Family and Children(OFC), it is common practice for the intake officer to investigate
   the existence of such records in order to determine the ―current status‖ of the child before the court.
   The preliminary inquiry procedures greatly increase the likelihood that child welfare records regarding
   a child before the juvenile court will be made known to the court.
   The Youth Division will be investigating this issue further by bringing it before the Governor‘s
   Juvenile Law Commission to interpret specifically what the requirement means to the operation of the

_____________________________                                                                            102
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   juvenile courts and OFC‘s around the State and to determine any recommendations, policy or statutory
   changes the Commission determines to improve the coordination of child welfare records and juvenile
   court proceedings.

   ESTABLISHING POLICIES AND SYSTEMS TO INCORPORATE RELEVANT CHILD
   PROTECTIVE SERVICES INTO JUVENILE JUSTICE RECORDS

   Pursuant to Section 223(a)(27) of the JJDP Act of 2002, the State must establish policies and systems
   to incorporate relevant child protective records into juvenile justice records for purposes of
   establishing and implementing treatment plans for juvenile offenders. The JJDPA, under Section
   223(a)(28), also requires the State to provide assurances that juvenile offenders whose placement is
   funded through Section 472 of the Social Security Act receive the protections specified in Section 471
   of such Act, including a case plan and case plan review as defined in Section 475 of such Act.

   With regards to the first issue, the establishment family courts, SHOCAP/SAFEPOLICY
   (information-sharing programs), wrap-around programming, child protection teams, and most recently
   a move towards systems-of-care have led many counties to begin the process of incorporating relevant
   child protective records into juvenile justice records for the purposes of treatment plan development.
   Moreover the Division of State Court Administration, under the leadership of Indiana‘s Supreme
   Court, are working to formally adopt this incorporation through the Indiana Supreme Court Judicial
   Technology and Automation Committee (JTAC).

   With respect to providing assurances that juvenile offenders whose placement is funded through
   Section 472 of the Social Security Act receive the protections specified in Section 471 of such Act,
   including a case plan and case plan review as defined in Section 475 of such Act, the attached (See
   Appendix A) excerpts from Indiana’s Title IV-E State Plan submitted to the federal Department of
   Health and Human Services from the Indiana Family & Social Services Administration, Department of
   Family and Children provided the necessary information to assure that the State provides the
   protections specified in Section 471 of the Social Security Act.

   Technical Assistance Needs
   The State will be making formal requests to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
   to provide technical assistance specific to addressing Disproportionate Minority Contact and
   Programmatic Site/Grant Reviews. Changes in the three year plan will be reviewed, state-level
   resources to meet technical assistance will be investigated, technical assistance requests will be
   solicited from local communities and a formal technical assistance requests will formalized.




_____________________________                                                                         103
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   SAG Membership

                                      STATE ADVISORY GROUP
                                           MEMBERSHIP FORM

                                     Represents    F/T    Youth       Date of          Residence
NAME                                              Govt   Member     Appointment
 Robert Mardis, Chair          E                                    June 30, 1995      Terre Haute
    Hal Thompson               F                                    June 30, 1995         Carmel
   Susan Carpenter             B                   X                June 30, 1995      Indianapolis
     Pam Robbins               D                                    June 30, 1995          Pekin
    David Donahue              C                   X                March 1, 2005      Indianapolis
    Timothy Curley            A/B                                 February 19, 2002    Terre Haute
    Clarissa Snapp             G                   X              February 19, 2002    Indianapolis
     Heather Mollo             B                   X                March 5, 2002        Nashville
      Kathy Lisby              C                   X                March 1, 2002      Terre Haute
    Cathy Graham               H                                   November 2004       Indianapolis
   Linda Henderson             D                                   November 2004         Bedford
       Colin Riley                                         X                            Rensselaer
     Laura Bradley                                         X       March 1, 2005      New Palestine
  Angelica Jackson                                         X       March 1, 2005      Jeffersonville
      Julie Turner                                         X       March 1, 2005          Muncie
The SAG serves as the advisory board.




_____________________________                                                                 104
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
   Staff of the JJDP Formula Grants Program

The following list of people serve as staff for the Youth Division of the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
(ICJI). Planning and Administration funds received from the Formula Grant Award and matched by the
State are used to support these positions for the individual percentages of time listed:

        EMPLOYEE                           % OF TIME                         POSITION
Heather Bolejack                              10%                         Executive Director

Michelle Tennell                               100%                 Division Director/JJ Specialist

Kate Gullans                                   20%                      Dep. Dir. Of Programs

Tyrrell Giles                                  20%                   Program Coordinator/EUDL

Devina Jani                                    100%                        DMC Coordinator

Josh Ross                                      20%                           Research Staff

Mary Murdock                                   10%                      Fiscal Division Director

Brenda Copass-Israels                          05%                           Fiscal Officer

Patricia Cooney                                10%                    Human Resources Director

Pauline Pollard                                05%                     Administrative Assistant


PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY THE YOUTH DIVISION

The Youth Division of ICJI administers all funds received by the State from the Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), including the following:

        Title II Formula Grants Program;
        Title V: Community Prevention Grants Program;
        Juvenile Accountability Block Grant (JABG) Program; and
        Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws (EUDL) Program.

In addition to federal funds from OJJDP, the Division receives NHTSI federal Traffic Safety Funds
through the Traffic Safety Division implement the Indiana Point of Youth (POY) program. These funds,
in conjunction with a portion of EUDL funding, finance this statewide youth advocacy program that
works to develop youth leaders from around the state to support local and statewide efforts in making
Indiana communities safer.



_____________________________                                                                            105
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
The Youth Division administers one state-funded grant program as well. The Governor‘s Safe Haven
Education Program is a $3 million state funded grant program that provides funds for public school
corporations and communities to jointly develop plans for opening school buildings for extended hours to
implement programs that reduce substance abuse, reduce violent behavior, and/or promote educational
progress. Funds are also available to improve the safety and security of school facilities. The coordinator for
this program is funded solely through state funds.



