- Section 6: Reentry
- Goals
- Examine three challenges related to juvenile sex offender reentry
and aftercare
- Over–reliance on the most secure placements
- Insufficient reentry and aftercare planning
- Fragmentation across the system
- Clarify how these challenges can be addressed
- Over–Reliance on the
Most Secure Placements
- National Statistics: Placement
- More than 100,000 youthful offenders in placement released each year
- Increase of more than 40% from 1990–1999
- National Statistics: Placement
(Continued)
- Placement of Juvenile Sex
Offenders
- While over time numbers have decreased, juvenile sex offenders in placement
have increased
- 1997–2003
- 2003
- Approximately 8% (8,000) were sex offenders
- Placement of Juvenile Sex
Offenders (Continued)
- Most (72%) of the nation’s specialized treatment programs are community–based
- 28% are in residential or institutional facilities
- But about ½ of juvenile sex offenders were treated in residential
or institutional programs
- Tendency to Over–Rely
on Residential and Institutional Placements
- Not all youth will benefit
- No strong evidence to suggest that placements result in substantial
reductions in recidivism
- Interventions in a youth’s natural environment are more likely
to result in positive outcomes
- Not all juvenile sex offenders in residential or institutional facilities
need to be there
- Insufficient Reentry and
Aftercare Planning
- Getting In Is Easy, Getting
Out Is Difficult
- Compared to most other types of youthful offenders, juvenile sex
offenders spend more time in placement
- One reason is a lack of or insufficient reentry and aftercare planning
- Tendency to assume that “more” is better
- Consequences
- Prolonged detachment from positive community supports and productive
involvement in prosocial activities exacerbates reentry challenges
- Potential negative outcomes when delinquent youth are placed together
for the purpose of intervention
- Maxing out with no aftercare programming or community supervision
- Movement to “low” level of supervision or care, with
no gradual reduction in aftercare services and support
- Prevent early identification of needs and barriers
- Fragmentation Across the
System
- Design of the System
- Establishes a residential or institutional dimension and a community
dimension that can be mutually exclusive
- “In” or “out”
- Consider
- Treatment providers “in” and “out”
- Institutional or residential caseworkers or managers “in” and
juvenile parole officers “out”
- Potential Solutions
- Reasons for Over–Reliance
- High stakes
- Insufficient assessment data
- Limited specialized management capacity
- Lack of confidence in existing community resources
- Negative community sentiment
- Strategies to Reduce Over–Reliance
- Assessment–driven decisionmaking at the point of disposition
or sentencing
- Building community capacity
- Raising awareness and increasing confidence through specialized training
and education
- Juvenile and family court judges and prosecutors
- The community
- Insufficient Planning
- Planning for reentry at the point of entry
- Early assessment is key
- Anticipate needs that youth and the family have that may hinder reentry
and aftercare efforts
- Key Questions to be Answered
- What issues, concerns, and barriers need to be addressed at some
point during the reentry and aftercare process?
- When must these be addressed? In the facility before release? When
the youth is in the community? Or in both?
- Who will address them?
- Elements of a Comprehensive
Reentry and Aftercare Plan
- Specialized treatment needs
- Mental health problems
- Healthcare concerns
- Family issues
- Family Reunification Challenges
- Limited placement options
- Requests from family members
- Concerns raised by victim advocates and service providers
- Expectations of child welfare and social service agencies, and juvenile
and family courts
- Large caseloads
- Limited long–term influence of involved agencies and the courts
- Key Elements of Reunification
- Victim safety
- Early initiation of process
- Gradual and deliberate
- Out of home placement
- Treatment interventions
- Readiness assessments
- Supervised contacts in clinical settings
- Clarification
- Supervised contacts in natural environments
- Transition to family supervision
- Return home
- Flexible and responsive
- Collaboration
- Promoting Early Involvement
of Families
- Approach parents and caregivers as partners whose input is valued
- Identify common ground and common goals
- Make family therapy an expectation rather than an easy “option” to
decline
- Plan to incorporate therapeutic activities or assignments into visitation
time
- Create “after hours” parenting skills classes, and education
and support groups
- Plan to offer transporation
- Elements of a Comprehensive
Reentry and Aftercare Plan
- Educational needs
- Vocational needs
- Life and independent living skills
- Community supervision strategies
- Community hostility concerns
- Importance of Continuity
of Programming and Services
- Staff “in” and “out” must work together to
ensure continuity of care
- Services provided should anticipate interventions that are to come
or build upon previous programs
- Avoiding delays is critical
- Schedule appointments in the community prior to release
- Utilizing the Whole Continuum
- Planning early to avoid “all or nothing”
- Ideally, jurisdictions have a range of
- Community–based options
- Specialized supervision
- Non–residential programs
- Alternative living
- Day treatment
- Outpatient services
- Residential and institutional programming
- Group homes
- Halfway houses
- Transition or step–down
- Responding when Problems
Arise
- Increasing supervision intensity
- Imposing a sanction that is treatment–based
- Requiring a temporary return to a residential or institutional placement
- Critical Factors to Consider
- Seriousness of behavior
- Risk level
- Degree to which community safety was jeopardized
- Juvenile’s disclosure
- Level of responsibility assumed by youth
- Awareness and disclosure of behavior by parents, caregivers, other
community support network members
- Ability of parents/caregivers to provide structure and support
- Presence of other assets or services to assist juvenile to maintain
compliance
- Fragmentation Across the
System
- Importance of collaboration
- Inside
- Outside
- “In” to “Out”
- Conclusion
- To address over–reliance on the most secure placements
- Specialized and comprehensive PSIs and PDRs, and psychosexual
evaluations
- Build community management capacity
- Provide specialized training
- Work proactively with the community
- Think about “reentry at the point of entry” and initiate
transition and aftercare planning at intake
- Focus on youth, family, and other “environmental” considerations
- “In” to “out” requires collaboration!
- Intensive Aftercare Program
Model
- Individualized case planning
- Continuity of care
- Collaboration
- Formal transition structures
- Small caseloads
- Balance
- Supervision and control mechanisms
- Range of programming
- Graduated rewards and sanctions