DESCRIPTION OF JJ SPECIALIST & OTHER DIVISION STAFF DUTIES

The Youth Division Director serves as the State‘s JJ Specialist and is responsible for direct oversight of
all federal funds received from OJJDP, including the Title II Formula Grant, Title V: Community
Prevention Grant, EUDL and Juvenile Accountability Block Grant funds. This includes:

        development of state plans/federal grant applications to be submitted to OJJDP;
        development of request for proposals and grant application materials to be distributed to potential
         applicants across the State;
        administrative review of grant proposals and grant applications and preparation of grant review
         materials for review by the Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group (JJSAG) and ICJI Board of
         Trustees;
        staffing of the JJSAG and ICJI Board of Trustees;
        administration and oversight of all subgrants awarded under the grant programs listed above,
         including direct supervision of one full-time program assistant to aid in grant administration;
        oversight of the State‘s Compliance Monitoring Program, including supervision of a full-time
         contract staff Compliance Monitor and coordination of part-time contract staff to implement
         statewide training and technical assistance for compliance monitoring;
        supervision of one full-time staff person responsible for oversight of the EUDL program and the
         POY program described above;
        supervision of one full-time staff person responsible for addressing DMC;
        supervision of one full-time staff person responsible for oversight of the Governor‘s Safe Haven
         Education Program described above; and
        responsible for state-level planning and policy development for juvenile justice issues, including
         serving as staff to the Governor‘s Juvenile Law Commission.

The Youth Division Program Assistant is responsible for the administration of programmatic paperwork
for the grant programs listed above, including:

        preparation of subgrant award packets and grant files, including electronic financial histories;
        the receipt subgrant reports (both fiscal and programmatic) and entering of data into subgrant
         financial histories;
        direct contact with subgrants regarding reporting issues, questions, and delinquent reports;
        support staff for completion of federal reporting requirements, including compliance monitoring
         data entry; and
        other duties as assigned to aid in the administration of OJJDP grant programs.

The Youth Division Program Coordinator is responsible for administering the EUDL program and the
POY program described above and provides further administrative support for the Formula Grant
program as necessary.
_____________________________                                                                                 106
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
The Youth Division provides a subgrant to the Youth Law TEAM of Indiana to provide the Institute with
the services of one full-time Compliance Monitor who is responsible for the following:

        receipt, coding and entry of self-reported intake data from secure juvenile and adult facilities;
        administration of compliance monitoring records and facility files;
        conducting scheduled and random on-site compliance monitoring visits to both secure and non-
         secure juvenile and adult facilities to verify self reported data, determine sight/sound separation,
         verify non-secure status and determine technical assistance/training needs;
        address potential violations reported to ICJI by making telephone contact within 48 hours and if
         necessary conducted an on-site visit to coordinate a corrective action plan with the facility
         director;
        coordinating with the ICJI Research Division staff to analyze compliance monitoring data and
         annually submit the State‘s Compliance Monitoring Report to OJJDP; and
        develop a policy and procedure manual for the ICJI Compliance Monitoring Program.




_____________________________                                                                              107
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                                                                      Indiana Criminal
                                                                                                      Justice Institute
                                                                                                       Organizational
                                                                                                           Chart

                                                                                                                Vacant
                                                                                                                    E-1



 Dep. Dir. Of                                                                                                                                   Dep. Dir. Programs
 Research                               Dep. Dir. Admin/Policy                                                                                  &
  Jason Hutchens                         Mary Murdock                                                                                                 Vacant
         E-3                                    E-3                                                                                                    E-3


                                                                                    Governor’s                                                                         Drug/Crime                       Staff
 Josh Ross                    Fiscal            H.R.               Victim’s Comp.   Commission              Traffic Safety           Youth         Vict. Ser.            Control       Communications   Attorney
 PAT I
                                                                                    Sonya                                                                                                               Sylvia
                                        Patricia Clooney         Sandy Warren       Cleveland       Dan Jefferies            Michelle Tennell   Lydi Davidson        Steven King       Vacant           Miller
                        Brenda Copass
 Amanda Thornton        PAT II          PAT I                    PAT I              PAT I           PAT I                    E-6                E-6                  E-6               E-6              E-6
 PAT I
                                                                                                                                                                                                        David
                                                                                                    Nils King                                                                                           Stewart
                        Carl Heck       Emily Miller             Karen McGinness    Tyrrell Giles   PATI                     Tanya Johnson      Rachel Meyer         Terrie Grantham   Mica Perry
 Ryan Klipsch           PAT II          PAT V                    PAT I              PAT II                                   PAT I              PAT III              PAT I             PAT I
 PAT I
                        Ivan Baird      Pauline Pollard          Vicky Gee                                                   Devina Jani        Sandy Warren         Cecelia Wylie
                                                                                                                                                                                                        Emily
                        PAT II          PAT IV                   Clerical Asst II                                            PAT II             PAT III              Contract                           Miller


                                                                 Sarah Davis                                                 Lynn Kirkland      Sarah Davis
                                                                 PAT III                                                     Contract           PAT IV


_____________________________                                                                                                                                                                                     108
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                      <10
                                                      2%
ENDNOTES
                                                            10 to 12
                                                              8%
  15 to 17
1
2
    68%
  IC 31-10-2-1
  IC 36-8-2-1; IC 36-8-2-2
3
  IC 36-2-13-2
4
  Ind. Const., Art. 6 Sec. 2
5
  IC 10-1-1-1; Acts 1945, c.344, s.1; Acts 1973, P.L.93, SEC.1; Acts 1975, P.L.34, SEC.10
6
  IC 31-37-5-1; IC 31-4-2-1                                  13 to 14
7
  IC 31-37-5-3                                                 22%
8
  IC 31-34-2-3
9
  IC 31-30-1-4
10
   IC 31-37-10-1; IC 31-34-9-1; IC 31-37-12-4
11
   IC 31-30-3
12
   IC 31-37-22
13
   IC 31-32-2
14
   This can also occur at the detention hearing if the child is held in custody. IC 31-32-4-2.
15
   IC 31-40-1
16
   IC 33-9-15
17
   Standards for Indigent Defense Services in Non-Capitol Cases, adopted by the Indiana Public Defender
Commission, effective January 1, 1995, amended most recently on March 10, 2004. See
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/pdc/docs/standards/indigent-defense-non-cap.pdf.
18
   IC 31-9-2-50
19
   IC 31-32-3
20
   IC 31-31-7
21
   Indiana State Office of GAL/CASA website, http://www.in.gov/judiciary/galcasa.
22
   IC 31-40-3
23
   The National Center for Juvenile Justice, State Juvenile Justice Profiles. See
http://www.ncjj.org/stateprofiles/profiles/IN04.asp?state=IN04.asp&topic=profile
24
   See the Indiana Courts webpage, http://www.in.gov/judiciary/citc/lessons/structure/ijs.html.
25
   2004 Indiana Judicial Service Report, available at http://www.in.gov/judiciary/admin/reports/ijs/2004report.pdf.
26
   Indiana Court Improvement Program webpage, http://www.in.gov/judiciary/cip/history.html.
27
   Family Court Project webpage, http://www.in.gov/judiciary/family-court/.
28
   IC 31-30-3-1
29
   IC 31-30-3-2
30
   IC 11-13-1-1; IC 11-13-2-1
31
   IC 11-13-1-3
32
   IC 31-9-1-117
33
   IC 31-31-8-3b
34
   IC 11-12-1-1
35
   IC 11-12-2-2
36
   IC 11-12-3-1
37
   IC 12-12-1-2.5
38
   IC 11-10-2-4; IC 11-10-2-5
39
   Indiana Department of Correction 2005 Year End Review, available at
http://www.in.gov/indcorrection/pdf/100days/currentbrief.pdf
40
    For the purposes of the boot camp program, a youthful offender is an offender who is less than 21 years of age;
has been committed to the IDOC to serve a sentence not in excess of eight years; has received a suspend able
sentence under IC 35-50-2-2 or IC 35-50-2-2.1; has been sentenced by a court having criminal jurisdiction; has
never been confined in a state or federal adult correctional facility; and has not previously participated in a military
or correctional boot camp program.
41
   IC 11-14-1-5
_____________________________                                                                                         109
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
42
   IC 11-14-4-1; IC 11-14-4-3
43
   IC 11-12-10-3
44
   IC 11-10-11.5-1
45
   IC 11-12-10-1
46
   Indiana Department of Correction 2005 Year End Review, available at
http://www.in.gov/indcorrection/pdf/100days/currentbrief.pdf.
47
   IC 11-13-6-4
48
   IC 31-37-1
49
   IC 31-37-2
50
   IC 31-37-6-2; IC 31-34-5-1
51
   IC 31-37-6-6; IC 31-34-5-3
52
   IC 31-37-7-1; IC 31-34-6-1
53
   IC 31-37-7-4; IC 31-34-6-3
54
     IC 31-9-2-62
55
   IC 31-34-7-1;IC 31-34-7-3; IC 31-37-8-1
56
   IC 31-34-7-1; IC 31-37-8-2
57
     IC 31-37-8-4
58
     IC 31-37-8-5; IC 31-34-7-2
59
   IC 31-34-8-1 through 8-3; IC 31-37-9-1 through 9-4.
60
   IC 31-34-8-6 through 8-8; IC 31-37-9-7, IC 31-37-9-9
61
   IC 31-34-9-1; IC 31-37-10-1
62
   IC 31-34-9-2
63
    IC 31-37-10-2
64
   IC 31-37-11-1
65
    IC 31-37-11-7
66
    IC 31-37-12-1
67
     IC 31-37-12-5
68
      IC 31-32-3-1
69
     IC 31-37-12-7 through 12-9
70
     IC 31-37-13-1; IC 31-34-11-1
71
   IC 31-37-11-2; The time limitations of the speedy trial rights citation may be extended if the delay is cause by the
juvenile, or other extraordinary circumstances.
72
   IC 31-37-13-2; IC 31-34-11-2
73
   IC 31-37-13-3; IC 31-34-11-3
74
     IC 31-37-17-1; IC 31-34-18-1
75
     31-37-18-1.1; IC 31-34-19-1.1
76
     IC 31-37-18-6; IC 31-34-19-6
77
   See Appendix A for the full code citation for juvenile court dispositional alternatives.
78
   IC 31-34-21-2
79
   IC 31-37-20-2, IC 31-37-20-3
80
   IC 31-37-20-1; IC 31-34-21-1
81
     IC 31-37-22-1; IC 31-34-23-1
82
   All arrest data is compiled from the Federal Bureau of Investigation‘s Uniform Crime Report. These data include
the offenses of murder and non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; robbery; aggravated assault; burglary;
larceny; motor vehicle theft; arson; other assaults; forgery and counterfeiting; fraud; embezzlement; stolen
property, buying, receiving; vandalism; weapons, carrying, possessing; prostitution and commercialized vice; sex
offenses (except forcible rape and prostitution); drug abuse violations; gambling; offenses against family and
children; driving under the influence; liquor laws; drunkenness; disorderly conduct; vagrancy; all other offenses
(except traffic offenses); suspicion; curfew and loitering law violations; and runaways.
83
   The Uniform Crime Report Part I property offenses include burglary, larceny theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
84
   In July 2000, U.S. District Court Judge John Tinder struck down Indiana‘s curfew law on the grounds that it was
too restrictive and that it interfered with the First Amendment rights of minors. The following year, the Indiana
_____________________________                                                                                     110
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
General Assembly passed a curfew law that included exceptions for youth engaging in religious, free-speech, or
assembly activities with the permission of their parents. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 against the
revised law in January 2004, stating it impinged on minors‘ First Amendment rights and the right of parents to raise
their children as they see fit. These decisions and the resulting uncertainly surrounding Indiana‘s curfew law are
mostly likely the cause in the dramatic decrease in curfew arrests.
85
   The Uniform Crime Report Part I violent offenses include murder and non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape;
robbery; and aggravated assault.
86
   The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT State Level Data Online, www.kidscount.org.
87
   The missing data include arrest numbers for the District of Columbia, Kansas, and Wisconsin for the 2000
reporting period; arrest numbers for the District of Columbia and Kansas for the 2001 reporting period; and arrest
numbers for Nevada for the 2003 reporting period.
88
   Indiana Youth Institute, Kids Count in Indiana Database, http://iyikcdb.iyi.org
89
   Instructions, Indiana Law Service Report, available at
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/admin/courtmgmt/forms/probation/pb_rept_juvserv_instruct.pdf
90
   Indiana Supreme Court Division of State Court Administration, Office of Guardian Ad Litem / Court Appointed
Special Advocate (GAL/CASA) webpage, available at http://www.in.gov/judiciary/galcasa.
91
   State Court Administration 2004 Indiana Probation Report Summary, available at
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/admin/reports/probation/2004-probation1-summary.pdf
92
   State Court Administration 2004 Indiana Probation Report Summary, available at
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/admin/reports/probation/2004-probation1-summary.pdf
93
   State Court Administration 2004 Indiana Probation Report Summary, available at
http://www.ai.org/judiciary/admin/reports/probation/2004-probation1-summary.pdf
94
   According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Indiana‘s estimated population for 2004 was 6,237,569 people. Data
available at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/18000.html.
95
   Indiana Business Research Center, http://www.ibrc.indiana.edu.
96
   The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT State Level Data Online, www.kidscount.org.
97
   U.S. Census Bureau 2004 Population Estimate
98
   U.S. Census Bureau 2000 Census
99
   The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT State Level Data Online, www.kidscount.org
100
    U.S. Census Bureau 2004 Population Estimate
101
    U.S. Census Bureau 2004 Population Estimate; U.S. Census Bureau 2000 Census
102
    U.S. Census Bureau 2004 Population Estimate
103
    STATS Indiana, available at http://www.stats.indiana.edu/index.html.
104
    The Indiana Youth Institute, http://www.iyi.org
105
    U.S. Census Bureau Small Area Income & Poverty Estimates, 2003.
106
    The Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count in Indiana Database, available at
http://iyikcdb.iyi.org/county_one_ind_form.asp.
107
    The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT State Level Data Online, www.kidscount.org
108
    The Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count in Indiana Database, available at
http://iyikcdb.iyi.org/county_one_ind_form.asp.
109
      2003 Kids Count in Indiana Databook
110
    The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT State Level Data Online, www.kidscount.org
111
    The Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count in Indiana Database, available at
http://iyikcdb.iyi.org/county_one_ind_form.asp.
112
    The Indiana Youth Institute Kids Count in Indiana Database, available at
http://iyikcdb.iyi.org/county_one_ind_form.asp; The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT State Level Data
Online, www.kidscount.org
113
    http://www.in.gov/fssa/servicemental//pdf/funding.pdf
114
    IC 5-2-10
115
    Students can serve for multiple years, but must reapply and be accepted each year.
116
    IC 5-2-10.1-9

_____________________________                                                                                    111
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
117
    The problem statement contains excerpts from a problem statement developed by Kathy Lisby, a
member of the Three-Year planning committee. The sources used to develop this problem statement
included the Indiana Youth Institute, Kids Count in Indiana, 1999 Data Book, the Indiana Department of
Correction and The Courage to Change: A Guide for Communities to Create Integrated Services for
People with Co-Occurring Disorders in the Justice System; December, 1999; National GAINS Center.
118
    The problem statement contains excerpts from a problem statement developed by Kathy Lisby, a
member of the Three-Year planning committee. The sources used to develop this problem statement
included the Indiana Youth Institute, Kids Count in Indiana, 1999 Data Book, the Indiana Department of
Correction and The Courage to Change: A Guide for Communities to Create Integrated Services for
People with Co-Occurring Disorders in the Justice System; December, 1999; National GAINS Center.
119
    Grant # 99-JE-001, Legal Applicant: Marion County Superior Court Juvenile Division; Implementing
Agency: Juvenile Justice Task Force. Funds provided by Federal Grant # 1999-JE-FX-0018,U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.




_____________________________                                                                      112
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                 Appendix A
      Excerpts from Indiana’s Title IV-E
                  State Plan




_____________________________              113
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        114
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        115
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        116
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        117
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        118
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        119
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        120
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        121
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        122
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        123
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        124
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        125
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        126
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        127
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        128
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        129
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        130
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        131
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        132
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        133
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        134
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        135
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        136
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        137
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        138
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        139
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        140
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        141
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        142
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        143
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        144
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        145
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        146
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        147
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        148
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
_____________________________        149
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                     Topical Index of Statutes

Assignment to Community Transition Program
(Applicability of chapter)
IC 11-10-11.5-1..................................................................................................................... 14

Boot Camp Criteria and Program Administration
(Purpose for program)
IC 11-14-2-1.......................................................................................................................... 14

Child Abuse Registry
(Access to information)
IC 31-33-17-6........................................................................................................................ 101

Child Taken into Custody
(Application of chapter)
IC 31-37-5-1.......................................................................................................................... 3
(Release or detention of child taken into custody without court order)
IC 31-37-5-3.......................................................................................................................... 3

Commitment, Evaluation, and Assignment of Delinquent Offender
(Evaluation; information to consider; utilization of reports or other information; previous evaluations and
information)
IC 11-10-2-4.......................................................................................................................... 12
(Assignment to facility or program)
IC 11-10-2-5.......................................................................................................................... 12

Community Corrections
Locally and Regionally Operated Community Corrections
(―Community corrections program‖ defined)
IC 11-12-1-1.......................................................................................................................... 12
State Grants to Counties for Community Corrections and Charges to Participating Counties for Confined
Offenders
IC 11-12-2 ............................................................................................................................. 12
(Community corrections advisory board; membership; terms; combined advisory board; officers; quorum;
assistance and appropriations)
IC 11-12-2-2.......................................................................................................................... 12
State Operated Community Corrections
(Establishment and operation of programs; contract with public or private agency to provide services)
IC 11-12-3-1.......................................................................................................................... 12

Community Transition Programs
(Establishment of programs)
IC 11-12-10-1........................................................................................................................ 14

(Community transition program funds)
IC 11-12-10-3........................................................................................................................ 14
_____________________________                                                                                                               150
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
Cost of Services; Liability of Parent or Guardian to Pay
IC 31-40-1 ............................................................................................................................. 5
(Obligation of parent or guardian for cost of services provided to child adjudicated delinquent or in need
of services; child support obligation worksheet)
IC 31-40-1-3.......................................................................................................................... 6

County Sheriff
(Residence; term of office)
IC 36-2-13-2.......................................................................................................................... 2

Definitions
(―Youthful offender‖ defined)
IC 11-14-1-5.......................................................................................................................... 14
(―Guardian ad Litem‖)
IC 31-9-2-50.......................................................................................................................... 6
(―Intake officer‖)
IC 31-9-2-62.......................................................................................................................... 6, 16
(―Shelter care facility‖)
IC 31-9-2-117........................................................................................................................ 10

Delinquent Children who commit Acts that would be Offenses if committed by Adults
IC 31-37-1 ............................................................................................................................. 15

Delinquent Children who commit certain other Acts and who need Care, Treatment, or Rehabilitation
IC 31-37-2 ............................................................................................................................. 16

Detention of Children
Detention of Alleged Child in Need of Services
(Detention in certain facilities prohibited)
IC 31-34-6-1.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Placement in facility located outside of child‘s county of residence)
IC 31-34-6-3.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Placement with family members)
IC 31-37-6-2.......................................................................................................................... 16
Detention of Alleged Delinquent Child
(Detention in certain facilities prohibited)
IC 31-37-7-1.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Placement in facility located outside of child‘s county of residence)
IC 31-37-7-4.......................................................................................................................... 16



Disclosure of Reports; Confidentiality Requirements
(Confidentiality; exceptions)
IC 31-33-18-1........................................................................................................................ 99
(Disclosure of unredacted material to certain persons)
IC 31-33-18-2........................................................................................................................ 99
_____________________________                                                                                                                  151
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Disclosure to qualified researchers)
IC 31-33-18-3........................................................................................................................ 100
(Notice to parent, guardian, or custodian of availability of reports, information, and juvenile court records;
release form; copying costs)
IC 31-33-18-4........................................................................................................................ 101

Dispositional Decrees
Modification of Dispositional Decrees
(Motion for modification)
IC 31-34-23-1........................................................................................................................ 19
(Motion for modification)
IC 31-37-22-1........................................................................................................................ 19
Review of Dispositional Decrees; Formal Review Hearings
(Progress reports; procedure for modification of decree)
IC 31-34-21-1........................................................................................................................ 19
(Periodic case review)
IC 31-34-21-2........................................................................................................................ 19
(Progress reports; procedure for modification of decree)
IC 31-37-20-1........................................................................................................................ 19
(Periodic case review)
IC 31-37-20-2........................................................................................................................ 19
(Formal hearing on continued jurisdiction and modification of decree)
IC 31-37-20-3........................................................................................................................ 19

General Policy and Provisions
(Policy and purpose)
IC 31-10-2-1.......................................................................................................................... 1

General Powers Concerning Public Safety
(Application of chapter)
IC 36-8-2-1............................................................................................................................ 1
(Police and law enforcement system)
IC 36-8-2-2............................................................................................................................ 1

Guardians ad Litem or Court Appointed Special Advocates
Guardian ad Litem or Court Appointed Special Advocate Services
IC 31-31-7 ............................................................................................................................. 6
Guardian ad Litem or Court Appointed Special Advocate User Fee; Guardian ad Litem or Court
Appointed Special Advocate Fund
IC 31-40-3 ............................................................................................................................. 6

Guardians ad Litem and Court Appointed Special Advocates
IC 31-32-3 ............................................................................................................................. 6
(Appointment)
IC 31-32-3-1.......................................................................................................................... 18

Hearings
Detention Hearing
_____________________________                                                                                                                152
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Time for hearing; notice)
IC 31-34-5-1.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Release; findings required for detention order)
IC 31-34-5-3.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Release; findings required for detention order)
IC 31-37-6-6.......................................................................................................................... 16
Dispositional Hearing
(Mandatory attendance at predispositional hearing by report preparer)
IC 31-34-19-1.1..................................................................................................................... 18
(Dispositional decree; factors)
IC 31-34-19-6........................................................................................................................ 18
(Mandatory attendance at predispositional hearing by report preparer)
IC 31-37-18-1.1..................................................................................................................... 18
(Dispositional decree; factors)
IC 31-37-18-6........................................................................................................................ 18
Factfinding Hearing
(Hearing requirement)
IC 31-37-13-1........................................................................................................................ 18
(Judgment; order for predisposition report; scheduling of dispositional hearing)
IC 31-37-13-2........................................................................................................................ 18
(Discharge of child)
IC 31-37-13-3........................................................................................................................ 18
Factfinding Hearing on Child in Need of Services Petition
(Hearing requirement)
IC 31-34-11-1........................................................................................................................ 18
(Judgment; order for predisposition report; scheduling of dispositional hearing)
IC 31-34-11-2........................................................................................................................ 18
Initial Hearing and Issuance of Summonses
(Application of chapter)
IC 31-37-12-1........................................................................................................................ 17
(Waiver of jurisdiction)
IC 31-37-12-4........................................................................................................................ 5
(Duty to inform child and parent, guardian, or custodian regarding nature of allegations, child‘s legal
rights, jurisdiction and dispositional alternatives)
IC 31-37-12-5........................................................................................................................ 18
(Child‘s admission or denial of allegations)
IC 31-37-12-7........................................................................................................................ 18
Review of Dispositional Decrees; Formal Review Hearings
(Progress reports; procedure for modification of decree)
IC 31-34-21-1........................................................................................................................ 19
(Periodic case review)
IC 31-34-21-2........................................................................................................................ 19
(Progress reports; procedure for modification of decree)
IC 31-37-20-1........................................................................................................................ 19
(Periodic case review)
IC 31-37-20-2........................................................................................................................ 19
(Formal hearing on continued jurisdiction and modification of decree)
IC 31-37-20-3........................................................................................................................ 19
_____________________________                                                                                                               153
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
Indiana Safe Schools Fund
(School safety specialists; duties)
IC 5-2-10.1-9......................................................................................................................... 57

Investigation and Preliminary Inquiries
Information about Children in Need of Services, Investigation, and Preliminary Inquiry
(Preliminary inquiry)
IC 31-34-7-1.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Provision of preliminary inquiry and recommendation to prosecuting attorney or attorney for county
office of family and children)
IC 31-34-7-2.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Decision whether to require authorization to file petition)
IC 31-34-7-3.......................................................................................................................... 16
Information about Delinquent Children, Investigation, and Preliminary Inquiry
(Receipt and forwarding of information concerning delinquent child; preliminary
inquiry)
IC 31-37-8-1.......................................................................................................................... 16
(Contents of preliminary inquiry)
IC 31-37-8-2.......................................................................................................................... 17, 102
(Advisement request for child interview)
IC 31-37-8-4.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Provisions of copies of preliminary inquiry and recommendation)
IC 31-37-8-5.......................................................................................................................... 17

Jurisdiction
Juvenile Court Jurisdiction Generally
(Exclusive original jurisdiction)
IC 31-30-1-1.......................................................................................................................... 6
(Applicability of juvenile law to certain offenses)
IC 31-30-1-2.......................................................................................................................... 9
(Juvenile court lacks jurisdiction over individuals at least 16 years of age committing certain felonies;
retention of jurisdiction by court having adult criminal
jurisdiction)
IC 31-30-1-4(a) ..................................................................................................................... 5, 8


Waiver of Jurisdiction
(Waiver of jurisdiction defined)
IC 31-30-3-1.......................................................................................................................... 8
(Heinous or aggravated acts, or act as part of repetitive pattern of delinquent
acts)
IC 31-30-3-2.......................................................................................................................... 8

Juvenile Detention and Shelter Care Facilities
(Juvenile detention center; criteria)
IC 31-31-8-2.......................................................................................................................... 10
(Provisions of juvenile detention and shelter care facilities; staff; budget;
_____________________________                                                                                                                    154
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
expenses)
IC 31-31-8-3(b) ..................................................................................................................... 10

Offenses against the Family
(Retail establishment‘s sale or distribution of tobacco to minors; defenses)
IC 35-46-1-10.2..................................................................................................................... 51

Parole and Discharge of Delinquent Offenders
(Discharge; term of parole; offenders not on parole; certification of discharge)
IC 11-13-6-4.......................................................................................................................... 15

Petitions
Filing of Petition alleging that Child is a Child in Need of Services
(Request for authorization to file petition; representation of interests of state)
IC 31-34-9-1.......................................................................................................................... 5, 17
(Authorization to file petition; evidence, finding)
IC 31-34-9-2.......................................................................................................................... 17
Filing of Petition alleging that Child is a Delinquent Child
(Standing)
IC 31-37-10-1........................................................................................................................ 5, 17
(Approval of filing petition)
IC 31-37-10-2........................................................................................................................ 17


Time Limits for Petitions; Motions for Continuance
(Time for filing petition alleging delinquency of child in detention)
IC 31-37-11-1........................................................................................................................ 17
(Time for factfinding hearing or waiver hearing)
IC 31-37-11-2........................................................................................................................ 18
(Release for noncompliance with time limits)
IC 31-37-11-7........................................................................................................................ 17




Predispositional Report
(Recommendation of care, treatment, or rehabilitation of child; alternative
reports)
IC 31-34-18-1........................................................................................................................ 18
(Recommendation of care, treatment, or rehabilitation of child; alternative
reports)
IC 31-37-17-1........................................................................................................................ 18

Probation
Probation Administration
(Probation officers; appointment; qualifications; term, responsibility, salaries, expenses, bond)
IC 11-13-1-1.......................................................................................................................... 9
(Probation officers; mandatory duties)
_____________________________                                                                                                                  155
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
IC 11-13-1-3.......................................................................................................................... 9
State Aid for Probation Services
(State financial aid program; establishment; administration; distribution)
IC 11-13-2-1.......................................................................................................................... 9

Program of Informal Adjustment
(Implementation of program)
IC 31-34-8-1.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Consent)
IC 31-34-8-2.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Petition for compliance; notice; hearing; order; contempt)
IC 31-34-8-3.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Duration of program; extension)
IC 31-34-8-6.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Report on extent of compliance)
IC 31-34-8-7.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Informal adjustment of program fee; order for payment)
IC 31-34-8-8.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Implementation of program)
IC 31-37-9-1.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Consent)
IC 31-37-9-2.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Petition for compliance)
IC 31-37-9-3.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Notice, hearing, and order for compliance; contempt)
IC 31-37-9-4.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Duration of program; extension)
IC 31-37-9-7.......................................................................................................................... 17
(Informal adjustment program fee; order for payment)
IC 31-37-9-9.......................................................................................................................... 17


Rehabilitation Services Bureau
(Organization of bureau)
IC 12-12-1-2.5....................................................................................................................... 12

Reports of Services Provided to Delinquent Children and Children in Need of Services
(Maintenance of information)
IC 31-31-10-1........................................................................................................................ 31

Right to Counsel
(Court appointment of counsel to represent child)
IC 31-32-4-2.......................................................................................................................... 5

State Drug Free Communities Fund
IC 5-2-10 ............................................................................................................................... 54

Taking a Child in Need of Services into Custody
_____________________________                                                                                                                  156
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Taking a child into custody without court order; documentation)
IC 31-34-2-3.......................................................................................................................... 3, 16

Transition Procedures
(Reporting to officer)
IC 11-14-4-1.......................................................................................................................... 14
(Conditions; coordination; personal contacts)
IC 11-14-4-3.......................................................................................................................... 14




_____________________________                                                                                                                  157
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
                                                Numerical Index of Statutes

IC 5-2-10
(State Drug Free Communities Fund) ................................................................................... 54

IC 5-2-10.1-9
(School safety specialists; duties) ......................................................................................... 57

IC 11-10-2-4
(Evaluation; information to consider; utilization of reports or other information; previous evaluations and
information) 12

IC 11-10-2-5
(Assignment to facility or program)...................................................................................... 12

IC 11-10-11.5-1
(Assignment to community transition program; applicability of chapter) ............................ 14

IC 11-12-1-1
(―Community corrections‖ program defined) ....................................................................... 12

IC 11-12-2
(State grants to counties for community corrections and charges to participating counties for confined
offenders) .............................................................................................................................. 12

11-12-2-2
(Community corrections advisory board; membership; terms; combined advisory board; officers; quorum;
assistance and appropriations) .............................................................................................. 12

IC 11-12-3-1
(Establishment and operation of programs; contract with public or private agency to provide services)
 .............................................................................................................................................. 12

IC 11-12-10-1
(Community transition programs; establishment of programs) ............................................ 14

IC 11-12-10-3
(Community transition program funds) ................................................................................ 14

IC 11-13-1-1
(Probation officers; appointment; qualifications; term, responsibility, salaries, expenses, bond) 9

IC 11-13-1-3
(Probation officers; mandatory duties) ................................................................................. 9

IC 11-13-2-1
(State financial aid program; establishment; administration; distribution) ........................... 9
_____________________________                                                                                                                        158
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
IC 11-13-6-4
(Discharge; term of parole; offenders not on parole; certification of discharge) .................. 15

IC 11-14-1-5
(―Youthful offender‖ defined) .............................................................................................. 14

IC 11-14-2-1
(Boot camp criteria and program administration; purpose for program) .............................. 14

IC 11-14-4-1
(Transition procedures; reporting to officer) ........................................................................ 14

IC 11-14-4-3
(Transition procedures; conditions; coordination; personal contacts) .................................. 14

IC 12-12-1-2.5
(Rehabilitation services bureau; organization of bureau) ..................................................... 11

IC 31-9-2-50
(Definitions; ―guardian ad litem‖) ........................................................................................ 6

IC 31-9-2-62
(Definitions; ―intake officer‖) ............................................................................................... 16

IC 31-9-2-117
(Definitions; ―shelter care facility‖) ...................................................................................... 10

IC 31-10-2-1
(General policy and provisions; policy and purpose) ........................................................... 1

IC 31-30-1-1
(Exclusive original jurisdiction)............................................................................................ 6

IC 31-30-1-2
(Applicability of juvenile law to certain offenses) ................................................................ 9


IC 31-30-1-4(a)
(Juvenile court lacks jurisdiction over individuals at least 16 years of age committing certain felonies;
retention of jurisdiction by court having adult criminal
jurisdiction) ........................................................................................................................... 4, 8


IC 31-30-3-1
(Waiver of jurisdiction defined)............................................................................................ 8

IC 31-30-3-2
_____________________________                                                                                                                    159
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Heinous or aggravated acts, or act as part of repetitive pattern of delinquent
acts) ....................................................................................................................................... 8

IC 31-31-7
(Guardian ad litem or court appointed special advocate services) ........................................ 6

IC 31-31-8-2
(Juvenile detention center; criteria)....................................................................................... 10

IC 31-31-8-3(b)
(Provisions of juvenile detention and shelter care facilities; staff; budget;
expenses) ............................................................................................................................... 10

IC 31-31-10-1
(Reports of services provided to delinquent children and children in need of services; maintenance of
information) .......................................................................................................................... 31

IC 31-32-3
(Guardians ad litem and court appointed special advocates) ................................................ 6

IC 31-32-3-1
(Guardians ad litem and court appointed special advocates; appointment) .......................... 18

IC 31-32-4-2
(Court appointment of counsel to represent child)................................................................ 5

IC 31-33-17-6
(Child abuse registry; access to information) ....................................................................... 101

IC 31-33-18-1
(Disclosure of reports; confidentiality requirements; confidentiality;
exceptions) ............................................................................................................................ 99

IC 31-33-18-2
(Disclosure of unredacted material to certain persons) ......................................................... 99

IC 31-33-18-3
(Disclosure to qualified researchers)..................................................................................... 100

IC 31-33-18-4
(Notice to parent, guardian, or custodian of availability of reports, information, and juvenile court records;
release form; copying costs) ................................................................................................. 101

IC 31-34-2-3
(Taking a child into custody without court order; documentation) ....................................... 3, 16

IC 31-34-5-1
(Detention hearing; time for hearing; notice)........................................................................ 15
_____________________________                                                                                                                     160
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
IC 31-34-5-3
(Release; findings required for detention order) ................................................................... 16

IC 31-34-6-1
(Detention of alleged child in need of services; detention in certain facilities
prohibited) ............................................................................................................................. 16

IC 31-34-6-3
(Detention of alleged child in need of services; placement in facility located outside of child‘s county of
residence) .............................................................................................................................. 16

IC 31-34-7-1
(Information about children in need of services, investigation, and preliminary inquiry; preliminary
inquiry).................................................................................................................................. 16, 17

IC 31-34-7-2
(Information about children in need of services, investigation and preliminary inquiry; provision of
preliminary inquiry and recommendation to prosecuting attorney or attorney for county office of family
and children) ......................................................................................................................... 17

IC 31-34-7-3
(Decision whether to require authorization to file petition) .................................................. 16

IC 31-34-8-1
(Program of informal adjustment; implementation of program) ........................................... 16, 17

IC 31-34-8-2
(Program of informal adjustment; consent) .......................................................................... 17

IC 31-34-8-3
(Program of informal adjustment; petition for compliance; notice; hearing; order; contempt)                                                    17

IC 31-34-8-6
(Program of informal adjustment; duration of program; extension) ..................................... 17

IC 31-34-8-7
(Program of informal adjustment; report on extent of compliance)...................................... 17

IC 31-34-8-8
(Informal adjustment program fee; order for payment) ........................................................ 17

IC 31-34-9-1
(Filing of petition alleging that child is a child in need of services; request for authorization to file
petition; representation of interests of state) ......................................................................... 5, 17

IC 31-34-9-2

_____________________________                                                                                                                       161
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Filing of petition alleging that child is a child in need of services; authorization to file petition; evidence,
finding).................................................................................................................................. 17

IC 31-34-11-1
(Factfinding hearing on child in need of services petition; hearing requirement) ................ 18

IC 31-34-11-2
(Factfinding hearing on child in need of services petition; judgment; order for predisposition report;
scheduling of dispositional hearing) ..................................................................................... 18

IC 31-34-18-1
(Predispositional report; recommendation of care, treatment, or rehabilitation of child; alternative reports)
 .............................................................................................................................................. 18

IC 31-34-19-1.1
(Dispositional hearing; mandatory attendance at predispositional hearing by report preparer)                                                     18

IC 31-34-19-6
(Dispositional hearing; dispositional decree; factors) ........................................................... 18

IC 31-34-21-1
(Review of dispositional decrees; formal review hearings; progress reports; procedure for modification of
decree) ................................................................................................................................... 19

IC 31-34-21-2
(Review of dispositional decrees; periodic case review) ...................................................... 19

IC 31-34-23-1
(Modification of dispositional decrees; motion for modification) ........................................ 19

IC 31-37-1
(Delinquent children who commit acts that would be offenses if committed by
adults).................................................................................................................................... 15

IC 31-37-2
(Delinquent children who commit certain other acts and who need care, treatment, or rehabilitation) 15

IC 31-37-5-1
(Child taken into custody; application of chapter) ................................................................ 3

IC 31-37-5-3
(Release or detention of child taken into custody without court order) ................................ 3

IC 31-37-6-2
(Detention of alleged child in need of services; placement with family members) .............. 15

IC 31-37-6-6
(Detention hearing; release; findings required for detention order) ...................................... 16
_____________________________                                                                                                                         162
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
IC 31-37-7-1
(Detention of alleged delinquent child; detention in certain facilities prohibited) ............... 16

IC 31-37-7-4
(Detention of alleged delinquent child; placement in facility located outside of child‘s county of
residence) .............................................................................................................................. 16

IC 31-37-8-1
(Information about delinquent children, investigation, and preliminary inquiry; receipt and forwarding of
information concerning delinquent child; preliminary inquiry) ............................................ 16

IC 31-37-8-2
(Contents of preliminary inquiry) ......................................................................................... 17, 102

IC 31-37-8-4
(Information about delinquent children, investigation, and preliminary inquiry; advisement request for
child interview) ..................................................................................................................... 17



IC 31-37-8-5
(Information about delinquent children, investigation, and preliminary inquiry; provisions of copies of
preliminary inquiry and recommendation) ........................................................................... 17

IC 31-37-9-1
(Program of informal adjustment; implementation of program) ........................................... 17

IC 31-37-9-2
(Program of informal adjustment; consent) .......................................................................... 17

IC 31-37-9-3
(Program of informal adjustment; petition for compliance) ................................................. 17

IC 31-37-9-4
(Program of informal adjustment; notice, hearing, and order for compliance;
contempt) .............................................................................................................................. 17

IC 31-37-9-7
(Program of informal adjustment; duration of program; extension) ..................................... 17

IC 31-37-9-9
(Informal adjustment program fee; order for payment) ........................................................ 17

IC 31-37-10-1
(Filing of petition alleging that child is a delinquent child) .................................................. 5, 17

IC 31-37-10-2
_____________________________                                                                                                                  163
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Filing of petition alleging that child is a delinquent child; approval of filing
petition) ................................................................................................................................. 17

IC 31-37-11-1
(Time for filing petition alleging delinquency of child in detention) ................................... 17

IC 31-37-11-2
(Time for factfinding hearing or waiver hearing) ................................................................. 17, 18

IC 31-37-11-7
(Time limits for petitions; motions for continuance; release for noncompliance with time limits) 17

IC 31-37-12-1
(Initial hearing and issuance of summonses; application of chapter) ................................... 17

IC 31-37-12-4
(Waiver of jurisdiction)......................................................................................................... 5

IC 31-37-12-5
(Duty to inform child and parent, guardian, or custodian regarding nature of allegations, child‘s legal
rights, jurisdiction and dispositional alternatives) ................................................................ 18

IC 31-37-12-7
(Child‘s admission or denial of allegations) ......................................................................... 18

IC 31-37-12-8
(Procedure following admission of allegations by child) ..................................................... 18

IC 31-37-12-9
(Dispositional hearing; factfinding hearing; consent) ........................................................... 18

IC 31-37-13-1
(Factfinding hearing; hearing requirement) .......................................................................... 18

IC 31-37-13-2
(Factfinding hearing; judgment; order of predisposition report; scheduling of dispositional hearing) 18

IC 31-37-13-3
(Factfinding hearing; discharge of child) .............................................................................. 18

IC 31-37-17-1
(Predispositional report; recommendation of care, treatment, or rehabilitation of child; alternative reports)
 .............................................................................................................................................. 18

IC 31-37-18-1.1
(Mandatory attendance at predispositional hearing by report preparer) ............................... 18

IC 31-37-18-6
_____________________________                                                                                                                    164
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan
(Dispositional decree; factors) .............................................................................................. 18

IC 31-37-20-1
(Progress reports; procedure for modification of decree) ..................................................... 19

IC 31-37-20-2
(Review of dispositional decrees; formal review hearings; periodic case review) ............... 19

IC 31-37-20-3
(Review of dispositional decrees; formal review hearings; formal hearing on continued jurisdiction and
modification of decree) ......................................................................................................... 19

IC 31-37-22-1
(Modification of dispositional decrees; motion for modification) ........................................ 19

IC 31-40-1
(Cost of services; liability of parent or guardian to pay) ...................................................... 5

IC 31-40-1-3
(Obligation of parent or guardian for cost of services provided to child adjudicated delinquent or in need
of services; child support obligation worksheet) .................................................................. 6

IC 31-40-3
(Guardian ad litem or court appointed special advocate user fee; guardian ad litem or court appointed
special advocate fund)........................................................................................................... 6

IC 35-46-1-10.2
(Retail establishment‘s sale or distribution of tobacco to minors; defenses) ........................ 51

IC 36-2-13-2
(County sheriff; residence; term of office) ........................................................................... 2

IC 36-8-2-1
(General powers concerning public safety; application of chapter) ...................................... 1

IC 36-8-2-2
(Police and law enforcement system) ................................................................................... 1




_____________________________                                                                                                         165
Indiana Criminal Justice Institute
Youth Division
JJDP Formula Grant Program
FY 2006-2008 Three Year Plan

								
To top